Roots of Resilience: Uncovering the Secrets behind 25+ Years of Inclusive Education Sustainability

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A very interesting study on inclusive education and attention to diversity in Pakistan is presented. However, there are issues and aspects that need to be reviewed in depth to improve the quality and scientific coherence. The article needs improvement in all dimensions and sections of this study. From a theoretical point of view, the ideas on how to build inclusive education systems need to be reinforced with a wide range of international references (references that need to be updated).

 

A positive element of the study is related to adequate contextualisation, as the policy and legal development of inclusion in the Pakistani education system is very interesting.

However, the methodological section needs substantial improvement. There are relevant errors or 'absences' such as the visibility of the categorisation process, a more detailed explanation of population and sampling aspects, as well as an explanation of the scientific parameters of the data collection instruments used. The presentation of the results also needs to be improved, as the format is not very 'visual' and does not allow for a more dynamic reading. Textual evidence should be analysed in a more global way, and for this purpose, the use of tables or a more attractive format for the presentation of these data is recommended.

Finally, the conclusions lack important elements of discussion and critical pedagogical analysis, especially because the importance of teacher training in inclusive education is not highlighted and positively valued, as well as the need to sensitise educational communities to make disability and diversity in general visible and positively valued. mentioned in a clearer way.

Author Response

All the suggested changes are made and responded in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear colleagues

 

I very much enjoyed your article, which I would like to see become a widely cited work after it has been revised.

 

Regarding the positive aspects of your work and approach, I would first like to emphasise that

1. your work is a necessary complement to the many publications on inclusive education from the rich North/West.

2. your work is original because, unlike many other authors, you have creatively chosen a positive case study

3. your work is very respectful of the participants you worked with, using rich quotes from the interviews

 

As for possible "improvements", I would like to suggest the following

1 I think it is possible to get the same message across with fewer words, i.e. I would like to see the whole thing shortened (perhaps the richness of the quotations is preserved by sometimes shortening, skipping?)

2) You state on page 1 that when social sustainability is achieved, human sustainability can automatically be achieved....This is a very strong position at the beginning of the article. Even better would be to include 'evidence' here as well (bibliography is really needed here, otherwise you risk being dismissed as an ideologue). 

3. you say that you are working with a 'private' school... readers outside Pakistan need more context: what is the significance of these schools in the overall Pakistani education system?

4. you state that inclusion is no longer just about 'disability', only to go on to outline a whole list of impairments at the bottom of page 3. Is this contradictory?

5. on page 4, you say that you conducted interviews (which is true); you also used policy texts and texts from the school itself, and you also include observations: this makes your methodology seem sloppy and incomplete.

6. you say that you used 'purposive sampling': did this give you enough 'space' to hear alternative voices, or did you only hear those voices that were positive about the school's policies?

7. You are using the distinction between 'mainstream', CWSN and SEN children ..... to what extent is the division of children into these groups still inclusive?

8. You praise working with the 'resource room': where does this work counter-productively for inclusion (?) ...is nowhere to be found.

9. you talk about 'teachers', 'resource teachers' and 'support teachers': people from outside Pakistan need more context about this division

10. you use 'a class', 'a resource classroom' and 'an inclusive classroom': again, more context is needed for outsiders to understand you better

11. on page 16 you suddenly use 'handicapped children': sorry, this term is no longer used

12. when discussing peer support, it is unclear whether children with special needs can only "receive "or also act in the 'helper role'.

13. In the discussion and conclusion I see a little too much repetition of the results section. What I miss is a discussion of the TRANSFERABILITY of the lessons learned here to the wider Pakistani school (and beyond).

 

warm regards

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It is necessary to change the word 'handicapped children' because this terminology is seen as offensive language

Author Response

All the suggested changes are reported in the manuscript and responded in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A major effort has been made to improve the quality of the article, especially when introducing some tables that have improved the presentation of the results. However, it is necessary to introduce more tables and visual elements of analysis instead of the large number of textual evidence in the form of ‘paragraphs’. Similarly, it is worrying not to include more elements of the research context, as well as the processes of categorisation and triangulation of informants and sources of information.

There is also a need to introduce updated and international references on educational inclusion and attention to diversity, and to introduce more ideas on the importance of improving initial and in-service teacher training on inclusive education in Pakistan.

All this needs to be improved in a relevant way.

Author Response

Thank you for providing the guidelines. The additions have been made, and our response to the comments is provided in the attached sheet.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The colleagues have been able to provide 'solid answers' to all the suggestions and questions. They both added necessary references and made their research more accessible, e.g. with Table 2.

As it stands now, I am satisfied with the result.

Author Response

Thank you for appreciating our efforts and accepting the paper in the current format.