Positive Psychology and Strengths-Based Interventions (SBIs): Implications for Uses with Special Student Populations (Special Needs, P-3, Gifted)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article presents a clear framework, based on established work by Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, as well as Linley et al., for applying positive psychology and strengths-based interventions (SBIs) to special student populations. I personally find it very interesting and enjoyable to read. It not only proposes a pragmatic approach that integrates intrapersonal, interpersonal, contextual/environmental, systemic, and developmental factors, but it also reviews empirical and theoretical literature relevant to SBIs and discusses the unique characteristics of different subpopulations (special needs, P-3, and gifted students). The author's arguments make a significant contribution by presenting a compelling case for the importance of considering multiple factors in developing SBIs and providing specific recommendations for future research.
Additionally, the article appears to be academically sound, with a strong and logically coherent argument that is well-grounded in the existing literature. It provides a comprehensive synthesis of current knowledge in the field. The article adheres to the principles of positive psychology and advocates for an integrative approach to intervention, making it a valuable citation source for other scholars and contributing to the journal's good reputation.
However, a key weakness of the article is the limited empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of SBIs in these populations. The article relies heavily on theoretical foundations and previous literature but lacks robust empirical data to substantiate the proposed interventions. To improve, the authors could add empirical data on the implementation and outcomes of SBIs within these specific student groups based on previous studies. I believe this would provide a stronger evidence base for the framework and its practical applications. Additionally, the article could benefit from including diverse cultural perspectives to ensure the interventions are adaptable and relevant across different contexts, which would enhance its contribution to the field of education and its generalizability to other settings.
With the strength of the already well-structured content of this article and the suggested improvements by the reviewers, it is believed that this article will become even more impactful and suitable for publication in the journal.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsPositive Psychology and Strengths-Based Interventions (SBIs): Implications for Uses with Special Student Population (Special Needs, P-3, Gifted)
Abstract: Special Needs, P-3, and Gifted are three very different groups. I know that there is not room in the abstract, but I do think that some framing around the thinking of why these three disparate groups are or can be lumped together would be appropriate near the start of the manuscript.
I realize that this piece is a commentary, but there are very few citations in the sections describing the three groups of focus: special needs, P-3, and gifted.
Gifted_ p. 4: I think the notion about unrealistic expectations should have a citation to support. Is the research clear on this claim?
I think a table or tables showcasing the identified articles for each group (special needs, P-3, gifted) would be helpful.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsn/a
