ABSTRACT

To inform a response to recent critiques of physical and health education (PHE) research activity within Canadian universities, this research inquired into peer-reviewed PHE publications by Canadian-based authors between 2010 and 2015 via an analysis of published research method framed within a ‘health’ metaphor. The three-phase method involved: (a) identifying Canadian-authored English-language PHE journal articles via targeted database keyword searches designed in consultation with an academic librarian and the Physical and Health Education Canada Research Council executive; (b) categorizing the publications by extracting data related to author affiliation, journal name, research question, and funding acknowledgement; and (c) conducting basic descriptive statistics to report findings on publication topics, authorship characteristics, journal outlets, and funding rates and sources. Results were interpreted through the lens of common criteria within Canadian tenure, promotion, and performance reviews for ‘healthy’ research publication activity: quantity of publications, prestige of publication outlets, knowledge mobilization to national and international practitioners and academics, and (external) funding. Findings revealed relatively ‘healthy’ measures of publication quantity, prestigious external funding, and nationally-focused knowledge mobilization to stakeholders inside and outside of academia. However, findings also revealed limits in the proportion of research published in prestigious journals and journals easily accessible to international audiences, both of which could be interpreted or represented (and subsequently weaponized) by others as ‘illness’. While it is neither our aim, nor place, to prescribe a way forward – as that is for the larger community of Canadian-based PHE scholars to consider together – it is our hope that this research provides the descriptive data and reflection needed to inform the beginnings of evidence-based discussion, action, and advocacy regarding PHE research publication activity in Canada.

摘要

为了回应加拿大大学最近对体育和健康教育 (PHE) 研究活动的批评，本研究通过对已发表的研究方法的分析，调查了 2010 年至 2015 年间加拿大作者的同行评审 PHE 出版物。健康' 隐喻。该三阶段方法涉及： (a) 通过与学术图书馆员和加拿大体育与健康教育研究委员会执行官协商设计的有针对性的数据库关键字搜索，确定加拿大撰写的英语 PHE 期刊文章；(b) 通过提取与作者隶属关系、期刊名称、研究问题和资助确认相关的数据对出版物进行分类；(c) 进行基本的描述性统计，以报告有关出版主题、作者特征、期刊渠道以及资助率和来源的调查结果。结果是通过加拿大任期、晋升和绩效评估中“健康”的共同标准来解释的。' 研究出版活动：出版物的数量、出版机构的声望、对国家和国际从业人员和学者的知识动员，以及（外部）资金。调查结果揭示了相对“健康”的出版物数量衡量标准、享有盛誉的外部资金以及面向学术界内外利益相关者的以国家为重点的知识动员。然而，调查结果也揭示了发表在著名期刊和国际读者容易获得的期刊上的研究比例有限，这两者都可能被其他人解释或代表（并随后武器化）为“疾病”。'。虽然规定前进的方向既不是我们的目标，也不是我们的目标——因为这是让更多的加拿大 PHE 学者共同考虑——但我们希望这项研究提供了必要的描述性数据和反思，以告知关于加拿大 PHE 研究出版活动的循证讨论、行动和倡导的开始。