Abstract
This review focuses on science education contributions to the Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education (CJSMTE) from January 2001 through December 2014. Through a combination of content and citation analysis, we examine the journal as a location for conversations around specific themes and broader ideas related to science education. Conversations absent from the journal are also considered. This analysis provides a retrospective of the ways in which the CJSMTE has contributed to the field of science education and makes suggestions for future considerations.
Résumé
Ce compte-rendu résume une analyse des articles sur l’enseignement des sciences publiés de janvier 2001 à décembre 2014 par la Revue canadienne de l’enseignement des sciences, des mathématiques et des technologies. Grâce à un examen des contenus et des citations, nous nous penchons sur la Revue en tant que lieu de discussion autour de thèmes précis, mais aussi de concepts plus généraux, liés à la didactique des sciences. Les sujets qui ne figurent pas dans la revue sont également soulignés. Cette analyse trace une rétrospective des façons dont la RCESMT a contribué au domaine de l’enseignement des sciences dans les 15 dernières années, et fait quelques suggestions de thèmes à prendre en considération.
Notes
1Within the 192 science education articles and Viewpoints we include 155 contributions that focus specifically on science education, 31 interdisciplinary contributions that include science, and six contributions that focus on environmental education but have some connection to science. Five issues of CJSMTE's 55 issues from January 2001 through December 2014 include no science content; most of these issues are special issues on mathematics. There are 337 contributing science authors and 261 unique science authors. See Wiseman and Pegg (this issue) for definitions of terms. More than half (56%) of the contributing authors are affiliated with Canadian institutions.
2The examples provided in the instances that follow are solely illustrative and not intended to identify foundational or highly cited work. One example is provided in each instance because to provide all instances of the example would become unwieldy within the confines of a single article.