FROM CREATIVE IDEAS TO SCIENTIFIC ACTION: RETHINKING BRAINSTORMING AND CASE-BASED LEARNING IN JUNIOR SECONDARY SCIENCE

Bamijoko Monica Adeforiti

Abstract


Students can suggest original solutions to science problems without being able to explain whether those solutions would work. Yet classroom discussions and assessments often treat the generation of ideas, scientific reasoning and innovation as though they were the same achievement. This article asks what kinds of learning experiences can help students move from an imaginative possibility to a claim that is supported by evidence and realistic in its setting. Through a critical synthesis of research on creativity, scientific argumentation, case-based learning and culturally responsive science education, it proposes the Epistemically Warranted Idea-to-Action (EWIA) framework. EWIA brings together five connected teaching functions: framing a meaningful problem, generating alternatives, examining evidence, adapting ideas to local constraints, and communicating or acting responsibly. Two examples from junior secondary Basic Science, flood-related water safety and soil erosion, illustrate how teachers might use the framework without expensive digital resources. An analytic assessment rubric and five propositions indicate how the proposal could be tested in future research. The argument is that originality, scientific justification, practical feasibility and actual implementation should be recognised as related but distinct educational outcomes. The framework is conceptual and has not yet been tested in classrooms.


Keywords


Scientific Creativity; Brainstorming; Case-Based Learning; Evidence-Based Reasoning; Basic Science; Instructional Design

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allchin, D. (2013). Problem- and case-based learning in science: An introduction to distinctions, values, and outcomes. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 364–372. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-11-0190

Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2016.10.001

Bang, M., & Medin, D. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: Supporting the navigation of multiple epistemologies. Science Education, 94(6), 1008–1026. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20392

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for “mini-c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(2), 73–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.1.2.73

Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20286

Biesta, G. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement: On the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9064-9

Çelik, T. İ., & Akay, C. (2025). The impact of brainstorming technique on academic achievement and creative thinking: A meta-analysis study. SAGE Open, 15(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251378562

Charamba, E. (2023). Translanguaging as bona fide practice in a multilingual South African science classroom. International Review of Education, 69, 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-023-09990-0

Dauer, J. M., Knippels, M.-C. P. J., & Tabassum, S. (2026). Grounded opinion forming processes: An underused learning frame for socioscientific issues instruction. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 8, Article 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-026-00176-w

Dewi, C. A., & Rahayu, S. (2023). Implementation of case-based learning in science education: A systematic review. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 20(4), 729–749. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2023.041

Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 497–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.497

Hennessey, B. A., & Amabile, T. M. (2010). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100416

Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098912

Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543534

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165

Novak, A. M., & Treagust, D. F. (2026). Developing deep knowledge by connecting scientific ideas with data through reasoning to support claims. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 8, Article 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-026-00164-0

OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en

OECD. (2024). PISA 2022 results (Volume III): Creative minds, creative schools. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/765ee8c2-en

Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035

Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092

Xu, S., Reiss, M. J., & Lodge, W. (2025). Comprehensive scientific creativity assessment (C-SCA): A new approach for measuring scientific creativity in secondary school students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23, 293–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10469-z


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 Bamijoko Monica Adeforiti

 

 

 

 ISSN (PRINT):    2734 - 2522

 ISSN (ONLINE):  2734 - 2514

 

 

 

   

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.