Between Tradition and Reform: The Attitudes of Croatian Preservice Primary School Teachers Towards Science Teaching and Their Views on Science

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper looks at how future primary school teachers in Croatia feel about teaching science and how they see science itself, at a time when big changes are happening in Croatia education system. Using a questionnaire called the DAS (Dimensions of Attitude toward Science), the researchers studied what these attitudes are like, whether taking a science course changes them, and how they connect to teachers views of science. The results show mostly positive attitudes, mixing both traditional and modern ideas. But the science course did not make a clear difference, and the link between attitudes and views of science was weak. The strengths of the paper include focus on a real and current reform in Croatia, a clear research approach, the use of a proven tool for measuring attitudes, and practical insights that could help improve how future teachers are trained. The paper is well structured and excellent written.

The only remark is this one:
Before the chapter 5.3 (in line 695) is one line (the line 694) empty. The situation is for example before 5.1 (line 527) and before 5.2 (line 651) not the same. It should be improved. Check also next lines: 379, 497, 714.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

- Some of the references in the manuscript seem old. They should probably be replaced or enriched by citations from the last five to ten years.

- The paper should state more clearly the point to which it differentiates from or advances - similar research on the same topic. Except, of course, for the fact that it refers to a specific country.

- Alternative ways of presenting the results, such as bar-charts, pie-charts etc. , apart from mere tables, wouls help, I think.

- I think it should be more discussed - in the discussion section - that this sample of  156 prospective Primary School teachers - all belong to the same University (Department and Faculty), and this could cause some bias in the results.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Summary

This empirical study explores the attitudes of Croatian preservice primary school teachers toward science teaching, as well as their epistemological views on science, in the context of a national curriculum reform. It applies a validated instrument (DAS) and compares attitudes between those who completed a science course and those who did not.

Comments

Strengths

• The topic is timely and relevant, particularly in light of the ongoing curricular reform in Croatia.
• The structure of the paper is clear, coherent, and logically organized.
• The use of the validated DAS instrument strengthens methodological reliability and allows international comparability.
• Statistical analyses are appropriately selected and transparently reported.
• The discussion is well-informed and grounded in relevant literature.

Points for Improvement

• While the authors highlight as a strength that all participants were drawn from the same institution and program, the sample covers students from all five years of study. This raises potential concerns about developmental differences in attitudes across cohorts, which are not discussed. The paper would benefit from a more explicit limitations section discussing potential biases, including self-selection, single-institution sampling, and gender imbalance.
  
  
• The key finding – that the science course had no significant effect on professional attitudes – is presented but not critically examined. The authors do not reflect on why the course might be ineffective, nor do they describe its pedagogical structure in detail. This is a missed opportunity to offer insights into science teacher education. I would recommend expanding the discussion to consider possible reasons for the course’s lack of impact. Including qualitative data in future research could help explain these findings in more depth.
  
  
• The cross-sectional design limits the study's interpretability. Since teacher attitudes evolve over time, the study design precludes conclusions about how these attitudes develop. This should be explicitly acknowledged. A longitudinal or mixed-method approach might be more suitable for future studies aiming to capture change over time.
  
  
• Some parts of the discussion – for example, the suggestion that low anxiety implies emotional preparedness – are somewhat speculative given the purely self-reported and quantitative nature of the data. A clearer distinction between data-driven interpretations and broader assumptions would strengthen the argument, possibly by adjusting the phrasing accordingly.
  
  
• While the paper rightly points to the importance of improving teacher education curricula, the suggestions remain abstract. Given the findings, what specific curricular elements should be reconsidered or introduced? E.g., mandatory methods course, increased practicum hours, reflective teaching modules.

Minor Points:

• Table 1 is very detailed and somewhat difficult to navigate. Consider summarizing subscale-level findings in the text and either labeling the subscales more clearly within the table or moving the full table to the supplementary materials.
  
  
• Some references are quite dated, particularly in the introduction (e.g., Durant & Bauer, 1997; Miller et al., 1997). As this section sets the stage for the study's relevance, it would benefit from more recent literature. 
  
  
• In line 42 (and elsewhere), the term "didactic" is used. Given the actually neutral meaning of the term, it might be more precise to use alternatives such as "teacher-centered", "lecture-based", or "instructivist".

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf