Educational Connections: Museums, Universities, and Schools as Places of Supplementary Learning

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I thought that this was an interesting article although it is perhaps more relevant to the specific context - I gather that the context is Spain which I am inferring from the from the majority of the selected institutional research sample and I think that the sample population’s context should have been presented explicitly so as the article’s problematic is situated.  In this sense, from a methodological perspective, I was unclear as to why two non-Spanish universities, one from France/Paris, and one from Brazil/Goias were included so some clarification on the geo-sample would have been helpful. Conversely, for example countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, have well established frameworks of collaboration eg institutional, research, teaching, placements, between museums and universities and it seems to me that the literature/preliminary research might have identified these existing practices, not least to support the research’s arguments and call for innovation (whilst bearing in mind the different cultural, cultural politics, political economies and legal frameworks in which all these operate).  Fron this angle, and as someone operating in one of these traditions the article seemed limited to me (in terms of its vision/ambition) – the bibliography denotes this, the international handful of sources seems to be dated.

Having said that, I think the authors achieve their stated research aims, the reviewed or developed reporting on the research methodology deployed is a welcome addition to the article. However, I wonder whether the focus-group method might have been also a suitable choice here rather than (only) a series of individual, separate, interviews undertaken over a period of 10 years (according to the abstract). Reading the last few pages, this feels a bit repetitive overall, and I felt the need for a more robust, perhaps sector-representative collective perspective (which the focus group method might have helped with) rather than what seem to be a cumulative selection of individually collected themes. In a way the article collects these views but does not recommend a way or ways forward for Spanish museums.  But, overall, this article includes interesting what are always topics for reflection.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1,

Thank you for your valuable contributions to the review of our manuscript. Your suggestions have been carefully considered and addressed as follows:

1. Both the abstract and the methodology section now specify that the study includes 17 Spanish institutions. Furthermore, it is clarified that the two international interviews (from Brazil and France) were incorporated due to the participants’ roles as expert collaborators within the Spanish university context (see lines 14–17).
2. As recommended, illustrative examples from the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, among others, have been included in Section 2, “Interinstitutional Collaboration: A Multidimensional Approach,” as benchmarks of best practices (see lines 64–98).
3. The bibliography has been updated to include seven additional, more recent references.
4. The suggestion to utilize a focus group is excellent and will be considered for future research methodologies in this field.
5. Individual contributions have been specified according to analytical dimensions (see Table 2). The most consistent ideas have been regrouped, and those with lower frequency indices have been excluded.
6. The conclusions now incorporate recommendations for advancing the development of Hispanic Museums.
7. The conclusions and methodology sections specify the disciplinary backgrounds and professional trajectories of the interviewees.
8. The study’s limitations, particularly regarding the disciplinary focus of the expert participants—primarily from the fields of art and art education—have been addressed in the conclusions.

Thank you once again for your insightful feedback.

Sincerely,
The Authors

Dear Reviewer 1,

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work shows an interesting approach to the intersections between University and Museums from the perspective of schools and basic education. It is an interesting contribution from a qualitative point of view.

The selection of participants shows two clear biases. The first is towards Hispanic institutions. This should be made more explicit in the summary and approach of the paper, as the situation of museum education in Spain is very different from other countries. Adding some international references does not save this approach.

The second bias in the sample is the selection of a large group of teachers of didactics of plastic expression who mainly teach in early childhood and primary education degrees. These university teachers show concerns linked to their careers and to the use of the museum as a tool for their students. However, there is a lack of representation of teachers from other areas who research museums in terms of their educational value. In order to resolve this issue, these questions need to be clarified in the approach.

Due to the type of interviews carried out, the opinions of the experts consulted go beyond the focus of the work and raise issues related to the value of the museum in lifelong learning, the training needs of museum professionals or research processes in museums and their consequences. It should be clear that these opinions are not necessarily representative, as the sample focuses on professionals and museums linked to basic education.

For the rest, this is a good piece of work.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,Estimado crítico 2,

We sincerely appreciate your thoughtful and constructive feedback on our manuscript. In response to your recommendations, we have implemented the following revisions:Apreciamos sinceramente sus comentarios reflexivos y constructivos sobre nuestro manuscrito. En respuesta a sus recomendaciones, hemos implementado las siguientes revisiones:

1. The abstract and methodology sections now explicitly state that the sample comprises 17 Spanish institutions. Additionally, we have clarified that the two international interviews (from Brazil and France) were included due to the participants’ expertise and collaborative engagement within the Spanish higher education sector (refer to lines 14–17).Las secciones de resumen y metodología ahora afirman explícitamente que la muestra comprende 17 instituciones españolas. Además, hemos aclarado que las dos entrevistas internacionales (de Brasil y Francia) se incluyeron debido a la experiencia y el compromiso de colaboración de los participantes dentro del sector de educación superior española (consulte las líneas 14-17).
2. In accordance with your suggestion, we have incorporated examples from the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, among others, in Section 2, “Interinstitutional Collaboration: A Multidimensional Approach,” to highlight recognized best practices (see lines 64–98).De acuerdo con su sugerencia, hemos incorporado ejemplos del Reino Unido, Canadá, y Estados Unidos, entre otros, en la Sección 2, "Colaboración interinstitucional: un enfoque multidimensional", para resaltar las mejores prácticas reconocidas (ver líneas 64-98).
3. The reference list has been expanded with seven newly added, up-to-date sources.La lista de referencias se ha ampliado con siete fuentes recién agregadas y actualizadas.
4. Your recommendation to employ a focus group methodology is greatly appreciated and will be taken into account in future research endeavors within this area.Su recomendación para emplear una metodología de grupo focal se aprecia enormemente y se tendrá en cuenta en futuros esfuerzos de investigación dentro de esta área.
5. We have detailed individual contributions according to specific analytical dimensions (see Table 2), consolidating the most robust themes and omitting those with lower frequency.Tenemos contribuciones individuales detalladas de acuerdo con dimensiones analíticas específicas (ver Tabla 2), consolidando los temas más robustos y omitiendo aquellos con menor frecuencia.
6. The conclusions section now features recommendations aimed at furthering the progress of Hispanic Museums.La sección de conclusiones ahora presenta recomendaciones destinadas a promover el progreso de los museos hispanos.
7. We have specified both the academic backgrounds and professional trajectories of the interviewees in the conclusions and methodology sections.Hemos especificado tanto los antecedentes académicos como las trayectorias profesionales de los entrevistados en las secciones de conclusiones y metodología.
8. The study’s limitations, particularly those related to the disciplinary backgrounds of the expert participants—which are predominantly in art and art education—have been explicitly addressed in the conclusions.Las limitaciones del estudio, particularmente aquellas relacionadas con los antecedentes disciplinarios de los participantes expertos, que están predominantemente en la educación artística y artística, se han abordado explícitamente en las conclusiones.

Thank you once again for your invaluable input.Gracias una vez más por su invaluable aporte.

With kind regards,Con un cordial saludo,
The AuthorsLos autores