Page 44 - i1052-5173-32-5

Letter to the Editors

We are writing to express our concern with the editorial pub- “social work”: these are robust, data-driven, interdisciplinary
lished in GSA Today in the December 2021 issue titled “Why fields in which innovations can have immediate relevance to soci-
Publish in GSA Today?” and authored by that publication’s two sci- ety and can also substantiate the relevance of the geosciences as a
ence editors, Mihai Ducea and Peter Copeland. After laying out the whole to the well-being of society. These fields are also more
reasons for submitting a science article to GSA Today, including that diverse and include more early-career scientists, and the conse-
it is “one of the most visible venues for… the earth sciences” and quences of excluding their contributions can be severe.
that a GSA Today article can “reach much further than the ‘normal’ We agree that Groundwork articles can be an excellent option for
papers,” Ducea and Copeland go on to give examples that are appro- publication, but they cannot be the only venue. As noted by Ducea
priate, including review papers at the graduate student level, “inter- and Copeland, science articles are lavishly illustrated and include
disciplinary papers that reach into new directions,” and technologi- a front cover image at no charge; they are allowed six pages to
cal advances. We agree that GSA Today has an impressive potential Groundwork’s two. Graduate-level review articles in geoscience
to reach across all subdisciplines of the geosciences and is an excel- education research, geology and health, and the interactions
lent venue for publication of science that is of broad interest and between geology and society are invaluable to our community, and
applicable for a wide audience. could help build the momentum established by URGE (Unlearning
Our concern comes with their statement about what is not Racism in the Geosciences) to reach students coming into the geo-
appropriate for a science article, namely, “social science/social sciences and ground them in social and environmental justice.
justice or geo-education pieces.” Ducea and Copeland justify their We are particularly confounded by the statement that the edi-
dismissal of these topics, continuing, tors struggle to review and find reviewers for manuscripts that
The Society is deeply involved in increasing the diversity of its cover anything other than “rocks and minerals.” They seem to
constituency and of our community in general. Therefore, such have no trouble finding reviewers for these manuscripts when
papers are in theory needed; we encourage authors to investigate they are submitted as Groundwork articles, which also undergo
the Groundwork format for those. As far as the main science arti- rigorous peer review (at least according to GSA’s published
cle, it is difficult for editors with experience and expertise in earth
science to review (or even identify appropriate referees for) manu- guidelines and the experience of several signatories of this let-
scripts whose main focus lies not on rocks and minerals but lies ter), so we are curious why this is a concern for science articles.
more in the domains of sociology, social work, law, and related Current and former editors of the Journal of Geoscience
fields. Current and former editors of GSA Today agree that the Education (JGE) on this letter also face the challenge of finding
feature science articles should be concerned with earth materials appropriate reviewers and integrating their reviews of papers
and processes, not the people who are studying them. Nevertheless,
Groundwork articles are good vehicles to communicate the latest that lie outside their specific expertise; this is the primary
adjustments in the way we do our work (e.g., teaching in times of responsibility of an editor. We can recommend not only the
COVID) or a variety of other topics. authors of previously submitted science and Groundwork articles
but the authors of articles published in JGE as excellent starting
As leaders in the National Association of Geoscience Teachers places, as well as GSA’s own members in their Geoscience
(NAGT), an Associated Society of GSA, NAGT’s Geoscience Education Division. Working with editorial boards of research
Education Research (GER) Division, and its research journal, journals of other Associated Societies could build the commu-
the Journal of Geoscience Education, we find this statement nity that values and publishes in GSA Today.
regressive, exclusionary, and condescending, and it puts GSA— Most disturbing, however, is the editors’ statement that such
with GSA Today as its member journal—in danger of becoming papers are “in theory needed” to support the diversity efforts of the
irrelevant in the modern landscape of geoscience. society as a whole, but yet they are not willing to implement that
The published guidelines (www.geosociety.org/GSA/ theory in practice, instead choosing to maintain the inequitable
Publications/GSA_Today/author_info/GSA/GSAToday/Author_ status quo. We ask: Is this truly the view of the GSA leadership?
Info/home.aspx) for submission of science articles state that sci- As geoscientists and educators, we call on GSA to recognize
ence articles should be “timely, high-quality, appealing to a broad the essential scientific contributions of all of its members by
geoscience audience” and “innovative and focused on current top- embracing the vast array of geoscience endeavors that are wor-
ics & discoveries in geoscience.” We argue that some of the most thy of publication in GSA Today, including those that lie at the
timely and innovative work being done in geoscience right now intersection of Earth and humanity.
lies at the intersection of science and society, and these issues are Because GSA Today is the member journal of the organization,
of profound importance to GSA’s membership and the health of we also urge the elected leaders and executive director to
the society as a whole, including how systemic racism influences respond publicly to this letter.
the type of science that gets published and rewarded. Why should
we all know about “cool tools” but not effective, evidence-based Respectfully, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers
teaching practices? Ducea and Copeland are displaying their (NAGT) leadership:
affinity bias for scientists who do science like they do, despite the Margaret Crowder, President
fact that the society they represent has scientific Divisions, such as Christy C. Visaggi, 1st Vice-President
geology and health, geology and society, and geoscience educa- Reginald Archer, 2nd Vice-President
tion. The science done by the members of these Divisions is not Jennifer M. Wenner, Past-President

44 GSA TODAY | May 2022