Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
Across a broad range of disciplines, research has found that inequity is systemic in the journal review process. Collectively, however, this study does not specifically examine racial inequity. Moreover, literature on the peer review process in science education, in particular, does not foreground equity as a subject of study. The present study aims to address this void by examining racial equity in the peer review process with a specific focus on journals in science education. Data are collected from lead editors of major science education journals through the form of interviews, focus groups, and critical arts-based methods. The two research questions driving data collection are (a) In what ways does the science education journal peer review process promote racial equity? and (b) How are science education journal editors’ perceptions of racial inequity reflected in the peer review process? McNair and colleagues’ racial equity framework informs the explorations of journal review in science education from the lead editors’ perspectives. From our findings, we offer four suggestions for moving toward greater racial equity in the science education peer review process.more » « less
This mixed methods study reports data from the implementation of a 2‐week nanotechnology camp for secondary level students. The camp, Nanotechnology Experiences for Students and Teachers, had the overarching goal of increasing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) interest among the next generation of potential STEM professionals. Statistical pre‐ and postsurvey data indicate that overall the camp was successful in fostering increased STEM interest among participants. However, early analysis of ethnographic data showed that African American students were observed to have radically different experiences than the non‐African American students. To better understand why the camp yielded such divergent outcomes, we examined ethnographic data focusing specifically on incidents of microaggressions. We were particularly interested in the impact that microaggressions had on African American students’ camp experience and learning. Our data show that microaggressions were pervasive; they came from students, instructors, and the environment; and in response, African American students adopted detachment‐coping strategies. Together these factors worked against African American students’ success. We conclude with suggestions for practice.