U.S. Institutional Research Productivity in Major Science Education Research Journals: Top 30 for 2000’s

Abstract

VonAalst (2010) used Google Scholar to identify the top four science education research journals: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Science Education, International Journal of Science Education, and Journal of Science Teacher Education. U.S. institutional productivity for 2000-2009 for the above journals was the data for the study. The major domestic science education programs were identified for raw and weighted counts. For the top 10, there was a 100% agreement with different ranks while there was only a 60% agreement among the bottom 10. These results demonstrated that dominant science education faculty published their research in multiple empirical journals.Keywords: institutional/faculty productivity, science education research journals, domestic higher education institutions IntroductionThe first purpose of this study was to identify the major domestic science education programs based upon recognized research journals. VonAalst (2010) used Google Scholar and identified Journal of Research in Science Teaching (JRST), Science Education (SE), and International Journal of Science Education (IJSE) as the top three market shares for science education. The Journal of Science Teacher Education (JSTE) had the next greatest number of articles published. These four journals collectively were used to establish U.S. institutional productivity. In recording data for the above journals, there were a large number of multiple authors (up to eight); therefore, a second purpose was to compare raw and weighted count to determine institutional productivity.Earlier, Barrow, Settlage and Germann (2008) used eight science education journals (JRST, SE, IJSE, JSTE, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Journal of Elementary Science Education, School Science & Mathematics, and Journal of Science Education and Technology) that publish empirical research to identify the top 30 domestic science education programs for 1990s. They reported variation in journals where research was published. There was a greater agreement between the raw and weighted counts for the top 10 than bottom 10. Related LiteratureInstitutional research is either perception (rankings based upon perceptions [e.g., U.S. News and World Report's annual ranking of best graduate schools]) or productivity (e.g., faculty members' publications). Recently, the National Research Council (2010) published an extensive U.S. graduate review, but most areas of education, including science education, were excluded. No published study based upon perceptions on science education was located; although, many science educators probably have a personal view of the dominant programs.The vast majority of U.S. institutional research studies have been productivity oriented. Three fields (library and information science, counseling psychology, and reading/literacy education) have varied objective measures over the years.Budd and colleagues (Budd & Seavey, 1996;Budd, 2000;Adkins & Budd, 2006) have conducted a series of reviews of library information and sc...