top of page

debrief

Scientific discovery is less about reaching a big, concrete finish, but more so assisting in a continuous cycle of understanding.

While the common assumption about science research and discovery follows a linear model, it can be a lot trickier and take a lot longer than planned.

The linear model assumes a straightforward pipeline where research funding will lead to applicable science and societal benefits (and more funding would lead to more benefits). However, it is inaccurate. Modeled by Thomas S. Kuhn, scientific research is cyclical and involves a lot more fluidity.

 

This model instead shows that most research is actually accomplished in a pre-paradigm state (in which you were in most of this simulation!). During this period, researchers assert different ideas in a long, convoluted process of trial and error. However, once a theory or framework is established within a discipline, the science becomes normal science. It is only when anomalies, or things that don't fit in with the normal science's framework, begin occurring and building up does the normal science fall apart and the cycle begins anew!

Screen Shot 2020-12-02 at 4.45.20 PM.png
Screen Shot 2020-11-30 at 11.19.15 PM.pn

references

Bevans, R. (2020, August 4). A guide to experimental design. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/experimental-design/

Bidarra, J. & Rusman, E. (2017). Towards a pedagogical model for science education: bridging educational contexts through a blended learning approach. Open Learning, 32(1), 6-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2016.1265442

Chawla, D. S. (2020, September 10). Science is getting harder to read. Nature Index. https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/science-research-papers-getting-harder-to-read-acronyms-jargon

Fahnestock, J. (1986). Accommodating science: The rhetorical life of scientific facts. Written Communication, 3(3). 275-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088386003003001

Institutional review board. (2020, November 26). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_review_board

Iskander, J. K., Wolicki, S. B., Leeb, R. T., & Siegel, P. Z. (2018). Successful scientific writing and publishing: A step-by-step approach. Prev Chronic Dis 2018, 15(E76). 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd15.180085

Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.

McCombes, S. (2020, July 3). How to do survey research. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/survey-research/

McCombes, S. (2020, September 21). How to create a research design. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/research-design/

McCombes, S. (2020, October 22). How to write a hypothesis. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/research-process/hypotheses/

Raghunandan, M. (2018, July 24). How to get published in a scientific journal. Kolabtree Blog. https://www.kolabtree.com/blog/how-to-get-published-in-scientific-journal/

Sarewitz, D. (1996). The end of the age of physics. Frontiers of illusion: Science, technology, and the politics of progress, (pp.1-15). Temple University Press.

Shaikh, A. A. (2016, April 4). 7 steps to publishing in a scientific journal. Elsevier. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/7-steps-to-publishing-in-a-scientific-journal

Steps of the scientific method. (n.d.). Science Buddies. Retrieved November 23, 2020, from https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-method

bottom of page