JSTE as a Forum for Engaging in Knowledge Generation and Discourses in Science Teacher Education, Equity and Justice-Focused Science Teacher Education, and Professional Learning for Science Teacher Education Scholars

For the past 30 years, JSTE has served as an influential voice in science teacher education. This can be seen historically in the heterogeneity and importance of issues explored in research published within JSTE and the diversity of esteemed scholars who have contributed to the journal, as well as the influential leaders who have served in editorial roles. It is within this stream of the journal’s history that we find ourselves as the new Co-Editors in Chief of JSTE, having only recently taken up our post January 1st, 2019. In fact, this serves as the first opportunity to craft an editorial solely authored by us for the journal, after having had the privilege of co-authoring a joint-editorial with our distinguished predecessors, Norman and Judith Lederman, and inviting a guest editorial from Eric Banilower to outline important

National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education (NSSME+)¹ findings related to science teacher education (Banilower, 2019) in the editorials included to date in Volume 30. Given this, we wanted to be sure we took advantage of this opportunity to outline the role we envision for the journal into the next five years. As the title of this editorial makes explicit, we see JSTE playing a critical role for the science teacher education community, especially members of the Associate for Science Teacher Education (ASTE), by serving as a forum for engaging in knowledge and discourse in science teacher education, equity and justice-oriented-focused science teacher education, and a medium for the professional learning for science teacher education scholars. The purpose of each of these foci is explicated below, before we end with information about where the journal is currently situated in terms of reach and impact, and in relation to the immediate horizon.

Knowledge generation and discourses in science teacher education

Glazer and Peurach (2015) note how without some level of collegial forms of collaboration, there is a danger that the field of education will continue to struggle to develop knowledge of teaching and learning that “can provide much-needed balance to the market and bureaucratic strategies that inform current approaches to school improvement” (p. 173). They proposed epistemic communities as a possible form of collegial collaboration focused on improvement that is rooted in the explication of theory, codification of language and performance, and the inscription of tools as reciprocally refining activities that can support communities not bound by geographic contexts. Here, Glazer and Peurach (2015) defined epistemic communities as “diverse practitioners [and researchers] in disparate locations interpret[ing], perform[ing], and talk[ing] about work in highly similar ways” (p. 180) with the aim of “continuously generat[ing], us[ing], and refin[ing] knowledge” (p. 173).

A possible example of such an emergent epistemic community might be said to be forming around Ambitious Science Teaching (AST) (Windschitl, Thompson, & Braaten, 2018). In this, a theoretical stance (i.e., theory) supportive of early career science teaching situated around four sets of high-leverage practices has supported geographically dispersed groups of professionals in science teacher education to engage in codified language and performances supportive of science teaching (e.g., eliciting students initial ideas) and the development of tools (e.g., summary tables, back-pocket questions) that have supported the collegial collaboration and work of those engaged in specialized ways.

It is within this focused type of specialized work by subsets of scholars collaborating in science teacher education that we see a specific role for JSTE as a forum for engaging in knowledge generation and discourse in science teacher education. In this, we believe that JSTE can serve as an important hub for helping elevate the meaningful work of epistemic communities (i.e., groups of science teacher education scholars collectively focused on valued pursuits of our profession). More specifically, JSTE can elevate and support the work of epistemic communities by publishing their unfolding efforts to lay bare the articulation of theory supportive of their work; make connections between theory and its refinement through emergent codes (i.e., language and performances) that instantiate theory in practice; and, finally, reveal the tools that support such work among geographically distant groups of actors.

