I am most pleased to present to you this Theme Issue focusing upon policy perspectives in science education. Ideally, this Theme Issue will represent the beginning of substantive dialogue on issues of importance to the science education community.
For the past 2 years, the conversation at each of the NARST Board meetings has touched upon the notion that science educators have little influence in the realm of policy issues. Board conversations have focused upon ways to position NARST to be a more influential professional organization. While institutional visibility and recognition may be necessary, it is not sufficient. Much of the work of science educators is essentially personal and public, not institutional. Personal in that each of us asks varied questions and utilizes varied methods and modes of discourse. Public in that while our work may facilitate our relationships with particular audiences it is also "out there" for multiple audiences to interpret. Over time, our audiences and relationships may shift as well.
NARST as an organization is an amalgamation of communities. While recognizing the diversity within our organization, the question we must pose with respect to our ability to influence policy issues is whether we can ascertain the ideological underpinnings of our field. Concomitantly, we ought to ask ourselves "How can we influence practice in important and meaningful ways?" The diversity of our organization ought to be the strength of our organization. If this is true, then we can ask ourselves as individuals how each of us contributes to the larger dialogue within science education, thereby enhancing our collective ability to influence policy. Finally, I believe that we must also come to realize that policy is not a thing; and, it is not finished business. Policy, as it relates to education in general and science education in particular, is a conversation: a conversation in which, to date, many science educators have chosen not to participate.
If we are to influence policy, then we must be active contributors to the conversation. Individuals interested in influencing policy perspectives in science education in the early years of the 21st century ought to reflect upon the achievements over the past 25 years, as well as upon what we failed to achieve. We must develop a more profound understanding of the accomplishments to which we aspire. Understanding our aspirations implies remaking both experience and its discursive representations so that we see the past and present more clearly, thereby enabling us to see where our visions might lead us in the future.
I wish to express my gratitude to Gerald H. Krockover and Paul E. Adams, Coeditors for this Theme Issue. They have done an excellent job of facilitating the review and editorial processes. Their investment of considerable time and effort to produce an intellectually stimulating