Navigating Self-Reflection for Aspiring Special Education Teachers: A Scoping Review on Inclusive Educational Practices and Their Insights for Autism Education

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article presents a thorough evaluation of the role of self-reflection in the development of skills for future educators, with a focus on teaching students with diverse needs, including autism. The three key research questions are clearly and systematically formulated, providing a solid framework for the entire approach. The methodology of a scoping review is well-suited for this exploratory type of research. The authors' adaptation of search strategies as needed demonstrates methodological flexibility and rigor. The inclusion of diverse studies enriches the review and offers valuable insights into fostering self-reflection among future special education teachers. The emphasis on the need for feedback and guidance in addition to self-reflection activities aligns with current best practices in teacher education.

The review effectively highlights the broader impact of self-reflection in diverse teaching contexts and underscores its pivotal role in bridging theory and practice. This theme is particularly relevant in the context of preparing educators for work with diverse student populations.

However, there are some areas that could benefit from further clarification. Specifically, additional information on the total number of sources studied and whether a multi-level selection process was employed would enhance the transparency of the review process. Furthermore, considering the potential impact of didactic techniques, learning instruction, and the reflective practice in specific didactic methods, as well as the didactic abilities of future educators, could provide additional depth to the analysis.

In conclusion, the study makes a valuable contribution to the field of teacher education, particularly in the context of special education. With the incorporation of the suggested additions, it has the potential to further enhance its impact and relevance.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This review provides insights into the importance of self-reflection for improving trainee teachers' skills in teaching in diverse classrooms. The introductory section provides insight into ASD and not only highlights a deficit-oriented perspective, but also recognizes the strengths of individuals with ASD. Although the author provides some information about ASD, the author does not go into detail when it comes to explicitly explaining ASD (for example, with reference to ICD-11). I am confident that this paper would benefit from adding more information about ASD in this regard. However, I would like to reiterate that I appreciate that the author has also considered problematic aspects of stereotyping and subsequent exclusion of people with ASD.

While I acknowledge the author's experience and expertise on this topic, I am of the opinion that, against the background of good scientific practice, the presentation of subjective experiences (lines 80-100) should not be the focus of a high-quality paper. I do not mean to diminish the author's expertise, but to point out that the introductory section would benefit from other, more important explanations. Accordingly, as explained above, I think that a clear presentation of the manuscript's underlying understanding of ASD is needed (and not just a presentation of the problems and strengths of individuals with ASD observed in empirical studies). Moreover, even though the author states that she/he/they is/are focusing on the work of Joseph Mintz, I cannot understand what the author defines and understands by the terms "reflective practice", "critical thinking" and "professionalism". Considering that both terms are included in research question 1, it is essential to provide a detailed definition. In this vein, I wonder if "critical thinking" can be subsumed under the term "reflective practice"?

With regard to the research questions, I wonder why the author did not include students with autism in research question 1. Because if children with ASDare not included in the search for articles from the outset, you will probably end of with a lot of articles that may not be aimed at children with ASD at all, but at other children (e.g., children with learning difficulties, children with ADHD). 

Concerning the methods section, I recognize that the author used the PRISMA guidelines to provide a systematic process. However, I still do not quite understand (and this also connects to my critique concerning the research question 1 and its very general wording), why students with ASD were not included as part of the inclusion criteria. This is problematic because the second research question is more or less an inference, which means that conclusions are drawn from the results of research question 1 to research question 2. Thus, if all studies dealing with teachers in the field of special education are included in the database search, it is questionable whether conclusions can be drawn for teachers who teach children with ASD (RQ2). 

As for the results section, Table 2 was very difficult to read and interpret due to its formatting. I suggest changing this. Furthermore, in relation to section 3.1, I wonder whether the characteristics of reflective practice can really be so clearly distinguished from one another, in the sense that each of the studies takes up different characteristics. Is there really no overlap here? Also, I cannot quite understand how sections 3.1 and 3.2 answers the research questions proposed in the introductory section. I question this in view of the fact that the characteristics of reflective practice in the studies are presented in the results section, as well as approaches to promoting self-reflection in future teachers. However, in the research questions, the author asks how reflective practices can promote critical thinking and professionalism and what conclusions can be drawn for teachers working with students with ASD. Although I am confident that this study provides important findings and conclusions on the tested reflection approaches, I also do not see how research question 3 is addressed in the results section. It is also unclear to me how and where research question 2 is addressed and answered in the results section. As I understand it, the research questions should always be answered in the results section and discussed in the discussion. In this article, however, some of the research questions are only dealt with in the discussion section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The article touches on a very important topic of teachers' work with students on the autism spectrum. Relevant research questions. Methodology described sufficiently. In the conclusions, I feel the insufficiency of proposals for practical solutions, applications of the obtained results in the education of future teachers. After possible additions, I recommend the article for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for addressing all the issues raised.