Teacher Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Tensions and Challenges of Initial Teacher Training Practices

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for providing this opportunity to read your article entitled: ‘Teacher Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: tensions and challenges of initial teacher training practices.’ It focuses on a relevant topic within the field of teacher education and works with a potentially interesting data set. It is presented in a clear manner, with appropriate supporting tables and figures and accurate referencing. The conclusions drawn are potentially interesting, but please see further commentary below.

General comments

The abstract succeeds in giving an effective overview, and the introduction establishes the rationale for the research and situates the study in some of the existing literature. The decision to work with universities is well-justified and the methods of data collection are appropriate. It is interesting that most universities chose to maintain the practice model in times of emergency and the identification of discursive, symbolic and triads of co-construction is interesting and has potential to further our understanding of the impact of the pandemic on teacher education practices. The paper certainly has potential merit.

However, I feel the manuscript would benefit from development in the following areas:

·        While it is noted that the pandemic generated feelings of insecurity, melancholy and uncertainty in teachers in training (line 69), opportunities to reflect on the impact of both the pandemic and the changing nature of triads on the development of teacher identity are not really exploited. There is passing mention of identity construction at line 54, but this important element could have been developed further in the findings and analysis (or omitted from the introduction if this is not a helpful direction of travel).

·        The exploration of ethics is underdeveloped. There is passing reference at line 80 to ethical protocols, but what these are or how they have been informed are not detailed. The positionality of the researcher(s) is also not addressed. Were the participants known to the researcher(s)? Are the researcher(s) from the field of teacher education? What preconceptions are held? What steps have been taken to mitigate against bias? Issues of reflexivity are always central to qualitative research and this is not considered here.

·        While it is appreciated that there are constraints with word count, the process of data analysis is not explored in sufficient detail. How were the categories listed in Table 2 derived? Was there a process of thematic analysis? How does this relate to the Dimensions listed in Table 1? There is mention of coding at line 106 but no further detail. In order for the findings to be fully valid, the process and analysis needs further exploration.

·        The relationship between the findings and the discussion is also not as clear as it could be. It is noted (again) at line 243 that the pandemic generated feelings of insecurity, melancholy and uncertainty in teachers in training but this isn’t fully evidenced in the data as presented.

·        It is acknowledged that this study is situated in Chile but there could have been greater engagement with the extensive international literature on the impact of Covid on the teacher education, particularly with regard to concepts on innovation (see for example Kidd & Murray, 2020; La Velle et al, 2020; Cutri et al, 2020; Scull et al 2020; Darling-Hammond & Hyler, 2020; Flores & Swennen, 2020…)

·        Although interesting, the study seems somewhat stuck in the times of Covid. It offers an insightful description of the impact on formative triads, but I am left with a nagging question of ‘so what?’. The paper could be richly extended to include some exploration of how the changes implemented at the time of pandemic have been adopted (or not) since the lifting of restrictions. Without this detail, the paper remains an interesting but largely static description of a point in time.

Specific comments

Line 16: Consider including COVID-19 and/or Pandemic in the keywords. The omission seems odd given the centrality of the time to the analysis

Line 169 (and after): The difference between the abbreviations PF and FP is not clear

 

Manuscript Evaluation

Novelty: The question isn’t especially original (formative triads are common in preservice teacher education settings) but is well-defined. The results certainly have the potential to advance current knowledge, but there needs to be a greater interplay between the findings and the discussion, as detailed above.

Scope: The work appears to fit the journal’s scope well.

Significance: The results appear to be interpreted appropriately but not all conclusions are fully supported by the results at present.

Quality: The article is written in an appropriate way, with clarity of presentation and accuracy.

Scientific Soundness: As outlined above, the paper would benefit from further explanation of the methods of data analysis and ethical considerations.

Interest to the Readers: The paper is of potential interact to the readers of the journal, but would benefit from some consideration of practices since the lifting of restrictions. Had the publication date been 2020, things would be different but the teacher education worlds has moved on since then.

Overall Merit: With revision, there would be merit in publishing this work.

English Level: The English language used is appropriate and understandable.

I wish you every success with your work and hope that my comments are useful in the revision process.

Author Response

Each comment is answered in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article presents interesting research based on interviews conducted during the pandemic, a time when many educational institutions faced great challenges in continuing to educate students in a non-face-to-face manner. Some areas for improvement and suggested additions to enrich the content are detailed below:

- Abstract: The abstract is well laid out, with a clear statement of objectives, methods, and results. However, it is essential to add a final conclusion that synthesizes the findings and their relevance. This conclusion will allow readers to better understand the impact and implications of the study.

- Introduction: The introduction is adequate, but it would be beneficial to elaborate on the specific gap that the study aims to address. A more detailed analysis of the context and issues will better situate the research and highlight its relevance in the current educational landscape.

- Method:

          o   Participants: Include a specific section describing the participants, detailing their demographic characteristics and any inclusion or exclusion criteria used.

     o   Sample collection procedure: Explain in more detail how participants were selected and contacted. Describe the data collection process, including any tools or platforms used.

     o   Interview categorization system: Detail the interview categorization and analysis system, providing examples if possible.

     o   Informed consent: Explicitly mention obtaining informed consent from all participants, emphasizing its ethical importance.

- Annexes: Include the interview questions in an annex to provide greater transparency and allow for replication of the study.

-        - Results:

       o   Tables and figures: In tables, such as Table 2, it would be useful to include percentages in addition to counts to facilitate interpretation of the data. Figure 1 is very interesting and can be supplemented with detailed descriptions.

       o   Additional analysis: Consider including additional analyses that can provide further insight into the data obtained.

     - Discussion and conclusions: Practical implications: add a section that discusses the practical implications of the study. Answer questions such as: what implications does this study have for the future of distance education? What actions can be taken from these findings?

      - Recommendations: Provide specific recommendations based on the results, directed to educational institutions, policy makers and other relevant stakeholders.

      - References: References are current and relevant, but it is crucial that they follow the journal's guidelines. Be sure to review and adjust formatting according to specific guidelines provided by the journal.

      - Ethics Committee: include a statement that the study has been approved by the institution's ethics committee. Generally, an approval code is assigned and should be included in the article.

      -  Ethical transparency: Highlight compliance with ethical principles in the conduct of the study, strengthening the credibility and integrity of the work.

Finally, it is advisable to carry out an exhaustive review of the document to ensure coherence, clarity and precision in the presentation of the information. The integration of these elements will contribute to improve the quality of the article and its impact on the academic and educational community.

Author Response

Each comment is answered in the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for responding to the review comments. I believe that the paper is much improved as a result.