Professional Agency for Learning as a Key for Developing Teachers’ Competencies?

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for inviting me to review this paper. I think it addresses an important gap in literature about the relationship between teacher agency and competence, and their implications for teacher education. 

The main strenght of this contribution is in the systematic overview of the similarities and differences between the concepts of agency and competence drawing on current literature. For what it's worth I also agree with the overall thrust of the argument that the recent focus on competencies in teacher education might need to be broadened to encompass the development of teacher agency as a way to support more open-ended, life long learning.

I would encourage the authors to further consider and specify how agency can be developed in teacher education. For example, I wondered what an alternative preparation might look like considering that the development of agency seems to require a preparation for the uncertainty of the future workplaces. On p. 3 (lines 150-151) authors raise an important question about the need for understanding of the (future) conditions of teachers work. This question could be more explicitly addressed in the following section. There is a potential contradiction in designing programmes based on predictions of future conditions and related 'competences' vs. building professionals' capacity to create/shape those very conditions. It would be interesting to see further elaboration and possibly and example of such open-ended teacher preparation. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer

Thank you very much for your constructive feedback and comments of our manuscript “Professional agency for learning as a key for developing teachers’ competencies?” that we have submitted to MDPI Education Sciences, and especially to the special issue Contemporary Teacher Education: A Global Perspective edited by Professor Kirsi Tirri. We perceived them highly useful for our work.

We have made the required revisions to the manuscript and followed your suggestions as far as possible. We have highlighted the changes made to the manuscript (with track changes), and also written a detailed report of our revisions. We clarify the changes made to the manuscript in our responses below.

REVIEWER 1:
1) Thank you for inviting me to review this paper. I think it addresses an important gap in literature about the relationship between teacher agency and competence, and their implications for teacher education.
AUTHORS' RESPONSE: Thank you for your feedback.
2) The main strenght of this contribution is in the systematic overview of the similarities and differences between the concepts of agency and competence drawing on current literature. For what it's worth I also agree with the overall thrust of the argument that the recent focus on competencies in teacher education might need to be broadened to encompass the development of teacher agency as a way to support more open-ended, life long learning.
AUTHORS' RESPONSE: Thank you for your feedback.
3) I would encourage the authors to further consider and specify how agency can be developed in teacher education. For example, I wondered what an alternative preparation might look like considering that the development of agency seems to require a preparation for the uncertainty of the future workplaces. On p. 3 (lines 150-151) authors raise an important question about the need for understanding of the (future) conditions of teachers work. This question could be more explicitly addressed in the following section. There is a potential contradiction in designing programmes based on predictions of future conditions and related 'competences' vs. building professionals' capacity to create/shape those very conditions. It would be interesting to see further elaboration and possibly and example of such open-ended teacher preparation.
AUTHORS' RESPONSE: Thank you for this feedback and suggestions. In line with this suggestion, we have revised paragraphs 4 and 5 and clarified our elaboration related to teacher education that would allow student teachers to learn professional agency. We have referred to our empirical research in which we have quite extensively investigated the characteristics of teacher education learning environment that enhance student teacher learning of professional agency.

We look forward to hearing about your feedback. Thank you for all your work.

Kind regards, Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

I would sugest to develop an empirical study in order to use the theoretical information that you have presented in the article.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you very much for your constructive feedback and comments of our manuscript “Professional agency for learning as a key for developing teachers’ competencies?” that we have submitted to MDPI Education Sciences, and especially to the special issue Contemporary Teacher Education: A Global Perspective edited by Professor Kirsi Tirri. We perceived them highly useful for our work.

We have made the required revisions to the manuscript and followed your suggestions as far as possible. We have highlighted the changes made to the manuscript (with track changes), and also written a detailed report of our revisions. We clarify the changes made to the manuscript in our responses below.

REVIEWER 2:
1)I would sugest to develop an empirical study in order to use the theoretical information that you have presented in the article.
AUTHORS' RESPONSE: Thank you for your feedback and suggestion. We have conducted several empirical studies related to teacher’s professional agency among student teachers, early career teachers and experienced teachers. We utilize these results in the manuscript and refer to our empirical results in it.

We look forward to hearing about your feedback. Thank you for all your work.

Kind regards, Authors

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors

It is not possible to perceive if it is a review, research or reflection article. Almost all of what is developed is framed in a kind of extensive background, without structure or review or research.

There is talk of discussion without having evidence of objectives, method or results.

The citations do not respond to the norm of the journals and the references there is an important process of modification and purification to the standards of the journal.

Greetings

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you very much for your constructive feedback and comments of our manuscript “Professional agency for learning as a key for developing teachers’ competencies?” that we have submitted to MDPI Education Sciences, and especially to the special issue Contemporary Teacher Education: A Global Perspective edited by Professor Kirsi Tirri. We perceived them highly useful for our work.

We have made the required revisions to the manuscript and followed your suggestions as far as possible. We have highlighted the changes made to the manuscript (with track changes), and also written a detailed report of our revisions. We clarify the changes made to the manuscript in our responses below.

REVIEWER 3:
1) Dear authors. It is not possible to perceive if it is a review, research or reflection article. Almost all of what is developed is framed in a kind of extensive background, without structure or review or research. There is talk of discussion without having evidence of objectives, method or results.
AUTHORS' RESPONSE: Thank you for your question. Our manuscript is a reflective article, in which we aim to elaborate the relationship between the two broad concepts extensively referred to in the literature: teacher competence and teacher’s professional agency. Interestingly, the constructs have been developed in the field of research on teacher development and teacher education without connections to each other. We have conducted both theoretical and empirical research on both of them. In this article, we bring these two broad and widely explored constructs together and elaborate their relationships and connections.
2) The citations do not respond to the norm of the journals and the references there is an important process of modification and purification to the standards of the journal. Greetings
AUTHORS' RESPONSE: Thank you for your feedback. We have corrected the citations and list of references in line with the journal’s requirements.

We look forward to hearing about your feedback. Thank you for all your work.

Kind regards, Authors

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Author

The situation of the article is exactly the same as in the previous version: It is not possible to perceive whether it is a review, research or reflection article. Almost all of what is developed is framed in a kind of extensive background, without structure or review or research.

There is talk of discussion without having evidence of objectives, method or results.

The only modification made is to adapt the citation system to that of the journal.

 

Regards

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf