As editors of a major journal in our field, we read many manuscripts, most of which never successfully pass peer review to appear in the pages of the journal. One of the most frequent unmet expectations JRME reviewers have is that manuscripts will make a significant contribution to the field. Reviewers often ask authors to clarify what the contribution of a manuscript is and why the work is worth the attention of the field at large. Some authors seem puzzled by the question-after all, they have identified research questions tied to problems documented in the literature, as well as listed implications for improving practice. What else, they ask, are reviewers looking for?Authors who feel that they have made an important contribution by identifying implications for the improvement of practice have some justification for their puzzlement; our existence as a field of research is surely warranted socially and financially on the capacity of our portfolio to help improve practice sooner or later. Yet, as Sloane (2008) suggested, answers to the question of what works in mathematics education require a continuum of types of research, starting from basic research and ending with sustainability studies. 1 Thus, the extent to which a single piece of research can contribute to the field on the basis of its implications for practice is limited. Instead, a manuscript's contribution to the field could be located in how it supports the continuum of research studies proposed by Sloane (2008). In other words, manuscripts can support the building of the field's portfolio in many different ways that eventually contribute to improving practice.In this editorial, taking advantage of the commonalities and differences that we see among the articles included in this issue, we elaborate on one of the answers that could be given to the contribution question, and one end of the continuum proposed by Sloane (2008): One class of contributions to the field of mathematics education consists of pieces of basic research. By basic research we mean pieces that contribute to our field's fundamental understanding of the practices of mathematics education. Our goal is to explain what we mean by that statement as we seek to appeal to an expansive interpretation of basic research in mathematics education. The canonical definition of basic research is work in which a particular gaze or perspective is applied to a focus or phenomenon in the world with the aim of understanding it. Our elaboration proposes that this aim to understand can benefit from ecumenism in how we think of the gaze and of the focus of basic research: Our field's traditional mathematical gaze can benefit from being shaped by multiple orientations, including critical ones, and our field's traditional focus on children's thinking and learning can be expanded to encompass various scales or levels of activity. With those expansions in mind, we encourage submitting authors to consider and discuss whether and how their work contributes to basic research in mathematics education even as they a...