Encounters with Care in a Scottish Residential School in the 1980s

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear author,

I'd like to start by praising the way you introduce the article and your own position, in a short paragraph that reveals the maturity of the article itself. You clearly and objectively present the aim of the article, stating that your intention is: "to bring to light some of the characteristics of care experienced by those who have received it, refracted through the lens of my reflections on its provision". 

It presents the methodology on which the work is based: autoethnography and characterizes it, explaining the reasons for choosing it. It characterizes the method and the context in which the data collection takes place, making it possible to recognize, as it is assumed, the way in which the author relates to these spaces.

The concept of care appears after the contextualization of the research through Honneth's Theory of Recognition and after a brief explanation, the data and its respective analysis appear. I think the article could benefit from presenting a more systematic literature review on the main theme and problem of this research, and even triangulate this theory with other relevant ones on the subject. If one of the ideas is to reaffirm the relevance of the Theory of Recognition as a motto for thinking about action in foster homes, putting it up for discussion with other authors could support this position.

Finally, I think that in the conclusion, the author could try to summarize and respond to the objective.

Author Response

Firstly, many thanks for the positive review of the article.

Two points are made

The concept of care appears after the contextualization of the research through Honneth's Theory of Recognition and after a brief explanation, the data and its respective analysis appear. I think the article could benefit from presenting a more systematic literature review on the main theme and problem of this research, and even triangulate this theory with other relevant ones on the subject. If one of the ideas is to reaffirm the relevance of the Theory of Recognition as a motto for thinking about action in foster homes, putting it up for discussion with other authors could support this position.

Response: I can see where you are coming from on this but don't feel able to do it 1) for the very practical reason that the article is already over 10,000 words. To do what you suggest would substantially increase the length; and 2) I'm not sure I set out to assert the relevance of recognition theory alongside other theories. I think all I would claim is that it fitted for me and helped me group themes but i also found it attractive in considering the subjective, the intersubjective and the social spheres, whereas other approaches tend to have a narrower focus

Finally, I think that in the conclusion, the author could try to summarize and respond to the objective.

I have sought to tighten the conclusion to hopefully bring it back round to the question/premise a bit more clearly

Reviewer 2 Report

The focus of the paper was to challenge the so-called grand narrative on the nature of care in residential schools as an abusive and cruel one (cf pp. 3, 11, 14). The author adopted autoethnography as a methodology that gives insight into "the experience of everyday care" (p. 2) in those settings, taking into account a particular Scottish residential school, St Roch's, to tell the story of seven interviewed men, residents there in 1980s.

What seems missing here is a bit more details about those interviews - were they performed by the use of standarized questionnaire or just a semi-structured interview, recorded and then professionally transcribed or other method... I'm sure one can find these details in the Author's book, but it might be also helpful for this paper's readers.

The main value of this text lies in the aim "to put another side of the story" (p. 5) about residential schools in the 20th century. It seems to be totally at odds with the so-called "grand narrative of residential schooling as failing or to [check the spelling please] offer care" (p. 3), and at this point it makes the scholarly discussion come alive and "takes us into the realms of how stories and memories are constructed" (p. 14) to offer an alternative narrative on this basis, bringing the reader closer to an objective assessment of reality.

A few minor errors to be corrected:

p. 4 (bottom): a particular philosophy withing which...

p 5: I do not recognise the depictions of residential schools asserted in the public story of them; they with what I saw and experienced.

p. 13: bell hooks (2003: p.127) - Hooks (2000) in the list of references

The article is very interesting, original and at the same time provides a great opportunity to transcend the vision of the "punitive institution" by the "happy home" memory.

Author Response

Firstly, many thanks for such a positive review.

I have addressed the typological errors you helpfully point out.

I agree about the need for a bit more detail on methods and have provided this in line with your comments.

Thanks again