Editorial: School Science and Mathematics 101

School Science and Mathematics, May 2002 by Flick, Lawrence B, Lederman, Norman G

At the beginning of the 101st year of School Science and Mathematics, I joined Norm as a co-editor of this journal. Our collaboration and transition was challenged by his taking a new position with the Illinois Institute of Technology. All has progressed smoothly in a very large part due to the effective and professional work of Managing Editor, Rene Schwartz and Technical Editor, Lynn Bell. The journal is co-edited between Oregon State University and IIT, reviews are processed by Renee at OSU, final editing and layout is completed by Lynn in Virginia, and printing is run in Kansas.

Modern telecommunications dictated that computing equipment for the managing and technical editors be upgraded. Earlier this year $4200 of new computer equipment was installed. The transition to new computer systems did not proceed without glitches but overall the journal is coming out in much better shape.

The web site, http://osu.orst.edu/pubs/ssm/, has logged in nearly 20,000 visitors. This site will continue to handle an increasing amount of the journal's business. As many of you probably know, you can access the Tables of Contents and Abstracts of all the journals back to January 1994, and you can track the review of your submitted manuscripts.

Editorials were written by Norm and myself trading off every other month. The theme issue in October on NCTM's Principles and Standards was written by Joan Ferrini-Mundy as guest editor. This coming year you may see additional guest editorials when we find a good match between important issues and an author. The theme issue raised the question of "How might Principles and Standards, or elements of the process used in its development, be helpful in moderating and giving focus for substantive conversations across constituencies with different perspectives?" In this issue Ferrini-Mundy and guest co-editor Glenda Lappan proposed that the major contribution of the Principles and Standards was to foster a "systematic discussion and debate about mathematics education issues."

In November Flick used the work of Lee Schulman to examine the question ofhow teachers learn from practice. This editorial highlighted the challenge of capturing, communicating, and building on the knowledge of practice.

In December Lederman examined the possible ulterior motives for promoting alternative certification of teachers to meet the need for more science and math teachers. He posed provocative questions such as who are these people we want in the teaching profession so much that we are willing to alter program requirements? And perhaps we should focus on what it is about the teaching profession that makes one unwilling to complete the standard program requirements.

In January Flick examined the effect of reform efforts on increased science and math course-taking and critically compared it to statistics on high school and college completion. The result was to ask what more is needed beyond more exposure to science and math instruction to help students feel capable at using those skills in post-high school education.

In February Lederman critically examined what kinds of agreement there was around the content posed in the science and mathematics standards documents. He posed the question as to whether there needs to be a true consensus about content in the standards before innovative curriculum and instruction can be developed.

In March Flick promoted the value of reading instruction in the context of teaching science and mathematics. Beyond the reading necessary in test-taking, use of textbooks, and reading about science and mathematics in the press, he challenged educators to examine the complementary nature of higher order thinking in effective reading and in productive engagement in complex science and mathematics work.

Finally, Lederman wrote his traditional April Fools editorial on the presence ofj argon and its function in our profession. He proposed that Ockham's razor, a classic rule of parsimony, be forsaken in favor of more complexity. He used the example of the meaning of PCK, the knowledge that accomplished teachers develop, and compared it to the Italian word, sprezzatura, "the art of doing the complex with apparent ease." Was he really fooling?

We are looking forward to the coming years. Quality submissions to thejournal are always needed but we have managed to attract a high quality of manuscript. We envision developing guidelines for manuscripts that document classroom instruction and formative assessments. There is a need to guide scholarship in the capturing, communicating, and building on the knowledge of teaching practice in science and mathematics. With the future in mind, we will close with a discussion of how manuscripts are processed and feedback on how to improve the quality of manuscripts and increase the possibilities of being published. For most of you this will be kind of a refresher course to School Science and Mathematics 101.

Receipt and Logging of Manuscripts

Immediately upon receipt, all manuscripts are forwarded to our managing editor, Renee' Schwartz. Within 1 week, she assigns an identification number to each manuscript and enters it into our database. The identification number may contain an "M," "S," or "I," indicating whether the substantive focus of the manuscript is mathematics, science, or integration of mathematics and science. Within 1 week, a letter is sent to the primary author indicating that the manuscript has been received and providing the identification number. It is interesting to note that for the past 12 months, about 50% of the submissions have been single author and 56% of the published manuscripts are single author.