Complex pathways within nested systems

Exploring approaches to centering equity in peer review

Bibliographic Data

ID21392878
AuthorsStacy Olitsky (0000-0002-7192-0563, Department of Teacher Education Saint Joseph's University Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume106
Issue5
Pages1283-1298
Publication date2022-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueScience Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0036-8326 • E-ISSN: 1098-237X
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/sce.21732
OpenAlexW4225117444
LanguageEN
References cited25

In this essay, I explore some of the insights provided in a set of three manuscripts that focus on centering equity in peer review, authored by Bancroft, Ryoo and Miles, Nkrumah and Mutegi, and Marshall and Salter. I consider various aspects of their arguments, highlighting implications for the procedures and norms of journals and funding organizations and questions for further consideration. Drawing on their findings and analyses, I discuss various recommendations, such as the need to change the rules and norms of peer review to be more equitable, to ensure that reviews are free from race, ethnicity, gender, and other kinds of identity‐related biases, to work towards equitable distribution of the resources, such as advising, mentoring, and valuable feedback, that support fair reviewing, and to establish criteria and rubrics that support research that is conducted in collaboration with communities marginalized in science education. In addition, I raise issues for further consideration, including the evolving relationship between “equity” and “merit” with regard to peer review and the need for centering equity in ways that allow for discussion, debate, and development of the field

Engineering ethics · Equity (law) · Ethnic group · Pedagogy · Political science · Public relations · Rubric · Sociology · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Higher Education Research Studies · Law · Psychology · Social Psychology