Conferenceproceedings LSGS CONFERENCE 2020

Home , 2019 in science, 2020 in science

LSGS CONFERENCE 2020 Finding Your Place in the Learning Sciences Communityƍ

Conference Proceedings

13-15 November ćą20 | Y±ÚÃÇÍá of Wisconsin | Madison, WI Table of Contents

1 Posters and Demos

The role of interactive support within a mathematics storybook in students’ learning of integers ...... 1 Mahtob Aqazade

Does using playdough help students think in three dimensions? A quantitative analysis in an undergraduate geoscience course ...... 3 Naomi Barshi, Jonathan Ham, Kathryn M. Bateman, Basil Tikoﬀ, Carol Ormand and Thomas F. Shipley

“Talking Back” to Dominant Narratives with Multimodal Texts: An Analysis of That Deaf Guy...... 5 Betsy Beckert

Pulling forward and pushing back: Taking time with resilience in making practices ...... 7 Ali Blake and Melita Morales

Exploring Methods in Acoustemology: Soniﬁcation of Two Classroom Soundscapes ...... 9 Michelle N. Brown

Language Inquiry into Middle School Students’ Perceptions of Science ...... 11 Samuel J. Bullard

Support for Spatial Thinking through Children’s Use of Spatial Sensemaking Practices ...... 13 Kyungjin Cho, Madison Botch and Julia Plummer

Techquity Designs with Kids ...... 15 Merijke Coenraad

Geo-actions: Implications of Embodied Cognition for Geologic Learning ...... 17 Brandin Conrath

Purpose-ﬁrst Programming: Coding for learners who care most about what code achieves ...... 19 Kathryn Cunningham

Visual Counter-Storytelling Design ...... 21 Shima Dadkhahfard and Miwa Aoki Takeuchi

”[W]hen I came back, she had drawn rain.”: Exploring Elementary Teachers’ Talk about English Learners in Inquiry Science ...... 23 Bethany Daniel

Engineering Inclusion? Teacher Sensemaking in Engineering ...... 25 Natalie De Lucca and Jessica Watkins

Interpretability and Actionability of Teacher Dashboards ...... 27 Kathryn C. Drzewiecki

i Creative Interactions: Analyzing User Comments in an Online Music Making Community ...... 29 Patrick W. Horton

The Use of Instructional Design and Formative Assessment in Designing Eﬀective Online Courses for Graduate Students ...... 31 Fei-Tien Hu

Mapping the Newest Generation of Learning Scientists with Collaborative Network Analysis...... 33 Megan Humburg

Professional Vision: An Interactional Analysis Study of the Competitive Visions of Earth and Space Science Teachers Within a Professional Development Environment . . . . 35 Jennifer Jackson and Jonathan McCausland

Finding the right words: Positioning students with agency, authority and accountability in classroom discourse ...... 37 Rebekah Jongewaard

Mechanical Landscapes and Opportunities for Practice in Social Studies-oriented Simulation Games ...... 40 Taylor M. Kessner

Assessing Engagement in Informal STEM Spaces: The ﬁrst steps toward applying Human Computer Interaction measures to understand engagement in natural history museums, science centers and other informal STEM spaces ...... 42 Heather Killen

Developing Virtual Reality Data Kit for Education Researchers ...... 44 Taehyun Kim, Jaewook Lee, Robb Lindgren and Jina Kang

Discourses of Writing in Schools: A critical analysis of policy and teacher talk...... 46 Erin Lane

Student-Student Dynamic Aﬀordances for Creativity...... 48 Michael Laureta

Curriculum evaluation for teacher learning supports for emergent multilingual learners ...... 51 Samuel Lee, Sage Anderson and Karina Mendez Perez

Understanding High School Students’ Debugging Strategies through Think-Aloud Protocols ...... 54 Yuhan Lin and Deborah A. Fields

Consequential Conversations: Negotiating Knowledge Territories and Participation Frames ...... 56 Melita Morales

Genocide Prevention in Education: Empathy Building from Historical Perspective Taking to Reﬂect on Self and Society...... 58 Joanna Oko

ii Understanding Students’ Perceptions of Computing Following Participation in Informal Computing Education Programs ...... 60 Melissa Perez

Parallax as a Generative Tension: The Challenges and Potentials of Expansive Transitions in Arts Integrated Partnerships...... 62 Erin A. Preston and Mark Diaz

Hands on history: Messaging “touch” at California’s history museums ...... 64 Zoe Silverman

Distributed collaboration using interactive, augmented, and embodied projections . . . . . 66 Casey J. Smith

Working It Out: How does the Format of Worked Examples Inﬂuence Learning? ...... 68 Hannah Smith and Avery Harrison

The Role of Technology in Intergenerational Learning Experiences ...... 70 Abigail T. Stephan

Human Capital: Games as a pathway to Funds of Identity ...... 73 Christina Stiso

Let’s Work Collaboratively to Improve Our Spatial Skills ...... 75 Jesslyn Valerie, David DeLiema and Keisha Varma

How the Prediction of Directed Actions Inﬂuences Simulated Actions for Geometry Proof ...... 77 Fangli Xia and Mitchell J. Nathan

2 Lightning Talks

Implications of Sociopolitical and Historical Contexts on the Identity and Learning of South Asian Muslims ...... 80 Ayesha Bhimdiwala

Designing Micro-credentials: Insights from Employers on Mastery-based Learning . . . . . 84 Steven L. Cederquist

Creating a Community of Practice through Online Collaborative Interpretation of Jewish Texts ...... 86 Shai Goldfarb Cohen

A Study on the Teaching Method of Reading the Whole Book Call to Arms in the First Year of Senior High Schools ...... 88 Fuyi Feng and Yilang Zhao

Theory and Practice, an Examination on How Second Language Acquisition literature, and English as a Second Language Literature address students’ identities . . . . 90 Alejandra Franco

iii Quizlet Live! Learning second language vocabulary through gameplay modes...... 92 Yuchan (Blanche) Gao

Grounded and embodied mathematical cognition: Are the body and language both necessary to produce valid proofs-with-insight? ...... 95 Doy Kim and Mitchell J. Nathan

Unschooling, Hacking, Playing, SparkThinking- Disciplinary Ethos For a New Data Science ...... 97 Noel Kuriakos

Taiwanese-American Children’s Chinese Language Learning and Ethnic Identity ...... 99 Huiyu Lin

Integrating Personal Experiences with Science Content to Support Cognitive Engagement in Middle School ...... 101 Tayler Loiselle and Keisha Varma

Changes in Thinking and Planning about Curricular Coherence Inﬂuenced by a PD: A Case Study ...... 103 Nessrine Machaka and Christina Krist

The aﬀordance of Identity Supportive Design of Digital Environments on Adolescent African-American Girls’ STEM Identity ...... 105 Shelana K. Martin

Engaging Social Studies Pre-Service Teachers in Technology Tool Design ...... 107 Bahare Naimipour, Mark Guzdial and Tamara Shreiner

Reimagining Teacher Interviews as Reciprocal Modes of Critical Dialogic Inquiry . . . . . 109 Ada Okun

Finding the “Right Word”: Constructing Understandings of Inclusion Through Interactions ...... 112 Christopher P. Ostrowdun

Informal Learning Spaces: Extending the Experience in the Time of COVID-19 ...... 114 Emily Holm Tobin

Exploring the “with whom” in the analysis process: broadening our perspectives to include interdisciplinary co-designers ...... 115 Lauren Vogelstein

What’s Interesting and What’s Not? Using Learning Contexts to Inform Educational Videogame Design ...... 117 Sherry Yi

Explore Self-reﬂection and Strategic Thinking in a Gaming Setting ...... 119 Yilang Zhao

iv 3 Panels

Deﬁning, Measuring, and Teaching Computational Thinking ...... 121 Avery Harrison, Hannah Smith and Katerina Tsarava

Who’s in Charge? Creating an Environment of Care in Out-of-School Learning Spaces ...... 123 Ari Hock, Robbin Riedy and Sherry Yi

Using Critical Lenses to Address Power and Privilege in an Uncertain Educational Future ...... 126 Alexa W.C. Lee-Hassan, Christopher Ostrowdun, Marrok Sedgwick and Joanne Moliski

Designing Embodiment into STEM Education ...... 129 John D. McGinty, Bria Davis, James Planey and Jackson Reimers

Investigating the Synergy Between Theatre and Learning Sciences ...... 130 Lisa Siciliano, Laura J. Carter-Stone, Jackson E. Reimers, and Nathan T. Wheeler

Complex Measures in Complex Learning Environments ...... 133 Gahyun Callie Sung and Eileen McGivney

v THE ROLE OF INTERACTIVE SUPPORT WITHIN A MATHEMATICS STORYBOOK IN STUDENTS’ LEARNING OF INTEGERS Mahtob Aqazade Purdue University [email protected]

Keywords: Cognitive conflict, Integer, Storybook, Interactivity, Elementary

Abstract: Students often struggle to make sense of negative number concepts, which often do not correspond to their prior conceptions. Therefore, it is not uncommon to see, for instance, a cognitive conflict regarding which integer values are greatest (Bofferding, 2019). Given a seemingly contradictory context—an external conflict of asking for the hottest temperature among all negative numbers—one fifth grader reasoned, “Because all of these temperatures are in the cold, coldest, and they are not in hot because of the negatives.” To determine students’ experiences of cognitive conflicts and their resolution process, they need to be exposed to conflicting situations (Murray, 1983; Zimmerman & Blom, 1983). One way to expose students to external conflict and propose its resolution is through stories. In this study, I investigate how students experience, resolve, and learn from contradictory ideas between the absolute and ordered values of integers and their resolution in the context of temperature presented through an electronic mathematics storybook. The embedded interactivities in the storybook provide additional support for making sense of the external conflict and mathematical content and resolving any emerging cognitive conflicts. I sought to explore: (1) the effects of types of embedded interactive features used in a mathematics storybook on students’ integer learning and (2) ways their interpretations of the story’s conflict and its resolution correspond to their own cognitive conflicts and resolution as expressed during reading and retelling sessions. Fourteen 3-5 grade students participated in this study from a Midwestern public elementary school (45% free and reduced-price lunch and 11% ELLs). Students took a pretest examining their integer-related understanding. Then, they read (or listen to) one of the versions of the mathematics storybook (i.e., visual, language, mixed, and non- interactive) three times. The story content across these versions is the same but they differ in the form of interactivities (or hotspots): visual or language. In the visual version, activating a hotspot results in visual information (e.g., a magnified thermometer). In the language version, activating a hotspot poses a mathematical question related to the story, and students receive feedback after answering it. The mixed version contains both visual and language type of interactivities. Across reading sessions, I probed students’ understanding of the conflicting situation and its resolution at key points within the story and asked them to retell the story. Finally, they took a posttest identical to the pretest.

Table 1 Participants’ Conditions and Grade Levels Grade Storybook Versions (Conditions) level Visual Language Mixed Non-interactive 3rd (n = 3) 1 1 1 0 4th (n = 5) 1 1 2 1 5th (n = 6) 1 2 2 1

1 The data analysis will include determining students’ responses on pretest and posttest and comparing their gains based on the version of storybook that they read (RQ1). Further, students’ retelling and reading sessions will be analyzed to identify when and how they expressed a cognitive conflict and when and how they resolved their expressed cognitive conflict (RQ2). The expected findings will contribute key insights into the process by which students with various conceptions of integers interpret and interact with the integer value conflict presented in the story, internalize it, and work to resolve the cognitive conflict with or without additional support for understanding the mathematical content within the story.

References

Bofferding, L. (2019). Understanding negative numbers. In A. Norton, & M. Alibali (Eds.), Constructing number: Merging perspectives from psychology and mathematics education (pp. 251-277). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00491-0_12

Murray, F. B. (1983). Equilibration as cognitive conflict. Developmental Review, 3, 54-61.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Blom, D. E. (1983). Toward an empirical test of the role of cognitive conflict in learning. Developmental Review, 3, 18-38.

2 Does using playdough help students think in three dimensions? A quantitative analysis in an undergraduate geoscience course

Naomi Barshi, University of Wisconsin – Madison, [email protected] Jonathan Ham, Temple University, [email protected] Kathryn M. Bateman, Temple University, [email protected] Basil Tikoff, University of Wisconsin – Madison, [email protected] Carol Ormand, Carleton College, [email protected] Thomas F. Shipley, Temple University, [email protected]

Keywords: spatial reasoning, modeling, geoscience, higher education

Abstract: Spatial reasoning in three dimensions is integral to science disciplines and a highly desirable professional skill. Thinking in three dimensions challenges both students and instructors (Manduca & Kastens, 2012). While recent studies have focused on using advanced technology such as virtual reality (Klippel et al., 2019) and augmented reality sandboxes (Woods et al., 2016) to support developing spatial reasoning, we implemented playdough as an inexpensive, portable, familiar instructional tool. We investigated whether using playdough to model 3D geologic structures and the processes that create them helps students visualize 3D structures and processes from 2D representations (e.g. geologic maps and cross sections). Similar mixed-methods, curriculum-integrated research can be employed by instructors in their own classrooms to improve student learning. This work is part of a larger, ongoing examination of learning in an undergraduate geoscience course at a large Midwestern university. The course, “Introduction to Geologic Structures”, was designed to focus on geologic spatial thinking skills. The instructional team met weekly with geoscience education researchers to develop course activities, surveys, and assessments involving playdough to implement into lecture (1 hour, 3 times/week) and lab (3 hours, 1 time/week) sections of the course as well as on two field trips during the semester for the 38 students. We used playdough to represent two different types of geologic concepts: structure and process. Structure refers to a geometry of rock bodies, such as folded layers. Process refers to the evolution of that geometry, such as from flat-lying layers into folded layers. We identified final exam questions that correlated with specific playdough models and sorted those questions by type of model used and question topic to test the efficacy of different types of playdough use. For example, one exam question asked about faulted rock layers, which we modeled with two different playdough models. While the question asked purely about structure, the playdough we used modeled process. Since data were not normally distributed, we used the non-parametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test to determine whether students did better on questions related to structure models, process models, or questions that were not directly supported by playdough models used in the classroom, lab, or field. Likewise, we compared questions which asked about structure and process, and those related to a non-spatial course concept, like rock type. Initial results show that students performed significantly better on questions related to structure models (W=6, Z=4.372, p<0.0005, r=0.71) and questions without a relevant playdough model (W=3, Z=5.01, p<0.0005, r=0.81) compared to questions related to a process model. The

3 difference between student scores on structure-playdough questions and non-playdough questions is not significant at 99% confidence (W=14, Z=2.05, p=0.04, r=0.33). Our current interpretation is that process-based questions were more cognitively demanding than structure-based questions. Understanding structures is a 3D task. Understanding processes requires four-dimensional (time) thinking. Additionally, what students learn from a playdough model may not match the intent of the model. Class-based playdough modeling may need more targeted or careful design to support the variety of spatial thinking tasks required to interpret 3D structural evolution of subsurface geology from a 2D map or cross-sectional representation.

References

Klippel, A., Zhao, J., Jackson, K. L., La Femina, P., Stubbs, C., Wetzel, R., Blair, J., Wullgrün, J.O., & Oprean, D. (2019). Transforming Earth Science Education Through Immersive Experiences: Delivering on a Long Held Promise. Journal of Educational Computing Research. Manduca, C. A., & Kastens, K. A. (2012). Mapping the domain of spatial thinking in the geosciences. Earth and mind II: A synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences. Geological Society of America Special Paper, 486, 45-49. Woods, T. L., Reed, S., Hsi, S., Woods, J. A., & Woods, M. R. (2016). Pilot study using the augmented reality sandbox to teach topographic maps and surficial processes in introductory geology labs. Journal of Geoscience Education, 64(3), 199-214.

4 “Talking Back” to Dominant Narratives with Multimodal Texts: An Analysis of That Deaf Guy Betsy Beckert Boston University [email protected]

Keywords: Deaf Studies, Representation, Literacy, Cultural Heterogeneity, Multimodal Texts

Abstract: “Stories matter. Many stories matter. Stories have been used to dispossess and to malign, but stories can also be used to empower and to humanize.” - Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

The children’s publishing industry is largely dominated by White (77%), cis-gender (97%), heterosexual (81%), and non-disabled (89%) individuals.8 It is, therefore, unsurprising that deaf children, especially those with minoritized, intersectional identities, rarely see themselves or their lives represented in print. Furthermore, the few images or storylines of deaf people in children’s literature often promote handicapism by presenting deaf individuals from a medical model, a form of deficit perspective. In the medical model, deafness is portrayed as an illness or a disability to be corrected and interventions are lauded that aim to treat hearing loss (e.g., Cochlear implants), teach speech skills, and generally “help” deaf individuals conform to the larger hearing society.3,4 In contrast, the cultural model of deafhood humanizes deaf individuals building from recognition of their linguistic, cultural, and everyday repertoires. 3,7,9 However, even within this model, deaf characters are often presented as homogenous, their identities and experiences flattened to fit an essentialized deaf-hearing binary.10 In this paper, I explore how Matt Daigle, the deaf creator of the comic series, That Deaf Guy, assembles both images and text to give voice to a deaf counter-narrative to mainstream ways of viewing the world. That Deaf Guy is chosen for closer investigation because it is one of the few examples of comics or children’s literature in which both the creator and main character identify as deaf. I conduct a close study of three comics, “Deaf Culture 101: Describing an Accident”, “The Benefits of Being Profoundly Deaf”, and “Deaf Bourne Identity”, drawing on multimodal scholarship 5,6 and a critical content analysis framework2 to explore how the possibilities and tensions of the cultural model live in the comics. An analysis of each comic reveals deaf characters who are complex, intelligent, and capable, in alignment with the cultural model. Furthermore, deaf gain (i.e., the benefits of being deaf) is emphasized.3,4 Across the texts, humor is used to elucidate a difference between hearing and deaf cultures, storytelling practices, and perspectives. However, That Deaf Guy falls short in delivering multiple intersectional characters who offer counter-narratives to the deaf-hearing paradigm; only one of the three comics included deaf characters who did not present as white and male. Despite this, That Deaf Guy demonstrates the potential of the multimodal text to combat dominant narratives. Given the dearth of deaf characters in comics and children’s literature as well as the tendency for authors to employ harmful disability tropes and frame deafness from a deficit perspective, it is crucial that teachers and students take up texts with a critical eye. This exploration of how deaf characters are portrayed in That Deaf Guy offers insights into how comics can function as a medium with characteristics uniquely suited to “talk back” to powered ways of viewing the world.

5 References

¹ Adichie, C.N. (2009). The danger of a single story. TEDGlobal. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story

² Beach, R., Enciso, P., Harste, J., Jenkins, C., Raina, S. A., Rogers, R., Short, K., Sung, Y., Wilson, M, & Yenika-Agbaw, V. (2009). Exploring the “critical” in critical content analysis of children’s literature. In 58th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 129-143). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.

³ Golos, D. B., & Moses, A. M. (2011). Representations of deaf characters in children’s picture books. American Annals of the Deaf, 156(3), 270-282.

⁴ Golos, D. B., Moses, A. M., & Wolbers, K. A. (2012). Culture or disability? Examining Deaf characters in children’s book illustrations. Early Childhood Education Journal, 40(4), 239-249.

⁵ Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O'Halloran, K. (2016). Introducing multimodality. New York: Routledge.

⁶ Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Hodder Arnold Publication.

⁷ Ladd, P. (2003). Understanding deaf culture: In search of deafhood. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

⁸ Lee & Low Books, Jiménez, L., Beckert, B. (2019). Where is the diversity in publishing?: The 2019 Diversity Baseline Survey results. Retrieved from https://blog.leeandlow.com/2020/01/28/2019diversitybaselinesurvey/

⁹ Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press.

10 Ruiz-Williams, E., Burke, M., Chong, V.Y., & Chainarong. N. (2015). My deaf is not your deaf: Realizing intersectional realities at Gallaudet University. In A. Kusters & M. Friedner (Eds.), It’s a small world: International deaf spaces and encounters (pp. 262- 273). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.

6 Pulling forward and pushing back: Taking time with resilience in making practices Ali Blake, Boston College, [email protected] Melita Morales, Boston College, [email protected]

Keywords: making, makerspace education, critical making, modern coloniality, arts, relational pedagogies, resilience

Abstract: Resilience: when the warp and weft of a fabric returns to its “initial” state following the impact of external forces, the way a rubber band snaps back to its resting form, the way young people overcome adverse experiences and continue to charge forward in society as it is. And yet, who is desiring a return to familiar structures? As making practices are touted for building “resilience” in learners–– in particular, learners within non-dominant cultures and communities–– we, the authors, ask, what kind(s) of resilience? Resilience often implies a “going back,” remaining undistorted in the midst of oppressive and dominating forces. This serves to deepen ruts of colonial narratives about learning framed by linear versions of development that move from primitive to sophisticated (Bang, 2017) without generating alternative possibilities. The authors’ work in makerspaces serves as the context in which we question making practices that set polished products as the goal over thinking with materials. Vossoughi and Vakil (2018) highlight how makerspaces are steeped in macrostructures that exert ideological influence on the pedagogies of the makerspace environment. Young people are often left working toward corporate and military investment agendas, and economic goals tied more to social reproduction than speculative imagining and social transformation. As such, particular ways of knowing, being, and valuing are sustained in ways that bolster a modern coloniality, working in opposition to real social change (Calderon, 2014; Hira & Hynes, 2018; Vossoughi et al., 2016). We offer a conceptual provocation to consider resilience against dominating linear narratives about progress and innovation that are synonymous with economic growth mapped by a one-directional vector. Current critical discourse demonstrates continued efforts to highlight cross-cultural expressions of making, working to “expand the possibility that this movement will contribute to intellectually generative and liberatory pedagogical practices” (Vossoughi, Hooper & Escudé, 2016, p. 211), including tending to indigenous making and sharing practices (Barajas-López & Bang, 2018) and relational equity (DiGiacomo & Gutiérrez, 2015). For us, this includes an examination of time as a tool to measure a “chronology of difference” through dichotomized scales of saved/unsaved, civilized/primitive, progressive/luddite (Shajahan, 2014). We connect linear formulations of product-driven rapid-prototyping based innovation with ontological divisions that separate time and space from nature and bodies. We problematize product-oriented learning tied to future outcomes portrayed through management, measurement and control, alienated from relationships, ideas, subjectivities.

7 From arts and maker perspectives, we offer possibilities of action oriented toward slowing down to focus on quality of attention and relationships through decolonizing time (Shahjahan, 2015). What if a resilient movement reached further and in more directions, connecting with knowledge and ideas engaged across time and integral to an unsettled (Tuck & Gaztambide-Fernández, 2013), thriving future? We offer a version of resilience in making that does not recoil into an unaltered previous form, but shifts to generate different relationships between warp and weft, challenging the neoliberal logic of linearity and dichotomies of being.

