Towards a Sustainable Future through Renewable Energies at Secondary School: An Educational Proposal
, Rosa P. Merchán †, José M. Mateos Roco †, Alejandro Medina † and María Jesús Santos *,†Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
According to Sustainability's Instructions to Authors (Sustainability | Instructions for Authors (mdpi.com)), the journal accepts two main types of articles: articles and reviews. The manuscript does not fulfill the requirements of either of the two types of publication.
‘Articles: Original research manuscripts. The journal considers all original research manuscripts provided that the work reports scientifically sound experiments and provides a substantial amount of new information.’
‘Reviews: These provide concise and precise updates on the latest progress made in a given area of research.’
The manuscript, as it is stated at numerous places in the manuscript itself, presents what the authors call ‘an educational proposal intended to secondary school students.’ It provides the detailed description of an educational method intended to raise students’ awareness of issues related to energy and renewable sources of energy and to teach them about energy generation. The paper does not present any original research or experiments (the experiments described are the ones to be performed in class for educational purposes). Thus, no research results are obtained either.
It seems that the manuscript would be better placed in a journal on educational methods and methodology. I am sure that, given the topicality of the issues and the need for awareness raising on environmental and energy issues, the practical methods and teaching materials presented would be very welcome in such a periodical.
Best regards,
Reviewer
Author Response
The authors of the work would like to acknowledge the referee by his/her careful reading of the manuscript and the suggestions enclosed in the comments. It should be noted that the work is focused to the special issue "Hands-On Science: Developing a Sustainable Education System"
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/special_issues/hands_on_science
Among the lines proposed in this special issue, we think that the following ones are directly related to our work: hands-on science, curricular integration, SDG, low-cost science, science education, experimental citizen science…
We have tried to change the way the manuscript is presented, emphasizing its main conclusions as a relevant research work. It was highlighted that there are several ways for secondary education teachers to make students familiar with renewable energies and SDG objectives within the contents of science and technology courses. In the work different methodologies, experiments, adapted evaluation routines, etc. are made available for teachers in a novel way. This point has been emphasized in the Abstract and the Introduction. Furthermore, we have enriched the bibliography, to justify and motivate the work at a research level. And, finally, we have deeply revised all the manuscript to present the main outputs of the work more clearly. Particularly, Introduction and Conclusions sections have been completely rewritten.
Reviewer 2 Report
None
Author Response
The authors of the work wish to thank the referee for his careful reading of the manuscript, as well as for his/her positive feedback.
Reviewer 3 Report
The article deals with an interesting, actual, and relevant topic; however, in its current state, the paper fails to confirm the scientific originality and contribution of the survey to the field of research. Moreover, regarding the theoretical and empirical parts of the paper, it is to note that the content does not fit the journal's goals, aims, and requirements.
The abstract needs major revision. It is suggested to emphasize the main goals and objectives of the manuscript and validate the process and results. Literature review on the interlinks between the role of education supporting the achievement of sustainability goals, comparison of applicable teaching-learning methodologies considering previous studies are entirely missing. Therefore, creating a literature review (by dividing the methodology part of the paper) section and adding the research objectives directly to this part of the manuscript are recommended. It is to note that besides the over-detailed description of the planned sessions and evaluation, the development process (motivation, ideation, alternatives, decision making) of the proposed program and curriculum and the involvement and engagement of the stakeholders should be highlighted. Without these essential modifications, the mismatch between the article content and descriptive style and the journal's requirements cannot be solved; it is recommended to submit an entirely new article (after reflections are available) or submit the manuscript to another journal focusing on educational issues.
The main conclusions and the usability of the results are not stressed. As the authors highlighted, no real experience is available considering the success or challenges of the proposed program. Regarding the style, language use, and grammar, the article fulfills the requirements. Editing, referencing, and quotation meet the formal requirements.
Author Response
The authors of the work would like to acknowledge the referee by his/her careful reading of the manuscript and the suggestions enclosed in the comments. Next we detail the changes made with respect to all your comments and suggestions.
