Epistemological Obstacles to Social Studies Education

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper examines critical issues in social studies education that are especially timely today. Since I (the peer reviewer) have a U.S. context, so it is impossible to read this paper without considering political implications. This is perhaps something the author could consider -- as Gramsci, Foucault, etc. were often counter-political in their critiques of discourse and hegemony. 

Another point to consider is that social studies education in the U.S. often involves six dimensions: sociology, anthropology, geography, economics, history, and civics. Each of these disciplines are make up the loosley defined concept of "social studies" for K-12 students. If this paper seeks to identify epistemological obstacles in social studies education, one would need to examine curriculum standards that predetermine curriculum and pedagogy in many schools. I would recommend a few sentences that address the limitations of critical social studies inquiry.

Last, it is impossible to reform epistemological obstacles in social studies without mentioning Eurocentricity and White, male-dominated narratives [that focus on Western centrality, not diverse subaltern perspectives]. This ignores other dimensions of diversity that are largely missing in social studies. How can obstacles in the systems be addressed when the silencing of voices is engrained within systemic inequity?

Last, school curricula is big business in the West. It is intrinsically connected to standardized testing, college readiness, and capitalism. Many students, teachers, and educational leaders feel powerless. I would recommend the paper addressing the economic side as an obstacle to epistemological reform.

Author Response

Comments 1: This paper examines critical issues in social studies education that are especially timely today. Since I (the peer reviewer) have a U.S. context, so it is impossible to read this paper without considering political implications. This is perhaps something the author could consider -- as Gramsci, Foucault, etc. were often counter-political in their critiques of discourse and hegemony. 

Response 1: I have added a reference to this aspect in the discussion, which I agree needed to be strengthened, although I believe it was already present in the article. I have used Gramsci and Foucault to address it, as well as another article on the relationship between education and the recent rise of national populism.

Comments 2: Another point to consider is that social studies education in the U.S. often involves six dimensions: sociology, anthropology, geography, economics, history, and civics. Each of these disciplines are make up the loosley defined concept of "social studies" for K-12 students. If this paper seeks to identify epistemological obstacles in social studies education, one would need to examine curriculum standards that predetermine curriculum and pedagogy in many schools. I would recommend a few sentences that address the limitations of critical social studies inquiry.

Response 2: I have made some references to the limitations imposed by curricular standards, another aspect that makes overcoming epistemological obstacles challenging. However, I chose not to delve into the reality of social studies in the United States. Firstly, this theoretical discussion is written from outside the United States, and I do not see why I should focus specifically on this country. While I understand that the concept of social studies originates from this context, it is not exclusive to it. I intended to use the term "social studies" as an umbrella to refer to these fields globally, whether they are called history, social sciences, citizenship, civic education, or other names depending on the country.

Comments 3: Last, it is impossible to reform epistemological obstacles in social studies without mentioning Eurocentricity and White, male-dominated narratives [that focus on Western centrality, not diverse subaltern perspectives]. This ignores other dimensions of diversity that are largely missing in social studies. How can obstacles in the systems be addressed when the silencing of voices is engrained within systemic inequity?

Response 3: Although this topic was addressed in the text, it is true that it lacked the precision and detail you suggest. I appreciate the proposal and have further developed this aspect in greater detail.

Comments 4: Last, school curricula is big business in the West. It is intrinsically connected to standardized testing, college readiness, and capitalism. Many students, teachers, and educational leaders feel powerless. I would recommend the paper addressing the economic side as an obstacle to epistemological reform.

Response 4: I have also made this aspect explicit in the text, as it is true that, in the original draft, it was not sufficiently evident.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Reading the text, I can see that there is a thorough theoretical study and interesting contributions, although perhaps in the final part of the conclusions, where the authors' studies on primary school children are mentioned, some of the results should be more specific and the consistency with future lines of initial and in-service teacher training should be considered in order to overcome the epistemological obstacles described.

Author Response

Comments 1: Reading the text, I can see that there is a thorough theoretical study and interesting contributions, although perhaps in the final part of the conclusions, where the authors' studies on primary school children are mentioned, some of the results should be more specific and the consistency with future lines of initial and in-service teacher training should be considered in order to overcome the epistemological obstacles described.

Response 1: I have included specific results from the mentioned studies, which serve to exemplify the challenges faced by both teachers and students when analyzing information on social issues, and how students often struggle significantly to question the hegemonic discourses that shape their understanding. Additionally, a brief mention of future lines, advocating for work based on social issues, reinforces the coherence between the conclusions and the section on future directions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf