The premise underpinning the editorial policy of CSSE is stated in page 7: \”allow authors to author and reviewers to review.\” This view can be traced back to a special edition of Research in Science Education in 2002, edited by Roth & Tobin, where Tobin (2002) expressed his dissatisfaction with current editorial practices in existing science education research journals, as follows:

\”I regard a tendency for editors to micro-manage authorship as a constant contradiction. In most cases there is an unsettling tone in the letters that convey to me that the editors have overstepped the bounds of being peer reviewers. Insistence on including a particular theoretical frame or citing specific references is an author\’s decison; not the business of editors. Since I have experienced both sides of the review process I note here that many of those that insist on being gate-keepers and guardians of high standards are frequently poor authors\” (p. 143.

The editors of CSSE appear to have taken a different stance. They offer their own authoring and editorial practices to be scrutinized by their peers publicly. To what extent this draws out debate with other editors, and impacts on editorial practices more generally, remains to be seen. Let\’s hope that we see some interesting discussions emerge on this public site about editorial practices in science education journals.

Reference

Tobin, K. (2002).The multiple faces of peer review in science education. Research in Science Education, 32(2), 135-156.