References:

Barajas-López, F., & Bang, M. (2018). Towards Indigenous Making and Sharing: Claywork in an Indigenous STEAM Program. Equity & Excellence in Education, 51(1), 7–20. Bang, M. (2017). Toward an ethic of decolonial trans-ontologies in sociocultural theories of learning and development. In I. Esmonde & A. Booker (Eds.), Power and Privilege in the Learning Sciences (pp. 115–138). New York, New York: Routledge. Calderon, D. (2014). Uncovering settler grammars in curriculum. Educational Studies, 50(4), 313–338.

DiGiacomo, D. K., & Gutiérrez, K. D. (2016). Relational Equity as a Design Tool Within Making and Tinkering Activities. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(2), 141–153. Hira, A., & Hynes, M. M. (2018). People, Means, and Activities: A conceptual framework for realizing the educational potential of Makerspaces. Education Research International, 2018, 1–10. Shahjahan, R. A. (2015). Being ‘Lazy’ and Slowing Down: Toward decolonizing time, our body, and pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(5), 488–501. Tuck, E., & Gaztambide-Fernández, R. A. (2013). Curriculum, replacement, and settler futurity. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 29(1). Vossoughi, S., & Vakil, S. (2018). Toward what ends? A critical analysis of militarism, equity, and STEM education. In Education at War: The Fight for Students of Color in America’s Public Schools (pp. 117–140). Vossoughi, S., Hooper, P. K., & Escudé, M. (2016). Making through the lens of culture and Power: Toward transformative visions for educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 86(2), 206–232.

8 Exploring Methods in Acoustemology: Sonification of Two Classroom Soundscapes Michelle N.Brown Penn State University [email protected]

Keywords: acoustemology, science sensemaking, soundscapes, methodology

Abstract: What do different learning environments sound like? How can listening to these sounds create new insights for educators and researchers? This demo shares a pilot exploration of the sounds in two learning spaces to consider new ways educators and researchers can interrogate the classroom norms. Leveraging Foucault’s (1995) docile bodies, and Bakhtin’s (1981) intersubjectivity, I consider how listeners, including myself, can hear learning spaces differently. My exploration of sound aligns with Stephen Feld’s (2005) theory of acoustemology: “an exploration of sonic sensibilities, specifically of ways in which sound is central to making sense, to knowing, to experiential truth,” (p. 185). I began this project by listening to two 30-minute audio recordings of a 2nd grade classroom, focusing on musicality, not words. One recording captures the teacher’s lesson on plural nouns, which I call a “traditional” soundscape, and the other covers an evaporation investigation or “science sensemaking” soundscape. I heard distinctly different sounds in each space: a restlessness in the students, and a staccato, slowly repeating rhythm as the teacher’s and students’ voices moved back and forth, aligned to an Initiate-Response-Evaluate (IRE) interaction, in the traditional soundscape, and expanding and irregular bursts of sounds that lasted longer between and among students and teacher in the science sensemaking space. This first iteration of listening differently provides space for divergent interpretations and focal points. In future work, I am interested in collecting the interpretations of educators, students, and families, particularly those from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds, to highlight the different perspectives of these soundscapes. After this initial exploration, I openly and iteratively coded each soundscape, recording four different themes, with sub-categories in VNote: discipline, teacher/researcher voice, student voice, and other sounds/discourses, (Figure 1). I then assigned musical notes to each code, and “played” the data as if it were notes on a piano scroll, through a process called sonification (Hermann, Hunt, & Neuhoff, 2011). I first randomly assigned musical notes to all codes to create a control transposition. Randomizing the notes allowed me to hear all the data equally, while highlighting differences between each space, including between and within codes (listen in Table 1). For example, I could hear how discipline was less frequent and student talk was more frequent in science sensemaking spaces, and teacher talk was prevalent in both spaces. To explore how data could be heard differently, I sonified the data in two additional ways: orchestrally and percussively, using different pitches and tones to group themes. This sonification process has many limitations, including coding bias, small data samples, and novice sonification productions. However, the process has provided insights about learning spaces, particularly how students’ and teachers’ roles are produced differently in each space. Moving forward, I am interested in how sonification and soundscapes can be used with educators and families, as a starting point to discuss how sounding is a social process with different interpretations, and to apply a critical frame to interrogate white, western norms of what school should sound like.

9 Figure 1: Coded Soundscapes Coding schemes populated in VNote represent different categories (see key), which were later assigned to sounds. Below are the complete codes. Traditional Coding Scheme Science Sensemaking Coding Scheme

Key:

Discipline

Teacher/ Researcher talk

Student talk

Other discourses

Table 1: Soundscapes Click on each sound icon to access the sound: Soundscape: Traditional Science-Sensemaking Control

Control: Discipline Only

Control: Teacher Talk Only

Control: Student Talk Only

Control: Other Discourses Only

Orchestral

Percussive

References

Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). Dialogic imagination: Four essays (M. Holquist (ed.)). University of Texas Press.

Feld, S. (2005). Places Sensed, Senses Placed: Toward a Sensuous Epistemology of Environments. In D. Howes (Ed.), Empire of the Senses: The Sensual Cultural Reader (p. 179). New York: BERG.

Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish (2nd ed.). Vintage Books.

Hermann, T., Hunt, A., & Neuhoff, J. G. (2011). The Sonification Handbook. (T. Hermann, A. Hunt, & J. G. Neuhoff, Eds.). Berlin, Germany: Logos.

10 Language Inquiry into Middle School Students’ Perceptions of Science Samuel J. Bullard University of Minnesota [email protected]

Keywords: science perceptions, linguistic style, LIWC, text analysis, middle school

Abstract:

As the United States follows the international trend towards a Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) oriented economy, so does the need for a generation of scientifically literate and enthusiastic learners. However, researchers have long observed a steady decline in students’ attitudes, interests, and motivations towards science, particularly during the transition from primary to secondary school (Potvin & Hasni, 2014; George, 2000). These are typically measured via self-report scales or interviews (Teo, 2011), which benefit from their capacity to address items thought to be related to the construct directly. However, little is understood about how students express these perceptions while engaging with science content. Research suggests that linguistic style reflects an individual's psychological traits (Chung & Pennebaker, 2008; Rude, Gortner, & Pennebaker, 2004), personal values (Boyd et al., 2015), and potential academic success (Pennebaker, Chung, Frazee, Lavergne, & Beaver, 2014). Automated text analysis allows researchers to better understand descriptive relationships between language and psychological variables of interest (Pennebaker, Mehl, & Niederhoffer, 2003). An inquiry into students’ linguistic style in science assignments may allow for a more thorough understanding of their perceptions of self-efficacy, motivation, opinions, and anxiety toward science rather than by using self-report measures alone. This study explores the following research question: What relationships exist between students’ self-reported perceptions of science and the cognitive, affective, motivational, and social processes observed in student speech? Researchers recruited students from a Midwestern middle school during the 2019-2020 academic year. Participants in this study (a) completed a survey assessing individual perceptions of science and (b) recorded one or more video(s) speaking about science concepts in response to a video prompt by their teacher, posted to the social learning environment Flipgrid (Flipgrid.com). Researchers subsequently transcribed student videos. The Attitudes Towards Science Inventory is an instrument developed by Gogolin and Swartz (1992) designed to assess college students’ attitudes toward science. Weinburg and Steele (2000) modified the inventory for use with younger students. This study administered an abridged version (mATSI:a) to prevent respondent fatigue. Ongoing analyses will evaluate the internal consistency between mATSI:a items and conduct factor analysis to determine the dimensions of student science perception captured by the survey. We expect this analysis to reveal four distinct dimensions consistent with other versions of the inventory. These include self-efficacy in science, anxiety toward science, desire to do science, and perception of science’s overall value to society (Weinburg & Steele, 2000). The Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC, 2015) software provides insight into the cognitive, affective, motivational, and social processes reflected through language. The program counts words from text input and places them into categories that pertain to psychological variables. Output values are represented by the quotient of the number of variable-related words

11 divided by the total number of words in the analyzed text. Four summary variables (analytic thinking, clout, authenticity, and tone) are calculated by algorithms proprietary to the software developers. We will analyze transcripts from students' Flipgrid videos and perform statistical testing to compare the LIWC variable outputs with mATSI:a subscores. Findings will reveal whether students’ science perceptions are demonstrated through the language they use when engaging with science content in social learning environments.

References

Boyd, R.L., Wilson, S.R., Pennebaker, J.W., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., & Mihalcea, R. (2015). Values in Words: Using Language to Evaluate and Understand Personal Values. ICWSM. Chung, C., & Pennebaker, J. (2008). Revealing dimensions of thinking in open-ended self- descriptions: An automated meaning extraction method for natural language. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(1), 96-132. Flipgrid. Ignite Classroom Discussion. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.flipgrid.com/ George, R. (2000). Measuring change in students’ attitudes toward science over time: An application of latent variable growth modeling. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 9(3), 213–225. Gogolin, L. and Swartz, F. (1992), A quantitative and qualitative inquiry into the attitudes toward science of nonscience college students. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 29: 487-504. doi:10.1002/tea.3660290505 Pennebaker, J. W., & Boyd, R. L. (2015). Language Inquiry and Word Count [Computer Software] Retrieved from https://liwc.wpengine.com/ Pennebaker, J. W., Chung, C. K., Frazee, J., Lavergne, G. M., & Beaver, D. I. (2014). When small words foretell academic success: The case of college admissions essays. PloSOne, 9, 110. Pennebaker, J., Mehl, M., & Niederhoffer, K. (2003). Psychological Aspects of Natural Language Use: Our Words, Our Selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 547-577. Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: A systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85–129. Rude, S., Gortner, EM., & Pennebaker, J. (2004) Language use of depressed and depression- vulnerable college students, Cognition & Emotion, 18:8, 1121-1133, DOI: 10.1080/02699930441000030 Teo, T. (2011). Towards greater precision in latent construct measurement: What's the Rasch? British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), E122-E124. Weinburgh, Molly & Steele, Donald. (2000). The Modified Attitudes toward Science Inventory: Developing an Instrument to Be Used with Fifth Grade Urban Students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering.

Support for Spatial Thinking through Children’s Use of Spatial Sensemaking Practices

Kyungjin Cho, [email protected], The Pennsylvania State University Madison Botch, [email protected], The Pennsylvania State University Julia Plummer, [email protected], The Pennsylvania State University

Keywords: Spatial thinking, Story, Informal education, Early-childhood, Gestures

Abstract: This study investigates ways in which the combination of a science storybook and a story-driven investigation can be used to support children’s engagement in spatial sensemaking practices. Learners engage in spatial sensemaking practices, such as spatial talk, gestures, and object manipulation, when they draw on material and social resources to make sense of spatial phenomena (Ramey & Uttal, 2017). Despite evidence suggesting early spatial skills are critical to children’s engagement in later science opportunities (e.g., Ferrara et al., 2011; Ehrlich et al., 2006), we found limited literature on the development of resources for teachers and parents to support preschool-age children’s spatial thinking (Newcombe, 2016). This study uses a spatially- rich science storybook to promote guided investigation of science phenomena through children’s use of spatial sensemaking practices. Our research was guided by the following research question: In what ways can preschool-age children’s engagement in spatial sensemaking practices be supported through story-driven investigations? This study uses a design-based research approach to iteratively test how features of story- driven investigation may influence children’s spatial thinking. We designed a workshop around the topic of lunar craters, using a storybook to guide children’s explorations during the investigation. The workshop was implemented multiple times (three iterations N=35, targeting 3- to-5 years) by the same informal science educator at a children’s science museum and community preschools. To conduct video analysis, we developed a codebook to define various spatial sensemaking practices, and applied those codes to identify how children expressed their spatial thinking through their interactions with the educator and supporting workshop materials. Our analysis suggests three ways that children express their spatial thinking: talk, gestures, and object manipulation. Children’s spatial talk often consisted of one-word descriptions of spatial phenomena (e.g., deep or shallow) with a few instances where a full sentence was used to convey more extensive ideas. We also note that spatial gestures were used to substitute spatial talk, rather than support it, on about half of the occurrences. For instance, if asked whether a crater was deep or shallow, a child may have demonstrated the depth of the crater by spreading their arms/hands. Children expressed their spatial thinking through object manipulation during the investigative and reflective portions of our program. Explanatory object manipulation was used during the reflection portion of our program when children were asked to make their own craters using clay and explain to others what they had learned. The current phase of our research examines how the educator and program design supported children’s engagement in spatial sensemaking practices, and will be used to develop recommendations for practitioners seeking to support children’s spatial thinking through engagement in spatial sensemaking practices. Our team is currently in the process of conjecture mapping to identify ties between program design, educators’ practices, and how those impact children’s engagement in spatial sensemaking practices.

References

Ehrlich, S. B., Levine, S. C., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2006). The importance of gesture in children's spatial reasoning. Developmental psychology, 42(6), 1259. Ferrara, K., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., Newcombe, N. S., Golinkoff, R. M., & Lam, W. S. (2011). Block talk: Spatial language during block play. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5(3), 143-151. Newcombe, N. S. (2016). Thinking spatially in the science classroom. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 10, 1-6. Ramey, K. E., & Uttal, D. H. (2017). Making sense of space: Distributed spatial sensemaking in a middle school summer engineering camp. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(2), 277- 319.

14 Techquity Designs with Kids Merijke Coenraad University of Maryland, College Park [email protected]

Keywords: Cooperative Inquiry, educational technology, equity, computer science education

Abstract: In the modern era, there is a computer in almost every pocket or bag and on nearly every street corner. The predictions of ubiquitous computing made 30 years ago have been realized (Weiser, 1991). But ubiquitous computing creates increased opportunities for technology to do harm within society and for it to both create new and perpetuate old biases (Wachter-Boettcher, 2017). Consciously or unconsciously, programmers and developers build their own biases into the technology they create based on their own perceptions of users and the use of historical data with minimal updating of algorithms based on if predictions are correct or not (O’Neil, 2016; Wachter-Boettcher, 2017). These biases affect online advertising (O’Neil, 2016; Wachter- Boettcher, 2017), search results (Noble, 2018), facial recognition (Buolamwini & Gebru, 2018), speech recognition (Koenecke et al., 2020), policing and criminal justice decisions (Garvie, Bedoya, & Frankle, 2016; O’Neil, 2016; Wachter-Boettcher, 2017), and many other algorithms and pieces of artificial intelligence that control the technology within society. These and other biased facets of technology are threats to equity within computing. Broadly, they are issues related to the social justice impacts of computing, a concept I call Techquity.

In my work, I am partnering with youth and teachers to design a series of Techquity infused computer science lessons for middle grades (5th – 8th) learners. In this poster, I present preliminary results from a series of design sessions hosted with youth to learn more about their impressions of Techquity and to gather youth generated design ideas around Techquity. I aim to answer the research questions: (1) What design characteristics and topics do youth consider when designing middle grades (ages 10-14) learning materials about Techquity? and (2) How do youth design lessons about Techquity to teach peers about these topics?

Using cooperative inquiry (Druin, 1999, 2002), a participatory design technique in which designers work cooperatively with children in an equal partnership to design around technology, I worked with seven children ages 8-13. All of the children identify as Black. In total, we designed across five 90-minute design sessions (Table 1). We examined Techquity from a youth perspective, rated Techquity concerns within children’s lives, designed opportunities to teach peers about Techquity, critiqued early lesson plans, and created public service announcements about Techquity using the Scratch block-based programming environment. Preliminary results indicate that youth were able to provide multiple examples of Techquity within their lives. The children had concerns about the relative homogeneity of technology development teams and the use of data for profit and to direct advertising that could negatively affect them. Youth felt that it was important to teach their peers about Techquity and designed both computer programs and robots that allowed peers to experience Techquity concerns in a controlled, gamified manner to allow for understanding and experiential learning. With the rates at which youth are using technology, it is essential that they are thinking about how technology can negatively impact society and the biases and inequalities that can be built into the very structure of technologies.

15 References: Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Machine Learning Research: Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Druin, A. (1999). Cooperative Inquiry: Developing New Technologies for Children with Children. In CHI ’99 Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing system (pp. 592–599). Retrieved from http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. In Behavior & Information Technology (Vol. 21, pp. 1–25). https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290110108659 Garvie, C., Bedoya, A. M., & Frankle, J. (2016). The perpetual line-up: Unregulated police face recognition in America. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://www.perpetuallineup.org/ Koenecke, A., Nam, A., Lake, E., Nudell, J., Quartey, M., Mengesha, Z., … Goel, S. (2020). Racial disparities in automated speech recognition. Proceedings Fo the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915768117 Maloney, J., Resnick, M., & Rusk, N. (2010). The Scratch programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 10(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/1868358.1868363.http Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York, NY: New York University Press. O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York, NY: Crown. Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., … Kafai, Y. B. (2009). Scratch: Programming for All. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1145/1592761.1592779 Wachter-Boettcher, S. (2017). Technically Wrong: Sexist apps, biased algorithms, and other threats of toxic tech. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company. Weiser, M. (1991). The computer for the 21 st century. Scientific American, 265(3), 94–105.

16 Geo-actions: Implications of Embodied Cognition for Geologic Learning

Brandin Conrath The Pennsylvania State University [email protected]

Keywords: embodied cognition, action, learning, geoscience

Abstract:

The actions one engages in can promote learning (Alibali & Nathan, 2018). Students participate in actions mentally throughout instruction but not always physically. STEM disciplines, in particular, have many action-oriented subjects. However, even within these disciplines, there is a disparity in the amount of embodied actions and processes. For instance, certain mathematical properties of geometric shapes utilize various mental actions when learning about key spatial topics like translation, transformation, or reflection. One science subject that is heavily rooted in embodied action is astronomy. Astronomy learning can often utilize the body as a tool or resource (Azevedo & Mann, 2018). There has been theoretical and empirical research done in these other areas of STEM that we can use to inform our thinking of embodied cognition in geoscience. Few empirical studies have been done on embodied cognition and geoscience. In order to delve into this lesser known area, we propose a study driven by the following research question: Can embodied action be used to promote the learning of certain geologic concepts such as plate tectonics? To answer this question, the proposed study will analyze the explicit instruction and use of embodied actions during the implementation of Geological Models for Explorations Of Dynamic Earth (GEODE). GEODE is an online curriculum designed to support student learning about system-level plate tectonics using virtual models and simulations. The study will analyze data from two groups of middle school students that are participating in the GEODE curriculum. One will receive supplemental and explicit instruction of embodied actions (such as gestures of plate motion) and one group that receives only the online curriculum without embodied supports. Mixed methods data will be collected in the form of content pre/post test results and student interviews. The content pre/post tests are embedded in the GEODE curriculum. While the interview will focus on spatial tasks and explanations of plate tectonics such as: How did the Andes Mountains form? We predict that students who participate in the supplemental instruction and use of embodied actions will perform higher on the post assessment. By receiving explicit instruction on embodied design, these students are also predicted to be more likely to use embodied actions in their future studies. Even their cognition beyond educational studies can be influenced, such as in the realm of social anthropology (Abrahamson & Lindgren, 2014). By conducting this study, we hope to be able to contribute a current empirical perspective to the learning sciences and geoscience education community. A second study could be proposed that analyzes the relationship between instruction of embodied actions and students’ spatial reasoning. This could involve the measuring of students spatial reasoning before and after GEODE instruction to determine if the supplemental embodied instruction promotes overall spatial reasoning.

References:

Abrahamson, D., & Lindgren, R. (2014). Embodiment and embodied design. The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, Second Edition, 358–376. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.022

Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2018). Embodied cognition in learning and teaching: Action, observation, and imagination. International Handbook of the Learning Sciences, 75–85. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315617572

Azevedo, F. S., & Mann, M. J. (2018). Seeing in the dark: Embodied cognition in amateur astronomy practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(1), 89–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1336439

18 Purpose-first Programming: Coding for learners who care most about what code achieves

Kathryn Cunningham University of Michigan [email protected]

Keywords: novice programmers, purpose-first programming, end-user programmers, conversational programmers, code tracing, scaffolding, learning environment

Abstract:

Instructional approaches developed for introductory programming classrooms typically take a semantics-first approach, emphasizing code tracing knowledge about the details of how code executes (Sorva, 2013). Hierarchies of programming skills developed by computing education researchers designate code tracing as a skill students naturally learn (Lister, 2016) or should be taught (Xie et al., 2019) prior to other skills like explaining what code does in natural language, or writing code from scratch. However, these skill hierarchies do not consider the differing motivations that various communities of learners may have for different learning tasks. Not all programming learners want to be software developers. Aspiring end-user programmers, such as data analysts, want to create programs that solve domain-specific tasks (Ko et al., 2011). Aspiring conversational programmers, such as project managers and user experience designers, want to understand what others can do with code, but typically don't wish to write code themselves (Wang, Mitts, Guo, & Chilana, 2018). Currently, aspiring end-user programmers and conversational programmers are taught with the same semantics-focused approach as aspiring software engineers. This semantics-first learning intentionally removes information about the context of what code is used for, with the reasoning that a focus on code semantics alone is more important (Lister et al., 2004). For some learners, this focus on code tracing may be detrimental: a recent study found that some learners in an end-user programmer major rejected the activity of code tracing, describing themselves as having identities incompatible with code tracing tasks (Cunningham, Agrawal Bejarano, Guzdial, & Ericson, 2020). I have developed an instructional approach called Purpose-first Programming, where learning starts from the user’s need for programming, rather than the demands of programming language semantics. Instruction will focus on common programming patterns in the domain of choice, called plans (Soloway & Ehrlich, 1984). Purpose-First Programming learners assemble and tailor plans, so that they write useful programs from the start. Learners avoid the need for code tracing because the action of code is described in natural language. Purpose-First Programming is naturally domain-specific, resulting in authentic learning that aligns with professional practice and is personally meaningful for students. To evaluate Purpose-first Programming, I developed a proof-of-concept curriculum in the domain of web scraping, based on five plans identified through an analysis of files on Github and interviews with experts. In the curriculum, learners focus on the ways that plans are modified to achieve goals. I evaluated this approach with nine novice programmers who were aspiring end user programmers or conversational programmers, and had no prior knowledge of web scraping. I found that these learners were largely successful at scaffolded code writing, debugging, and explanation tasks after 45 minutes of instruction. In thinkalouds, these novices used provided

19 plan information, like goals and subgoals, during problem-solving. They reported being motivated to learn with plans in the future for a variety of reasons, including the focus on conceptual knowledge and their ease of use.

References

Cunningham, K., Agrawal Bejarano, R., Guzdial, M., & Ericson, B. (2020). I’m not a computer: How identity informs value and expectancy during a programming activity. Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Memphis, TN, United States.

Lister, R. (2016, October). Toward a developmental epistemology of computer programming. In Proceedings of the 11th workshop in primary and secondary computing education (pp. 5-16).

Lister, R., Adams, E. S., Fitzgerald, S., Fone, W., Hamer, J., Lindholm, M., ... & Simon, B. (2004, June). A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin (Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 119-150). ACM.

Ko, A. J., Abraham, R., Beckwith, L., Blackwell, A., Burnett, M., Erwig, M., ... & Rosson, M. B. (2011). The state of the art in end-user software engineering. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 43(3), 1-44.

