Indigenous Perspectives: Grounding Mathematics Education Through Land and Ancestors
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsthe overall goal to defend the existence of ineffable things related with mathematics is not achieved. this happens because the author do not present concrete episodes of practices in which readers can notice how the knowledge involved can not be grasped with an academical gaze. What the text provides is an unwarranted promise that the author have experienced such thing, and we have to trust him because he said so. I am afraid that we can enter in vicious circle of self-justification in which a request to provide concrete episodes and practices can be contested with an assersion that experiences and feelings can not be grasped but sensed and the request is no more than evidence of an academic canon.
I certainly believe than academic knowledge has blind spots , and also I believe that indigenous knowledge systems deploy unique ways of communication. However that is not equal to not provide evidence.
Reading the text I was feeling a a very problematic approach to identity: if within colonalism we needed to reject any claim coming from indigenous voices just because they were indigenous, now the author ask us to accept his claims just because he is indigenous.
Concerning the state of the art, I recommend to go deep into the concept of mutual interrogation of Willy Allangui, an author briefly referenced .
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
please check lines 490 and 491. It seems to be a typo.
Author Response
See attached cover letter of edits made to revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is a very special paper. It tells a strong story. The author’s personal journey is presented honestly and clearly. Thank you for inviting me to read this paper. I believe the paper needs some more work before it can be published.
From the three research questions it was not clear to me what the paper’s focus is. Reading through the paper, I can see how the author’s strong and personal journey that the paper describes, indeed can contribute to Indigenous master and ph d students in other parts of the world. I would love to see a research question that concerns the author’s personal development/journey/process. The abstract uses I and we, but from the paper text it seems to be only one single author.
Ethnomathematics appears at page 9, line 387 and without any reference. It is relevant to the reader to have this introduced before the author’s journey is presented. Maybe some more recent references to D’Ambrosio could contribute to the paper. Bishop (1988) is in the reference list. Including Bishop’s activity ‘explaining’ might contribute to the analysis.
The terms ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ are used as if these are well-defined. If the terms are wrapped as ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’, a discussion about the terms might be avoided. If not, then maybe the terms can be removed from the text.
Line 368: by closing my dominant eye. Here there would be interesting to read a sentence or two about how the author closed the dominant eye.
In section 3.6 t regarding Cajete (2000) as part of Indigenous ways of knowing, this seems to belong to the discussion section. The author prefers a different ordering than Cajete’s mind, body, emotions and spirit. The author needs to give reasons for the suggested change, and link it to the analysis in this study.
The author might benefit from including Skovsmose's (2006) paper about the prototype mathematics classroom in the paper. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0732312306000484Author Response
See attached cover letter of edits made to revised manuscript.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComments and suggestions are presented in attached file
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Kindly find attached edits.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