Equity and justice-oriented science teacher education

Central to our work in science teacher education is a focus on equity that is accomplished through a justice-focused orientation. This is captured by Windschitl and Calabrese Barton (2016) who that argued “that issues of equity should be fundamental to conversations about reform, and that concerns in particular for the rigor of instruction should not be separate from the concerns to provide all students with opportunities to learn science” (p. 1100). To a large extent, as a science teacher education community as a whole, we have struggled to make progress in supporting science teacher education that provides more equitable access and forms of participation capable of redistributing power and legitimizing minoritized populations knowledge and knowledge production practices (c.f., Dawson, 2017; Gutiérrez, 2016). While JSTE has helped elevate pockets of effective work in this area (e.g., Brenner, Bianchini, & Dwyer, 2016; Lee, Miller, & Januszyk, 2016; Mensah et al., 2018; Verma, 2009), there is an increasing need to address this issue. We believe JSTE can help address this shortcoming by, among other strategies, considering ways in which work published within JSTE is prompted to foreground equity. STEM Teaching Tools (see stemteachingtools.org), a set of practitioner briefs aimed at addressing pressing problems of practice, might serve as a model for how this can be accomplished, since all tools include a specific section devoted to “Attending to Equity”. The consistent focus on equity across all STEM Teaching Tools points to a measure of success in our efforts in science teaching and learning that deeply considers our ability to take advantage of and build new versions of disciplinary participation from the epistemic diversity of individuals and communities (Penuel & Watkins, 2019). As we move forward, we are considering how we might find ways to persuade science teacher educators to more prominently consider, and highlight, how their work attends to equity and orients to justice in science teacher education. Among other possibilities, this might come in the form of working with the ASTE Equity and Publications Committees to highlight equity in JSTE through amending directions to authors or promptings reviewers to support authors by highlighting missed opportunities to foreground equity and justice during the review process.

Professional learning for science teacher education scholars

Lastly, JSTE can serve as a forum for professional learning for science teacher educators. An obvious example of this is in the work of our Associate Editor and Editorial Review Board members in providing insightful reviews to authors submitting manuscripts to the journal. Over the coming months and years, we will be looking to provide enhanced opportunities for advanced graduate students and aspiring ERB members to be mentored into the reviewing role. This is important for three reasons; first it is a means of contributing to the learning of the next generation of researchers. Second, it is a strategy for raising the quality of reviews, and thus the overall impact and reach of the journal. Third, engaging with our colleagues as they enter the profession strengthens the profession, by helping move our colleagues from the periphery of the science teacher education community toward more central forms of participation.

What is the state of JSTE and what is on the immediate horizon?

Alongside, each of these ambitious goals we have for JSTE, we also wanted to provide an assessment of the current impact and reach of the journal and those exciting things we hope to focus on in the immediate future. Currently, based on a January 2019 report from our publisher Taylor & Francis, JSTE had 31,045 article downloads at the end of 2018. We believe this is an important indicator of the broad impact and reach of JSTE. The acceptance rate for 2018 was 28%. More recently, from January to April of 2019, 73 new manuscripts and 44 revised manuscripts were submitted to JSTE. Of the new manuscripts submitted during this time period, 35 manuscripts were from outside of the U.S, from 18 different countries. These international submissions were from the following countries: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Philippines, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Slovenia, South Africa, and Turkey. These are all promising current demographics that reveal the strong foundation established for JSTE as a result of the efforts of our predecessors and that of ASTE and the broader science teacher education community.

On the immediate horizon, we are excited about recent efforts to reach out to new groups of scholars (both junior in the field and those who may not have considered publishing in JSTE previously). More specifically, we have begun to cultivate relationships with scholars who have yet to publish in JSTE through personal conversations and presentations at conferences including ASTE, NARST and AERA. Additionally, we have started a twitter account for JSTE found at @JSTE1924 (please consider checking this out and following us) where we have begun publicizing the important work emerging in recent JSTE publications, as well as past influential pieces.

Finally, it is with great excitement and care that we approach our editorial role, especially focused on situating JSTE as a forum for the knowledge generation and discourses in science teacher education, equity and justice-focused science teacher education, and professional learning for science teacher education scholars. As always, like we indicated in our initial co-authored editorial in Volume 30 Issue 1, we appreciate your comments and suggestions related to anything we have shared here, as well as your manuscripts.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

¹ The plus symbol reflects the study’s added emphasis on computer science and engineering.