Soloway, E., & Ehrlich, K. (1984). Empirical studies of programming knowledge. IEEE Transactions on software engineering, (5), 595-609.

Sorva, J. (2013). Notional machines and introductory programming education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 13(2), 8.

Wang, A. Y., Mitts, R., Guo, P. J., & Chilana, P. K. (2018, April). Mismatch of expectations: How modern learning resources fail conversational programmers. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-13).

Xie, B., Loksa, D., Nelson, G. L., Davidson, M. J., Dong, D., Kwik, H., ... & Ko, A. J. (2019). A theory of instruction for introductory programming skills. Computer Science Education, 29(2-3), 205-253.

20 Visual Counter-Storytelling Design Shima Dadkhahfard, Miwa Aoki Takeuchi University of Calgary [email protected], [email protected]

Keywords: Visuals, Graphic Design, Counter-Storytelling, Equity Abstract: In the current field of the learning sciences, a growing body of scholarship brings forth critical perspectives on power and identities in relation to learning and design.1,2,9 In this context, we add to this discussion by designing visual counter-storytelling as a medium to envisage equitable learning opportunities in linguistically and racially diverse classrooms. Our goal in this paper is to explore the affordances of visual counter-storytelling as a medium to facilitate dialogues with pre-service teachers on equity and learning. Counter-storytelling informed by critical race theory offers space to challenge dominant and deficit narratives and centralizes the story and voices of historically marginalized groups.8 Counter-storytelling challenges the deficit master narrative that overemphasizes and individualizes the deficits of non-dominant students and eventually forces them to assimilate into mainstream norms.5,8 Visual mediums can offer unique affordances to facilitate experiences and dialogues with audiences. Such affordances have long been discussed from the perspectives of information exchange and data processing.6 More recently, graphic-textual illustrations have also been discussed in relation to its power for displacing and disrupting colonizing knowledge- making practices, especially considering linguistically diverse learning environments.4 Our work attempts to further advance the discussion on the affordance of visuals as a key part of counter-storytelling. Specifically, in this paper, we closely examine the design process of visual counter-storytelling including designers’ intentions and lessons learned from conversations with the audience. Prior to visualization, an ethnographic study was conducted in a school that belonged to a large public-school board in Canada. The school had approximately 450 students representing more than 30 different language groups. Twenty-three percent of the students were born outside Canada and moved as an immigrant or a refugee. We visually transformed findings and theoretical contributions from the ethnographic study. The illustration contrasted experiences of two bilingual students from different geopolitical backgrounds (i.e., one Afghan refugee and one Canadian-born Francophone). We then used the illustrations in a teacher education course and facilitated the conversation about learning and equity. Pre-service teachers illustrated their reactions to the designed illustrated story and came up with potential classroom pedagogy to counter the dominant and deficit narratives on historically marginalized groups of students. The graphic design process of the illustrator/researcher and of pre-service teachers was video-recorded and used for our analysis that examined whether and how the illustrated stories and graphic design evoked pre-service teachers’ conversations on equity and learning. We situate our study within the field of learning sciences where a growing number of scholars are adding critical perspectives on power and identities to the interplay among design, teaching and learning.3 Our work demonstrates the design process behind visual counter- storytelling toward the goal of surfacing dominant narratives in schools and invokes discussion toward equitable classroom designs.

21 References

1Bang, M., & Vossoughi, S. (2016). Participatory design research and educational justice: studying learning and relations within social change making. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 173–193. 2Gutiérrez, K. D., & Jurow, A. S. (2016). Social design experiments: Toward equity by design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 565–598. 3Hostetler, A., Sengupta, P., & Hollett, T. (2018). Unsilencing critical conversations in social- studies teacher education using agent-based modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 36(2), 139- 170. 4Kayumova, S., Zhang, W., & Scantlebury, K. (2018). Displacing and disrupting colonizing knowledge-making-practices in science education: Power of graphic-textual illustrations, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education 18(3), 257–270. 5Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. (1995). Towards a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 47–68.

6Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. ECTJ, 30(4), 195–232.

7McDermott, R. P. (1993). The acquisition of a child by a learning disability. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. (pp. 269–305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 8Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23–44. 9Vakil, S., Royston, M. M. D., Nasir, N. S., & Kirshner, B. (2016). Rethinking Race and Power in Design-Based Research: Reflections from the Field. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 194– 209.

22 “[W]hen I came back, she had drawn rain.”: Exploring Elementary Teachers’ Talk about English Learners in Inquiry Science Bethany Daniel Vanderbilt University [email protected]

Keywords: Elementary science; English learners; language proficiency; professional development

Abstract: Science learning and language instruction are traditionally disconnected into separate content areas, despite the fact that scientific practice is mediated by language (Rosebery et al., 1992; Nasir et al., 2006). New science standards work to make science accessible to all learners (NGSS Lead States, 2013), but the language demands of inquiry science are often invisible to science teachers, who are often un(der)prepared to meet the needs of English learners (ELs; Buxton & Caswell, 2020). Inquiry-based teaching can support language development in critical ways (Buxton & Caswell, 2020; Case & Montgomery, 2020; Stoddart et al., 2002), but content-area teachers may not feel that they play a role in developing EL students’ language (Jung, 2019). Therefore, how teachers think and talk about their ELs mediates the extent to which they integrate language into science learning. This study explores how elementary teachers participating in a professional development (PD) talk about their ELs in the context of inquiry science. Data from this study came from a larger PD project focused on using representations in inquiry science. Nine K-4 teachers participated in a three-day summer PD, including a one-hour session on supporting ELs. Teachers met quarterly throughout the school year to analyze student work and classroom practice. The last meeting focused specifically on ELs. Data sources included transcripts and video recordings from the PD sessions. All explicit references to ELs were analyzed. Two participants had limited data and were not analyzed. Using qualitative content analysis of video data (Powell et al., 2003), multiple passes were made to identify participants’ (1) teaching context, (2) nature of participation in PD sessions, (3) instructional strategies for EL support, and (4) pedagogical orientations and perspectives on ELs and language learning. Teachers were then positioned along a science and language integration continuum informed by Stoddart et al. (2002; see Figure 1).

Figure 1 Participants’ orientations toward language and science content integration

23 Findings revealed that teachers’ pedagogical orientations shaped how they viewed the relationship between science and language. All participants used inquiry-based practices but varied in how they integrated language into these practices. Teachers’ degree of integration influenced the types of supports that they provided for their ELs. Three teachers provide representative examples. Toni focused primarily on science content. Language was positioned as a separate domain, with support provided to ELs as needed. Kourtney saw language as an important component of learning science in a unidirectional relationship. At the same time, language was not a prerequisite to accessing science concepts and content. Sarah viewed language and science as mutually reinforcing each other. Language was an essential tool that mediated conversations central to scientific sensemaking. How teachers conceptualize language and position it in relationship to science impacts their practice with regard to their ELs. Implications include working with science teachers to (1) identify their shared role in developing students’ language (Jung, 2019); (2) reconceptualize the relationship between language and science (Stoddard et al., 2002); (3) reorient their pedagogy toward greater integration (Lee, 2018; Lee et al., 2019); and (4) intentionally leverage current inquiry practices to support language proficiency (Buxton & Caswell, 2020).

References

Buxton, C. A., & Caswell, L. (2020). Next generation sheltered instruction to support multilingual learners in secondary science classrooms. Science Education, 104(3), 555- 580. Case, A., & Montgomery, C. (2020). The untapped potential of academic language in world language classrooms. In B. M. Burke (Ed.), Room for all at the table: Central states conference on the teaching of foreign languages report 2020 (pp. 75-94). Robert M. Terry. Jung, K. G. (2019). Learning to scaffold science academic language: Lessons from an instructional coaching partnership. Research in Science Education, 49, 1013-1024. Lee, O. (2018). English language proficiency standards aligned with content standards. Educational Researcher, 47(5), 317-327. DOI: 10.3102/0013189C18763775 Lee, O., Llosa, L., Grapin, S., Haas, A., & Goggins, M. (2019). Science and language integration with English learners: A conceptual framework guiding instructional materials development. Science Education, 103(2), 317-337. Nasir, N., Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Lee, C. D. (2006). Learning as a cultural process: Achieving equity through diversity. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 489–504). Cambridge University Press. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states (Appendix D, Case study 4: English language learners and the Next Generation Science Standards). National Academies Press. Powell, A. B., Francisco, J. M., & Maher, C. A. (2003). An analytical model for studying the development of learners' mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 405-435. Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Connant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(1), 61-94. Stoddart, T., Pinal, A., Latzke, M., & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry science and language development for English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(8), 664-687.

24 Engineering Inclusion? Teacher Sensemaking in Engineering Natalie De Lucca, Jessica Watkins Vanderbilt University [email protected]; [email protected]

Keywords: Engineering, Teacher Learning, Teacher Sensemaking, STEM Education, Inclusion

Abstract: K-12 Engineering instruction has increased across the United States through its inclusion in the widely implemented Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). 1 Messaging across engineering education research and policy suggests that K-12 engineering instruction expands possibilities for who is considered capable in classrooms.2 However, studies examining engineering teachers’ perceptions point to patterns of thinking that invert rather than broaden perceptions of ability.3 This study explores this phenomenon further, offering an in-depth sociocultural examination of how disciplinary resources mediate a teachers’ sensemaking about inclusive pedagogies in engineering. By sensemaking, we mean how a teacher reasons about unexpected or novel classroom events in ways that integrate attention to students’ work, engineering pedagogy, and ideologies of ability. In particular, we ask: 1. What are resources within the engineering discipline that support a teacher to reason about inclusivity in particular classroom events? 2. What are the affordances and limitations of these resources for disrupting dominant ideologies about ability in K-12 classrooms? This study examines these questions using a case study approach,4 to analyze one teacher’s sensemaking throughout an 18-month online graduate-level certificate program for K-12 teachers: Tufts University Teacher Engineering Education Program (TEEP). The teacher selected for this study, Brad, stood out in his commitment to integrating engineering to develop more inclusive pedagogical practices in his third-grade inclusion classroom. Brad was interviewed six times throughout TEEP; the study primarily draws on interview transcripts, supplemented by his course assignments and self-submitted classroom video. We identified episodes in which Brad reasoned about classroom events that centered engineering and inclusive pedagogies. We described what engineering resources he drew on, analyzed the affordances and constraints of these resources for his ideological sensemaking, and debriefed these interpretations with research team members. Throughout TEEP, Brad’s reflections demonstrate an entanglement of engineering disciplinary and pedagogical conceptual resources - engineering-pedagogical conceptual resources (EPCRs) - leveraged to reason about classroom events incongruent with school’s normative operations. For instance, one EPCR Brad drew on was the engineering design process, supporting him to notice the unique approach used by his special education students for solving coding challenges. While the process supported Brad to appreciate his special education students’ resources for engineering, he simultaneously upheld hierarchical ideologies of ability that positioned his general education students as deficient. EPCRs offered affordances to Brad’s understanding of inclusion in his classroom, such as being more attentive to his students’ experiences. However, EPCRs did not provide an opportunity to engage with issues of power critically, and even as he attempted to challenge marginalizing narratives, he tacitly reified them. This study aims to build theory around the relationship between disciplinary resources in engineering and teachers’ sensemaking about inclusive pedagogies. Additionally, we highlight tensions between policy and practice as policy documents see the implementation of engineering curriculum as a potential mechanism to achieve educational equity in science.2 Implications of this work can encourage engineering teacher learning researchers to design professional development that intentionally critiques systems of power.

25 References

1National Academies Press. (2020). Building capacity for teaching engineering in K-12 education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 2NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 3Sengupta-Irving, T., & Mercado, J. (2017). Anticipating change: An exploratory analysis of teachers’ conceptions of engineering in an era of science education reform. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 7(1), Article 8. 4Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research: Design and methods. Washington, DC: Sage Publications.

Interpretability and Actionability of Teacher Dashboards Kathryn C. Drzewiecki Worcester Polytechnic Institute [email protected]

Keywords: Dashboard, Human-computer interaction, Student achievement, Educational technology, Data visualization

Abstract: Educational technologies provide students opportunities for self-paced practice and immediate feedback. However, to integrate educational technologies into classroom instruction, teachers must understand what happens as students engage with the technology and provide appropriate feedback. Feedback is critical to learning, as it identifies where improvement is needed, and how to improve (Schwartz et al., 2016; Cannon & Witherspoon, 2005), and research finds immediate feedback boosts student learning (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). With the push for data-driven instruction, many are utilizing educational technology dashboards (graphical representations of student data) to display information about student progress, correctness, or mastery. These are often limited and are “not typically designed to meet the needs of teachers who use them” (Holstein et al., 2017), leaving many teachers unable to use that data effectively to identify where and why students are struggling (Hopfenbeck, 2020; Schwartz et al., 2016; Zou et al., 2019). Cognitive demands on teachers are already high (Sweller, 1989; Feldon, 2007), leaving many teachers without adequate time or resources to identify information about students’ process. In order to fully utilize dashboards, teachers must interpret the information, translate it into appropriate, actionable feedback, then alter their feedback and instruction effectively. There is a dearth of research on how to best design dashboards to reduce cognitive load and provide actionable feedback for teachers. Few studies examine how effectively teachers generate and provide actionable feedback to students from the visualized data (Feng & Heffernan, 2006; Zou et al., 2019). While dashboards in other contexts (e.g. medical or automotive) more frequently utilize interconnected data and interactivity, educational dashboards exist often as static charts only. From Here to There! (FH2T), an interactive mathematics game developed by our team (Ottmar et al., 2015) provides students with a mathematical expression or equation (e.g. 3+3+3+3) and asks them to transform it to a provided goal state (e.g. 4+4+4). The system only permits mathematically valid operations and logs all student actions. While this game has demonstrated efficacy, teachers are unable to see students’ behavior as they solve problems in the system. To address this need, we are developing an actionable dashboard for teachers that provides information about how students solve problems within FH2T. This fall, we will have users engage with the dashboard and survey them on different aspects of the design including surface features (layout, font size, chart color), interpretability, and actionability of this feedback. Users will engage with one of four dashboards (simple vs complex & static vs interactive). Our main research questions focus on determining how useful and interpretable the different metrics presented are, investigating interpretability differences between static and interactive dashboards, identifying steps to reduce cognitive load when utilizing the dashboard, and testing if users are able to correctly identify actionable steps to take

with the information presented in the dashboard. After this usability study, we will iterate and work with our target population of teachers. This presentation includes initial dashboard designs and visualizations; I hope to receive feedback on different aspects of the designs.

References Cannon, M. D., & Witherspoon, R. (2005). Actionable feedback: Unlocking the power of learning and performance improvement. Academy of Management Perspectives, 19(2), 120-134. Feldon, D. F. (2007) Cognitive Load and Classroom Teaching: The Double-Edged Sword of Automaticity, Educational Psychologist, 42:3, 123-137, DOI: 10.1080/00461520701416173 Feng, M., & Heffernan, N. T. (2006). Informing teachers live about student learning: Reporting in the assistment system. Technology Instruction Cognition and Learning, 3(1/2), 63. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112. Holstein, K., McLaren, B. M., & Aleven, V. (2017, March). Intelligent tutors as teachers' aides: exploring teacher needs for real-time analytics in blended classrooms. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 257-266). Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020) Making feedback effective?, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27:1, 1-5, DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2020.1728908 Ottmar, E., Landy, D., Weitnauer, E., & Goldstone, R. (2015). Graspable mathematics: Using perceptual learning technology to discover algebraic notation. In Integrating touch-enabled and mobile devices into contemporary mathematics education (pp. 24-48). IGI Global. Schwartz, D. L., Tsang, J. M., & Blair, K. P. (2016). The ABCs of how we learn: 26 scientifically proven approaches, how they work, and when to use them. WW Norton & Company. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J.J.G. & Paas, F.G.W.C. Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design. Educational Psychology Review 10, 251–296 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205 Zou, X., Ma, W., Ma, Z., & Baker, R. S. (2019, June). Towards Helping Teachers Select Optimal Content for Students. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 413-417). Springer, Cham.

Creative Interactions: Analyzing User Comments in an Online Music Making Community Patrick W. Horton Northwestern University [email protected]

Keywords: music, creativity, composition, online

Abstract: The purpose of this poster is to describe a content analysis exploring the creative interactions of musicians in an online community focused on notation-based composition. The study of online spaces within music education is a growing area of research (Ruthmann & Hebert, 2018) and recently scholars have examined the music making and learning that occurs within these communities (Salavuo, 2008; Shin, 2011; Waldron, 2009, 2011; Waldron & Veblen, 2009). As new technological tools are designed and online communities develop around them, user interactions in these spaces may help to show how individuals relate to musical representations (both standard notation and computer playback) and how these online interactions support creative music making. Waldron defines “open online communities” (OOCs) as “internet affinity groups whose websites are free and open to viewing (i.e. ‘lurking’) by the public; there is no requirement to register as a member” (2018, p. 3). As an OOC, Noteflight (n.d.) is a cloud-based platform that facilitates the creating, editing, sharing, and playback of original and arranged musical scores that utilize standard Western music notation. While this platform incorporates multiple musical representations, the social tools also allow users to interact through comments directly connected to the posted scores which provide a unique space for sharing ideas, methods, and inspiration. The componential model of creativity (Amabile, 2012), suggests that creativity comes from the interaction of four components. Three come from within a person, (a) domain-relevant skills, (b) creativity-relevant processes, and (c) task motivation, while one is located outside a person, (d) the social environment in which the person is working. Through this lens, this content analysis of user comments will explore the creative interactions of users in this emergent online music creation community in an attempt to illuminate communal attitudes toward creativity and music learning. This study will focus on one of the site’s most popular publicly available original musical scores, “Emily” by speedstacks (n.d.). An original score was chosen because of the emphasis it places on the creativity, musical knowledge, and compositional skill of the individual. This piece also has a large number of publicly available user comments that suggests rich social and musical interactions. The researcher collected an initial round of data, including usernames, timestamps, and user comments from the Noteflight platform through a web scraping application in March 2020. Comments have been analyzed initially with open coding (Miles et al., 2018) with a secondary pass to be undertaken using the lens of Amabile’s (2012) componential model of creativity. Studying the interactions of the users within these online communities may illuminate how music and the way it is represented with technology can relate to creative activities such as information seeking, providing feedback, and collaborative music composition in remote learning environments. Preliminary analyses highlight the unique relationship between the creative product and the creative process when users give and receive feedback online. Findings

may help guide the design of remote creative learning environments aimed at facilitating reflection and lifelong creative engagement.

Reference: Amabile, T. M. (2012). Componential Theory of Creativity. In E. H. Kessler (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Management Theory (p. 10). Sage.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2018). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

Noteflight Music Notation Software. (n.d.). About Us Retrieved December 12, 2018, from https://www.noteflight.com/company/about

Ruthmann, S. A., & Hebert, D. G. (2018). Music learning and new media in virtual and online environments. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.), Creativities, technologies, and media in music learning and teaching (Vol. 5). Oxford University Press.

Salavuo, M. (2008). Social media as an opportunity for pedagogical change in music education. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 1(2/3), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1386/jmte.1.2and3.121_1

Shin, H.-K. (2011). Enabling young composers through the Vermont Midi Project: Composition, verbalization and communication [Dissertation]. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. speedstacks. (n.d.). Emily. Retrieved December 12, 2018 from https://www.noteflight.com/scores/view/856826ba47b2615ab8d1da662379a978852774ab.

Waldron, J. (2009). Exploring a virtual music ‘community of practice’: Informal music learning on the Internet. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 2(2/3), 97–112. doi: 10.1386/jmte.2.2-3.97_1

Waldron, J. (2011). Locating Narratives in Postmodern Spaces: A Cyber Ethnographic Field Study of Informal Music Learning in Online Community. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 10(2), 32-60.

Waldron, J. L. (2018). Online Music Communities and Social Media (B.-L. Bartleet & L. Higgins, Eds.; Vol. 1). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190219505.013.34

Waldron, J., & Veblen, K. (2009). Learning in a Celtic Community: An Exploration of Informal Music Learning and Adult Amateur Musicians. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 180, 59–74.

The Use of Instructional Design and Formative Assessment in Designing Effective Online Courses for Graduate Students Fei-Tien Hu, Teachers College, Columbia University [email protected]

Keywords: E-learning, formative assessment, instructional design, online teaching

Abstract:

Inspired by the perspective of learning analytics, which categorizes learning into macro (international), meso (institution-wide), and micro (individual) levels (SB Shum, 2012), I plan to expand the definition of this framework and allow the interpretation to encompass remote education as a macro system. This would consist of various micro level events that can make a difference for the entire ecosystem. The micro level events I define here will include decisions that the instructor makes in successfully designing their online courses and instructional methods to better serve their students.

The research question is as follows: To foster engaging and effective learning for graduate students, what elements of instructional design (ID) should be considered in online courses? The major issues that I will address regarding online courses, both synchronous and asynchronous, that this paper will address are the tendency of simply transmitting information (Jona, 2000), a lack of interaction, and inappropriate assessment (Zhang et al, 2006).

Since the relatively limited literature focuses on how the ID elements would enable effective online course implementation, this paper aims to provide the perspective that the integration of ID concept and elements, whose roles are micro events in the entire online course design, is beneficial to instructors when they design online courses and therefore enhances their teaching effectiveness and students’ learning outcomes. To be more specific, I propose that the concept of iterative process in ID, as well as the use of formative assessment strategies - one of the stages in ID - is crucial to address the three main problems.

While the majority of instructors are experts in their subject matter and familiar with pedagogies, utilizing ID strategies is also important to create effective online courses. Both teachers and students need to devote more effort and time to online courses than to face-to-face courses to enable effective teaching and learning, but this commitment is often neglected (Chen, 2007). To avoid the above issues, teachers need to recognize the importance of the iterative process emphasized by ID and take advantage of each piece of feedback collected from students to adjust instructional content and methods to better meet students’ needs throughout the process. Furthermore, formative assessments are also important because they enable dynamic interaction, such as instant feedback, between students and students as well as the student and the teacher. The continuous interaction allows the teacher to know if their teaching is effective and better assist students to bridge their current capacity and desired learning outcomes. Continuous communication between students and teachers is the essence of constructing effective, meaningful online teaching and learning based on constructivism.

Literature has shown that formative assessments in online courses are considered effective for promoting engagement, learner autonomy, and learning achievement for students in higher education, especially lower performing students because feedback from peers and the instructor in the discussion forum assists them to detect their learning flaws, deepen their understanding of a subject matter (Gikandi, 2011; Baleni, 2015), and thus trigger active learning as well as their motivation (Bostock, 2004).

References:

Bostock S. (2004) Motivation and electronic assessment. In Effective Learning and Teachingin Computing (edsA.Irons & S. Alexander), pp. 86–99. Routledge Falmer, London.

Baleni, Z. G. (2015). Online formative assessment in higher education: Its pros and cons. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 13(4), 228-236.

Chen, S. J. (2014). Instructional design strategies for intensive online courses: An objectivist- constructivist blended approach. Journal of interactive online learning, 13(1).

Gikandi, J. (2011). Achieving meaningful online learning through effective formative assessment. Changing demands, changing directions, 452-454.

Jona, K. (2000, December). Rethinking the design of online courses. In Ascilite (pp. 14-19).

Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R. O., & Nunamaker Jr, J. F. (2006). Instructional video in e- learning: Assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information & management, 43(1), 15-27.

32 Mapping the Newest Generation of Learning Scientists with Collaborative Network Analysis Megan Humburg Indiana University – Bloomington [email protected]

Keywords: network analysis, representations, collaboration, educational technology Abstract: The proposed demo will introduce attendees to Net.Create (Craig & Danish, 2018), a collaborative network analysis software that allows multiple users to simultaneously aent er dat into a live visualization. In the visualization, nodes r epresent people, places, and ideas, while edges represent relationships between nodes. Our previous research has implemented this software in the context of university history classrooms (see Fig. 1), where students use Net.Create to interpret class readings, mapping the relationships between historical people, places, and events (Craig et al., 2020). We are also exploring uses of Net.Create to map funds of knowledge (FoK; Moll et al., 1992) in middle-school classrooms, as well as mapping relationships between theoretical concepts and research traditions in graduate-level classrooms.

Figure 1. A network created by undergraduate history students using Net.Create, with nodes (circles representing people, places, events, etc.) and edges (lines depicting relationships between nodes). Each node and edge contains a comment field, where attendees could fill in details about themselves, links to personal websites, etc. For LSGSC, we are proposing a demo of Net.Create that allows conference participants to collaboratively construct a network that depicts our field at the graduate student level – the

33 people, universities, research topics, and sub-fields that make up the vibrant LSGSC community. Based on the conference program, our team will enter the names of presenters and their affiliated universities to a starter network, and attendees will be able to add their own names to the network and revise existing entries. Each attendee can link themselves to various strands of research in order to visualize how they fit into the larger context of up-and-coming scholars in the learning sciences field. The resulting network will be a collaboratively created representation of what our field looks like to those who are currently in graduate school – who we are, where we study and with whom, and how our strands of research crisscross through disciplinary, geographical, theoretical, and methodological traditions. The set-up requirements for Net.Create are minimal, and this demo is particularly well- suited for a potential virtual conference. For an in-person conference, the ideal set-up would involve several internet-connected laptops, and perhaps a projector screen so that attendees could see the network updating in real time as they walk by the demo. However, our research team can also bring our own laptops and operate the network offline through a router if needed. In the event of a virtual conference, Net.Create can be configured to run on an online server, so that attendees could be given a link and a log-in code to synchronously and asynchronously edit the collaborative network on their own devices at home. The demo will serve dual purposes. First, it will offer conference attendees the opportunity to see how their own research fits into a web of connections with their colleagues. Second, attendees will be able to explore the technical features of Net.Create to brainstorm the wide array of possibilities for implementing network analysis in other educational contexts. This hands-on experience with the tool could spark potential future cross-site collaborations. References Craig, K. and Danish, J. (2018). Net.Create [Computer software]. Available from Netcreate.org [2018]. Craig, K., Humburg, M., Danish, J., Szostalo, M., Hmelo-Silver, C., & McCranie, A. (2020). Increasing Students' Social Engagement During COVID-19 with Net.Create: Collaborative Social Network Analysis to Map Historical Pandemics During a Pandemic. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(7/8), 533-547. Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132-141.

34 Professional Vision: An Interactional Analysis Study of the Competitive Visions of Earth and Space Science Teachers Within a Professional Development Environment

Jennifer Jackson and Jonathan McCausland The Pennsylvania State University [email protected] [email protected]

Keywords: Professional Vision, professional development, pedagogical approaches

Abstract:

During the summer of 2018, a group of Earth and Space Science teachers gathered for a week-long professional development workshop that focused on science content and the Ambitious Science Teaching (AST) framework at The Pennsylvania State University. The participating middle and high school teachers were from local and distant areas that all teach science in some capacity and their primary goal was to learn about how to use the GEODE Plate Tectonics module that covers fundamental geological content. Comprised of five individual activities, this module allows for users to learn about Earth & Space content while visualizing real-life phenomena through the use of multiple innovative tools (e.g. Seismic and Tectonic Explorer). The Tectonic Explorer acts as a virtual model that allows for the learner to undergo hypothesis testing by selecting specific segments of the Earth to observe and test for plate movement. In comparison, the Seismic Explorer acts as a data simulation and allows for the user to engage with authentic data sources while observing earthquake activity. The 2018 GEODE professional development is representative of an interactive learning environment that granted teachers the ability to engage in collaborative discussions while learning about an enriching science curriculum online learning platform. This professional development was captured on video and segments of video recordings (involving teacher group discussions) were selected to be further analyzed using the theoretical concept of Professional Vision (Goodwin, 1994). Our data analysis included looking for moments of “highlighting” (Goodwin, 1994) and/ or specific utterances that would indicate a distinctive type of Professional Vision being exhibited from the teacher or the researcher. Due to the differences between these two types of careers, individuals from either one of these professions could view/ perceive conceptual and pedagogical issues completely differently, but that is not to say that one’s vision is preferred over the other (Sherin, 2001; Lefstein & Snell, 2011). By using this theoretical framing, we performed a study to answer the following research question: How do competing Professional Visions of Earth and Space Science teachers (within an educational professional development setting) influence the pedagogical approaches of the GEODE curriculum? Through the application of contextualization cues (Bloome et al., 2004), use of transcription symbols from the Jefferson Transcription Notation, and identification of turn-taking patterns, we identified various Professional Visions within the context of this professional development setting. Not only does this interactional analysis provide insight as to how Earth and Space Science teachers tend to interact with each other in these types of settings, but it demonstrated how teachers and facilitators confronted a pedagogical dilemma (an issue

35 regarding the delivery of the curriculum) and discussed a possible solution. Preliminary findings show that teachers can in fact have different Professional Visions from each other as well as from educational researchers when attempting to establish a conceptual understanding of an educational tool. In summary, seeing these types of discussions emphasizes how professional development environments can influence the conceptual understandings of teachers and elicit the multiple Professional Visions of a group of individuals.

References

Bloome, D., Carter, S. P., Christian, B. M., Otto, S., & Shuart-Faris, N. (2004). Discourse analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events: A microethnographic perspective (pp. 1-49). Routledge.

Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional Vision. American Anthropologist, 96, 606–633.

G. Jefferson, “Transcription Notation,” in J. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds), Structures of Social Interaction, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2011). Professional vision and the politics of teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 505–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.004

Sherin, M.G. (2001). Developing a professional vision of classroom events. In T. Wood, B.S. Nelson, & J. Warfield (Eds.), Beyond classical pedagogy: Teaching elementary school mathematics (pp. 75-93). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

36 Finding the Right Words: Positioning students with agency, authority and accountability in classroom discourse Rebekah Jongewaard Arizona State University [email protected]

Keywords: productive disciplinary engagement, dialogic processes, situativity, agency

Abstract: The research context that inspired this paper is an ongoing effort, in one school, of teachers and researchers to co-design for student-led consequential learning, productive disciplinary engagement (PDE) (Engle & Conant, 2002) and rightful presence (Calabrese Barton & Tan, 2019) in science classes. The guiding question for this paper-in-progress, asks in what ways discursive practices, both those that are designed and those that emerge in situ, support or thwart the positioning of students with agency, authority and accountability. A situative perspective (Greeno, 2005) and Engle and Conant’s PDE framework (2002; Engle, 2012) underlie this paper’s approach to examining the ways that students are positioned with agency, authority and accountability. This positioning is achieved through, among other practices, fostering meaningful participation, encouraging problematization, and promoting student ownership of knowledge (Greeno, 2005; Engle & Conant, 2002). In considering student positioning, it is useful to examine how dialogic patterns of discourse, including cumulative and exploratory talk (Wegerif & Mercer, 1997) and authoritative talk (Mercer & Howe, 2012) support these practices. At the beginning of the 2019-2020 school year, students and teachers in the “Middle Years Program” (MYP) at a new, Title 1, International Baccalaureate school in a metropolitan area in the southwestern U.S. embarked on a seven-month agrivoltaics project that coupled solar energy with school gardening. I analyzed one session in which 7th graders critiqued three design innovations proposed by Learning Sciences graduate students to enhance the solar energy gardening project. The purpose of the students’ critique, which occurred mid-way through the project, was to determine which innovation would be most useful to the MYP’s project. The activities in the 90-minute session included viewing video proposals, independently noting questions, positive and problematic aspects of the proposals, and sharing those notes in small and whole-class discussions. Using the dialogic frameworks set out by Mercer & Howe (2012) and Wegerif & Mercer (1997) and Engle & Conant’s (2002) PDE, I analyzed audio recordings and transcripts of student and teacher discursive interactions during the session using discourse analysis. In addition, ethnographic field notes, the innovation notes students took, video recordings of a portion of the class, and audio recordings of previous co-design activities informed the interpretive analysis of this episode. In my analysis, I explore three concurrent processes observed in this session: ● first, a mandated cumulative talk activity (Mercer & Howe, 2012), which I argue undermines the teacher’s goal of framing the students as authoritative experts; ● second, the teacher’s use of personal anecdotes, positioning herself as a learner and her students as authorities; ● and third, an emerging “dance of agency” (Greeno, 2005; Pickering, 1995) between teacher, students, discourse strategies, and innovation proposals in which student accountability and agency were co-negotiated.

37 I will explore how these three processes worked independently and in concert to aid in the development of PDE. This analysis will highlight the challenges frequently encountered by teachers in enacting discourse practices intended to promote PDE. Further examining these tensions will allow us to suggest ways in which teacher discourse practices can support PDE and student agency.

38 References

Engle, R. A. (2012). The productive disciplinary engagement framework: Origins, key concepts, and developments. In Design research on learning and thinking in educational settings (pp. 170- 209). Routledge.

Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and instruction, 20(4), 399-483.

Greeno, J. G. (2005) Learning in Activity. Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press.

Greeno, J. G. (2011). A situative perspective on cognition and learning in interaction. In Theories of learning and studies of instructional practice (pp. 41-71). Springer, New York, NY.

Mercer, N., & Howe, C. (2012). Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory. Learning, culture and social interaction, 1(1), 12-21. Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice. Time, agency and science, Chicago.

Wegerif, R., & Mercer, N. (1997). A dialogical framework for researching peer talk. Language and Education Library, 12, 49-64.

Mechanical Landscapes and Opportunities for Practice in Social Studies-oriented Simulation Games Taylor M. Kessner Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College Arizona State University – Tempe [email protected]

Keywords: Videogames, opportunities for practice, social studies, unified discourse analysis

Abstract: The purpose of social studies education is to prepare young people to don the mantle of citizenship.2 Furthermore, each of the disciplines making up the social studies field constitute their own Discourses,4 each with their own disciplinary knowledge, skills, and concepts (DKSCs) used for making sense of and taking informed action in the world. Thus, the preparation of citizens ought to include preparing them to use DKSCs as tools for doing work in the world. Developing fluency with such tools--and knowing when to use them--is closely related to the development of dispositions,11 which requires frequent opportunities for practice.6 Videogames are spaces rife with such opportunities.12 Nevertheless, little exploration has been conducted into how different structural designs of videogames afford opportunities for practice. I therefore asked, How do history-oriented, commercial off-the-shelf digital simulation games create opportunities for learners to practice using DKSCs in situated contexts? Guided by the theoretical assumption that humans learn through conversations with the world,3 and that game mechanics constitute the language players and games use to “talk” to each other, this study draws on principles of content analysis,7 interaction analysis,9 and discourse analysis5 to examine three digital simulation games: Civilization: Beyond Earth, Offworld Trading Company, and Surviving Mars. I selected these particular games for three main reasons. First, each of these games is of a social studies nature; that is, they take up, whether explicitly or implicitly, the kinds of issues that lie at the heart of social studies teaching and learning. Second, they are a form of speculative fiction, which, in alignment with principles of design-based research,1 encourages “readers” to imagine what can be, not simply what is. Third, because each of the games is set temporally and spatially outside the extant human experience, players are not constrained by existing sociohistorical narratives, and are therefore free to engage in conversations with the game world constrained only by their fluency with the DKSCs relevant to taking goal-oriented action in the game. Data collection included using Windows Game Bar to record gameplay of each of the games’ tutorial missions, as well as several playthroughs of each game’s primary game mode; I also recorded my own thoughts during gameplay through think-aloud memos. To analyze the data, I first leveraged the mechanics-dynamics-aesthetics framework8 to unitize the data10 into discrete game mechanics; I then identified the dynamics formed by the interaction of mechanics, and then the aesthetics to which those dynamics gave rise. I then employed unified discourse analysis5 to identify how game mechanics, dynamics, and aesthetics

converged to create opportunities for players to practice using DKSCs to take situated action13 within the game world. Results indicate the formation of a principles-based framework for the design of learning mechanics in games may be useful for designing games that create opportunities for learners to practice using DKSCs in situated contexts. With the education world pivoting toward a stronger embrace of digital and remote learning, such advancement in the design of these learning technologies may have great reach going forward.

References

1Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. 2Barton, K. C., & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. Routledge. 3Gee, E. R., & Gee, J. P. (2017). Games as distributed teaching and learning systems. Teachers College Record, 119, 1–22. 4Gee, J. P. (2014a). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge. 5Gee, J. P. (2014b). Unified discourse analysis: Language, reality, virtual worlds, and video games. Routledge. 6Greeno, J. G., & Gresalfi, M. S. (2008). Opportunities to learn in practice and identity. In P. Moss, D. C. Pullin, J. P. Gee, E. H. Haertel, & L. J Young (Eds.), Assessment, equity, and opportunity to learn (pp. 170-199). Cambridge University Press. 7Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. 8Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game AI, 4, 1722. 9Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39-103. 10Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd edition). Sage. 11Perkins, D., Tishman, S., Ritchhart, R., Donis, K., & Andrade, A. (2000). Intelligence in the Wild: A Dispositional View of Intellectual Traits. Educational Psychology Review, 12(3). 12Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning: Teaching and participatory culture in the digital age. Teachers College Press. 13Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge University Press.

41 Assessing Engagement in Informal STEM Spaces: The first steps toward applying Human Computer Interaction measures to understand engagement in natural history museums, science centers and other informal STEM spaces Heather Killen University of Maryland, College Park [email protected]

Keywords: Engagement, STEM, Informal Learning, Assessment, Museums

Abstract: Informal science learning is recognized as a pervasive and potentially powerful way to promote scientific interest and literacy while increasing knowledge (National Research Council, 2009). Museums struggle, however, to engage with people who don’t already have a developed interest in science (Farrell and Medvedeva, 2010; Beane, 2000; Bultitude, 2014). One challenge involves engagement. While not a contested term, engagement is a broad concept that can be framed in multiple ways. Museum studies often uses Active, Prolonged Engagement (APE), (Humphrey & Gutwill, 2005) or simple metrics focused on how visitors moved through museum spaces. The learning sciences and education might use the Student Engagement Instrument (Appleton, Christenson, Kim, & Reschly, 2006) or cognitive models involving curiosity (Litman, 2005). By not having a shared understanding of engagement and how it should be assessed, science museums are not systematically measuring and reporting engagement, which may result in researchers making less nuanced determinations of engagement while stymieing attempts to make comparisons of engagement across informal STEM contexts. A possible solution is to apply a standard engagement measure that is detailed enough to provide the nuance needed while broad enough to apply to the varied learning contexts found in science and natural history museums. In this work I applied a popular and interdisciplinary (O’Brien, Cairns, & Hall, 2018) Human Computer Interaction (HCI) framework developed to operationalize user engagement in interactive systems (Lalmas, O’Brian and Yom-Tov, 2014) to review 55 articles from the last five years in the learning studies, museum studies and science education. I answered two questions: 1. How is engagement in the context of science and natural history museums being thought about, measured and reported? 2. How well do all the ways engagement, participation and involvement are thought about, measured and reported in studies involving science and natural history museums map onto the engagement characteristics developed out of HCI to assess user engagement in interactive systems? I found that engagement is being widely thought about and reported on in science and natural history museums. Taken as an aggregate, the reviewed studies spoke to all eight of the characteristics of engagement in the HCI framework (Focused attention, Positive affect, Aesthetics appeal, Endurability, Novelty, Richness and control, and Reputation, trust and expectation). My review indicates that Focused attention; Endurability; and Reputation, trust and expectation were being underutilized as measures of engagement. Authors had difficulty clearly and cleanly identifying and assessing Positive affect. Novelty was most commonly associated with objects rather than experience. Richness and control and User context, motivation, incentives and benefits were most commonly reported. These two characteristics also evidenced the most overlap, indicating an interesting avenue of future research. This framework proved to

42 be a powerful lens to assess how different stakeholders within different disciplines thought about, measured and reported engagement.

References

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445.

Beane, D. B. (2000). Museums and healthy adolescent development: What we are learning from research and practice. Journal of Museum Education, 25(3), 3-8.

Bultitude, K. (2014). Science festivals: do they succeed in reaching beyond the ‘already engaged’?. Journal of Science Communication, 13(4), C01.

Farrell, B., & Medvedeva, M. (2010). Demographic transformation and the future of museums. American Association of Museums, Washington, D.C.

Humphrey, T., & Gutwill, J. (2005). Fostering Active Prolonged Engagement. The Art of Creating APE Exhibits. Exploratorium. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA.

Lalmas, M., O'Brien, H., & Yom-Tov, E. (2014). Measuring user engagement. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services, 6(4), 1-132.

Litman, J. (2005). Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: Wanting and liking new information. Cognition & Emotion, 19(6), 793–814.

National Research Council. (2009) Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

43 Developing Virtual Reality Data Kit for Education Researchers Taehyun Kim1, Jaewook Lee1, Robb Lindgren1, Jina Kang2 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign1, Utah State University2 [email protected]

Keywords: Virtual reality, Learning analytics, Data visualization, Assessment

Abstract: Interesting aspects of immersive virtual reality (VR) is its ability to leverage interactivity (Bailenson et al., 2008), and the diversity of interactions between learners and simulations has significantly increased (Johnson-Glenberg, 2018). Consequently, interactions in VR environments produce vast amounts of log data. The volume and complexity of this log data engender various challenges for its storage, analysis, and presentation, but simultaneously, this data is suggested to open up opportunities for those who can handle it (Teras & Raghunathan, 2015). For example, cutting-edge features (e.g., interaction modalities) in VR together with machine learning capabilities allow for an understanding of students’ learning processes. On the other hands, some studies argue that there are limitations of measuring students’ learning process in VR environments through traditional summative tests (Shute et al., 2016) and video analysis (Lisa et al., 2018). In response to these needs, we developed a Virtual Reality Data Kit (VRDK) to support education researchers. VRDK is an open-source software platform developed to extract various user interaction data generated in an Oculus-based VR environment. VRDK consists of two major features: data extraction and data visualization. The data extraction feature can be used with the Unity engine to parse and export user interaction data without writing additional code. The extracted data will be automatically sent to a researcher’s email address in the form of a CSV file. Additionally, data visualization scripts will allow the researcher to explore the data through various forms of visualizations which inform diverse user behaviors and support decision making for further analyses. A total of five sets of data can be extracted and a brief explanation of these data sets are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Brief description of data sets and visualization ideas Data set Description Proposed Visualization • Calculate environment map size • Time series heat map User automatically position • Stores user position over time Controller • Stores controller position and rotation • Third person replay system position • Using “Raycast”, tracks objects that • Bar Graph comparing average Gaze the headset is looking at interaction time per object • Stores which object was grabbed • Dual-Axis Bar Graph comparing • When the grab event began and ended total interaction time and count Grab • How far the object was moved from per object its initial position • Box Plot • Stores which object was pointed at Pointing using a laser pointer and when pointing began and ended

44 Fig. 1. Example images of proposed visualization

To verify the possibilities and to further develop the first version of VRDK, we are developing embodied VR learning environments in various STEM domains such as biology, astronomy, and mathematics that integrating VRDK. We believe more in-depth exploration will be possible through VRDK, such as analyzing associations between students’ gesture usage patterns and learning outcomes or categorizing the way students interact with objects and verifying how different interaction types affect students’ understanding. Further, we hope that having a common data collection and visualization platform will allow researchers of different types of VR education application to make comparisons and share ideas.

References

Bailenson, J., Patel, K., Nielsen, A., Bajscy, R., Jung, S. H., & Kurillo, G. (2008). The effect of interactivity on learning physical actions in virtual reality. Media Psychology, 11(3), 354- 376.

Johnson-Glenberg, M. C. (2018). Immersive VR and education: Embodied design principles that include gesture and hand controls. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5, 81.

Rühmann, L. M., Prilla, M., & Brown, G. (2018, January). Cooperative mixed reality: an analysis tool. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on Supporting Groupwork (pp. 107-111).

Shute, V. J., Leighton, J. P., Jang, E. E., & Chu, M. W. (2016). Advances in the science of assessment. Educational Assessment, 21(1), 34-59.

Teras, M., & Raghunathan, S. (2015). Big data visualisation in immersive virtual reality environments: embodied phenomenological perspectives to interaction. ICTACT Journal on Soft Computing, 5(4).

45 Discourses of Writing in Schools: A critical analysis of policy and teacher talk Erin Lane University of Washington [email protected]

Keywords: critical discourse analysis, literacies, writing, equity

Abstract:

This poster is about a study that critically analyzes discourses of writing in policy and teacher talk. The motivation for this study grew out of a research project studying writing instruction where teachers were asked about the purposes for teaching writing. While drawing on critical studies in education (Freire, 2000; Darder, 2015; Esmonde & Booker, 2016), I examine the ways in which both teachers and the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) articulate the purposes for writing. In the context of Hardt & Negri’s (2000) notion of Empire, frameworks of New Capitalism and critical discourses analysis (Fairclough, 2003), and monolingual language ideologies (Flores & Rosa, 2015), I seek to explore and deconstruct representations of oppressive structures that might be operating in discourses of writing. My research questions are: 1) How are the purposes of writing expressed in the Common Core State Standards? 2) How are readers and writers positioned in the Standards? 3) How do teachers articulate the purposes of writing? How do they position the reader and writer? 4) How are monolingual language ideologies present or absent across discourses of writing? Seven teacher interviews were drawn from a larger study of thirteen teachers in a large, urban district in the Pacific Northwest, and one in a small urban district in the Northeast. I chose these seven to have a mix of public, private, affluent, and Title 1 schools represented. The larger study examined the writing instruction of 4th, 5th, and 6th grade teachers during an academic year. I also examined elementary writing standards from the CCSS, along with introductory materials and appendices as they related to writing. Ongoing analysis has drawn on critical discourse methods (Fairclough, 2003; Bloome & Clark, 2006) and iterative in-vivo and deductive coding methods (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), with attention to my research questions. Initial findings from analysis of the CCSS show repeated attention to writing as preparation for academic and professional approval, conflating text type with text purpose, and the implicit presence of a nameless/faceless, powerful “reader”. In teacher interviews, initial analyses have shown they articulate purposes for writing that include participation in academic or professional institutions, or for self-expression and change-making. These results represent a possible tension in how teachers articulate purposes for writing, as change-making and self-expression could be in conflict with appealing to institutions. Additionally, the initial finding that discourse in the CCSS includes a nameless/faceless, powerful “reader” may show the prevalence of monolingual ideologies and Empire on writing activities in schools. The potential implications of this study are to reveal the need for discourses on writing that are explicit about purpose and disrupt the practice of teaching writing in schools solely for the purposes of participating in or seeking approval from (often oppressive) institutions. This could point toward possibilities for revising policy discourse on writing, while also engaging teachers in more discourses of writing that more deeply deconstruct policy discourse and offer opportunities to articulate more just purposes for writing.

