Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see the attachment.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

we really thank you for the valuable suggestions that have improved the scientific quality of the paper and its usability by potential readers.
Please, find in the attachment answers to your comments and the related additions/modifications within the revised manuscript.

Please do not hesitate to contact us for any further request.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study focusses on an interesting and important point, the emotional state of teachers in the school system of Italy. There is no doubt that there is a need for empirical data on this question and the study tries to fill this gap.

Unfortunately there are two major concerns that I have withe the manuscript.

First it is possible to use Grounded Theory for analyzing the interviews. The problem in this study is the way that the participants were gathered, using theoretical saturation and not the preferred way to gather data till saturation is achieved. So maybe there should be another way of explaining the process of the data collection. Especially why the authors think, that saturation is achieved with their sample.

In addition the study identifies core categories but fails to develop a theory or even explores those categories and the relation between them. In the way the results are presented those core categories are not linked together.

Second the discussion needs a thorough revision with a focus on language and clarity. I struggled to understand what the author(s) tried to say with the text. 

I tank the manuscript has the potential to be published and I encourage them to revise and resubmit.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

we really thank you for the valuable suggestions that have improved the scientific quality of the paper and its usability by potential readers.
Please, find in the attachment answers to your comments and the related additions/modifications within the revised manuscript.

Please do not hesitate to contact us for any further request.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a very interesting work, and the metohodology was well selected.

Some suggestions or comments.

In Participants (2.7.) I don't understand the way you select the sample. You need to describe in a more detailed way the process of selecting participants.

In Table 1, you didn´t present age. It is presented in the text as others characteristics are presented too. The picture will be complete with all the information.

In Practical Implications you just identified some measures directed objectively to the problems that were extracted from the interviews, and thstss is OK. I would like to see a sentence, or a few words, about policy in the domain of social changes in the role of school an teachers. About the macro system surrounding students, teachers, school and policies. Maybe you consider this out the focus of this paper and I accept that.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

we really thank you for the valuable suggestions that have improved the scientific quality of the paper and its usability by potential readers.
Please, find in the attachment answers to your comments and the related additions/modifications within the revised manuscript.

Please do not hesitate to contact us foe any further request.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to read a second version of this manuscript. You've done a very nice job revising the paper. It is much more clear and your conclusions are better supported. There are a few places that could use some grammatical fixes, but those should be smoothed out in the final editing process. Very nicely done.

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript has been improved and the points I mentioned in the previous review were dealt with. 

I see the manuscript fit for publication.