Hi Michelle. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to read your paper. I must say first how much I enjoyed it. I could identify with so much of what you wrote about the processes and learning with your students. There were quite a few points where I just said 'YES!' aloud during the reading. I felt a genuine connection with your ideas, struggles and clarity. I think what you're writing about really matters and is highly educational. And I love the videos. They are clearly relating to the values you're writing about.
I've gone through the paper twice. First reading for the overall scope and meanings, and then more painstakingly - and some might say in a more pernickety manner!
To summarise, before I am happy to recommend it for publication, there are a few things I'd like to suggest in terms of strengthening the paper as your living-theory. In no particular order:
1) I felt the paper needed to start with a greater sense of contextualisation for the reader. I felt a little lost in the opening pages, because you only offered me later details that would have helped at the beginning. I think there is a bit of a juble of paragraphs at the beginning. The way you've started the paper is more like a prologue than the first part of the main text. It's important, what you're writing at the beginning, but I'm not sure it's as powerful for the reader as it could be.
2) You make a few claims without evidence. See script for details. This links with the lack at times of engagement with the ideas of others and the brevity of the References list at the end. I've made several suggestions. Of course, you can take my particular suggestions with a pinch of salt, but I think the point stands about the need for a greater contextualisation through the ideas of others.
3) The abstract is very short indeed, and not, to my mind, sufficient for the reader to extract the main ideas from. Its brevity isn't simply a matter of word-count either, it's borne out by the fact that you don't go into any detail about some issues, for example, power - something that ties to 1) above. Power, as far as I understand it from your paper, emerges as a significant dimension of your discussions around the issues you are presenting. I also think Power needs to be a keyword after the abstract.
4) There are some issues of formal presentation that need addressing. I've noted them in the Comments on the attached.
I hope you find these comments constructive, Michelle. Don't hesitate to ask any questions (on this thread) about anything I haven't been clear about. I am attaching a paper I am recommending with these comments and the annotated paper as well, but in a connected thread as it won't allow me to upload two files to one posting.
All the best,