References

Bloom and Clark. (2006). Discourse Analysis in Education, in Green, Judith L, Camilli, Gregory, & Elmore, Patricia B. (2006). Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research. Routledge.

Common Core State Standards. (2017). Retrieved from: http://www.corestandards.org/

Darder, A. (2015). Decolonizing Interpretive Research: A Critical Bicultural Methodology for Social Change. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 14(2), 63-77.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London ; New York: Routledge.

Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149-171.

Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). New York: Continuum.

Hardt, M., & Negri, Antonio. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Merriam, S., & Tisdell, Elizabeth J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (Fourth ed., Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass: A Wiley Brand.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Motha, S. (2014). Race, empire, and English language teaching: Creating responsible and ethical anti-racist practice (Multicultural education series (New York, N.Y.)). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

47 Student-Student Dynamic Affordances for Creativity Michael Laureta Arizona State University [email protected]

Keywords: creativity, dynamic systems, student-student interactions, sociocultural, wasted time

Abstract: This poster will explicate ongoing research into how student-student interactions afford creative utterances during group work and conversation. The research that is conducted is being framed within a sociocultural perspective. While the aim is to primarily look at student-student interactions, it is still important to consider how the overarching contexts of each student affects their interactions with one-another. This data was collected during an interview with three students attending a middle school that was allowing their students to engage in a community-based gardening project. These students, who have been afforded agency by their teachers throughout the entirety of the gardening project, had just created a prototype irrigation system that they were looking to implement in their class garden. The aim of this research is to understand how often students afford other students the opportunity to engage in creative thought processes and what kind of significance does that affordance hold in regards to the overarching contexts that these students find themselves within? A transcription of the audio file from the interview was performed and after the transcription was completed each line of dialogue was coded via Microdevelopmental Creativity Measure (MCM, Kupers, Van Dijk, & Lehmann-Wermser 2018) looking at the levels of creativity and appropriateness behind each utterance (for coding frame see Figure 1), as well as whether the utterances encouraged divergent thinking or convergent thinking. Relationships and patterns of these utterances were quantified and analyzed. The initial usage of MCM by Kupers focused on student-teacher interactions and utterances, but this research focuses on student-student interactions in this iteration of the framework. It was found that when students' utterances encouraged divergent thinking, the next student who spoke was more likely to contribute something novel and overall more creative to the conversation. It was also found that when students’ utterances encouraged convergent thinking, the next student to contribute to the conversation was less likely to contribute something novel or overall more creative to the conversation. By diving into how often these students afforded one another these opportunities insight is gained into the dynamic interactions that occur between students’ personal account of specific contexts. “Creativity emerges in reciprocal interaction between the person and the (proximal and distal environment” (Kupers & van Dijk 2020) and the environment for each member of the triad includes the other two members of said triad. This reciprocity between triad members is key in that it may imply that students are more likely to have more creative and meaningful discourse in

48 a context that allows them agency, especially when agency is afforded by another student. It may also allude to that if this kind of behavior is encouraged from an early point it is more likely to occur again in future contexts without facilitation. This research has the potential to encourage educators to more readily utilize classroom structures that afford for more student-centered inquiry and in effect incorporate more play and “wasted time” (Coats & Shields 2019). In response this could provide further research opportunities within those respective areas to combat the stigma of unproductivity that educators often hold against them.

References

Coats, C., & Shields, A. (2019). Inviting the Waste of Studio Practice: Cala Coats and Alison Shields in Conversation. Visual Arts Research, 45(1), 103-109. doi:10.5406/visuartsrese.45.1.0103 Kupers, E., van Dijk, M., & Lehmann-Wermser, A. (2018). Creativity in the here and now: A generic, micro-developmental measure of creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 2095. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02095 Kupers, E., & van Dijk, M. (2020). Creativity in interaction: the dynamics of teacher-student interactions during a musical composition task, Thinking Skills and Creativity, Volume 36, 2020, 100648, ISSN 1871-1871, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100648.

Figure 1: Coding frame for novelty and appropriateness

50 Evaluating educative features for emergent multilingual learners’ opportunities to learn and support for three-dimensional science and language instruction. Samuel Lee1, Sage Anderson2, Karina Mendez Perez3 1Boston College, 2 & 3University of Texas at Austin [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Keywords: multilingual learners, English learners, educative curriculum, science, middle school

There is an increase in student linguistic and cultural diversity in U.S. K-12 classrooms. However, educators are often underprepared to support emergent multilingual learners (EMLs)3. Curriculum is one powerful resource to guide teachers in reform-oriented science teaching1. Specifically, language-in-use6 and knowledge-in-use7 provide an opportunity for curriculum designers and educational research to find novel ways to support EMLs in their science disciplinary and language development. Therefore, we investigated the following research question: how does a reform oriented middle school unit support the teaching and learning of EMLs science and language learning? To guide our evaluation, we draw on three criteria to support EMLs in their science and language learning. The first criterion, productive discourse, examines how EMLs engage in the disciplinary practices through active and receptive language use. In the classroom activity system5, EMLs are the subject, language and discourse around science constraints are tools, and the object is figuring out science phenomena10. The second criterion examines how the instructional materials utilize and encourage students to use multiple registers and modalities. Multiple modalities and registers are meant not as scaffolds for language or academic language but rather as meaningful tools for participation in the disciplinary practices of science4. The last criterion, disciplinary metalanguage and metalinguistic awareness11, incorporates the disciplinary core ideas (DCIs), crosscutting concepts (CCCs) and the science and engineering practices (SEPs) outlined in the Next Generation Science Standards8. We coded 6 lessons and their respective lesson parts, ranging from 9-15 parts, for each criterion from 0-2. We examined the educative features2 within each lesson part. A 2 represented opportunities and activities, for the criterion, are embedded in the lesson with guidance and/or explicit support that would benefit EMLs. Two researchers separately coded lesson 2 (~15% of the total codes) for a percentage agreement to come to an inter-rater reliability of 83%. The two rater codes were then discussed as a team for final codes. The remainder of the lessons were then independently coded by the first author. Across the 6 lessons, we found that productive student discourse (average 1.6) and multiple registers/modalities (average 1.7) rates higher than disciplinary metalanguage and metalinguistic awareness (average 0.78). In particular we noticed three themes in relation to criteria 3: (1) greater support for DCIs (2) potential metalanguage moments for the CCC: Patterns (3) potential metalanguage scaffolds for the CCC: systems and system models. One example about the CCC: systems and system models, students use the language of components

51 and constraints to not only create ecosystem models but also to later on evaluate and compare different ecosystem models, in relation to the anchor phenomenon. Using the CCCs as lenses9, such as rules and as tools for figuring out phenomenon, is a helpful method for seeing potential design for curriculum supports in language-in-use and knowledge-in-use for EMLs and teachers.

References:

1Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (2007). History of science curriculum reform in the United States and the United Kingdom. Handbook of Research on Science Education, 781-806.

2Davis, E. A. & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34, 3-14.

3Faltis, C. J., & Valdés G. (2016). Preparing teachers for teaching in the advocating for linguistically diverse classrooms: A vade mecum for teacher educators. In D. H. Gitomer & C. A. Bell (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp 549-592). American Educational Research Association.

4Grapin, S. E. (2019). Multimodality in the new content standards era: Implications for English learners. TESOL Quarterly, 53, 30-55.

5Greeno, J. G. & Engestrom, Y. (2014). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2nd ed, p 128-148). Cambridge University Press.

6Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Valdés, G. (2013). Science and language for English language learners in relation to Next Generation Science Standards and with implications for Common Core State Standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42, 223 - 233.

7National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165.

8NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.

9Rivet, A. E., Weiser, G., Lyu, X., Li, Y., & Rojas-Perilla, D. (2016). What are crosscutting concepts in science? Four metaphorical perspectives. In C. K. Looi, J. L. Polman, U. Cress, & P. Reimann. (Eds.), Transforming learning, empowering learners: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) (Vol. 2, pp. 970–973). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

10Russ, R. S. & Berland, L. K. (2019). Invented science: A framework for discussing a persistent problem of practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28, 279-301.

11Schleppegrell, M. J. (2020). The knowledge base for language teaching: What is the English to be taught as content? Language Teaching Research, 24, 17-27.

Understanding High School Students’ E-textiles Debugging Strategies through Think- Aloud Protocols Yuhan Lin Deborah A. Fields University of Maryland Utah State University [email protected] [email protected]

Keywords: Debugging, Computing Education, Electronic Textiles, Physical Computing, High School

Abstract: Physical computing is making its way to introductory computing programs to broaden participation in computing across age, gender and ethnicities, and yet we know so little about debugging practices and struggles among novices. And yet, nearly all of the research on students’ debugging has focused on screen-based coding7 revealing often naive approaches of debugging. Much less is known about students’ debugging of physical computing activities such as robotics and electronic textiles where students’ debugging not only involves on-screen code but also the design of a physical artifact. In the context of electronic textiles students not only need to design functional circuits but also write code that controls actuators and sensors crafted in an e-textile artifact such as a garment or plush toy4. Debugging physical computing artifacts requires working in a multimodal space, but little is known about how novices tackle these challenges which could help design efforts. In this poster, we share our creation of an analytical rubric to map novice students’ debugging strategies in three different contexts. We followed a think-aloud protocol2 and interviewed 73 high school students while they debugged three different artifacts: 1) an “everyday computing” task about instructions for furniture arrangements5 ; 2) an e-textiles toy with pictures and descriptions of the intention and actual (malfunctioning) actions; and 3) a pre-made partially functional e-textiles artifact. The video recordings were transcribed and annotated to include gestures, gaze direction, and artifact manipulation. We took an expansive approach to view learning as distributed, contrasting traditional debugging studies which analyzed debugging mostly as an individual cognitive activity. We first developed a rubric by categorizing by open-coding students’ actions1 in a subset of interviews. Second, we organized those actions in line with Lee and Fields’6 coding rubrics on novice e-textiles thinking. Third, we revised coding rubrics and noted students actions did not fit the rubric (i.e., actions unusually “out of the box”). Finally, we re-analyzed 24 interviews with the revised rubrics. The rubrics showcase a range of students’ naive strategies of debugging and their level of sophistication. For instance, we saw students who never read a provided diagram and students who used it to identify a bug from the mismatch between the diagram and the actual artifact. The rubrics also show students’ common-sense strategies applied to technical tasks, for instance, suggestions to repeat all the actions in hopes that it would work out better the second time. In special cases, students questioned the very premise of the problem and they demonstrated unusual ways that students tackled problems by reframing the problem itself. This is the first part of a larger study, analyzing pre-interviews before a 12-week e-textile unit. Eventually we plan to develop fuller rubrics that can analyze development in students’ debugging strategies before and after the unit (i.e., both with pre-unit and post-unit interviews). These rubrics will inform curricular, instructional and tool design, and support other researchers analyzing students’ debugging strategies—all towards furthering equitable learning with physical computing.

References

1Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. sage.

2Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1998). How to study thinking in everyday life: Contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(3), 178-186.

3Fields, D. A., Landa, J., Nakajima, T., Kafai, Y. B., Goode, J., Margolis, J. & Ottina, J. (2018). Stitching the Loop: An Electronic Textiles Unit in Exploring Computer Science. Exploring Computer Science. Available at http://exploringcs.org

4Kafai, Y. B., Fields, D. A., Lui, D. A., Walker, J. T., Shaw, M. S., Jayathirtha, G., ... & Giang, M. T. (2019, February). Stitching the Loop with Electronic Textiles: Promoting Equity in High School Students' Competencies and Perceptions of Computer Science. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 1176-1182).

5Klahr, D., & Carver, S. M. (1988). Cognitive objectives in a LOGO debugging curriculum: Instruction, learning, and transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 20(3), 362-404.

6Lee, V. R., & Fields, D. A. (2017). A rubric for describing competences in the areas of circuitry, computation, and crafting after a course using e-textiles. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology.

7McCauley, R., Fitzgerald, S., Lewandowski, G., Murphy, L., Simon, B., Thomas, L., & Zander, C. (2008). Debugging: a review of the literature from an educational perspective. Computer Science Education, 18(2), 67-92.

55 Consequential Conversations: Negotiating Knowledge Territories and Participation Frames Melita Morales, Boston College [email protected]

Keywords: Conversation analysis; epistemic status; epistemic stance; participation frameworks; footing; prototyping; sociocultural theory; STEM; IRE

Abstract: Traditional scripts of schooling enforce implicit cultural rules about how teachers and students enact participatory roles that work in opposition to constructivist learning goals (Lemke, 1990; Simich-Dudgeon, 1998). Dialogue is largely directed toward accepting or imposing ‘finished’ meanings, where teachers hold the correct, known answers and learners work to find them. This is epitomized in the known-answer question routine (Waring, 2009; Wells & Aruz, 2006). A disruption to such orders must allow for alternative interactional rearrangements in which questions are grounded in an authentic unknown, and position students as consequential contributors. This study aims to extend current understandings of how classroom discourse structures afford or constrain students’ participation as valid knowledge creators. I focus on the negotiation of an individual’s contribution within a situated learning activity, with socially organized rules and roles, and examine how it is valued within the community (Solís, Kattan and Baquedano-López, 2009; Gutiérrez & Rogoff, 2003; Kelly & Cunningham, 2019; Goodwin, 1997, 2010). I use conversation analysis (CA) to examine teacher-student and student-student questions throughout the prototype testing activity. In CA, who has the rights to possess or articulate information is part of the complex structure of turn-construction and allocation in conversation (Heritage, 2012). An individual in conversation is said to have rights and responsibilities to certain domains of information, or territories of knowledge, such as their thoughts, feelings, experience, families, etc. (Drew, 1991; Heritage, 2012; Hayano, 2011). Conversational participants occupy different status along an epistemic gradient (more knowledgeable [K+] or less knowledgeable [K-]) based on what is known and how it is known. This study suggests that the use of questions during the prototype testing activity becomes a discursive feature that positions students as knowers and frames them as consequential contributors within the interactionally organized classroom. Question use demonstrated clear links to participation frames: students as knowers, students as collaborators, and teacher as knower. In the students as knowers and students as collaborators participation frames, students and teachers exercised micro-level status shifts (i.e. shared information, sought clarity, gave input) which successfully altered the roles students and teacher played as initiators of talk and action. As an integral aspect to the knowledge building community, they aligned to each other as experts and holders of information. Alternatively, in the teacher as knower

56 participation frame, the teacher claimed higher epistemic status using subtle language and gestural cues. We need research that investigates how students and teachers make sense of relational aspects of design activity as a way to foreground students’ authentic contributions to the classroom. This prototype testing activity offers one context through which a teacher might gain insight into how different participation frames might be more explicitly signaled and assembled in NGSS (NGSS, 2013) driven constructivist approaches to learning. Additionally, we need to think about the discursive moves that keep potentially innovative reform practices, such as PBL, from reinforcing traditional relational structures.

References: Goodwin, C. (1997). The blackness of black: Color categories as situated practice. In L. Resnick, R. Saljo, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, Tools and Reasoning: Essays on Situated Cognition (pp. 111–140). New York, New York: Springer. Goodwin, C. (2010). Things and their Embodied Environments. In C. Malafouris, Lambros, Renfrew (Ed.), The Cognitive Life of Things: Recasting Boundaries of the Mind. (pp. 103–120). Cambridge, MA: McDonald Institute for Archeological Research. Gutiérrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural Ways of Learning: Individual Traits or Repertoires of Practice Cultural Styles: A Way of Talking About. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25. Hayano, K. (2011). Claiming epistemic primacy: Yo-marked assessments in Japanese. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (Eds.), The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 58-81 Kelly, G. J., & Cunningham, C. M. (2019). Epistemic tools in engineering design for K-12 education. Science Education, 103(4), 1080–1111. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values (Language and Educational Processes). Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values (Language and Educational Processes). NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press Simich-Dudgeon, C. (1998). Classroom strategies for encouraging collaborative discussion. Directions in Language & Education, (12), 2–15. Solís, J., Kattan, S., & Baquedano-López, P. (2009). Socializing respect and knowledge in a racially integrated science classroom. Linguistics and Education, 20(3), 273–290. Waring, H. Z. (2009). Moving out of IRF (initiation-response-feedback): A single case analysis. Language Learning, 59(4), 796–824. Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the Classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428.

57 Genocide Prevention in Education: Empathy Building from Historical Perspective Taking to Reflect on Self and Society

Joanna Oko Arizona State University – Tempe [email protected]

Keywords: genocide prevention, historical perspective taking, empathy, identity, transgenerational trauma

Abstract: The “Never Again” that became a defining phrase after the Holocaust is not an ontological absolute realized simply by the existence of the phrase; it must be cultivated, understood and believed that if our daily interactions were measured without the weight of their consequences we could not claim truth in the “neverness” of atrocity in our future. Historical Perspective Taking (HPT) affords an opportunity to step into the experiences of individuals throughout history. It transcends reading about events and people and allows students to envision themselves in the moment as if it were their own lived experience (Nilsen, 2016). This poster presentation illustrates how HPT can be a transformative tool for education by designing an environment for genocide prevention. HPT will be used to shift conversations from historical recollection toward fostering conscious agents of change. The study is grounded in CHAT (Roth & Lee, 2007) to underscore how student internalizations of the past nurture consciousness of injustice to transform their agentive trajectory in emerging social dynamics. Facing Indigenous history, students will step into the worlds within chosen accounts to consider three elements crucial to understanding genocidal pasts: they will rationalize perpetrator decision-making, think critically about the role of collective engagement in genocide, and meditate meanings of identity in victimization. Though emotionally challenging, HPT is a tool with potential for remarkable impact on how students learn to reflect and dismantle the status quo of injustice. This project collaborates with early high school history teachers, Indigenous community organizations, and stakeholders in recent legislation to mandate Holocaust education in Arizona. Students will be aligned with the 8 Stages of Genocide (Stanton, 1996) and HPT will be integrated into relevant history units empowering them to challenge the complacency of unjust structures and begin to develop risk awareness in their own communities. Primary documents and biographies will be used to 1) facilitate reflection between perpetrator behavior, personal bias and current social dynamics, 2) connect processes of past atrocities with contemporary risks and, 3) deepen perspectives of identity and transgenerational trauma (Salberg, 2015). Considering the three elements, students will reflect individually, collectively discuss how HPT felt different than other ways they have learned about the past, and volunteers for one-on-one conversations will be asked to speak more deeply about personal insights. These will be analyzed to identify how learning with HPT seeds consciousness in genocide prevention. Coded signal phrases, expressed beliefs and facial expressions will be examined that reveal emotional connections to perpetrators and victims, internalized risks and processes, and reveal connections to identity-based victimization. Analysis will seek evidence of expressed empathy and its influence on student realizations of their capacity to be agents in prevention.

58 Bringing to the forefront learning that helps students make connections between history, their own community and the consequential nature of every interaction is a powerful form of prevention—one that seeks to shape a think-force of empathic, prevention-oriented innovators— and can transform how we cultivate conversations around identity and experience, nurture empathy, and reignite the power in “Never Again”.

References

Bang, M. Faber, L., Gurneau, J., Marin, A., & Soto, A. (2015). Community-Based Design Research: Learning Across Generations and Strategic Transformations of Institutional Relations Toward Axiological Innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1-14.

Nilsen, Adam P. (2016). Navigating Windows Into Past Human Minds: A Framework of Shifting Selves in Historical Perspective Taking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(3), 372- 410.

Roth, W.M., & Lee, Y.J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s Neglected Legacy”: Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186-232.

Salberg, Jill. (2015) The Texture of Traumatic Attachment: Presence and Ghostly Absence in Transgenerational Trauma. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, (1), 21-46.

Stanton, Gregory H. (1996) “The Eight Stages of Genocide”. Briefing Paper: US State Department. www.genocidewatch.com

Stetsenko, Anna. (2015) “Theory for and as Social Practice of Realizing the Future: Implications for a Transformative Activist Stance” Pp 102-116 in The Wiley Handbook of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology: Methods, Approaches, and New Directions for Social Sciences. John Wiley & John, Ltd.

Waller, James. (2007) Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing. New York: Oxford University Press.

59 Understanding Students’ Perceptions of Computing Following Participation in Informal Computing Education Programs Melissa Perez University of Michigan School of Information [email protected]

Keywords: computing education, perceptions of computing, broadening participation in computing, photo elicitation

Abstract: The most common way students’ participation in computing is represented is whether they major in computing or are interested in computing careers (Weidler-Lewis et al., 2017). While this form of participation is common, students who participate in different ways, perhaps as artists or teachers, could be marginalized or left out (Weidler-Lewis et al., 2017). Additionally, students who are underrepresented in computing (UIC), whose experiences are already marginalized within computing fields, could participate or see participation differently than these accepted ways of engaging. In parallel, we see that short-term, informal computing education (CE) programs have not been shown to be a significant factor for students going into computing majors/careers (Weston et al., 2019), but can play a major role in exposing students to computing, including students UIC. Although these students leave informal programs with some impression of computing, we do not know what they believe “counts” as participation in computing, which could help refocus efforts to broaden participation to be where students already participate. Therefore, with this work I investigate the question: How do women view “what counts” as participation in computing after participating in a broadening participation in computing (BPC) program? To answer this, I draw primarily from photo elicitation interviews (ex. Fincher et al., 2011) focusing on understanding how participants conceive of “participation in computing”. I have interviewed 10 women of different ethnic/racial backgrounds who participated in 3 different women-focused BPC programs, who are and are not engaged in computing majors or careers. Participants bring photos related to different aspects of their perception of computing (ex. “Who participates in computing?”), which we then discuss with relation to how they participate in computing, how others might, and what it looks like to participate in computing. A more in-depth description of the methods used and the theoretical framework motivating it can be found in Perez (2020). The photos are analyzed using content analysis (Bell, 2004) where they are reviewed for content along certain dimensions, for example “type of computing” (laptop, cell phone, etc.), “representation of people” (no people, partial, etc.), and “activity” (working, casual, etc.). Interviews have been transcribed and are being coded initially using holistic coding (Saldaña, 2009) to understand the main ideas from participants’ responses. When I finish this round of coding the photos and interviews, I will send participants my high-level themes and a few representative quotes for their feedback. Their responses will inform subsequent rounds of coding specifically to begin to answer the research question. I anticipate finding that students who have participated in these programs have nuanced ways of thinking about computing, and may consider themselves participants in computing in ways that are not captured by asking about their major or career choice. If this is the case, future work could examine how computing intersects with their other interests and how programs could possibly be designed to support those interests while also teaching computing/coding. Ultimately,

60 this study could expand our understanding of how students view their participation in computing and inform how we think about the outcomes of informal CE programs.

References

Bell, P. (2004). Content analysis of visual images. In Van Leeuwen, T., & Jewitt, C. The handbook of visual analysis (pp. 10-34). London: SAGE Publications Ltd doi: 10.4135/9780857020062

Fincher, S., Tenenberg, J., & Robins, A. (2011). Research design: necessary bricolage. In Proceedings of the seventh international workshop on Computing education research (ICER ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 27–32.

Perez, M. (2020). Understanding Students' Computational Perspectives and Figured Worlds of Computing. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 326–327.

Saldaña, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Sage Publications, Inc.

Weidler-Lewis, Joanna & Dubow, Wendy & Kaminsky, Alexis. (2017). Defining a Discipline or Shaping a Community: Constraints on Broadening Participation in Computing. 627-632.

Weston, T.J., Dubow, W.M., & Kaminsky, A. (2019). Predicting Women’s Persistence in Computer Science- and Technology-Related Majors from High School to College. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 20, 1, Article 1 (September 2019), 16 pages.

61 Parallax as a Generative Tension: The Challenges and Potentials of Expansive Transitions in Arts Integrated Partnerships Erin A. Preston, Independent Research Consultant, [email protected] Mark Diaz, Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education, [email protected] Keywords: arts integration, activity theory, professional learning

Abstract: This study combines tools from activity theory (Engeström, 2008; Sannino, Engeström, & Lemos, 2016) with framing (Benford & Snow, 2000; Coburn, 2006) in a discourse analysis of arts integrated (AI) partnerships. AI can introduce generative disturbances to normative classroom activities especially when pedagogical approaches counter systemic norms favoring certainty, individualism, and compliance (Diaz & McKenna, 2017; Engeström, 2008). The communities of practice individuals work within enculture them to epistemological stances that can result in competing perceptions (Engeström, 2008). Framing emergent problems requires negotiation of perspectives, thus a partnership model for AI can open possibilities for grappling with contradictions (Engeström, 2008). We drew on theories which situate contradictions as central to social activity (Engeström, 2008) to explore episodes of pedagogical reasoning (EPRs) (Horn, 2007) and analyze instances of framing (Benford & Snow, 2000; Coburn, 2006). In partnerships, cross-disciplinary expertise can facilitate the reframing of situations because authority is disrupted and framing processes can bring values into open discussion (Bannister, 2015; Engeström, 2008). A close examination of EPR’s (Bannister, 2015; Horn, 2007) can illuminate limits and potentials of framing as sites for expansive transitions (Engeström, 2008; Sannino, Engeström, & Lemos, 2016). We explore the questions: 1) How do teacher and artist partners negotiate framing of emergent problems?, and 2) How does problem framing show up in partner talk? Discourse analysis was used to explore how partners framed emergent problems and related activities. This study followed two partnerships over two years who were recruited from a randomized list. Multiple ethnographic data collection methods were used and sources included interviews (16), observations (10), and digital portfolios (4). Analysis involved identifying EPR’s of problem framing and negotiation followed by coding, thematic categorization, and comparative analysis (Charmaz, 2014). Two framing constructs were used: 1) diagnostic framing for negotiation of shared understandings of problems, and 2) prognostic framing for action- oriented discussion of problems (Benford & Snow, 2000; Horn, 2007). Preliminary findings indicate inner contradictions of AI can create parallax framing where means and aims were seemingly aligned but had substantive differences based on positions of the teacher or teaching artist. We use parallax framing as a metaphor to describe how optic differences in the indeterminate path toward purposes can create both challenges and potentials for co-constructing frames. Both partnerships framed problems as endemic to cultural and historical contexts and this counterframing was a mechanism for shifting learning objects beyond initial purposes. Although counterframing oriented activity toward transforming socio-

62 cultural dimensions of activity, parallax framing did not necessarily result in transforming norms partners aimed to address. For example, one artist struggled with the prognosis to use punitive grading and framed this tension:

[The student] did get there and just took an extra three-and-a half minutes... So, [the teacher] wouldn't have given him a four, because he couldn't get there by himself, but when you're an artist you don't really get places by yourself (Interview, 2019).

These results are interesting because parallax framing can be a powerful way to understand challenges and potentials of expansive transitions and was crucial for reproducing or challenging norms.

References Bannister, N. (2015). Reframing practice: Teacher learning through interactions in a collaborative group. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(3), 347-372. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual review of sociology, 26(1), 611-639. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Coburn, C, E. (2006). Framing the problem of reading instruction: Using frame analysis to uncover the microprocesses of policy implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 343-379. Diaz, G. & McKenna, M. B. (2017). Preparing Educators for Arts Integration: Placing Creativity at the Center of Learning. New York, NY: Teacher’s College Press. Engeström, Y. (2008). From teams to knots: Activity-theoretical studies of collaboration and learning at work. Cambridge, England, UK: Cambridge University Press. Horn, I. S. (2007). Fast kids, slow kids, lazy kids: Framing the mismatch problem in mathematics teachers’ conversations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(1), 37– 79. Sannino, A., Engeström, Y. & Lemos, M. (2016). Formative Interventions for Expansive Learning and Transformative Agency, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 599-633.

Hands on History: Messaging “Touch” at California’s History Museums Zoe Silverman University of California, Berkeley [email protected]

Keywords: Content Analysis, Embodied Cognition, Informal Learning, Museum Education

Abstract: Contemporary museums are more than mausoleums conserving the material culture of late, great empires for receptive, elite publics. Since the 1990s, museums have increasingly articulated their public value in terms of education and community wellbeing (Hooper-Greenhill, 1999). Embracing insights from sociocultural theory, sociology, neuroscience, and psychology, museums have begun to recognize themselves as multimodal, sensory, and affective spaces (Levent & Pascual-Leone, 2014) and have shifted their communication, programmatic, and educational strategies accordingly. The 1992 report Excellence and Equity asserted the central role of education in museum practice, arguing that “[m]useum missions should state unequivocally that an educational purpose is imbedded in every museum activity” (American Association of Museums & Hirzy, 2008, p. 16). Object-handling programs in museums align with recommendations set forth in Excellence and Equity. Hands-on learning programs designed may look like artifact-handling sessions for the general public or touch-tours for blind or low-vision visitors. Outside of structured programs designed to explicitly recruit touch as a learning modality, art and objects in museums nevertheless excite memory and emotion through their (imagined) tactility and sensory qualities (Freedberg & Gallese, 2007). Since the “sensory turn” in cultural studies (Howes, 2006, 2014; Howes & Classen, 2014), research about and programming for embodied experiences in museums have become increasingly popular (Faron & Banda, 2014; Kai-Kee et al., 2020). As part of a broader research program exploring the value of object-based learning with historical artifacts in heritage contexts (Chatterjee, 2008), this preliminary study uses summative content analysis to understand how history museums talk about “touch” (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). This study addresses the questions: In what contexts do the word “touch” appear on museum websites and what valences does this word carry? Content analysis is a research technique that systematically employs codes to identify and analyze certain words, themes, and concepts within a given text, leading to a full characterization of the “manifest content of communication” (Berelson, 1952). Summative qualitative content analysis includes both deductive and inductive coding techniques to provide basic insight into the use of keywords in context (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). All American Alliance of Museums-accredited history museums in California (n=106) were sampled using the Google site:search function; after excluding cases, 54 unique uses of the word “touch” across 27 history museums in California were identified for inclusion and analysis. The study finds that variations in the valence of messaging on the websites of California’s history museums reflect the contested status of touch as an important aspect of multisensory learning on the one hand and as a threat to the conservation of valuable material culture on the other. These tensions are reflected in the explicit contexts and latent attitudes toward “touch” on museum websites, particularly regarding visitor policies directed at specific audiences. Indeed, at the site of their most accessible, public presence, museums reveal conflicting approaches to touch: elevating it as a primary learning modality, condemning it for its destructive force, and celebrating it as a mode of connection and reminiscence.

References

American Association of Museums, & Hirzy, E. C. (2008). Excellence and equity: Education and the public dimension of museums (2nd reprint). American Association of Museums. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Free Press. Chatterjee, H. (Ed.). (2008). Touch in museums: Policy and practice in object handling. Berg. Faron, R., & Banda, J. (2014). Exhibition carts: Intentionally designed spaces on the move. Exhibitionist, 20–25. Freedberg, D., & Gallese, V. (2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(5), 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.003 Hooper-Greenhill, E. (Ed.). (1999). The educational role of the museum (2nd ed). Routledge. Howes, D. (2006). Charting the sensorial revolution. The Senses and Society, 1(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.2752/174589206778055673 Howes, D. (2014). Introduction to sensory museology. The Senses and Society, 9(3), 259–267. https://doi.org/10.2752/174589314X14023847039917 Howes, D., & Classen, C. (2014). Ways of sensing: Understanding the senses in society. Routledge. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687 Kai-Kee, E., Latina, L., & Sadoyan, L. (2020). Activity-based teaching in the art museum: Movement, embodiment, emotion. Getty Publications. Levent, N., & Pascual-Leone, A. (Eds.). (2014). The multisensory museum: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on touch, sound, smell, memory, and space. Rowman & Littlefield.

Distributed collaboration using interactive, augmented, and embodied projections Casey J. Smith University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Keywords: Makerspaces, Collaboration, Access, Embodiment, Informal Education

Abstract: When does a student become an engineer? Is it the first time they build something or see a problem in the world they want to solve? When they look to a mentor and think “I could do that!” Students face an evolving world that expects new skills and ways of approaching problems. Meeting these needs for interdisciplinary collaboration (Felder & Brent, 2003) and understanding of societal impacts, requires students to have experience in engineering and design (Blikstein, 2013). Makerspaces fill this need for ‘practice-based’ engineering that supplements the bookend project experiences prevalent at many universities (Barrett et al., 2015). However, effectively scaffolding collaboration in these spaces remains a challenge. What if a local making expert is not available or not in the same physical space? Supporting the positive affordances of physical interactions with artifacts (Papert, 1991) in remote environments has taken on new urgency with COVID-19 putting in-person makerspace collaboration at risk. The proposed study aims to address these challenges through the investigation of a novel communication device that allows users to share gestures around a common artifact while in separate locations, supporting communication prior to understanding the language of a specific domain (Roth, 2001). The primary research questions that will be explored are: 1. What kinds of collaboration are facilitated, or hindered, by this technology? 2. In what ways do shared gestures affect collaboration across geographic separations? 3. What impact does distributed collaboration have on feelings of inclusiveness, community, and maker identity? The proposed intervention is a two-way communication device that uses a pico-video projector and camera positioned above a work surface to project and capture an image the size of a piece of notebook paper. A user places an artifact on the work surface (Figure 1) and an audio- visual link projects the artifact on a second user’s setup (Figure 3). The cameras capture everything happening in both spaces creating duplicate images of hand gestures and interactions with the artifact while the users collaboratively discuss it (Figure 2). This allows students to share embodied gestures via telecommunication while simultaneously grounding cognition in the physical environment (Alibali & Nathan, 2012). Pre- and post-intervention surveys of undergraduates using makerspaces at a R1 research institution will address RQ1 and RQ3 and are expected to show a statistically significant increase in student experience of collaboration when shared gestures are used. Coding and analysis of video and interview data is expected to provide insight into RQ2 and how the intervention affects user behavior. Interviews will highlight students’ experiences in the makerspace, and video will help to assess and frame the experience of using the collaboration device. Design-based research methodologies will be used to iterate the intervention design based on student feedback. Through this research, we will develop a richer understanding of the ways this type of collaborative communication device can improve student access to, and experience of, remote collaboration in makerspaces and how maker identity can be supported when access to shared physical space and expert advice is limited.

Figure 1. Presenter Viewpoint Figure 2. Projected Gesture Figure 3. Helper Viewpoint

References

Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2012). Embodiment in Mathematics Teaching and Learning: Evidence From Learners’ and Teachers’ Gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 247–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.611446

Barrett, T., Pizzico, M., Levy, B. D., Nagel, R. L., Linsey, J. S., Talley, K. G., Forest, C. R., & Newstetter, W. C. (2015). A Review of University Maker Spaces. https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/53813

Blikstein, P. (2013). Digital fabrication and ‘making’ in education the democratization of invention. In J. Walter-Herrmann & C. Büching (Eds.), FabLab. transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839423820.203

Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2003). Designing and teaching courses to satisfy the abet engineering criteria. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168- 9830.2003.tb00734.x

Papert, S. (1991). Constructionism (I. Harel, Ed.). Ablex Publishing.

Roth, W.-M. (2001). Gestures: Their Role in Teaching and Learning. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 365–392. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071003365

67 Working It Out: How does the Format of Worked Examples Influence Learning? Hannah Smith, Avery Harrison Worcester Polytechnic Institute [email protected], [email protected]

Keywords: Worked examples, algebra, online learning, problem-solving

Abstract: Worked examples provide students with step-by-step derivations of problems, helping students learn procedures for problem solving. Prior research has shown that worked examples are effective learning tools in math classrooms (e.g., Atkinson et al., 2000; Booth et al., 2013; Sweller, 2006) and specifically in algebra (Booth et al., 2013). Another tool for helping students learn to solve algebraic equations is Graspable Math (GM; Weitnauer et al., 2016), a dynamic algebra notation tool, based in theories of embodied cognition, which allows students to physically manipulate algebraic equations on a screen. Our study combines the use of the dynamic algebra tool with the known positive effects of worked examples to introduce new formats of worked examples and explore their effects on student learning gains. While it is known that worked examples lead to learning, the best way to present worked examples remains unclear. We explore the effects of six different worked example formats ranging from completely static images to fully dynamic videos. We compare the impact of viewing worked examples in novel dynamic formats (where equations are manipulated and transformed in GM and displayed as looping GIFs), traditional static formats (displaying complete derivations in one image), and sequential line-by-line formats (showing derivations line by line in a looping GIF). Within these variations, we also compare concise worked examples (e.g., Rittle-Johnson & Star, 2007), which display the important steps of solving the algebra problem to extended versions, which display all steps in a derivation. In this 45-minute study, students are randomly assigned to one of six worked example conditions in an online problem set. Participants complete an eight-item pretest on algebraic equation solving, view six worked examples, immediately complete paired practice problems adapted from Rittle-Johnson and Star (2007), and then finish by completing a posttest mirroring the pretest. Our main research question is, which worked example format leads to the largest student learning gains? Through answering this question, this project aims to identify which presentation elements or combinations of elements make different formats of worked examples effective for learning. So far, this study has been completed by 146 students, with the ultimate goal of collecting data from 400 students. Preliminary results showed that overall, students improved from pre- to posttest after completing the worked example practice, t(145) = 3.89, p < .01. A 6(condition)✕2(time) repeated measures ANOVA revealed a main effect of condition, F(5,136)=2.49, p<.05, and a main effect of time, F(1,136)=9.27, p<.01. Additionally, post-hoc comparisons revealed that only students who viewed static or line-by-line extended worked examples improved significantly from pretest to posttest p’s < .02, while students who viewed the other worked example formats did not show significant improvement. By presenting our project and the six different worked example formats we have created, we aim to contribute to the efforts in analyzing what components of worked examples make them effective, develop a framework for systematically examining worked example variations,

68 challenge others to consider what makes a worked example effective, and get feedback on the variations of worked examples we are studying.

References

Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 181-214.

Booth, J. L., Lange, K. E., Koedinger, K. R., & Newton, K. J. (2013). Using example problems to improve student learning in algebra: Differentiating between correct and incorrect examples. Learning and Instruction, 25, 24-34.

Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 561.

Sweller, J. (2006). The worked example effect and human cognition. Learning and Instruction.

Weitnauer, E., Landy, D., & Ottmar, E. (2016, December). Graspable math: Towards dynamic algebra notations that support learners better than paper. In 2016 Future Technologies Conference (FTC) (pp. 406-414). IEEE.

69 The Role of Technology in Intergenerational Learning Experiences Abigail T. Stephan [email protected] Clemson University

Keywords: intergenerational learning, technology, digital media

Abstract: Intergenerational learning is the process through which knowledge, skills, and attitudes are transmitted between individuals from two or more different generations (Boström & Schmidt-Hertha, 2017; Istead & Shapiro, 2014). It is marked by reciprocity and often results in the co-construction of an experience (Newman & Hatton-Yeo, 2008; Schmidt-Hertha, 2014; Spalding & Carpenter, 2019). While intergenerational learning can naturally occur in the family, designed intergenerational programs within the community, education, and faith-based organizations can act as structured spaces that bring together individuals from different generations that may not otherwise interact. In considering demographic shifts leading to increased geographic separation between extended family members and an increasing generational social divide, as well as the more recent COVID-19 pandemic forcing physical isolation between generations, technology as a form of communication likely plays a large role in sustaining relationships, both within and outside of the family context. To better understand the current state of empirical research in this area, I conducted a review of relevant literature focused on understanding the role of technology in facilitating intergenerational learning across a broad range of environments. I obtained relevant literature through a systematic search in common education, psychology, and social science databases in May 2020. Using the terms “tech*” and “digital” with “intergenerational learning” yielded 120 articles. Then, the criteria of being published in English in peer-reviewed academic journals between 2015 and 2020 were applied, resulting in 28 articles. I reviewed the abstracts and, in some instances, additional sections of the selected papers to identify empirical articles strongly related to the research question. A total of 11 articles were included in this preliminary review. Taking into account basic background information from each article, such as participants’ demographic information and methodologies, findings from the articles were analyzed using emergent coding, a process through which themes are identified based on common ideas and patterns salient within data (Saldaña, 2015). This form of analysis allows for flexibility in determining final themes (Creswell, 2013) and was utilized to identify how technology is used to facilitate intergenerational learning experiences. Initial results suggest that technology is used as both a tool and an outcome in relation to intergenerational learning experiences. While several articles position technology as a mode through which intergenerational learning is facilitated (e.g., Akhter, 2016; Cucinelli et al., 2018; Dauenhauer et al., 2018; Gutiérrez et al., 2019; Kelly, 2015; Wall et al., 2017), others consider increased understanding about technology as a benefit of intergenerational learning experiences (e.g., Bjursell, 2015; Chadwick et al., 2018; Hewson et al., 2015; Lee & Kim, 2019; Stacy & Aguilar, 2018). Additional salient themes and significant outcomes are included on the poster. Overall, the purpose of this preliminary work and the poster presentation is to highlight in greater depth the state of research around the role of technology in intergenerational learning in informal spaces and begin a conversation with fellow Learning Sciences students and scholars regarding next steps and potential collaborations.

70 References Akhter, P. (2016). A young child’s intergenerational practices through the use of visual screen-based multimodal communication to acquire Qur’anic literacy. Language & Education: An International Journal, 30(6), 500–518. Boström, A.K., & Schmidt-Hertha, B. (2017). Intergenerational relationships and lifelong learning. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 15(1), 1-3. Bjursell, C. (2015). Organizing for intergenerational learning and knowledge sharing. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 13(4), 285–301. Chadwick, C., Dickson, D., Arnold, C., Cisneros, L., Volin, J., Campbell, T., Moss, D., & Rodriguez, L. (2018). Connecting generations through informal geospatial and conservation education. Journal of Extension, 56(5), 5. Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage. Cucinelli, G., Davidson, A.L., Romero, M., & Matheson, T. (2018). Intergenerational learning through a participatory video game design workshop. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 16(1/2), 146–165 Dauenhauer, J. A., Heffernan, K. M., & Cesnales, N. I. (2018). Promoting intergenerational learning in higher education: older adult perspectives on course auditing. Educational Gerontology, 44(11), 732–740. Gutiérrez, K. D., Higgs, J., Lizárraga, J. R., & Rivero, E. (2019). Learning as movement in social design-based experiments: Play as a leading activity. Human Development, 62(1/2), 66–82. Hewson, J., Danbrook, C., & Sieppert, J. (2015). Engaging post-secondary students and older adults in an intergenerational digital storytelling course. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 8(3), 135–142. Istead, L., & Shapiro, B. (2014). Recognizing the child as knowledgeable other: Intergenerational learning research to consider child-to-adult influence on parent and family eco-knowledge. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 28(1), 115-127. Kelly, C. (2015). ‘Let’s do some jumping together’: Intergenerational participation in the use of remote technology to co-construct social relations over distance. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 13(1), 29–46. Lee, O.E.K., & Kim, D.H. (2019). Bridging the digital divide for older adults via intergenerational mentor-up. Research on Social Work Practice, 29(7), 786–795. Newman, S., & Hatton-Yeo, A. (2008). Intergenerational learning and the contributions of older people. Ageing Horizons, 8(10), 31-39. Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage Publications. Schmidt-Hertha, B. (2014). Different concepts of generation and their impact on intergenerational learning. In B. Schmidt-Hertha, S. Jelenc Krasovec, & M. Formosa (Eds.), Learning across generations: Contemporary issues in older adult education (pp. 145–154). Rotterdam/Netherlands: Sense. Spalding, R., & Carpenter, B. (2019). Examining the intergenerational stake hypothesis in grandparent-grandchild dyads. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 89(2), 172-186. Stacy, J., & Aguilar, J. (2018). Connection, culture, & creativity: Using mobile technology as a medium for storytelling in an intergenerational classroom. Multicultural Education, 25(2), 28–35.

71 Wall, K., Burns, H., & Llewellyn, A. (2017). Mind the Gap: An exploratory investigation of a family learning initiative to develop metacognitive awareness. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15(2), 115–129.

72 Human Capital: Games as a pathway to Funds of Identity Christina Stiso Indiana University [email protected]

Keywords: game-based learning, STEM, social justice, funds of knowledge, history

Abstract: Note: Due to the ongoing Sars-COV-2 pandemic, I have had to change this project from the original submission to fit within the new parameters of digital interaction. Human Capital is a simple game I have designed the allows players to explore the ideas of cultural capital (Hinton, 2015), funds of knowledge (Moll, Amanti, & Gonzalez, 1992), funds of identity (Esteban-Guitart & Moll, 2014), and systemic systems of oppression (Yosso 2000; Solorzano & Bernel, 2001). The game is designed to be played in 60-90 minutes and has several permutations of the core rules to highlight different theories and ideas. The purpose of this game is to familiarize students with the ideas mentioned above, particularly the distinction between cultural capital and funds of knowledge, in order to elucidate obscured and entrenched systems of power within the modern/late-stage capitalist system that pervaded American institutions. It will also, hopefully, test the hypothesis that games can be a reliable tool for classroom teachers to elicit and distinguish funds of identity in a classroom setting. While a study using this game is in the proposal phase, no data has been collected; this will be a literal demonstration of the game. The proposed project will ask the following questions: 1) Can games be used to elicit funds of knowledge and identity? 2) How can a GBL environment help researchers/teachers to distinguish between FoK and FoI? 3) How do students employ their funds of identity in a GBL environment? The proposed analysis will rely on activity theory and interaction analysis of video recordings and interviews. The actual demonstration will require very little.

