Sustainability in Higher Education Institutions in the Amazon Region: A Case Study in a Federal Public University in Western Pará, Brazil
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
The article intends to be an overview of the literature about conception and characteristics of curricula greening and, how it can contribute to teaching learning about sustainability in university. However, the submitted article, under the proposed terms, should not be approved. The article is a little vague, long and not well structured, which does undermines its reading. Some of the figures may be out of place and do not add value to the article (figure 1). The authors should review some of the concepts and if they refer to the same; namely: education for sustainability, education for sustainable development and education for the sustainable development goals. I also suggest reviewing the methodology used, as well as indicating the validation of the scales used in the questionnaire. I suggest the reading of some articles about sustainable development in Portuguese higher education that I consider that may help in the article restructuring, namely about: students perspective on sustainable development; the implementation of sustainability practices; roles, barriers and challenges toward sustainability; sustainable development incorporation and practices.
Yours sincerely,
Author Response
First of all many thanks for the comments ot the Reviewer 1. It was an opportunity to learn and improve the article structure, the aims and the methodology. Followin the commitment is a way of improving the quality of the article for the readers of this important journal. The comments were divided in five points and for each one was provided the response as it can be check below. All the point check “must be improved” were aldo reviewed.
Point 1: The article intends to be an overview of the literature about conception and characteristics of curricula greening and, how it can contribute to teaching learning about sustainability in university. However, the submitted article, under the proposed terms, should not be approved. The article is a little vague, long and not well structured, which does undermines its reading. Some of the figures may be out of place and do not add value to the article (figure 1).
Response 1: The aim of the article was changed to allow a better approach of Sustainable Devepolment and Education for Sustainable Development. It was analysed how Education to Sustainable Development (ESD) is reflected in the official documents (IDP) in a higher education institution in Amazon Region and how is the perception of students about Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). The structure of the article was changed and figure 1 was removed.
Point 2: The authors should review some of the concepts and if they refer to the same; namely: education for sustainability, education for sustainable development and education for the sustainable development goals.
Response 2: We change the title of the literature review to education for the sustainable development goals and tried along the text to uniformize and define concepts. The concept of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) was defined according to some auhors (AZEITEIRO et al. 2013; 2015; 2018; 2021; CAEIRO, 2020; DISTERHEFT et al., 2015; LOZANO et al., 2015; 2019; LEAL FILHO, 2009 and others) and some documents from UNESCO (2012) and United Nations Economic Comission for Europe (2011).
Point 3: I also suggest reviewing the methodology used, as well as indicating the validation of the scales used in the questionnaire.
Response 3: The methodoly included new section providing better explanation about the sample and used scales.
Point 4: I suggest the reading of some articles about sustainable development in Portuguese higher education that I consider that may help in the article restructuring, namely about: students perspective on sustainable development; the implementation of sustainability practices; roles, barriers and challenges toward sustainability; sustainable development incorporation and practices.
Response 4: It was included new articles suggested and many others about sustainable development in Portuguese higher education were already on the article.
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic discussed is important, especially in the context presented, but a small change must be made: the way of analyzing Ufopa's Institutional Development Plan.
The percentage compared between the number of appearances of the characteristics sought in the document does not allow to deduce which is more likely to be fulfilled. The number of occurrences of each term should be provided and not a percentage comparison between them. For example, it is not the same for one term to appear once and another twice (double) as for one to appear 100 times and the other 200 (also double). If there were already a comparison with documents from other centers, it would be a complete analysis, but I understand that it could be the objective of a future work.
Author Response
First of all many thanks for the comments of the Reviewer 2. The reviewer 2 recognize it is an importante approach specially the context investigated. The reviewer suggested a small change in a way of analyzing Ufopa Institutional Development Plan, and it was accepted and included in the article. Following the commitment it is a condition to reach the quality of the article for the readers of this important journal. All the point check “must be improved” were aldo reviewed.
Point 1: The percentage compared between the number of appearances of the characteristics sought in the document does not allow to deduce which is more likely to be fulfilled. The number of occurrences of each term should be provided and not a percentage comparison between them. For example, it is not the same for one term to appear once and another twice (double) as for one to appear 100 times and the other 200 (also double). If there were already a comparison with documents from other centers, it would be a complete analysis, but I understand that it could be the objective of a future work.
Response 1: The number of occurences of the characteristics were changed to cardinal numbers. We agree with the comment and it was provided others explanation about the result. It was necessary to review the concept of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) according to some auhors (AZEITEIRO et al. 2013; 2015; 2018; 2021; CAEIRO, 2020; DISTERHEFT et al., 2015; LOZANO et al., 2015; 2019; LEAL FILHO, 2009 and others) and some documents from UNESCO (2012) and United Nations Economic Comission for Europe (2011). The methodoly included new section providing better explanation about the sample and improving the scales. New tables were included with details explanation of the number and respective percentages to improve the discussion about the data collected.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
The article intends to be an overview of the literature about conception and characteristics of curricula greening and, how it can contribute to teaching learning about sustainability in university. The manuscript has been improved substantially and significantly; however, there are some bibliographical references that still need to be corrected. I suggest a detailed revision throughout the manuscript, especially the correction of all references appropriately.
Yours sincerely,
Author Response
Thank very much for your attention
Point 1: "There are some bibliographical references that still need to be corrected. I suggest a detailed revision throughout the manuscript, especially the correction of all references appropriately".
Response: A careful review of all references was carried out, in the article body and in bibliographical references.