- “It is to note that the content does not fit the journal's goals, aims, and requirements”
Please note that the manuscript was submitted aiming to the special issue "Hands-On Science: Developing a Sustainable Education System"
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/special_issues/hands_on_science
Among the lines proposed in this special issue, we think that the following ones are directly related to our work: hands-on science, curricular integration, SDG, low-cost science, science education, experimental citizen science…
- “The abstract needs major revision. It is suggested to emphasize the main goals and objectives of the manuscript and validate the process and results”
We have tried to change the way the work is presented, emphasizing that there are several ways for secondary education teachers to make students familiar with renewable energies and SDG objectives within the contents of science and technology courses.
In the work different methodologies, experiments, adapted evaluation routines, etc. are made available for teachers in a novel way. Particularly, according to this new approach, the Abstract has been modified in the revised version, highlighting (as suggested) the main objectives and goals of the work.
- “Literature review on the interlinks between the role of education supporting the achievement of sustainability goals, comparison of applicable teaching-learning methodologies considering previous studies are entirely missing.
Therefore, creating a literature review (by dividing the methodology part of the paper) section and adding the research objectives directly to this part of the manuscript are recommended.”
The scheme presented in the article comply with the sections requested by the magazine: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions.
We agree with the referee in which respect the comment to the literature review. In the revised version a deep bibliographic revision has been added in the Introduction, helping the readers to understand the novel contributions of the manuscript. Accordingly, Introduction has been completely restructured and enlarged.
Moreover, following your suggestions, the objectives of the manuscript have been clearly stated at the beginning of Section 2.
- “It is to note that besides the over-detailed description of the planned sessions and evaluation, the development process (motivation, ideation, alternatives, decision making) of the proposed program and curriculum and the involvement and engagement of the stakeholders should be highlighted.”
We also agree with the reviewer, probably the work sessions and evaluation process proposed in the manuscript were explained in a too detailed way in the original version. In the revised one this was abbreviated. At the same time, specially in the Introduction, the main methodological novelties of the proposed program have been highlighted.
- “It is recommended to submit an entirely new article (after reflections are available).”
The changes made in the revised version affect all the sections of the paper and, consequently, the work is presented in a quite different shape. We hope that all these changes allow the interested readers to find the manuscript methods and conclusions more remarkable and compelling.
- “The main conclusions and the usability of the results are not stressed. “
An important effort has been made to remark the possible use of all the material in the manuscript, as a review of experiences and innovative activities to work with renewable energy and to make it more attractive, specially for secondary school teachers, but also for other readers. Particularly, the final Section, Conclusions, has been completely rewritten.
Reviewer 4 Report
It is an excellent paper and the accepted without any corrections.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
According to the Special Issue Information (https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/special_issues/hands_on_science#info), the editors ‘warmly invite researchers to submit their contributions, both original research articles and review papers, to this Special Issue.’ Unfortunately, the manuscript still does not fall into either of the categories, as no scientific research is described in it, and the literature review is only a small part of the introduction, serving as a lead-in to a collection of teaching methods. Even the authors call their work an ‘Educational Proposal’ in the title (without actually specifying what they mean by proposal).
In spite of rewriting some parts of the manuscript, especially the Introduction and the Conclusions sections, the paper still does not present any original research or experiments (the experiments described are the ones to be performed in class for educational purposes). Thus, no research results are obtained either and no real conclusions are drawn.
I am still certain that the manuscript would be better placed in a journal on educational methods and methodology.
Should the manuscript be published in a journal, there are still a number of issues that need to be dealt with. Some examples are given below:
- Language: major problems, including wrong word formation (wrong word endings), wrong collocations, wrong prepositions, incorrect spelling, wrongly used possessive structures, inappropriate vocabulary (wrong choice of words at places), vague expressions (e.g. ’educational proposal’, ’rubric’ etc. without explanation), wrong referencing (use of pronouns), incorrect word order;
- Strange (probably unintended) expressions, e.g. ‘The goal of living on a sustainable planet’;
- Unclear parts, e.g. the role of the ‘reporter’;
- Formatting issues, e.g. the positions of the figures and tables (they sometimes seem rather random), paragraph formatting
Best regards,
Reviewer
Reviewer 3 Report
The article deals an intresting topic, all the modifications can be accepted. It is to note that in its current form, the manuscript fits to the aims and goals of the special issue. Due to the extensive efforts of the authors, the logic and content of the paper are in harmony.