References Esteban-Guitart, M., & Moll, L. C. (2014). Funds of Identity: A new concept based on the Funds of Knowledge approach. Culture & Psychology, 20(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X13515934

Hinton, K. A. (2015). Should we use a capital framework to understand culture? Applying cultural capital to communities of color. Equity & Excellence in Education, 48(2), 299-319.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (2001). Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice. In Supporting lifelong learning (pp. 121-136). Routledge. 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.

73 Solorzano, D. G., & Bernal, D. D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through a critical race and LatCrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban context. Urban education, 36(3), 308-342. Yosso, T. (2000). A critical race and LatCrit approach to media literacy: Chicana/o resistance to visual microagressions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

74 Let’s Work Collaboratively to Improve Our Spatial Skills Jesslyn Valerie, David DeLiema, Keisha Varma University of Minnesota – Twin Cities [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Keywords: spatial reasoning, qualitative methods, collaborative learning, productive failure

Abstract: Spatial skills are good predictors of STEM achievement.4 This finding has spurred an increasing number of studies in recent years to design training to improve spatial ability. For example, our previous study showed that eighth grade students who participated in the Rubik’s Cube training series improved their spatial skills. 3 However, most spatial training studies, ours included, are focused on individual learning and use pretest and posttest results as a measure of spatial skills. While our training was deemed effective, we are interested to investigate further the mechanisms through which those spatial learning processes occurred. 2 We are also interested in investigating whether students could develop spatial reasoning in the context of collaborative work which has not been previously explored in the literature. This study focuses on two research questions: (1) How do groups of two or three students develop, share, and refine their spatial reasoning strategies when collaborating on spatial reasoning activity? (2) How does the teacher guide the whole class to develop, share, and refine their spatial reasoning strategies when collaborating on spatial reasoning activity? The study will implement the productive failure design and that its teaching instruction almost exclusively involves collaborative learning in the failure stage of the design.1 The failure process plays a critical role in helping learners to develop their critical thinking skills and develop a better conceptual understanding. We will record students’ audio and video using action cameras and microphones set up at each group’s table during each of the sessions. We will conduct qualitative video-based conversation analysis (CA) to examine students’ interactions as they work collaboratively. Methods. We will conduct in four sessions with approximately 30 eighth-grade students. The first session will be an observation session where the researcher come to observe and understand the usage of spatial skills in a science classroom. For example, in an astronomy chapter, the science teacher would explain the spatial distance between the moon, earth, and stars beyond what our eyes can see. In chemistry, spatial skills are useful in introducing students to the molecular structure of the elements in the periodic table. The second session serves as the exploration phase where students will be able to try solving the first layer of the Rubik’s Cube in dyads or triads. Then, the teacher will make connections between each group’s moments of failure and suggest ways to improve their problem-solving strategies. The third session will serve as a consolidation phase where students reflect on their initial strategies, try to improve their performance using a more powerful strategy learned at the end of the previous session, and reflect on their moments of successes and failures. Finally, the fourth session will serve as another observation session. The aim is to understand the connections made between their newly learned spatial knowledge and science instruction. Expected results. The result of this study would provide a rich understanding to the learning sciences literature regarding the effectiveness of collaborative work in improving spatial skills and how those learning processes occurred.

75 References

1Kapur, M., & Bielaczyc, K. (2012). Designing for Productive Failure. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 21(1), 45-83.

2Ramey, K. E., Stevens, R., & Uttal, D. H. (2020). In-FUSE-ing STEAM learning with spatial reasoning: Distributed spatial sensemaking in school-based making activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112, 466–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000422

3Valerie, J., Aylward, G., & Varma, K. (2020). I Solved it! Using the Rubik’s Cube to Support Mental Rotation in a Middle School Science Classroom. In Gresalfi, M. and Horn, I. S. (Eds.), The Interdisciplinarity of the Learning Sciences, 14th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2020, Volume 2 (pp. 653-656). Nashville, Tennessee: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

4Wai, J., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Steiger, J. H. (2010). Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: A 25-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 860–871.

76 How the Prediction of Directed Actions Influences Simulated Actions for Geometry Proof

Fangli Xia, University of Wisconsin-Madison, [email protected] Mitchell J. Nathan, University of Wisconsin-Madison, [email protected]

Keywords: Embodied Cognition; Simulated Action; Directed Action; Prediction; Geometric Reasoning

Abstract:

The cognitive system is essentially a predictive architecture, informed by salient covariations in the environment (Churchland, 2004). Rather than passively awaiting sensory input, it continually predicts streams of sensory input by constructing models of possible causes of this input and generating potential actions to maximize health (Clark, 2013). Embodied cognition theories postulate that such predictions are accomplished by mental perceptuo-motor simulations of bodily interactions with the physical world (Barsalou, 2009). These perceptuo-motor simulations, which are often externalized via speech and gestures, are foundational for cognition. In the Gesture as Simulated Action framework (Hostetter & Alibali, 2008, 2019), gestures are shown to be crucial components of predictive simulations. It is hypothesized that people form these anticipatory simulations as permutations of (nearly) all of the plausible actions in goal-directed settings (Wolpert et al., 2003). During these goal-directed events, motor behaviors and cognitive processing are closely coupled, and each can affect the other reciprocally. This process of coordinating motoric and mental activity is what Nathan (2017) refers to as action-cognition transduction (ACT). In ACT, Nathan posits that inference making based on both body-based feedback and feedforward processing contributes to conceptualizations about future states and more generalized forms of reasoning. Using this theoretical framing, we ask broadly, will prompts to predict actions in the world benefit one’s reasoning?

We designed an experiment in which students will be prompted to predict body movements that activate spatial-motoric properties of geometry conjectures about space and shape (Nathan & Walkington, 2017). The planned study addresses two primary research questions: (1) Is the prediction of directed actions associated with participants’ simulated actions? (2) Is the prediction of directed actions associated with enhanced geometric reasoning?

We will recruit 120 undergraduate students. All participants will be recorded online to preserve orders for social distancing during the Covid-19 pandemic. We will assign participants into one of four groups using a 2x2 between-subjects design, directed actions (DA; Yes/No) and generate predictions (P; Yes/No) (Table 1). First, participants are asked to read a mathematical conjecture. An example conjecture is: “If you halve the length and width of a rectangle, then the area is exactly halved.” After reading and considering the conjecture, the treatment of each condition varies: (1) In condition DA+P, this group is exposed to an incomplete sequence of directed actions and then asked to predict a “possible” next movement; (2) in DA + no-P, this group receives the complete series of directed actions but makes no predictions; (3) in no-DA + P, this group is not exposed to DA but is subsequently asked to “imagine” movements that could enact the geometric transformation of each conjecture; (4) in no-DA + no-P (i.e., the control group), participants receive no directed actions and make no predictions. Finally, all four groups finish each conjecture by answering a prompt considering if the conjecture is always true or false and to provide verbal justification. 77 Understanding how motor simulation might be affected when students predict future actions will give insight into how to facilitate the body-based account of inference making, which forms the basis for mathematical imagination and generalization.

References Barsalou, L. W. (2009). Simulation, situated conceptualization, and prediction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1521), 1281-1289. Churchland, P. S. (2004). How do neurons know?. Daedalus, 133(1), 42-50. Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and brain sciences, 36(3), 181-204. Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2008). Visible embodiment: Gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(3), 495-514. Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2019). Gesture as simulated action: Revisiting the framework. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 26(3), 721-752. Nathan, M. J. (2017). One function of gesture is to make new ideas. In Why Gesture?: How the hands function in speaking, thinking and communicating (pp. 175-196). John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Nathan, M. J., & Walkington, C. (2017). Grounded and embodied mathematical cognition: Promoting mathematical insight and proof using action and language. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 9. Wolpert, D. M., Doya, K., & Kawato, M. (2003). A unifying computational framework for motor control and social interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 358(1431), 593-602.

78 Figures and Tables

Table 1. 2x2 Factorial Research Design

Prediction Prediction No Prediction X Directed Actions

Directed Actions

No Directed Actions

79 Implications of Sociopolitical and Historical Contexts on The Identity and Learning of South Asian Muslims

Ayesha Bhimdiwala Indiana University Bloomington [email protected]

Keywords: Muslim community, learning and identity, educational outcomes, sociopolitics, sociocultural

Abstract:

Going beyond the cognitive contributions to teaching and learning, Philips et al. (2018) has invited the education community to consider cultural and political differences that creates power and inequity in local contexts. Further, Uttamchandani (2018) emphasizes humanizing learning by exploring the learner’s potential and their human dignity through powerful tools and discourses that uncover their individualistic and collective identity of social oppressions. With the aim to interweave learner’s identity and culture into their everyday experience, I view South Asian Muslims’ (second largest religion in South Asia, biggest minority in India) teaching and learning trajectories within their historical and political experiences. The purpose of this work is to encourage and align with the more recent call for international perspectives in STEM education and learning sciences communities (Vakil & Beheshti, 2020). As a South Asian Muslim, I first-hand witnessed the historical and political remains of the partition of Hindustan into India and Pakistan, that affected my identity as a learner in formal classroom environments. The Islamic Golden Age, the pre-British Hindustan, and specifically post-British India and Pakistan have created and preserved important marks in the sociocultural and sociopolitical experiences of South Asian Muslims in schools and colleges. For example, co- locating Muslims in lower socioeconomic areas resulting in poor educational facilities. In this presentation, I present the historical shifts from 1800s to 1990s in South Asia which till date affects the education of Muslims (Noman, 1942). It follows with an anecdote to explore and connect my personal story to the wider cultural and political understandings of the learning identity of South Asian Muslims. Next, I focus specifically on post-British India, a multicultural nation, where later the privatization culture proved advantageous for the rise of Muslims enrolling in schools and colleges. I close my presentation with the 2014 and 2019 Indian general election and its effect on not only the identity and learning experiences of Muslims in India, but also their existence. In conclusion, this presentation encourages globalization of learning and educational sciences that would benefit the new and existing members of the Learning Sciences community. I hope to gain feedback from the audience that can inform the next steps on this topic and build my literature related to relevant topics.

References

Noman M. (1942). Muslim India: Rise and growth of the All India Muslim league. Kitabistan. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.59113.

Philip, T. M., Bang, M., & Jackson, K. (2018). Articulating the “How,” the “For What,” the “For Whom,” and the “With Whom” in Concert: A Call to Broaden the Benchmarks of our Scholarship, Cognition and Instruction, 36:2, 83-88.

Uttamchandani, S. (2018). Equity in the Learning Sciences: Recent Themes and Pathways. In Kay, J. and Luckin, R. (Eds.) Rethinking Learning in the Digital Age: Making the Learning Sciences Count, 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2018, Volume 1. London, UK: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Vakil, S., Behesti E. (2020). Theorizing the politics of identity in engineering: Reflections from the University of Tehran, Iran. In Gresalfi M. and Horn I. (Eds.) The Interdisciplinarity of the Learning Sciences, 14th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2020.

81 Designing Micro-credentials: Insights from Employers on Mastery-based Learning Steven L. Cederquist University of Michigan - Ann Arbor [email protected]

Keywords: Micro-credentials, Mastery-learning, School-Work Transitions, Higher Education; Labor Markets

Abstract: In explaining the process of editing incomplete transcript data in order to prepare the second College Course Map and Transcript Files: Changes in Course-Taking and Achievement, 1972-1993, Clifford Adelman bemoaned the “messiness” of college transcripts, describing data as both incomplete and incomprehensible. But Adelman also compared college transcripts to “old parish registers of baptisms, marriages, and funerals . . . in that they do not lie, they do not exaggerate, they do not forget, and they do not offer frivolous answers to interviewers’ questions.” (Adelman, 1996, p. 48). Adelman found opportunity in reimagining the college transcript so that it may demand the respect it deserves as the permanent record of student achievement. Scholars of higher education and information science have taken this idea a step further arguing that the college transcript itself is an outdated relic of the past deeply in need of innovation in the age of information (see McKay, 2016). While the design of such a transcript has mostly been the subject of much speculation, it is most commonly re-imagined as a data-driven (Koester, Fogel, Murdock, Grom, & McKay, 2017) and validated alternative credential of skills and competencies. While scholars have begun to examine the opinions employers hold regarding alternative credentials (e.g., Gallagher, 2018; Fishman, Teasley, & Cederquist, 2019; Pitt, Bell, Strickman, & Davis, 2019; Park & Taylor, 2016), this growing body of literature would benefit from an examination of how employers use credentials and the information behind them to make recruiting and hiring decisions. Understanding how alternative credentials are evaluated in labor markets will be particularly important as institutions move to innovative learning designs and tools which capture and produce new and diverse information about student performance.

Through a case study methodology, I will examine how employers use credentials and measures of student achievement to set standards for entry-level employment and, ultimately, assess the suitability of applicants for hiring. This work is guided by theories of how employers understand the role schooling plays in skill acquisition (see Bills, 1988 for review). The study design will include semi-structured interviews with employers who routinely recruit and hire bachelor’s graduates from a large midwestern university into entry-level positions throughout their organizations. Convenience sampling will be supported through collaboration with a number of career development offices associated with the university. Interview data will be thematically coded to develop how employers infer skill from credentials and theories on how employers would signal information from mastery-based learning and alternative credentials.

83 References

Adelman, C. (1996). Have you read your college transcript lately? Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 28(1), 48-49.

Bills, D.B. (1988). Credentials and capacities: employers’ perceptions of the acquisition of skills. The Sociological Quarterly, 29(3), 439-449.

Fishman, B.J., Teasley, S.D., Cederquist, S.L., (2019) Micro-credentials as evidence of college readiness: a report of an NSF workshop. Deep Blue. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/143851/Micro-Credentials%20In%20A dmissions%20Report.pdf?sequence=3

Gallagher, S. (2018). Educational credentials come of age: A survey on the use and value of educational credentials in hiring. Northeastern University: Center for the Future of Higher Education and Talent Strategy. https://www.northeastern.edu/cfhets/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Educational_Credentials_Com e_of_Age_2018.pdf

Koester, B.P., Fogel, J., Murdock III, W., Grom, G., & McKay, T.A. (2017). Building a transcript of the future. Proceedings from Learning Analytics and Knowledge. ACM: Vancouver, BC.

McKay, T. (2016, December 11). Thoughts on the transcript of the future. WordPress. https://21stcenturyhighered.com/2016/12/11/thoughts-on-the-transcript-of-the-future/

Park, R. & Taylor, A. (2016). Innovating credentialing: employers weigh in on co-curricular transcripts. College and University, 91(2), 63-72.

84 Pitt, C.R., Bell, A., Strickman, R., & Davis, K. (2019). Supporting learners’ STEM-oriented career pathways with digital badges. Information and Learning Sciences, 120(1/2), 87-107.

85 Creating a Community of Practice through Online Collaborative Interpretation of Jewish Texts Shai Goldfarb Cohen University of Wisconsin-Madison [email protected]

Keywords: Online Learning, Jewish Studies, Collaboration, Communities of Practice, Knowledge-Building Communities

Abstract: This presentation is about online Jewish websites used for learning Jewish sacred texts. Adult Jewish learning is not only valued as normative Jewish behavior but is also embedded in Jewish tradition and "even elevates to sacred status" (Schuster & Grant, 2008, p. 162). Today, there is an ongoing interest in innovation in Jewish education. Social and religious changes in Jewish education are viewed as shifting from being "provider centered" to "learner-centered." Learners are taking an active role in shaping their learning, making it relevant to their lives, as learning becomes more accessible (Rubin Ross, 2017). Therefore, there is an increase in online platforms that make Jewish history, Jewish thought, philosophy, and religion more accessible. Technologies play a central role in contemporary discussions of learning. Computer- supported collaborative teaching and learning practices have predecessors, such as traditional Jewish Torah studies. In this setting, students read, analyze, and evaluate Jewish texts, and raise questions trying to fill the interpretive "holes" in these sources collaboratively (Kent, 2010). The practice of interpretation is one of the key features in Jewish learning and teaching. It is the basis of the Jewish canon, as it created an ongoing engagement with ancient texts, forging connections between them, and creating new meanings. This learning practice which can be found online also reflects how social and textual acts of interpretation built a community of learners with the Jewish sacred texts in the center. The goal of this research is to better understand how learners use and experience the collaborative interpretation of Jewish sacred texts through online platforms. My main research question is how do online Jewish learning platforms create (or do not create) communities of practice around Jewish sacred texts? To answer this question, I conducted nine semi-structured interviews with adult learners between the ages of 29-65 who use online platforms for learning Jewish texts. I will analyze these data using frameworks of learning as a socio-cultural practice. These frameworks include Communities of Practice looking at relations between newcomers and old- timers in the context of their shared practice and how people learn to become members of a community (Lave & Wenger, 1991). I will also use the Knowledge-Building Communities framework as a pedagogical approach for knowledge creation as socially constructed in an activity (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2014). Through the interviews, I will focus on the learners' collaborative experiences of learning using online interactions. Preliminary findings show that through the collaborative interpretation of Jewish texts, these platforms create spaces in which learners both consume and produce knowledge. As adult lifelong learners, participants describe how they actively create connections between texts and their own life experiences with others. The digital spaces provide learners not only access to texts but also a place to continue the old Jewish tradition of learning in a community. I hope that the implications of my research on Jewish studies and educational technologies will provide a deeper understanding of Jewish education in the 21st century.

References

Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 3-19). Springer, Dordrecht.

Kent, O. (2010). A theory of havruta learning. Journal of Jewish Education, 76:3 (pp. 215-245). DOI: 10.1080/15244113.2010.501499

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Rubin Ross, R. (2017). Networked but no system: Educational innovation among Bay Area Jewish organizations. Journal of Jewish Education, 83(3), 196-208.

Scardamalia, & Bereiter. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2 ed., pp. 397-417). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Schuster, D. T., & Grant, L. D. (2008). Adult Jewish learning. In Goodman, R. L., Flexner, P. A., & Bloomberg, L. D. (Eds.). What We Now Know About Jewish Education: Perspectives on Research for Practice (pp. 161-172). Los Angeles, California: Torah Aura Productions.

A Study on the Teaching Method of Reading the Whole Book Call to Arms in 10th Grade Fuyi Feng Yilang Zhao Beijing Normal University University of Wisconsin – Madison [email protected] [email protected]

Keywords: Call to Arms, reading the whole book, teaching method, case study

Abstract: This presentation is about a case study based on the "teaching improvement" project of the Chinese discipline of Beijing Normal University. This study makes an in-depth observation on the classroom of two senior Chinese teachers in different schools with the orientation of qualitative research and the strategy of internal case investigation, explores the teaching method of reading the whole book Call to Arms, and studies their corresponding teaching contexts. The motivation for this case study is to figure out the commonness and differences between them to enlighten a new way of teaching Chinese literature. The relevant theoretical frameworks for this study are collaborative learning framework by Miyake and Kirschner (2014) and Dillenbourg, Jarvela, and Fischer’s (2003) interactive participation theory. Here is a brief summary of our research. We recruited 60 participants and used this data. The unit of analysis of our case would be one participant. With the proposal of the task "reading and discussion of the whole book" in the Chinese curriculum standard for senior high school (2017 Edition), senior high school’s Chinese teachers, university experts, and scholars have launched extensive discussions on this topic. "Reading the Whole Book" is defined as a teaching method with which the instructor prompts the students to study on a book that consists of multiple classics. Compared to the traditional single text reading, reading the whole book enables students to develop comprehensive understandings across articles with similar themes, which facilitates their deep thinking about the core values that the author attempts to deliver. This paper selects Call to Arms as the exemplar reading of "the whole book". According to existent research, the main research questions are: 1) What are the characteristics (differences and similarities) of the teaching methods of the two teachers? 2) What are the advantages of reading the whole book compared with the traditional single text reading? This study first constructs a classroom observation framework, and observes two classroom cases, collecting data from multiple rounds of teacher interviews as well as student interviews and documents. Through situational analysis, this paper analyzes the teachers' curriculum design concepts, specific teaching and evaluation methods, and identifies the similarities and differences between the two whole book reading teaching methods utilized by the teachers in this study, thematic teaching method and task-driven teaching method. The two theoretical frameworks mentioned above will be used to assess how well these two teachers incorporate theories into their classroom. Then, we compare the two cases, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these two teachers’ teaching methods, and propose some suggestions on the teaching methods of reading the whole book Call to Arms. Finally, this study produces the enlightenment of the case teachers from three aspects: using the theory of learning science, advocating "student-centered" teaching, and breaking through the shackles of Chinese single text teaching.

References

Miyake N., & Kirschner P. A. (2014). The Social and Interactive Dimensions of Collaborative Learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2 ed., pp. 418-438). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer- supported collaborative learning. In Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 3-19). Springer, Dordrecht.

89 Theory and Practice, an Examination on How Second Language Acquisition literature, and English as a Second Language Literature address students’ identities Alejandra Franco University of Washington [email protected]

Key Words: English Second Language, Second Language Acquisition, Identity Development, Language Theories

Abstract: This literature review has the purpose to explore the literature and research regarding the identity of English language learners (ELL) in the K-12 system, a literature I will refer to here as English as a Second Language (ESL). A second purpose is to compare the ESL literature with a second research literature, which I will refer to here as Second language acquisition (SLA), specifically around how this second literature addresses the identity of students learning a second language.

The importance of language and identity, as reflected in the ESL literature, was explained by Norton (2000), stating that language is not just a medium of communication, but also a tool for ELLs to gain access to social networks that provide them opportunities to express themselves and negotiate their identities in their classrooms. If international students and immigrants do not feel empowered enough in their English proficiency and certain linguistic practices are invalidated, their ways to construct their identities will be hindered and therefore their learning, engagement, and participation will affect their success in education. In addition, ELLs can be unseen in the mainstream classroom or detached from the learning process if their cultural identity is not being acknowledged (Sumaryono & Ortiz, 2004).

On the other hand, the idea of identity is not necessarily foregrounded in SLA theories. Within the SLA perspective, the focus is on students as individual learners and their cognition rather than students as actors within social activities (Vygotsky, 1978). Vygotsky was one of the first researchers to emphasize the relationship between culture and the development of bilingualism/multilingualism. Moll (2000) expanded Vygotsky’s understanding of culture by explaining that “we seek culture in human practices, situated in people’s involvement with (and creation of) the multiple contexts that constitute their social worlds. In other words, people live culturally rather than they live cultures” (p. 257-258).

A critical difference between SLA and ESL is that SLA is rooted in theory, rather than methodology (Hansen-Thomas & Grosso, 2013). Therefore, identity might not have the same importance that is given it within ESL, although identity is addressed by some SLA teachers and scholars. With this in mind, I examine how the SLA and ESL literatures pay attention to the ELL population mentioned above, and to the development of their language identity in the process of learning a new language.

