Learning to Become a Physics Teacher: A Case Study of Experienced Teachers

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The engagement with Wengers learning theory is needed and not yet fully explored in research. However, there is a lack of justification in the introduction for this inclusion in regards to previous literature.  There is also many old references used which needs to be updated to reflect the current argument.  Also, the paper avoids situating the study in teacher identity research which is vast. Not clear if this relates to current teachers or those in training, clarification of terms required for an international audience. 

The research question does not connect with the direction of the research as it progresses - the gendered issue is evident in the literature review and methods but not clear in the question. 

There are aspects of Turkish schooling that are alluded to but not explained and this would be useful for an international reader to know to fully understand the decisions made in the study.

Wengers learning theory was used as part of the analysis process so it is essential to include this as a conceptual framework section in this article so that the reader understands the relationship here.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Strong use of English language - some minor grammatical errors only

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. My responses are attached on a Word Document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have had the opportunity to read "Learning to Become a Physics Teacher..." and overall I find it to be well-written and describing a research process that was done with care. The paper carefully and clearly reports the perspectives of four experienced, female physics teachers, with special attention on how they developed their skills and knowledge. 

My main concern about this paper is its broad scope. A sharper, better defined research question would help. As it stands, the reader is not sure what information is important and what motivates the research. This concern becomes especially prominent when the reader arrives at the last paragraph, which begins, "Global changes in society require new reforms and developments in education and lead to changes in curriculum, assessment, and instruction." That is a bold and sweeping conclusion to draw after gathering quotes from four teachers. 

I strongly recommend that the paper be framed carefully to make clear what the goal of the authors actually is. I don't think this will be difficult to do, but I think it will make the paper more appropriate for publication.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. My responses are attached on a Word Document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper was very interesting to me, I was glad to had opportunity to read it. I like how the text was structured. 

 

line 102 - teaching science with NOS (the abbreviation is not introduced)

 

lines 180-181

"three categories: Vocation-oriented (including technical and religion-based schools), science-based project schools, and normal schools"

check are categories properly named, the same in line 200

 

lines 202-203

"These participants were selected among 32 physics teachers (22 male, 10 female), who voluntarily participated in researcher’s project on physics teacher identity."

Why where these four participants selected?

In lines 205-210 this is partially explained, but not clear enough. Is it convenient sample (lines 208-210) or the selection was made based on the analysis (lines 205-208)?

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments. My responses are attached on a PDF Document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Significant but sound changes made that strengthened the position of this article.  

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I find the improvements made to the paper to be sufficient for moving toward publication. Thank you for attending to my concerns.