Practicality and Philosophy of Journal Publication

Abstract

A year ago November, I was transitioning to the Journal of Geoscience Education (JGE) Editor-in-Chief position, and JGE was transitioning to a new publishing company, Allen Press. While I had been involved with JGE for many years, that was the first time I needed to start thinking about the production side of publishing an academic society journal. Within months, it became strikingly clear that practical considerations can sometimes clash with philosophical views on the right way to share research and ideas on teaching and learning and with our community. For example, there is a strong movement in the U.S. and Britain for full open access to all articles derived from grant-funded research (see p. 17, The Economist, April 14, 2012). This is a philosophical perspective that I agree with, but the practical side is that for a society (vs. for-profit) academic publication, we also need to take into account perspectives on member benefits and limited budgets. In this first year as journal Editor, it also became clear that the geosciences education community that JGE directly serves looks like a Venn diagram, with National Association of Geosciences Teachers (NAGT) members comprising one community group and JGE authors comprising a second community group. I was quite surprised to learn that the intersection of these groups is actually quite small. NAGT had an average of 1,289 members in 2010-2011(NAGT Annual Reports, 2010 [http://www.nagt.org/files/nagt/organization/ 2010_annual_report.pdf] and 2011 [http://nagt.org/files/nagt/ private/manduca_report.pdf]). During the same time frame, 187 authors published in JGE (most as coauthored papers), yet only 31 of the authors were also NAGT members. I suspect there is a third group that JGE serves, but one that is difficult to quantify: those individuals who turn to JGE as a resource for improving their teaching and student learning of the geosciences by reading the archived open access articles, but who are not members or authors themselves. What are the implications of these data? At a philosophical level, it is rewarding to see that the journal serves a community that extends well beyond the society of its origin. It is clearly valued by this broader community because authors are choosing to publish their intellectual ideas and research in it, which benefits NAGT members and nonmembers alike. But it is also disquieting because the data suggest that most authors do not see a compelling reason to join NAGT, and most NAGT members are not choosing to publish in JGE. To be sustainable, practical, and a more robust community, this situation needs to change. It is obvious that both groups highly value geosciences education. NAGT has as its mission the goals of fostering improvement in the teaching of the Earth sciences at all levels, emphasizing the societal significance of the Earth sciences to the public, and disseminating knowledge in this field (http:// www.nagt.org/index.html). JGE authors are doing just that - disseminating what they have learned, and thereby improving teaching and learning in the geosciences. …