Search

There has been sustained research interest in the role of early career researchers in advancing the field and the challenges that they face. However, efforts to document lived experiences of researchers working in a specific research area within science education have been scarce. This paper considers the meaning of innovation in the context of nature of science (NOS) research, drawing from a collective reflection of five early career academics from different backgrounds. After discussing the sources of our motivation to innovate in NOS research, we identify four distinct pathways of innovation. These pathways include (1) delving into specific aspects of NOS in greater depth, (2) exploring the interface of NOS and other established research areas, and (3) using NOS to address pressing social issues, and (4) expanding the methodological repertoire of NOS research. We illustrate these four modes of research innovation using examples from our own work. Barriers to early-career innovation such as the absence of NOS in curricula and initial teacher education, the lack of time to engage with practitioners to develop and implement instructional resources, and the underrepresentation of diverse education systems in NOS research literature are discussed.

Stemming from the realization of the importance of the role of explanation in the science classroom, the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States 2013) call for appropriately supporting students to learn science, argue from evidence, and provide explanations. Despite the ongoing emphasis on explanations in the science classroom, there seems to be no well-articulated framework that supports students in constructing adequate scientific explanations, or that helps teachers assess student explanations. Our motivation for this article is twofold: First, we think that the ways in which researchers in science education have studied scientific explanation are, at best, leaves much to be desired and, at worst, simply incomplete. Second, we believe that research about the teaching and learning of explanation in science classrooms must be guided by explicit models or frameworks that specify elements involved in constructing explanations particularly applicable to science. More importantly, we think that the development of such models or guidelines should be based on theoretical and philosophical foundations. In order to develop these frameworks or guidelines, we first outline and clarify models of scientific explanation developed by philosophers of science over the last few decades. In the second section of this article, we present a more recent philosophical work on scientific explanation, the pragmatic approach to studying scientific explanations. This approach suggests a toolbox for analyzing scientists’ scientific explanations, which provides a useful instrument to science education. In Section 3, we discuss the ways by which the previous two sections are useful in developing a K-12 scientific explanation schema. Implications for future research on students’ explanations are discussed.