I am very interested in the development of the ESE research area: its history, framing, role and how it is conducted and communicated. Questions like: What is a good research contribution; is it to confirm earlier research results by a new method or to fill a gap? Is it possible to be a new-thinker in a peer-reviewed research publication environment if we work with a ‘classic’ filtration model? How can we reach continuity in the development of the research area and at the same time support innovative change?
In 2013 I wrote an article with Jonas Greve Lysgaard where we tried to start elaborating on these type of issues. As a reviewer I often get papers which are not contextualized enough. Many times research that would have contributed to the field with specific settings or new contexts, won’t get published because the authors are not aware of what is done earlier in similar studies.
Too often research is not research but an evaluation study of expected learning outcomes of specific teaching methods, or a study with an interesting content but with a methodology poorly connected to earlier research. Sometimes there are more theoretical aspirations but the problem can then be the limited connection to educational philosophy in general. I think that contemporary Environmental and Sustainability Research, ESER need to be more critical and self-critical, especially at conferences. Many journals are certainly of very good research quality but many conference proposals can be further developed. This is my experiences after being the link-convenor for the ESER network (No 30) within the European Educational Research Association, EERA for two years. The network has an explicit aim to support the international development of high quality ESER. There are many good ambitious initiatives taken over the years (see ref. below) but ESE researchers seem to need continuous reminders regarding how to improve ‘research’ into research.