The Innovative and Research Professional Identity of Future Early Years and Primary School Teachers and Their Relationship with Psychological Well-Being

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The keyword "satisfaction with the choices" could be changed for another word that fits more closely with the content of the paper.
2. The first time "Table 1" is cited, it is too far from where it appears and it is not associated with the content. I propose to introduce a new "Table 1" with information about the characteristics of the sample.
3. You should explicit if the third- and fourth-year students, to whom the online questionnaire was sent, received any indication of how to proceed, as it was done with the first- and second-year students.
4. A Conclusions section should be introduced to separate these from the discussion of the results.
5. On line 275, the reference to Bolívar et al. is wrong. Number 17 corresponds to Sánchez in the references list.
6. Finally, the authors mention that studies in this field are scarce. Have they done a bibliographic search in other languages? If not, it is more than commendable that they do so and incorporate the results. There are many pertinent and relevant references in the authors' language, but more extensive references section in other languages ​​can help find results to compare with.

Author Response

1. The keyword "satisfaction with the choices" could be changed for another word that fits more closely with the content of the paper. The keyword has been removed (L. 24)
2. The first time "Table 1" is cited, it is too far from where it appears and it is not associated with the content. I propose to introduce a new "Table 1" with information about the characteristics of the sample. It has been eliminated the first time it appears and it has been decided not to include another table, as the characteristics of the sample are shown (L. 112).
3. You should explicit if the third- and fourth-year students, to whom the online questionnaire was sent, received any indication of how to proceed, as it was done with the first- and second-year students. This has been specified in the paper. (L. 153)
4. A Conclusions section should be introduced to separate these from the discussion of the results. A conclusion section has been included (L. 291)
5. On line 275, the reference to Bolívar et al. is wrong. Number 17 corresponds to Sánchez in the references list. The reference has been corrected (L. 275)
6. Finally, the authors mention that studies in this field are scarce. Have they done a bibliographic search in other languages? If not, it is more than commendable that they do so and incorporate the results. There are many pertinent and relevant references in the authors' language, but more extensive references section in other languages ​​can help find results to compare with. The search has been updated and some citations have been added, although studies are still scarce (L. 247, 287).

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Thanks a lot for your paper. The minor errors to correct are written in the copy of your paper.

I Think you should present the sentences of you scale the yes/no questions because otherwise we will not understand some of your comments about the results that you presented.

You wrote in line 240 and following that

“It is a true fact that there is an increasing demand for a wider range of professional skills beyond  those purely related to teaching, with teachers being asked to use innovative methodologies or   research and disseminate knowledge, among other tasks. “ but what literature supports your believes, it is not mentioned.

You should reflect with caution about the sentences I commented within your pdf because some of them make us give a big jump from “these results must be taken with caution due to their limitations, especially as to the sample size and the nature of the data collection tool” to say that

“Actually, in this study, a solid relationship has been found between research and innovative TPI, suggesting that a number of students have made a move into the assumption of a more elaborate and complex TPI, a new profile of innovative and research-246 oriented teaching as a function inherent in their role. “

How can we know that if we cannot read what your scale items were? The way you wrote that indicates that maybe you did some in interviews to students? If so, either a reference is missing, or you – knowing the items – are able to jump to that sentence… I could not see it only from your statistical computations. You should be re-thinking the sentence and clarify how may we also see that.

Nevertheless, my actual view of your paper, if you review your paper it would be a nice contribution to study teacher’s professional identity.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thanks a lot for your paper. The minor errors to correct are written in the copy of your paper.

I Think you should present the sentences of you scale the yes/no questions because otherwise we will not understand some of your comments about the results that you presented. Table 2 is added (targets two and three) (L.187)

You wrote in line 240 and following that. I'm sorry, but we don't quite understand what this comment refers to

“It is a true fact that there is an increasing demand for a wider range of professional skills beyond those purely related to teaching, with teachers being asked to use innovative methodologies or   research and disseminate knowledge, among other tasks. “ but what literature supports your believes, it is not mentioned. References are mentioned to support this statement (L.255)

You should reflect with caution about the sentences I commented within your pdf because some of them make us give a big jump from “these results must be taken with caution due to their limitations, especially as to the sample size and the nature of the data collection tool” to say that.

“Actually, in this study, a solid relationship has been found between research and innovative TPI, suggesting that a number of students have made a move into the assumption of a more elaborate and complex TPI, a new profile of innovative and research-246 oriented teaching as a function inherent in their role. “

These comments have been modified to give a more realistic view of the study's contributions (L. 291)

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Congratulations to the authors for their reply to the reviwer comments. Now the paper is ok to be published, since the majority of my questions were adequatly answered.