Did you know that Mathematics Teacher Educator has an article submission type for research commentaries?
Did you ever wonder what that meant for a journal that focuses on research-informed practitioner tools for mathematics teacher educators?
Well wonder no more, colleagues. Let’s talk about what a research commentary in MTE entails and how you can think about authoring one.
Over the 12 volumes of the journal, there have been a number of research commentaries published. Two appear in the first issue, which discuss the genesis of the journal and its intended purpose in building knowledge in the field of mathematics teacher education. The volumes that follow include six additional commentaries that address a wide variety of topics – attacks on scholars and scholarship in mathematics teacher education, new and emerging innovations in virtual field experiences, stances we can take in the field related to the political nature of mathematics teacher education and critical race theory, and the role of teacher voice in mathematics teacher education.
Most Mathematics Teacher Educator articles center on tools we have used on our practice and evidence of the efficacy of the tools. These tools are research-based, grounded in a long legacy of prior work, and have been used by the authors (and frequently others) for enough time that data have been collected, analyzed, and efficacy able to be asserted. The timeline from the genesis of a tool to having the ability to write about the tool in Mathematics Teacher Educator can be long.
We consider the role of research commentaries as being able to provide critical perspectives, pushes, and provocations to the field on pressing issues in mathematics teacher education that need additional attention. In these cases, we may be early in our understanding of the issue and still trying to figure out how to act on the idea with preservice or practicing teachers. In other cases, we may have nascent tools but not yet have efficacy data. In other cases, there may be existing tools and data but they may be missing attention to an area or idea. All of these cases are ones in which the field can benefit from a research commentary that helps shift the field’s attention in a particular way.
In our most recent editorial, Associate Editor Kate Johnson and I provide additional thoughts on the role of the research commentary. We identify three components of an MTE research commentary (the urgency, the toolbox, and the mission) and a set of six rhetorical practices that to use in writing a research commentary. It is our hope that these frameworks help MTE readers and authors consider research commentary ideas for the journal. We encourage you to reach out to the MTE editors with research commentary ideas.