Using peer reviews to examine micropolitics and disciplinary development of engineering education: a case study

Abstract

This article presents a case study of the peer review process for a feminist article submitted to an engineering education journal. It demonstrates how an examination of peer review can be a useful approach to further understanding the development of feminist thought in education fields. Rather than opposition to feminist thought per se, my experience reveals that opposing beliefs about what a feminist contribution to engineering education entails pose a challenge to those aiming to engage with feminist thought.

The role of peer review in identity development for engineering education researchers

“…Another complicating issue is that most scholars who identify with this emerging field are engineering academics (Borrego and Bernhard 2011). This is an issue because these academics may hold research qualifications and expertise in their own typical engineering field but are faced with developing new perspectives and expertise when moving into educationally related research (Beddoes 2012).…”

“…For engineering academics, along with our 'engineering disciplinary norms and expectations of what quality research is' (Beddoes 2012, 3) when we participate in engineering education research we also bring with us our engineering identities. The importance of our identity in becoming an engineering education researcher is highlighted by Wenger (1998, 160), who says that it:…”

New Metaphors for New Understandings: Ontological Questions about Developing Grounded Theories in Engineering Education

“…They expand upon the authors' prior research exploring the nature of theory in engineering education research and peer review in engineering education. [67][68][69][70] It should be noted that the tensions identified do not cover the entirety of critiques reviewers had of the paper.…”

Board 43: Work in Progress: The Field of Engineering Education Research as Seen Through the Peer Review Process

“…Exploring the normativities and boundaries shaping the emerging field of EER is particularly important given the field's interdisciplinary nature and the recent increase in scholarship about the status and development of the field. Moreover, scholars have noted a lack of internal consensus concerning the defining features of high-quality EER [21] and how the field should develop [19]. Further characterization of the normativities guiding the field will allow the EER community to critically examine and reflect on how knowledge is regulated in the field and advance beyond the status quo.…”

“…As such, academic journal outlets pull from a diverse pool of reviewers, representing a diverse set of expectations and normativities. In response to the interdisciplinary nature of EER, there has been a push in recent years to broaden the boundaries of the field [19]. Through deeper exploration of peer review processes, this project advances this line of inquiry into the development of engineering education research as a field.…”