Adult Education and Globally Engaged Trainers: The Case of Vocational Training Institutes
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1. Paragraph 1 sets out introductory arguments that should be better focused on the specific topic of the article. It is in this chapter that the object of the investigation should be clearly defined. First, it should be clarified what the authors mean by "global education" (a still too general definition is given in paragraph 3) and which are the different possible approaches. Furthermore, it should be clarified what it means to be able to practice "global education" in formal adult education. Also in the first paragraph it should be clarified whether the object of the survey is the propensity of teachers to train with respect to "global education", or if it is also something else: their training needs, their level of competence in the field, etc.
2. This question is not taken into consideration even in paragraph 2. Here it should be clarified which are the specific domains and subdomains that should be part of a teacher's competence. Without having clarified this aspect, it is difficult to understand what is the demand for teacher training, what are the domains and sub-domains they need to improve. Without this in-depth study, the survey risks detecting only the potential demand for access to formal teacher training and their propensity to train in "global education". In reality, some elements to identify the demand for teacher training emerge, but almost exclusively in relation to disciplinary fields (sociology, religion, etc.) and not to problems of active citizenship, for example.
3. In paragraph 3 the methodological framework is well presented. The results gathered from the survey are presented in detail. One could say that more data is exposed than is actually used in the analysis. In fact, a descriptive approach mainly focused on access to training in the field of global education and on the propensity to participate in it in the future prevails. It would have been interesting to know the correlation between the demand for participation and the learning outcomes possessed by teachers and deriving from their previous training experiences.
4. In paragraph 4 an in-depth analysis of the meanings of what is described in paragraph 3 should be better developed. I would recommend avoiding the repetition of the description of some data to instead discover their meanings. In the end, the reader is left with an elementary unresolved question: out of 310 teachers, how many are -albeit to varying degrees- the teachers who know how to practice "global education"?
Author Response
Dear sir/madam,
To begin with we would like to thank you for all your valuable comments which helped us improve our paper.
Regarding your suggestions, the object of the investigation was clearly defined, and the term of global education was further developed. Some more information was given about the domain factors and sub-factors of the global competence. However, we did not focus on them in this study, given that we did it in another one.
We totally agree with you that the demand for teacher education is in relation to disciplinary fields. However, especially in the field of VTI, it also derives from the labor market needs and from social and personal concerns. That is why we presented the contemporary context which affects the educational policies and the implementation of education and training.
In addition, we agree with you that this study is a descriptive approach that shows the participants’ propensity to participate in relative training programs in the future. At the discussion part some information which was presented in the “findings” part was deleted, in order to avoid repeating it.
What is more, regarding the “unresolved question”, how many teachers know how to practice “global education”, it is not something we can answer in a direct way, given that we did not pose a question like this. We wanted to expand our previous findings, according to which the sample demonstrated a high level of knowledge, skills, values on global competence and see the correlation with their participation in relative training programs. However, our future proposal could be to examine their ability to use their “global education” mindset, skillset and toolset in their working field.
Finally, we would like to mention that all changes are highlighted in yellow.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is very interesting and well-written. However, it can be improved in the following aspects:
1. The literature review section is a bit scattered, especially section 2. The authors need to explore why and how these trainers in Greece are important in terms of improving young people's global competence, especially in non-formal educational settings. Section 2 involves a lot irrelevant information, such as adult literacy, social justice etc. The authors need to narrow down the focus.
2. The website links in section 2 need to be in the reference, rather than in the main text.
3. The methodology section needs to include data analysis, i.e. how did you analysis the data.
Author Response
Dear sir/madam,
To begin with we would like to thank you for all your valuable comments which helped us improve our paper.
In addition, the literature review has been improved, the website links have been moved to the reference list, and at the methodology section we referred to the data analysis briefly, given that the data analysis is fully described at the “findings” section.
Finally, we would like to mention that all changes are highlighted in yellow.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The essay risks appearing to readers as a remnant of the "previous era". The conclusions should be more interpretative and assume the task of updating the meaning of the research findings.
Authors should explain what “global education” nowadays means while the world is facing an increasing trend toward de-globalisation and global decoupling: geopolitical conflicts, crisis of multilateralism, and so on.
It would be appropriate to explain what are the challenges of training for "global education" in times of war.
At the same time, always in the conclusions, it could be taken into account that the European debate (European Commission) is strongly oriented towards "skills for life". Is this the direction in which global education practices should evolve? Or are skills for life not teachable in a context of formal education?
Author Response
Dear sir/madam,
To begin with we would like to thank you for all your valuable comments which helped us improve our paper.
In addition, the literature review has been extended and some references to de-globalization dimension have been made in relation to current events. However, we do not think that much emphasis should be put on global education in times of war, because it is not a basic dimension or a research question of our paper. We totally agree with you that soft skills are related to our topic and a strong correlation has been made.
Finally, we would like to inform you that all changes are highlighted in green colour.
Thank you!
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
