Nurturing the Voice of Scholarship

As Teachers College Record (TCR) reaches its impressive 125th milestone, it is crucial to reflect on the significant contributions it has made to the landscape of education. Since its inception, TCR has been pivotal in shaping and nurturing the voice of scholarship in education by maintaining an editorial board of respected scholars from diverse backgrounds and various subfields within education; by publishing special issues dedicated to specific themes, topics, and emerging issues in education; and by supporting emerging scholars in developing high-quality manuscripts to facilitate the continued growth of emerging academic voice.

My initial intimate engagement with TCR occurred in 1987 through Jonas F. Soltis. At that time, I was enrolled in a course titled Philosophy and Education, which was taught by Dr. Soltis, then serving as the editor of TCR. In our sessions, he often passionately shared his insights about TCR; he delved into his editorials categorized under “For the Record,” including his introduction to the symposium on the recommendations of the Homes Group (Soltis, 1987).

Never did I anticipate that this initial encounter with TCR would evolve into a more personally enriching experience a decade later. As noted by Judy Randi (2023) in this issue of TCR, Lyn Corno invited me to collaborate on an article, “Case Studies of Families Doing Third Grade Homework” (Xu & Corno, 1998), for the 1998 TCR special issue on educational psychology (Corno, 1998). During this endeavor, Corno recruited and persuaded other prominent educational psychologists to collaborate with junior scholars. Now, a quarter of a century later, I cannot overstate the profound impact this opportunity has had on me. It has undeniably paved the way for me to develop and articulate my scholarly voice, particularly considering my background as an international graduate student—English is not my native language—in the United States.

Reflecting on transformative process, I vividly recall that Corno encouraged me to take charge, exemplified by directives such as, “Let’s see what you want to put down first.” She offered compliments where due, acknowledging instances such as, “This is a good introduction.” She provided constructive feedback, identifying areas for improvement with questions such as, “How do these sentences add to the point you have already made?” or “How would you explain that these children learn how to manage their homework from their parents, not their teachers?” She adeptly guided me in framing and reframing ideas to ensure alignment with the broader research context. She advised, “How does this article extend previous research in some important ways?” In addition, aligning with Judy Randi's (2023) observation in this TCR issue, Corno impressed upon me the significance of considering reviewers' comments during the revision process. She emphasized the importance of understanding reviewers' perspectives and addressing their comments to the best of my ability (e.g., “One reviewer commented what we learned from these families around homework interactions were quite rosy, how would you respond?”).

As a result, much like other contributions in the 1998 TCR special issue in education psychology (Corno, 1998), it appears that our article has garnered positive reception. One notable example is that it had been incorporated as research course materials in universities such as Teachers College/Columbia University (Lyn Corno, March 2, 2001) and Stanford University (Linda Darling-Hammond, April, 23, 2003). Another example is its citation by Cooper (2010) in his book on research synthesis and meta-analysis. In this book, Cooper emphasized the significance of considering qualitative findings when conducting meta-analysis, referencing our study:

A case study of six families by Xu and Corno (1998) involved both interviews and home videotaping to examine how parents structure the homework environment and help children cope with distractions so that they can pay attention to the homework assignment. This study clearly argued for the importance of parents as mediators in the homework process. (p. 32)

Given that our article (Xu & Corno, 1998) examined self-regulation of homework behavior—arranging the environment, managing time, monitoring motivation, controlling emotion, and handling distraction—this opportunity has empowered me to progressively refine my scholarly voice in this research area over the years (Corno, 2020). Since 1998, leveraging qualitative findings from this article, I have collaborated with a number of researchers, leading to an exploration of motivation and self-regulation in homework across diverse locations, including New York, Tennessee, Mississippi, and, eventually, China (e.g., Xu & Corno, 2022). This research trajectory has expanded to encompass motivation and self-regulation not only in traditional face-to-face homework but also in online homework (e.g., Xu, 2022). In addition, it has delved into the realm of online collaborative groupwork specifically involving African American female graduate students (e.g., Du et al., 2016), and the intersection of science interest, sociocultural studies in science education, and culturally relevant teaching involving exemplary African American teachers (Xu et al., 2012). The trajectory aligns broader societal movements toward inclusivity, social justice, and digital platforms, reflecting TCR’s influences on the changing dynamics of the educational landscape.

In accordance with Judy Randi's insights presented in this issue of TCR, my journey with the TCR Editorial Board began following an invitation from Gary Natriello and Lyn Corno in 2005. Responsibilities undertaken mirrored those outlined by Randi in her commentary. Corno regularly extended invitations for me to review manuscripts, extending beyond my specific research domains to include submissions from various countries and authors whose first language was not English. Among other aspects Corno (2020) discussed, noteworthy was her meticulous approach during my initial reviews for TCR, when she took the time to edit my comments. She would then discuss with me whether her edits better guided authors in addressing key issues in their revisions, or if I had additional points to incorporate. This experience heightened my consciousness regarding the reviewer's pivotal role in nurturing authors’ scholarly voice. Periodically, Corno directed my focus to specific manuscript areas, such as the statistics or method section. As time progressed, she entrusted me with what she termed “hard or challenging manuscripts,” or manuscripts that required a quick turnaround, indicating a growing confidence in my reviewing capability and proficiency. This cumulative experience not only has enriched my understanding of the intricate editorial process but also has underscored the significance of the reviewer's role in nurturing scholarly voice across diverse academic landscapes, particularly for emerging scholars.

TCR’s enduring legacy alongside my individual journey underscores the vital role of nurturing scholarly voice—whether through supportive coauthorship between established and emerging researchers, or a constructive review process involving editors, reviewers, and authors. The journal’s long-standing commitment to nurturing the voice of scholarship resonates not only in its historical contributions but also in its ongoing dedication to cultivating an inclusive and dynamic scholarly community. This positions TCR as a cornerstone in the continuous development of academic discourse, sustaining the vibrancy of the academic community, and contributing to the growth and diversity of perspectives within the scholarly realm.