Teachers’ Understanding of and Practices in Critical Thinking in the Context of Education for Sustainable Development: A Systematic Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsTeachers’ Understanding of, and Practices in Critical Thinking in the Context of Education for Sustainable Development: A Systematic Review
I find this study interesting, and the results are important for teachers and researchers e.g. in the field sustainability education. This systematic review was conducted using the PRISMA data collection method and the analyses were based on the Davies (2015) coding scheme. The analyses were conducted logically and analytically step by step.
The aim of the study is missing and should be added. However, the research question is found in the text, which helped the reader to understand. The research question could practically be divided in two (research question 1 and research question 2) to help the reader to follow the text.
To make the text even more logical the authors can think does it help to add not only the aim(s) of the study but also the goal, and/or purpose of study.
The reviewer hopes that the following comments help the authors to develop their manuscript to be more reader friendly.
Abstract
Has to be developed by adding the aims/research questions and the material/method "systematic review" using Prisma method.
- Introduction
In the last paragraph it has been addressed the gap of the research – why this study has been done. This is good.
Please add the aim of the study to the end of the introduction.
- Theoretical part … and 2.1. Critical thinking as a key to ESD … at the end 2.2. your formulated study question: “What does the literature say about how teachers understand and (can potentially) use CT in ESD with respect to critical rationality, critical character, critical actions, critical virtue, critical consciousness, and critical pedagogies?”
(instead of “say” use e.g. reveal)
Then follow the numbering for example 3. Material and Methods, and 3.1. Data collection
Note the aim of the study and especially your research question determines what things should be written in “Results” chapter
At the moment, “Results” section also contains things related to the systematic review. This text related to the material and methods section should be moved to material and methods.
- Materials and methods
Please use subheadings under this main heading to make the text easier to read.
e.g. 2.1. Data collection and article selection criteria (Note the numbering of the titles)
The word “the aims” is confusing here.
Please, write what is the aim of the study (see my comment above) and clarify that the systematic review was done to reach the study aim.
“the aims of this systematic review are to: 1) identify and synthesise qualitative research about teachers’ understanding of CT within the context of ESD, and 2) identify teaching practices where CT is discussed within an
ESD context.”
“On top of the analysis pertaining to these questions, we have mapped the scope of….”
It is unclear…What are the authors referring to in this sentence using “these questions”.
Table 1. There is written under the table *search up to 2021 inclusive .
What are the authors referring to with this sentence? (. Is not needed)
Figure 1. Please add to the figure legends the reference concerning Covidence
Recommended to move the text concerning to table 4 to be in Material and methods paragraph and the table 4 itself to appendix. Having this big table as an appendix makes the text more easy to follow.
In the table 4 text I recommend to clarify: PR - Peer reviewed, J – Journal article, TM – article in Teacher’s Magasine,… Shortening like this PRTM is also understandable.
- Results
Figure 3 and 4 belong to Material and method chapter – they are connected to the material and analyses processes. The text above the figures (such as subjects, number of publications pear year interval, distribution of ESD components, CT explicit categories) is not needed, while the same information is in figure legends.
Please add to the figure 3 text (n=43 articles)
I recommend to write all the information concerning the figure 4 and delete the figure 4 to avoid the too many figures.
The appearance of environmental, social and economic issues in relation to ESD (education for sustainable development) in the chosen 10 articles
-to my mind Figure 5 is not needed, while the same information can be found in the table 5 and the % can be mentioned in the written text.
-table 5 is important especially if the table 4 (43 articles) is in appendix
-Figure 6 is important (please delete the text above the figure “CT explicit categories”. This text is already in the Figure legend.
- Discussion
The following sentences are not needed in discussion.
“Authors should discuss the results and how they can be interpreted from the perspective of previous studies and of the working hypotheses. The findings and their implications should be discussed in the broadest context possible. Future research directions may also be highlighted.” Please delete.
My suggestions to develop the discussion is based on the issues that the article text is more reader friendly.
Neither the research question nor analyses method is not needed to repeat in discussion. Some little notes.
Example 1)
As very few of the included articles were systematic studies of
Teachers’ understanding of CT (first part of the research question) were presented in in a very few articles of the systematic review. we soon realised that the first part of the question must, So, to be able to answer to this first part of the research question, in a large extent …..
Example 2)
To capture the CT aspects that were addressed in these selected articles, going beyond the traditional sets of skills and dispositions, we analysed them with regard to Da-vies’ (2015) six categories the results revealed that unsurprisingly, all 19 articles included critical rationality (skills) as part of CT, while as many as 14 also addressed critical character (dispositions).
Every finding should be discussed in the frame of the aims of the study.
Once the aim(s) of the study is clearly formulated it should guide the discussion text.
Figure 7. Please check that all results found, are presented in “results” chapter and discussion chapter is only for discussing the findings presented results.
Why figure 7 is presented in discussion and not in result chapter. For the reader “when sorting” sounds like the authors carried on their analyses… Please rewrite the text concerning the figure 7. So that the reader understands why the figure 7 is in discussion part or otherwise move to results.
Please rewrite the discussion once the aim of the study is completed.
??? Limitations, implications and future directions
Please number this (sub)heading such as you have done with other headings.
Please, add the validity and reliability of the study.
References
This is a large list of references concerning the studied topic. The list has to be checked after rewriting.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageI would rather evaluate the scientific language. It is rather good but there is a need to some changes.
I am not a native English speaker, so I do not feel qualified to evaluate this. English I the manuscript is readable and understandable.
Author Response
Please see the attachment "Resp. Reviewer 1".
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article focuses on a topic that is particularly relevant to the promotion of holistic education and the fostering of an environmentally aware citizenry: the use of critical thinking as a pedagogical strategy.
While this topic of pedagogical strategies could have been developed further, the article fulfils its objectives by providing a systematic analysis of the literature and clearly outlining the process of data collection and analysis.
The article also uses an appropriate bibliography to discuss the results and provides avenues for further reflection and research.
I therefore believe it should be accepted for publication.
Author Response
Please see the attachment "Resp. Reviewer 2".
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsUnify fonts in the table.
Author Response
Please see the attachment "Resp. Reviewer 3".
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript can be forwarded in the process.
