Editorial: Book Reviews, Research Grants

Article excerpt

As I write this, we are preparing again for the annual convention of the NASA and beginning to think about the next year. The role of senior editor will pass to Graeme Sullivan, and we have talked about continuity and change within our arrangements for Studies. Continuity is the more important. As I think about my brief spell as editor, there are few things I would change about Studies' contents or procedures. They reflect quite directly the topics and issues that concern the readers (at least those that submit manuscripts) and reflect too their attitudes and abilities. This is how it should be.

One of the few things I would like to change is Studies' record with book reviews. Book reviews are helpful to the field for many reasons. They not only alert us to new books, but they can in various ways help us to understand them. They can compare new books with those that already exist, relate them to new trends or movements, raise issues of approach, ideology, and coverage. I think that Studies, as the major academic journal of the Association, should have a more active book review section. It seems a reasonable goal that there should be no significant new book in our field published without review in Studies. Of course, I recognize that it is sometimes a question whether a book is "in our field" or not; but the major reason we publish so few book reviews is that few are submitted. So this a call (again: I remember Graeme Chalmers issued a similar one during his editorship) to readers to consider submitting a review of a significant book, or books, and moreover, to make the review itself significant. Book reviews do not have to be short, though many of the best are. They do need to meet the same writing standards as other manuscripts do, but there is plenty of space in Studies for good ones.

The results of the new annual research grant competition held by the NASA Research Commission are now available. Readers will remember that the first call for proposals focused on student learning in secondary art education, and the second year will have the same focus. We have high hopes that this program will result in significant and cumulative research and that the results will eventually be published in the pages of Studies. Below, I will append an announcement of the awards by Tom Brewer, the research commission chair. To make space for the announcement, I will simply say of the contents of this issue that they are as various as those of the past, and the issue has been an equal pleasure to prepare. It says again, I think, that there is plenty of life and variety in art education.

Grant Results 2001: NAEA Research Commission

Thomas M. …


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.