Scalability of Leadership Development Program in a State Professional Development System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am grateful for the opportunity to review the manuscript entitled: “Scalability of Leadership Development Program in a State Professional Development System”.

After carefully reviewing your manuscript, I have identified several areas that require major revisions before it is suitable for publication.
Key Issues to Address:

Sample Size and Generalizability

The study relies on a relatively small sample (N=84 for surveys, N=11 for interviews), limiting statistical power and generalizability.

Expanding the sample across multiple states or education levels would strengthen the applicability of findings.

Reliance on Self-Reported Data

The study depends on self-reported survey responses, which may introduce social desirability bias.

Future research could incorporate objective performance measures (e.g., observed leadership behaviors).

Limited Longitudinal Impact Assessment

The study assesses leadership mindset and knowledge immediately after program completion, without evaluating long-term effects.

A follow-up study tracking participants’ leadership progression over time would provide stronger evidence of program effectiveness.

Excessive Text in Results Section with Few Tables

The results section relies heavily on textual descriptions, making it difficult to quickly grasp key findings.

The inclusion of more tables and visual aids (e.g., figures, summary charts) would enhance readability and help synthesize key outcomes.

 

For example, tables summarizing pre- and post-test results, effect sizes, and facilitator feedback themes would make the findings clearer and more accessible.

Discussion of Cultural and Equity Challenges

The study identifies challenges related to racial equity discussions and cultural adaptation of materials, but does not propose concrete solutions.

Future work could explore strategies for inclusive curriculum design and facilitator training on equity topics.

More Contextualization within Existing Literature

The discussion could better compare findings to previous leadership development research, particularly studies on scaling education interventions.

Inclusion of full references (‘Author, 2017; ...; Author, 2022’) in the bibliography

Conclusion

This study makes an important contribution to understanding scalable leadership development in early education, demonstrating that the scaled LDP model maintains effectiveness. Its rigorous methodology, inclusion of diverse populations, and practical recommendations enhance its value. However, small sample size, reliance on self-reported data, and lack of long-term impact evaluation limit the robustness of findings. Future research should expand sample diversity, integrate objective performance measures, and track long-term leadership outcomes. Despite these limitations, the study provides meaningful insights for policymakers, educators, and professional development organizations seeking to implement sustainable leadership training programs. The weaknesses mentioned above require changes to be made to the manuscript by the authors prior to publication.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

We thank the Editor and the Reviewers for their valuable feedback. We revised the paper
based on the Editor’s and the Reviewers’ comments. We believe that addressing these
comments has substantially improved our paper. Below, we provide detailed descriptions of
how we addressed the Reviewers’ comments in the order they were presented.

Reviewer #1:
I am grateful for the opportunity to review the manuscript entitled: “Scalability of Leadership
Development Program in a State Professional Development System”. After carefully reviewing
your manuscript, I have identified several areas that require major revisions before it is
suitable for publication.

Key Issues to Address:
1. Sample Size and Generalizability
The study relies on a relatively small sample (N=84 for surveys, N=11 for interviews), limiting
statistical power and generalizability. Expanding the sample across multiple states or
education levels would strengthen the applicability of findings.

Thank you for your feedback. We acknowledged the limitations of our sample size in the
limitations section and suggested that future studies could explore whether similar results can
be found with larger and more diverse samples across states and settings (see lines 510-516).

2. Reliance on Self-Reported Data
The study depends on self-reported survey responses, which may introduce social desirability
bias. Future research could incorporate objective performance measures (e.g., observed
leadership behaviors).
We revised the limitations section to acknowledge the potential for social desirability bias in
self-reported data. We also noted that future research could consider incorporating objective
performance measures, such as observed leadership behaviors, to strengthen impact
assessment (lines 524–527).

3. Limited Longitudinal Impact Assessment
The study assesses leadership mindset and knowledge immediately after program
completion, without evaluating long-term effects. A follow-up study tracking participants’
leadership progression over time would provide stronger evidence of program effectiveness.
We added language to the limitations section encouraging future research to include longterm
follow-up measures to assess sustained leadership outcomes (lines 527–531).

4. Excessive Text in Results Section with Few Tables
The results section relies heavily on textual descriptions, making it difficult to quickly grasp
key findings. The inclusion of more tables and visual aids (e.g., figures, summary charts) would
enhance readability and help synthesize key outcomes. For example, tables summarizing preand
post-test results, effect sizes, and facilitator feedback themes would make the findings
clearer and more accessible.
Thank you for the suggestion. We added Table 2 and Table 3 to summarize pre- and post-LDP
outcomes for entrepreneurial leadership mindset and leadership knowledge by cohort. We
also included Table 4 to synthesize key themes from facilitator interviews with brief
descriptions and illustrative quotes.

5. Discussion of Cultural and Equity Challenges
The study identifies challenges related to racial equity discussions and cultural adaptation of
materials, but does not propose concrete solutions. Future work could explore strategies for
inclusive curriculum design and facilitator training on equity topics.
We revised the manuscript to more explicitly suggest the need for future work around
strategies for inclusive curriculum design and facilitator training on equity topics (lines 489–
494).

6. More Contextualization within Existing Literature
The discussion could better compare findings to previous leadership development research,
particularly studies on scaling education interventions. Inclusion of full references (‘Author,
2017; ...; Author, 2022’) in the bibliography
We revised the discussion to more clearly connect our findings to existing research on scaling
in education, highlighting the importance of infrastructure, facilitator support, and fidelity
strategies (lines 421–424). Also, once the blind review process is finished, we will add full
references for previously placeholder citations (e.g., Author, 2017; Author, 2022) in the
reference section.

Thank you for considering our manuscript. We look forward to the opportunity to contribute
to this important discussion in Education Sciences.

Sincerely,

Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the presentation of your manuscript. This work is of great importance to the field of leadership development and equality.

The research was clearly presented, delivered a fresh perspective on leadership development programs and was thorough in in the explanation of results and discussion. The scalability of leadership programs is a critical feature of leadership development and the outcomes of this study are very encouraging. I will use this work in my own research and teaching of our Masters program once it has been published.

My only suggestion would be to incorporate additional citations where you have self-cited. I believe there are additional works which support these claims and these citations would further strengthen the work.

Thank you

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I have carefully reviewed the revised version of your manuscript entitled "Scalability of Leadership Development Program in a State Professional Development System."

I am pleased to inform you that the revisions you have made in response to the previous review are satisfactory. You have thoroughly addressed the comments and incorporated the suggestions provided by the reviewer. The improvements have significantly enhanced the clarity, structure, and overall quality of the manuscript.

Based on the current version, I find the manuscript acceptable for publication.

Thank you for your careful attention to the feedback and for your contributions to the field.

Sincerely,