Editorial Defining Education Research: Continuing the Conversation

A debate currently occurring in the research community centers around what qualifies as "high quality" education research. This discussion was prompted by the U. S. Department of Education's challenge to consider only "scientifically based research" in their funding and policies. This article outlines some of the issues related to this topic. It concludes with an invitation for interested researchers to continue this conversation. ********** The Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE) sponsors two peer-reviewed professional journals. The Journal of Technology and Teacher Education (JTATE) is an international publication that "serves as a forum for the exchange of knowledge about the use of information technology in teacher education" (http://www.aace.org/pubs/jtate/default.htm). JTATE publishes research-based articles that explore the role of technology in teacher education. The Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education Journal (CITE), an online journal, was established as a multimedia counterpart to JTATE. CITE includes three major categories of articles: * Current Issues include theoretical discussions of technology and teacher preparation. * Current Practices provide shorter, up-to-the-minute snapshots of technology in practice. * Seminal Articles include previously published "classic" articles that have advanced the discussion of technology and teacher education. Several professional organizations share responsibility for the editorial review of current issues related to their disciplines. These professional organizations include the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science (AETS), the Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators (AMTE), the Conference on English Education (CEE), the National Council of Social Studies College and University Faculty Assembly (CUFA), and SITE (http://www.aace.org/pubs/cite/default.htm). Both of these journals are interested in articles that are research-based and provide empirical evidence of the benefits and limitations of technology. However, a discussion currently occurring in the research community centers around what qualifies as "empirical evidence" and what methods constitute "scientifically based" research (Roblyer & Knezek, 2003, Dede, 2004; Hostetler, 2005; Thompson, 2005). DEFINING THE CONVERSATION In 2001, the United States (U.S.) Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCBL). At this time, the U. S. Department of Education challenged the research community to consider what constitutes scientifically based research (SBR). NCBL defined SBR as using empirical methods, randomized samples, and rigorous data analysis and measurements. In addition, research needed to be easily replicated and generalizable (National Research Council, 2002). This model is based on research conducted in the scientific and medical fields. This began a debate as to what constitutes "high quality" education research. Although acceptable within laboratory settings, SBR raises issues of practicality when applied to classroom settings in which one cannot account for all variables. It is not always possible in real classrooms to assign students to randomized treatments for the purpose of conducting research. Often schools are reluctant to participate in experimental research studies for fear that the study will detract students from learning necessary content needed to pass standardized tests. Finding one classroom willing to participate can be difficult; finding two so one can serve as a control group doubles the challenge. There are also ethical concerns to be considered when using randomized samples. How does one explain to parents that their child cannot use technology or specific software because the child is part of the control group? One way is to let them know that their child will have an opportunity to use the technology at a later time. …