Science // Scientific Inquiry

Could there be another explanation?

For any result, ask: is there another explanation? — the first explanation that fits isn't always the right one, and good scientists actively look for alternatives

Ages: 7 to 9
Type: Thinking skill
Builds on: 2 topics
Leads to: 3 topics

Quick check

When the learner comes up with an explanation for something they observed, do they try to think of at least one other possible explanation before deciding they've found the answer?

Ask this to see whether the topic is secure.

Topic // Mastery

What mastery looks like

What a learner can do once this topic is secure.

prompts to consider alternative possible worlds research (6-7 year olds)
scientific thinking promotes critical thinking (MDPI 2025)

Topic // Map

Where this fits

What to learn first and what this topic opens up, with the reason for each link. Required links come first.

RequiredMust come first
HelpfulHelps, but not essential

Before this

2 topics

Changing Your Mind with EvidenceRequired
Scientific Inquiry // Ages 6 to 8
Actively seeking alternative explanations requires first having the habit of not defending your original interpretation against the evidence
Understanding WhyHelpful
Learning to Learn // Learning to Learn // Ages 8 to 9
Asking 'is there another explanation?' is the scientific form of the universal elaborative-interrogation habit

You are here

Could there be another explanation?

Ages 7 to 9 // Thinking skill

Leads to

3 topics

Correlation vs CausationRequired
Scientific Inquiry // Ages 8 to 10
Recognising that correlation is not causation requires the habit of generating alternative explanations — the correlation/causation distinction is a specific case of asking 'is there another explanation?'
Using evidence to answer questionsHelpful
Scientific Inquiry // Ages 7 to 9
Identifying similarities and differences in evidence opens up space for alternative explanations — patterns that differ from expectations prompt the habit of seeking alternatives
Science Can Be RevisedHelpful
Scientific Inquiry // Ages 9 to 11
Provisionality of scientific knowledge is grounded in the habit of always seeking alternative explanations — science revises because scientists keep asking 'is there another way to explain this?'

Topic // Research-informed

Teaching notes

From the Marble Skill Taxonomy. These notes have not been validated in classrooms, so treat them as a starting point for your own judgement.

The approach

For children aged 7–9: build the habit of asking 'what ELSE could explain this?' after any result. The teaching objective is for a child to generate two or more plausible alternative explanations for the same observation and recognise that MORE evidence is needed to decide between them, rather than locking onto the first idea that fits. The central worked example is a wilted houseplant with several rival causes (too little water, too much water, no light, too cold, bugs), where incoming clues support some explanations and rule out others.

Common misconceptions

Assuming the first explanation that fits must be the correct one.
Thinking there is only ever one possible explanation for a result.
Believing a single clue settles the matter, without checking it against rival explanations.
Generating alternatives but then not seeing that more evidence is needed to choose.
Defending a favourite explanation instead of weighing it fairly against others.
Treating 'I'm not sure which yet' as failure rather than honest, in-progress science.

Useful representations

Explanation board: one result with several candidate-explanation cards
Clue tokens that mark each explanation as supported or contradicted
'One result → many possible causes' fan diagram
A 'which test would decide?' prompt pairing rival explanations with distinguishing evidence
Narrowing funnel from many explanations to the best-supported one

Teaching practices

Routinely ask 'what ELSE could explain this?' after any result, making a second and third explanation an expected move, not an optional one.
Reward the generation of alternatives itself (before deciding which is right), so children don't rush to lock onto the first fit.
Show that deciding between rival explanations needs MORE evidence, linking each alternative to a test that could rule it in or out.
Use everyday mysteries with several genuinely plausible causes so alternatives are real, not token.
Connect to controlling variables: each competing explanation is a variable you could isolate to test.
Model open-mindedness — 'I have a favourite idea, but let me hold it lightly until the evidence decides'.

Activities to try

1
Explanation Detective Board: one clue is rarely enough
Why it works: The first explanation that fits a result is not automatically the right one; usually more than one idea can account for the same observation, so you deliberately hold several open and gather more evidence to decide between them.
1. Look at a result on the board — a houseplant has wilted — and, instead of guessing THE reason, propose or select as many plausible 'suspects' as you can: TOO LITTLE WATER, TOO MUCH WATER, NO LIGHT, TOO COLD, BUGS.
2. Earn credit for each additional plausible explanation you add, so proposing a second and third idea is the scored move, not just picking one.
3. Reveal clues one at a time and mark how each clue affects every suspect: for 'the soil is soggy and wet', strike through TOO LITTLE WATER and brighten TOO MUCH WATER; for 'the identical plant next to it in the same dark corner is thriving', strike through NO LIGHT and also TOO COLD, because both plants share the same spot, so they get the same light and the same warmth.
4. Watch the field of surviving explanations narrow with each clue, and notice when a confident first guess (it looked dry, so — no water!) gets eliminated by the soggy-soil clue.
5. When two suspects are still standing, answer the closing prompt: 'what one clue would tell them apart?' — pairing each surviving explanation with the evidence that would distinguish it.
2
Detective dialogue: 'good — what else?'
Why it works: Asking for another explanation, and for the evidence that would decide between explanations, is a repeatable reasoning habit you can apply to any result.
1. Talk through a result with an in-role investigator who, each time you give one explanation, asks 'good — what ELSE could explain that?' and refuses to let you settle on the first idea.
2. For each pair of rival explanations, say what evidence would tell them apart ('what would tell us which is right?').
3. Practise saying 'I'm not sure yet' as a legitimate scientific position while you gather more evidence.
3
Primer: one result, several possible causes
Why it works: A single result can have several possible causes — more than one idea can fit what you observed.
1. Explore a mystery scene where tapping each hotspot reveals a different possible explanation for the same result, so you see several explanations can fit one observation.
2. Use this as a warm-up before the detective board, then move on to generating your own alternatives.

Science // Scientific Inquiry