Resistance to Critiques in the Academic Literature: An Example from Physics Education Research

TL;DR

This paper critiques a physics education research study claiming to find 'whiteness' in physics videos, highlighting methodological flaws and discussing the ideological tensions in critiquing diversity research.

Contribution

It provides a detailed critique of a specific study on diversity in physics education, emphasizing the importance of scientific standards in controversial research.

Findings

The critique highlights methodological shortcomings in the 'whiteness' study.

It discusses the ideological challenges in evaluating diversity-related research.

The paper illustrates the process of scientific critique within the physics education community.

Abstract

Research framed around issues of diversity and representation is often controversial. The question of what constitutes a valid critique of such research, or the appropriate manner of airing such a critique, thus has a heavy ideological and political subtext. Here we outline an attempt to comment on a paper recently published in the research journal $\mathit{Physical}$ $\mathit{Review}$ - $\mathit{Physics}$ $\mathit{Education}$ $\mathit{Research}$ (PRPER). The article in question claimed to find evidence of 'whiteness' in introductory physics from analysis of a six-minute video. We argue that even if one accepts the rather tenuous proposition that 'whiteness' is sufficiently well defined to observe, the study lacks the proper controls, checks, and methodology to allow for confirmation or disconfirmation of the authors' interpretation of the data. The authors of the whiteness study, however, make the stunning claim that their study cannot be judged by standards common in science. We summarize our written critique and its fate, along with a brief description of its genesis as a response to an article in which senior officers of the American Physical Society (which publishes PRPER) explained that the appropriate venue for addressing issues with the paper at hand is via normal editorial processes.