Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals through Company Staff Vocational Training—The Case of the Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB) INEBB Project
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Although the report is well described, the feeling in the reader is to be left with nothing in hand as there is no theoretical work about Vocational Education and Training and it is not clear the INEBB project model and how this goes to integrate a theoretical work with Education for Sustainable Development (ESD).
I think considerable revisions are needed to improve the manuscript. Below are my comments:
Report the theoretical framework that gave way to the project model and indicate the methodological procedures of implementation and data to support the same validity.
Author Response
Thanks for the review comments and feedback on the manuscript. Most of the comments are integrated in the new draft. Here are some response points.
- Report the theoretical framework that gave way to the project model-
This brief did not apply any theoretical considerations due to the the focus of the paper. The authors goal is to bring to TVET practitioners the INEBB model and the curruculums developed based on the German Sustainability Codex within the project as well the blended training platforms developed as well as the teaching tools within the project.
2. Indicate the methodological procedures of implementation and data to support the same validity.
The project INEBB2 was based on a piloted INEBB project 1 which was piloted with some SMEs . This 3 years piloted project got awarded sustainability of excellence by UNESCO for its innovativeness and engagement with chambers of commerce. The sucessful implementation of the project validates the final outcomes and outputs for scaling up. The paper also suggests that the model project cannot be generalised and explicitely stated that conclusions drawn are based on the INEBB model case and cannot be generalised as such. Further research needed in the transfer and best practices from different case studies to be able to make such generalisation.
Reviewer 2 Report
The report is easy to read and mostly well supported with relevant references. However, the aim/purpose of this report should be stated more clearly in the abstract, and early in the text, so the reader can better follow the argument introduced.
The reviewer thinks it would strengthen the argument if the authors make clear connections to the ESD learning goals and 8 key competencies that the UN presented parallel to the publication of the SDGs. The 8 key competencies have been assessed to be necessary for people to be able to achieve the SDGs. Have a look a the ESD learning goals and 8 key competencies from 2015, and it could put your VET into a more international policy context, particularly with regard to the first sub-chapter name.
In addition the following points could be of help:
- Line 12: you say "some evidence" but in line 193 you say "available" evidence.
This does not work well, especially when you do not refer to the UN policy on ESD and the 8 key competencies (published in 2015) - Line 16: you state you provide empirical evidence from the project ... Is the purpose then to "prove" the brilliance of you project? This sounds very normative.
- Line 20: ... in the review suggests the there is a need for further ...
- Line 203: ... is needed (add the word is)
Author Response
Thanks for the comments. Please find below responses on your feedback.
- The reviewer thinks it would strengthen the argument if the authors make clear connections to the ESD learning goals and 8 key competencies that the UN presented parallel to the publication of the SDGs. The 8 key competencies have been assessed to be necessary for people to be able to achieve the SDGs. Have a look a the ESD learning goals and 8 key competencies from 2015, and it could put your VET into a more international policy context, particularly with regard to the first sub-chapter name.
This part has been worked and integrated in the current draft.
In addition the following points could be of help:
2. Line 12: you say "some evidence" but in line 193 you say "available" evidence.
This does not work well, especially when you do not refer to the UN policy on ESD and the 8 key competencies (published in 2015)
The authors have made changes based on this feedback and referenced the UN policy on ESD and the 8 key competencies.
3. Line 16: you state you provide empirical evidence from the project ... Is the purpose then to "prove" the brilliance of you project? This sounds very normative.
Revised in the new draft.
4. Line 20: ... in the review suggests the there is a need for further ...
Revised in the current draft.
5. Line 203: ... is needed (add the word is)
Added .
Thank you very much for the useful comments that help to improve the draft.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors reviewed the paper and improved it
