Entrepreneurship Competence in Pre-Service Teachers Training Degrees at Spanish Jesuit Universities: A Content Analysis Based on EntreComp and EntreCompEdu

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

When you said...Three professionals from the field of
education closely linked to the EC have carried out a content analysis of the 631 competences that correspond to the ... what do you mean? Who are these three professionals? You and your team? Basically, I am wondering whether you are not the one who should carry out the analysis. Perhaps you need to reword that.

I am surprised that your paper ends with 'Discussion'. I can appreciate that you have a different style of writing, but I thought the standard practice was to have a conclusion section that deals inter alia, with aspects such as limitations, recommendation/future research direction, contributions of the study, and implications which are often derived from the findings. I see you have some of these in your Discussion section but it will do you some good to section them for clarity.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, 

First of all, I would like to thank you for your comments, which have helped me to improve the manuscript.

Point 1: References must be improved. 

Response 1: I have reviewed all the referenced. As you can see in the revised version of the manuscript (attached) I have made several changes. See page 13. 

Point 2: When you said...Three professionals from the field of
education closely linked to the EC have carried out a content analysis of the 631 competences that correspond to the ... what do you mean? Who are these three professionals? You and your team? Basically, I am wondering whether you are not the one who should carry out the analysis. Perhaps you need to reword that.

Response 2: I have reworded this paragraph, as our team (I am one of the members) was the one who carried out this study. See page 6.

Point 3: I am surprised that your paper ends with 'Discussion'. I can appreciate that you have a different style of writing, but I thought the standard practice was to have a conclusion section that deals inter alia, with aspects such as limitations, recommendation/future research direction, contributions of the study, and implications which are often derived from the findings. I see you have some of these in your Discussion section but it will do you some good to section them for clarity.

Response 3: I have prepared a new section (8. Conclusions). I have divided the Discussion section into two different sections: 7. Discussion and 8. Conclusions. I have also added extra information on this last one. See page 12.

I want to thank you again your comments and recommendations. I hope I have improved the manuscript. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Author (s),

I've read the manuscript entitled " Entrepreneurship competence in pre-service teachers training degrees at Spanish Jesuit universities: a content analysis based on EntreComp and EntreCompEdu" with interest and I thank you for this opportunity. 

Then I present some recommendations and suggestions (see the attached file).

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear reviewer, 

First of all, I would like to thank you for your comments, which have helped me a lot to improve the manuscript.

Point 1: The manuscript lacked to write its title. And regarding the title, I suggest that it be more concise.

Response 1: I thought that the title did not appear in this version. I apologize for that. I consider that the title of the manuscript is concise and I have doubts about how to make it more concise.

Point 2:  Section 1 – Introduction - the introduction should be improved in order to include the objective(s) of the investigation and the structure of the manuscript. the objectives are only presented in section 3.

Response 2: I have included a new paragraph at the end of section 1. I have included the objectives and the method used to be more precise and clear. See page 1 of the attached document with a revised version of the manuscript.

Point 3: subsection 1.1. concerning the Spanish context is too long to be in the introduction section, I suggest that this context be integrated in another section after section 2.

Response 3: I have added a new section (2. Spanish context: pre-service or initial teacher education in higher education). I have decided to leave it after the introduction to continue the thread. I hope you see it also suitable. See page 2.

Point 4: in subsection 2.1, in the paragraph before figure 1, it refers to the 15 competences, however it does not list them and this information is only visible in table 4. Perhaps reference should be made to table 4 or an annex should be inserted.

Response 4: I have added a reference to Table 4. See page 4.

Point 5: Because of the colours, in figure 1, it is not possible to read the numbering of competences related to "ideas and opportunities".

Response 5: I have changed the blue colour of the figure 1 to a lighter blue. See page 4. 

Point 6: in subsection 2.2 refers to "EntreCompEdu is based on six principles according to which knowledge is ...." are they 5 or 6 principles? revise the text that follows in accordance with the no. of principles.

Response 6: I have revised it and there are 6 principles. See page 4.

Point 7: Table 6 is difficult to understand. Explain the meaning of the 2nd line (see below).

Response 7: I have rewritten the referred paragraph. See page 10.

Point 8: throughout the text the expression "if we pay attention to " is used several times, they should be improved or replaced by another to avoid repetition

Response 8: I have revised the whole text and used different ways to refer to it: considering, regarding, as for...

Point 9: The discussion and conclusion sections must be separated. In the conclusion, the theoretical contributions to the study of this area should be highlighted, as well as the contributions to the academy. The conclusion, limitations and future research directions need to be improved with the contributions of this study

Response 9: I have prepared a new section (8. Conclusions). I have divided the Discussion section into two different sections: 7. Discussion and 8. Conclusions. I have also added extra information on this last one. See page 12.

Point 10: References must be improved. 

Response 10: I have reviewed all the referenced. As you can see in the attached revised version of the manuscript. I have also made several changes. See page 13. 

Point 11: One last global assessment: Could the differences obtained be due to geographical location? or to the organizational culture itself? Have you thought about these issues? How to improve the capacity of entrepreneurial skills.

Response 11: It could be an interesting hypothesis for the research we are dealing with at this moment, where we consider universities of the different autonomies of Spain and, therefore, we will have more data. In the case of this study, the five universities belong to the same Jesuit institution. We think that this is a factor that groups the different universities from different autonomies. In any case, I consider that it could be a key factor for the new research.

I want to thank you again your comments and recommendations. I hope I have improved the manuscript. 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

thank you for improving the paper