My academic family lost our patriarch, Jeremy Kilpatrick, on September 17, 2022. As I write this in October, reflecting on his legacy to our field feels timely. After a brief biographical sketch, I explore how Jeremy's influence, particularly in his role as Editor in Chief of JRME, shaped our field—and my own work as editor.
Browse
Michael D. Steele, Caroline S. Gneiting, and Kate R. Johnson
Previous MTE editorials have focused on the nature of evidence and how it relates to the claims we make, the nature of our tools, and the nature of the contributions to the shared knowledge base. In this editorial, we draw on these perspectives and MTE articles to discuss how we might think about aligning the tools we wish to share, the evidence related to the tool's efficacy, and the implications for aspects of mathematics teacher education.
Patricio Herbst, Daniel Chazan, Percival G. Matthews, Erin K. Lichtenstein, and Sandra Crespo
In our editorial last January, echoed a question often raised by reviewers of manuscripts: What is this manuscript's contribution to our research field? In that first elaboration on how manuscripts may contribute to the field of research in mathematics education, we discussed the contributions of basic research. In this editorial, motivated by the illustrations provided by the articles included in this issue, we do a similar exercise with applied research.
Percival G. Matthews, Patricio Herbst, Sandra Crespo, and Erin K. Lichtenstein
Michael D. Steele, Kate R. Johnson, Leilani C. Fonbuena, and Caroline S. Gneiting
We would like to begin our first editorial by sharing what an honor it is to serve as the fourth editorial team for Mathematics Teacher Educator (MTE). Our team has been working side by side with the previous editorial team for the past year learning systems, handling new manuscripts, and most importantly sharing aspirations and dreams for the next phase of the journal's life. We are indebted to Karen Hollebrands, Valerie Faulkner, Emily Elrod, and Heather West for their outstanding work in advancing the journal, in training our team, and in making us feel welcome.
Patricio Herbst, Daniel Chazan, Sandra Crespo, Percival G. Matthews, and Erin K. Lichtenstein
Patricio Herbst, Daniel Chazan, Sandra Crespo, Percival G. Matthews, and Erin K. Lichtenstein
Sandra Crespo, Patricio Herbst, Erin K. Lichtenstein, Percival G. Matthews, and Daniel Chazan
Emily Elrod and Valerie Faulkner
This editorial explores relationships between reviewers and authors within the Mathematics Teacher Educator community and provides reasons why and ideas for how to write a strong review.
Why take on the role of reviewer? That is a question we have asked ourselves as we generate emails asking our peers to do just that. Why do we spend our time reviewing other people’s work? Perhaps we have a sense of obligation, a sense of fairness or duty: “Others have reviewed my work; I need to put in my time." This, perhaps, draws us in. But, from there, we hope many of you find there is something more, something special, in the process.
