931223

editorial2020
JRMXXX10.1177/0022429420931223Journal of Research in Music Education

Editorial
Journal of Research in Music Education

Forum
2020, Vol. 68(2) 123­–124
© National Association for
Music Education 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0022429420931223
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429420931223
jrme.sagepub.com
Steven J. Morrison
Editor, Journal of Research in Music Education

The lineage of academic research journals can be traced back over 350 years. The
sentiment behind their inception is nicely represented by Henry Oldenburg’s com-
ments in the first issue of Philosophical Transactions, dating from March of 1665:,
“. . .there is nothing more necessary for promoting the improvement of Philosophical
Matters than the communicating to such, as apply their Studies and Endeavors that
way, such things as are discovered or put in practice by others” (p. 1). Oldenburg was
the first editor of Philosophic Transactions and penned those words in what I like to
imagine as the distant ancestor of essays like this Forum.
At a moment in history when scholarly interaction has been curtailed by the cancel-
lation of professional events, the wide scale move to online instruction, and the virtual
elimination of spontaneous collegial conversation as a result of closed campuses, the
utility of journals as a means of scholarly communication is a source of comfortable
consistency (ideally unlike at least some of the ideas contained therein). Certainly,
environments such as Zoom or Skype have their virtues as mechanisms to instantly
connect individuals from distant locations—which in a time of stay-at-home orders
might include such remote locales as the house next door. A set of screen-shared
PowerPoint or Keynote slides can pique interests and provide overviews of ideas,
projects, and findings. These are effective instruments for communication, albeit blunt
ones. To me the nuance of a design, the eloquence of a logical argument, and the power
of an individual’s voice shines most brightly when carefully set in text, a format that
demands and rewards precision from an author and promises opportunity for careful
and repeated study by a reader. And such is the place of academic research journals.
For the past eight years, six as editor, I have been awed by the nuance, eloquence,
power, and precision of researchers from around the globe who have contributed to the
JRME. It has been my responsibility to carefully and repeatedly study the reports that
have been submitted and to facilitate their vetting by and dissemination to the music
education community. Since stepping into the formidable editorial shoes of Wendy
Sims in July 2014, I have received approximately 750 new manuscripts—not including
revisions, and still counting as this issue goes to press—in the journal’s in-box. The
diversity of topics, methods, and analyses has been staggering in an impressive sort of
way, promising a bright and vibrant future for music education scholarship. Even across
the eight-year span of my time with the journal, I found it difficult to predict where
surges and ebbs in content or approach would occur. Looking ahead, any sort of prog-
nostication would be dubiously speculative in the most normal of times and impossible
124 Journal of Research in Music Education 68(2)

in the unfamiliar territory in which we now find ourselves as a society and, in turn, as a
profession. So many new questions, and problems that will lead to yet more new ques-
tions, have emerged in just the past couple of months. There is so much that remains
unknown. Fortunately, the research community specializes in the unknown.
It has been a privilege to be part of the knowledge-seeking process in my role as
editor of the JRME. I am immensely grateful to the 36 brilliant colleagues who com-
prised the editorial board at various times since 2014. To have had the ongoing oppor-
tunity to interact with such a stellar group of researchers was a learning experience I
treasured with each insightful review they shared with me. Their wisdom as scholars
and their humanity as educators were always on full display. I am also indebted to the
59 generous individuals who graciously agreed to serve as guest reviewers, lending
their particular areas of expertise to the peer-review process. The contributions of
three truly outstanding Editorial Assistants—Jamey Kelley, Anita Kumar, and Taina
Lorenz—cannot be overstated; they worked ceaselessly with skill and humor to keep
the machinery of the journal humming and the professionalism of the journal at the
highest standard. Passing the editorial chair to Peter Miksza is a distinct pleasure, as
has been working with him in his role of Associate Editor for the past two years. His
expertise and perspective as a scholar embodies our field at its best.
As a profession and as a scholarly community there is much work to be done to
understand the experiences and ramifications of these challenging times. Keeping with
its mission as stated over three centuries ago, scholarly communication will continue
to serve as a vital platform on which

solid and usefull [sic] knowledge may be further entertained, ingenious Endeavors and
Undertakings cherished, and those, addicted to and conversant in such matters, may be
invited and encouraged to search, try, and find out new things, impart their knowledge to
one another, and contribute what they can to the Grand design of improving Natural
knowledge. (Oldenburg, 1665, p. 2)

Reference
Oldenburg, H. (1665). The introduction. Philosophical Transactions (1665-1678), 1, 1-2.
Retrieved May 11, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/101400