The Use of Socioscientific Issues in Science Lessons: A Scoping Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

 

Thank you for the opportunity to read and review the manuscript "The Use of Socioscientific Issues in Science Lessons: A Scoping  Review".

 

Your work provides an overview of an important area of literature. Please consider the following points when revising your paper. I wish you all the best.

-        You introduce the abbreviation SSI twice in the abstract. I recommend that you write out the term throughout this section and only introduce the abbreviation in the main section.

-        In the first sentence of the abstract, please explain why this is an "innovative approach".

-        Which STEM curriculum (line 37) are you referring to?

-        Explain the abbreviation STEAM education (line 52) the first time it is mentioned.

-        The last sentences of the abstract are more of a description of the methodology.

-        I really enjoyed reading your detailed and varied questions. Consider adding another column with reasons for each research question.

-        You have considered a large number of questions in your study. This is both a strength and a weakness of your work. I am aware that the presentation of the results is correspondingly long. This length makes it difficult for the reader to find a focus. Please try to shorten the descriptions of the results.

-        I also recommend that you number the sub-chapters of the results section consecutively according to the individual research questions.

-        The discussion of your many results is short, too short. I recommend that you only present the results in short form in the results chapter. You can use some of the content that is already in this chapter for the discussion. In the current version, the discussion is too superficial.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Just one suggestion to the author: adding a section of literature review. Although it is a scoping review, it is still a research. To me, all research is developed based on prior studies. Thus, it is rare no reviewing of the literature that helps define the key concepts, identify the key debate, and imply the analytic or theoretical framework guiding your research questions (you haven't mention any), the literature selection criteria, and data analysis approach. It also helps you to discuss your findings with the literature and provide the field forward. 

I understand that you may think most of the literature are selected as the data so it's hard to have a literature review section. But, I think you can still review the literature that generally focus on the concept/topics like socioscientific issues, scientifical consciousness, and active citizens. In particularly, you can review the literature to hypothesize the link between them as you mention identifiying the linkage is the aim of the study. 

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, thank you very much for revising the manuscript. In my opinion, it is now of a much higher quality than before. I wish you all the best for your future work!

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No further comments on it