There is much research done in relation to language and identity (e.g., Lin, 2012: Gersten & Jimenez, 1994: Allen & Park, 2011). I believe that the backgrounds of the

90 scholars that are looking into these areas are as diverse as ELL students (e.g. English as second language teachers, ESL scholars, and learning sciences scholars). Their contrasting and/or similar perspectives regarding the learning of a second language are influenced by distinct theoretical perspectives. To better understand how identity is recognized in the literature, I will focus particularly on the differences and similarities between ESL and SLA articles. I intent to merge theory with practice, although, we cannot understand how these articles relate to each other without discussing how the theoretical perspectives consider identity development and learning of a second language.

References

Allen, H., & Park, S. (2011). Science education and ESL students. Science Scope, 35(3), 29- 35.

Bialik, K., Scheller, A., Walker, K. (2018) English language learners in U.S public schools. Retrieved from: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/25/6- facts-about-english-language-learners-in-u-s-public-schools/

Educational Linguistic (2015) Raciolinguistic perspective. Retrieved from: https://educationallinguist.wordpress.com/2015/06/14/why-we-need- raciolinguistics/

Flores, N., Rosa, J. (2017) Unsettling race and language: Toward a raciolinguistic perspective. Retrieved from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/language-in society/article/unsettling-race-and-language-toward-a-raciolinguistic- perspective/30FFC5253F465905D75CDFF1C1363AE3

Gersten, R., & Jimenez, R. (1994). A delicate balance: Enhancing literature instruction for students as a second language. Reading Teacher, 47(6), 438- 449. Lin, J. (2012) Principles of Effective English Language Learner Pedagogy. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/916837/Downloads/ED562799.pdf

Moll, L.C. (2000). Inspired by Vygotsky: Ethnographic experiments in education. Vygotskian Perspectives on Literacy Research: Constructing Meaning through Collaborative Inquiry. UK: Cambridge University Press

Norton, B. (2000) Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change. United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited

Peregoy, S., & Boyle, O. (2000) English Learners Reading English: What We Know, What We Need to Know. Theory Into Practice, 39:4, 237-247.

Schütz, R. (2019) Stephen Krashen’s Theory of Second Language Acquisition. Retrieved from https://www.sk.com.br/sk-krash-english.html

Sumaryono, K., & Ortiz, F. (2004, May) Preserving the Cultural Identity of the English Language Learner. Voices from the Middle, 11, 16-19

91 Quizlet Live! Learning Second Language Vocabulary through Gameplay Yuchan Gao (Blanche) Arizona State University [email protected]

Keywords: game-based learning, second language vocabulary, Quizlet Live, individual versus collaborative gameplay, value-added research

Abstract: Although research in digital game-based second language learning has shown positive results in students’ vocabulary learning, more nuanced differentiation of research designs is needed (Tsai & Tsai, 2018). Thus, this research proposal aims to explore how digital gameplay affects second language (SL) vocabulary learning. This study compares two modes of gameplay in Quizlet Live (QL) and examines their affordances for SL vocabulary learning. QL is an embedded mini-game in which players match definitions to vocabulary as quickly and accurately as they can (Wolff, 2016) in a vocabulary learning tool named Quizlet. Learners can play individually against other players (individual mode) or play as a team against other teams (collaborative mode). This study asks: How does participating in individual gameplay mode of QL compare to collaborative mode in terms of short-term vocabulary learning for ESL learners? Although previous studies suggested QL promoted SL vocabulary acquisition (Wolff, 2016; Harrold, 2017; Sanosi, 2018) and improved students’ learning satisfaction (Aiseri & Mustafa, 2018; Hougham, 2019), how different modes of digital gameplay affect learning is not fully understood. Modes of gameplay can be viewed as game mechanics and may offer different impacts on learners’ performance and engagement in game-based learning (Ke, 2020). Ke (2020) reviewed prior research on individual versus collaborative play and reported that collaborative play might have both positive and negative effects on learners’ in-game performance (Plass et al., 2013; Siu et al., 2014), knowledge acquisition (Pareto et al., 2012), and participation perception (Tsai et al., 2015). These mixed results highlight the need to better understand the role gameplay modes might play in SL vocabulary learning. Thus, this study explores different affordances of QL gameplay modes in facilitating SL vocabulary learning. This study is framed in a cognitive view of game-based learning as guided by the assumption that gameplay can enhance learner motivation and cognitive engagement (Plass et al., 2020). Collaborative gameplay is presumed to positively affect SL learners’ motivation and engagement in learning vocabulary. Guided by Mayer’s value-added research procedures (2014a, 2016, 2020), this study compares SL learners’ vocabulary acquisition between the QL’s individual mode (base version, control group) and the collaborative mode (value-added version, experimental group). Twenty participants (7th-9th graders) will be recruited from after-school clubs that instruct English as a second language in the US and randomly assigned to two groups for a 15-minute gameplay session. Participants’ short-term vocabulary achievement will be measured through a pretest and an immediate posttest (30-minute) including multiple types of questions (e.g., multiple-choice, true/false, etc.). The measurement tests will be adapted from Nation’s suggestions of vocabulary tests (2001). Participants’ mean scores and standard deviations will be computed to analyze the group differences and a T-test will be conducted to determine the significance of group differences. This research proposal is designed to provide empirical evidence for comparing different gameplay modes in promoting SL vocabulary learning. It also has implications on how particular game designs afford SL vocabulary learning

92 and how educators can utilize QL’s different gameplay modes in designing digital game-based second language learning environments.

References Aiseri, N. I. M., & Mustafa, N. H. (Eds.) (2018). Exploring students’ perceptions of English language Quizlet Live module for basic learners in UMK. Proceedings of international conference on UMMAH 2018: civilisation, language and sustainability, 331-338. UMK Press. Harrold, P. (2018). Using online student response games for vocabulary review. The JALT PanSIG Journal 2017, 54–58. Hougham, D. G. (2019). Active learning and learner development with Quizlet: An action research project. 広島女学院大学国際教養学部紀要, (6), 15-35. Ke, Fengfeng. (2020). Collaboration and competition in game-based learning. In Plass, J. L., Mayer, R. E., & Homer, B. D. (Eds.), Handbook of game-based learning (pp. 329-345). The MIT Press. Mayer, R. E. (2014a). Computer games for learning: An evidence-based approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Mayer, R. E. (2016). What should be the role of computer games in education? Policy Insights from Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 20–26. Mayer, R. E. (2020). Cognitive foundations of game-based learning. In Plass, J. L., Mayer, R. E., & Homer, B. D. (Eds.), Handbook of game-based learning (pp. 83-110). The MIT Press. Nation, I. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language (Cambridge applied linguistics series). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. Pareto, L., Haake, M., Lindstr.m, P., Sj.d.n, B., & Gulz, A. (2012). A teachable-agent- based game affording collaboration and competition: Evaluating math comprehension and motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(5), 723–751.

Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., Mayer, R. E., & Kinzer, C. K. (2020). Theoretical foundations of game-based and playful learning. In Plass, J. L., Mayer, R. E., & Homer, B. D. (Eds.), Handbook of game-based learning (pp. 3-24). The MIT Press.

Plass, J. L., O’Keefe, P. A., Homer, B. D., Case, J., Hayward, E. O., Stein, M., & Perlin, K. (2013). The impact of individual, competitive, and collaborative mathematics game play on learning, performance, and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1050–1066. Sanosi, A. B. (2018). The effect of Quizlet on vocabulary acquisition. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning (ISSN: 2321–2454), 6(04). Siu, K., Zook, A., & Riedl, M. O. (2014). Collaboration versus competition: Design and evaluation of mechanics for games with a purpose. FDG, 10, 14-22. Tsai, F. H., Tsai, C. C., & Lin, K. Y. (2015). The evaluation of different gaming modes and feedback types on game-based formative assessment in an online learning environment. Computers & Education, 81, 259–269. Tsai, Y.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2018). Digital game-based second-language vocabulary learning and conditions of research designs: A meta-analysis study. Computers & Education, 125, 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.020

93 Wolff, G. (2016). Quizlet Live: The classroom game now taking the world by storm. The Language Teacher, 40(6), 25-27.

94 Grounded and Embodied Mathematical Cognition: Are the body and language both necessary to produce valid proofs-with-insight? Doy Kim, Mitchell Nathan University of Wisconsin-Madison [email protected], [email protected]

Keywords: Geometric reasoning, Dynamic gesture, Transformational proof, Grounded and embodied cognition

Abstract:

This study aims to examine the role of gesture and speech in geometric reasoning from an embodied cognition perspective. Nathan and Walkington (2017) developed the Grounded and Embodied Mathematical Cognition (GEMC) model (Figure 1) based on the Gesture as Simulated Action framework (Hostetter & Alibali, 2019) and the action-cognition transduction hypothesis (Nathan, 2017). They showed how the activation of both the sensorimotor system and the language system is crucial for a learner to produce mathematically valid proofs-with-insight; which are proofs that simultaneously (a) are generalizable and hold for all cases under consideration; (2) utilize logical inference, progressing through an inferentially sound chain of reasoning, where conclusions are drawn from valid premises; and (3) exhibit operational thought, where the prover progresses systematically through a goal structure, anticipating the outcomes of the proposed transformations (Harel & Sowder, 1998). Specifically, the GEMC model and related studies argue that the presence of both dynamic gestures and transformational speech are associated predictors of the production of valid proofs-with-insight when proving a geometric conjecture (e.g., Nathan et al., in press; Pier et al., 2019). Dynamic gesture (DG) depicts transformational operations on mathematical objects (e.g., rotation, dilation), while transformational speech (TS) verbally articulates such transformations to prove a given conjecture. However, it needs further investigation as to the role of DG or TS in the production of valid mathematical proofs. Also, it is not clear how the absence of either DG or TS impacts the proving process. Therefore, the research question of this study is ‘when students produce valid proofs-with-insight, which proof scheme do they employ depending on their utilization of DG and TS?’ To explore this question, we draw upon Harel & Sowder’s taxonomy of proof schemes (Harel, 2007; Harel & Sowder, 1998) for our analysis. From our literature review, we expect a proof to be most persuasive both to the prover herself and others when DG and TS co-occur. Thus, we hypothesize that (a) the group who utilized both DG and TS would employ least restricted and most deductive proof schemes; (b) the group who do not utilize any of DG or TS would employ most restricted and least deductive proof schemes; (c) the group who used TS, but not DG would show less restricted and more deductive schemes than the group who used DG, but not TS. This study is a post-hoc qualitative analysis of the data set of 82 valid proofs-with-insight from college students who were recruited to prove four geometric conjectures. Participants were asked individually to prove the four conjectures projected on a screen. Their responses were video recorded and later transcribed. The transcripts were re-coded for this study for three categories: dynamic gesture, transformational speech, and proof schemes. During the presentation, we will show the result of our analysis and discuss further implications of this study for learning environment design and the embodied theories for geometric reasoning.

95 References

Harel, G. (2007). Students’ proof schemes revisited. In P. Boero (Ed.), Theorems in School: From History, Epistemology and Cognition to Classroom Practice (pp. 65–78). Sense Publishers. Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes: Results from exploratory studies. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education: Vol. III (pp. 234–283). American Mathematical Society. https://doi.org/10.1090/cbmath/007/07 Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. W. (2019). Gesture as simulated action: Revisiting the framework. Psychological Bulletin & Review, 26, 721–752. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423- 018-1548-0 Nathan, M. J. (2017). One function of gesture is to make new ideas: The action-cognition transdcution hypothesis. In R. B. Church, M. W. Alibali, & S. D. Kelly (Eds.), Why Gesture?: How the hand function in speaking, thinking, and communicating (pp. 175–196). John Benjamins Publishing Company. Nathan, M. J., Schenck, K. E., Vinsonhaler, R., Michaelis, J. E., Swart, M. I., & Walkington, C. (n.d.). Embodied geomoetric reasoning: Dynamic gestures during intuition, insight and proof. Journal of Educational Psychology. Nathan, M. J., & Walkington, C. (2017). Grounded and embodied mathematical cognition: Promoting mathematical insight and proof using action and language. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0040-5 Pier, E. L., Walkington, C., Clinton, V., Boncoddo, R., Williams-Pierce, C., Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2019). Embodied truths: How dynamic gestures and speech contribute to mathematical proof practices. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58(January), 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.01.012

Figure 1. Grounded and embodied mathematical cognition (GEMC) model (from Nathan & Walkington, 2017)

96 Unschooling, Hacking, Playing, SparkThinking- Disciplinary Ethos For a New Data Science Noel Kuriakos University of Maryland [email protected] Keywords: motivation, data science, STEM, learning and identity, educational outcomes Abstract:Students in middle school consistently rank STEM subjects lower than arts and humanities according to the most recent 2015 NAPE survey. These non-STEM students are disproportionally students of color (AfAm, Indigenous, Latinx or AIL), who may be excluded from participating in important areas of our society as adults. Our current instructional approaches do not engage and motivate these students for STEM disciplines. An alternative approach can incorporate a new conceptual, disciplinary platform framework called Dscifi (data science for inclusiveness). Dscifi weaves data science (DS) into non-STEM content disciplines in middle school. We highlight just one of the many essential components of Dscifi, the disciplinary ethos (DE), and how it can be used to develop an intersectional DS identity to attract and engage non-STEM marginalized & minoritized students. The conceptual DE was used in the overall learning-experience (curriculum & pedagogy) design of Dscifi, including a distinct DS identity (with a strong social justice orientation). There are several components to the DE, but we will highlight four of those components: unschooling, positive hacking, play, and sparkthink. Hacking and unschooling tap into middle schoolers’ anti- authority sentiments (including sociocultural & political oppression), disdain for prescriptive norms (dominant narratives), need for autonomy, creativity, and free expression. Unschooling leverages the natural way humans learn, by freeing learners from a prescriptive pedagogy and normative expectations, to an emergent pedagogy: personalized, self-directed, with a high degree of autonomy. Dscifi’s unschooling practices are conducive to creativity, self-efficacy, and self- determination. Hacking is adamantly anti-authoritarian, individualistic, pragmatic, subversive, and an efficient change mechanism with fast feedback loops. Hacking is a personal endeavor, based on each learners’ values and aspirations grounded in their cultural and community context. It develops persistence and perseverance, which can lead to flow states of optimal learning and performance. Also, hacking is free from settled normative instructional beliefs, such as deficit mindsets and dominant cultural narratives. Hacking can therefore motivate minoritized student populations to become interested and engaged in STEM with Dscifi. Play-based learning, such as constructionist video game-based learning, can help learners develop critical thinking skills through productive failure. Play allows students to learn and fail gracefully without the traditional, negative motivational consequences in STEM. Play instills a sense of connectedness, collectiveness, and camaraderie, within the sociocultural learning context. Play creates sparkthink: a state of spontaneous, reflexive thinking that ignites action to attain an immediate (hyper quick) objectives. Sparkthink moments allow learners to generate hypotheses during play, act, and evaluate their effectiveness in a compressed timeframe. Sparkthink strengthens students sense of competence, confidence, and self-efficacy, leading to

97 the development of a DS identity (countering effects of deficit, minoritized, structural biases) within the dscifi framework. In a world with problems that are persistent, prevalent, and pervasive, we need a diverse population of data scientists, who can frame problems in new ways, generate options, and implement effective and efficient solutions. Dscifi’s holistic, learning-experience design incorporates unschooling, hacking, play, and sparkthink practices to create personalized learning experiences, that leads to sustained engagement, motivation, and identity development for non- STEM, AIL students. References 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 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience ([Nachdr.]). Harper Perennial Modern Classics. New York: Harper [and] Row. Dalke, A. F., Cassidy, K., Grobstein, P., & Blank, D. (2007). Emergent pedagogy: learning to enjoy the uncontrollable—and make it productive. Journal of Educational Change, 8(2), 111– 130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-007-9021-2 Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256. Junior Achievement (2018). RESEARCH REVEALS BOYS’ INTEREST IN STEM CAREERS DECLINING; GIRLS’ INTEREST UNCHANGED - Press Releases | Junior Achievement USA. Retrieved from https://www.juniorachievement.org/web/ja-usa/press-releases/- /asset_publisher/UmcVLQOLGie9/content/research-reveals-boys%E2%80%99-interest-in- stem-careers-declining-girls%E2%80%99-interest-unchanged Kischner, D. H. (2008). Producing unschoolers: Learning through living in a US education movement (Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)). University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2136/ McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. New York: Penguin Press. National Assessment Governing Board (2020, May 29). NAEP - 2016 Arts Assessment - Visual Arts - Overall Results. Retrieved from https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/arts_2016/#/visual- arts/overall-results O’Hare, A., & Coyne, J. (2019). Unschooling and the Self: A dialogical analysis of unschooling blogs in Australia and New Zealand. Culture & Psychology, 1354067X1987791. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X19877914 Weintrop, D., Holbert, N., Horn, M. S., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Computational thinking in constructionist video games. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 6(1), 1- 17.

98 Taiwanese-American Children’s Chinese Language Learning and Ethnic Identity Huiyu Lin University of Washington [email protected]

Keywords: storytelling, immigrant history, ethnic language, identity, language ideologies

Abstract: This study aims to understand how the Taiwanese-American immigrant families view learning Mandarin Chinese as a way to shape and sustain their cultural identity.

In the US, many immigrant families place importance on learning their heritage language. Researchers found that immigrant parents believed heritage language exemplifies ethnic identity (e.g., Kim & Chao, 2009). Despite the interplay between heritage language, lived experience, and cultural identity, however, there is a paucity of research related to the associations between parents’ beliefs and the particular practices of their children in learning. Not to mention how these beliefs and value are shaped across time through lived experience and immigrant histories. Exploration of the immigrant families’ experiences also helps identify the challenges and struggles they are facing in the US education system.

The specific research questions guiding this qualitative case study are: How do Taiwanese-American families associate Mandarin Chinese learning with cultural identity? How do Taiwanese-American parents’ family history and early experiences shape their beliefs about the importance of children’s Mandarin Chinese learning?

Conceptually, I draw from tenets of culturally sustaining pedagogy (Paris, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2017) to inform the importance of sustaining ethnic language and identity. In addition, I discuss the concept of linguistic capital, illustrating how different languages are valued and positioned in different contexts and shape certain attitudes and ideologies of the speakers (Bourdieu, 1991; Lippi-Green, 2012; Piller, 2015). In particular, I use a narrative approach to explore how immigrant families make sense of their past experiences and construct their identities and beliefs in relation to Mandarin learning (Syed & Azmitia, 2010).

I conducted a year-long study in an after-school Chinese learning program. Data sources include semi-structured interviews with six Taiwanese-American parents to understand parents’ beliefs and values. I also participated in their children’s Chinese classroom as a participant-observer to gain in-depth understanding of children’s learning. Data analysis started with initial coding, then further identified with patterns to develop claims relevant to the current literature.

99 Findings indicate that learning Mandarin Chinese is believed by these parents as one critical way for their children to make connections with their heritage and shape a strong Taiwanese-American identity. The analysis also demonstrated how parents’ past experiences and immigrant histories have shaped those beliefs. Through storytelling, these immigrant families’ experiences and voices were exemplified and validated, vividly depicting the value of pluralism and the strengths of sustaining one’s heritage culture, language, and identity (Paris, 2012).

This study indicates how ethnic language is seen as cultural capital linked to cultural knowledge and identity (Bourdieu, 1977). Understanding of parents’ past and children’s schooling experiences also highlights how language ideologies shape access to education and influence students’ certain attitudes in ethnic language learning. This exploration has further shed light on how language changes its power and position in different contexts and shapes certain attitudes and identities of its speakers (Bourdieu, 1991; Sandel, 2003; Dupré, 2017). References Bourdieu, P. (1977). The economics of linguistic exchanges. Information (International Social Science Council), 16(6), 645-668. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Harvard University Press. Dupré, J. F. (2017). Culture politics and linguistic recognition in Taiwan: ethnicity, national identity, and the party system. Routledge. Kim, S. Y., & Chao, R. K. (2009). Heritage language fluency, ethnic identity, and school effort of immigrant Chinese and Mexico adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15(1), 27. Lewis, P. J. (2011). Storytelling as Research/Research as Storytelling. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(6), 505–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411409883 Lippi-Green, R. (2012). English with an accent: Language, ideology and discrimination in the United States. Routledge. Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational researcher, 41(3), 93-97. Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press. Piller, I. (2015). Language ideologies. The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction, 1-10. Sandel, T. L. (2003). Linguistic capital in Taiwan: The KMT's Mandarin language policy and its perceived impact on language practices of bilingual Mandarin and Tai-gi speakers. Language in Society, 32(4), 523-551. Syed, M., & Azmitia, M. (2010). Narrative and ethnic identity exploration: A longitudinal account of emerging adults’ ethnicity-related experiences. Developmental psychology, 46(1), 208.

100 Integrating Personal Experiences with Science Content to Support Cognitive Engagement in Middle School

Tayler Loiselle & Keisha Varma University of Minnesota- Twin Cities [email protected]; [email protected]

Keywords: science, cognitive engagement, middle school, ICAP

The most recent national assessment revealed that only 33% of eighth-grade students in the United States, on average, scored at or above proficiency in science (NAEP, 2015). Cognitive engagement, generally defined as psychological investment in a task, is known to support students’ learning outcomes (Fredricks et al., 2014). Students’ learning is also supported when they can meaningfully connect with content and find it relevant to their lives (American Psychological Association, 2015). Building connections through the use of experiences that occur outside of the science classroom or are interesting to students has shown a positive correlation to student learning in middle school science (Rivet & Krajcik, 2008). Therefore, this study aims to understand how connecting science content to personal experiences support students’ cognitive engagement in science. The current study utilized a social learning environment (SLE) Flipgrid (https://flipgrid.com), where teachers post video-based prompts to elicit students’ ideas or knowledge about different topics. Students respond to these prompts by recording their own video. Throughout one academic year, seven teachers from two diverse middle schools created SLE prompts related to content they were teaching in class. 177 students participated in this study. This study is part of a larger project that focuses on culturally relevant science pedagogy using Flipgrid. Therefore, the main goal of this study was how prompts that integrated science content and personal experiences elicited students’ cognitive engagement levels in their SLE responses. An adapted version of the ICAP framework was used to classify students’ cognitive engagement into four levels using overt behaviors to describe the ways students are engaging with material: Interactive (I), Constructive (C), Active (A), and Passive (P). (Chi & Wylie, 2014). This is an exploratory, mixed-method design, with the main focus on the qualitative findings. Teachers’ prompts were aggregated and coded into different themes based on the ways teachers connected to science content they were teaching in class (4 coders, 80% agreement were). Themes that emerged across the teachers’ SLE prompts were science (elicited directly science content knowledge only; example: What is the definition of force and motion?), personal (elicited personal experiences, indirectly connected to science content; example: What is the oldest thing you own?), and integrated (elicited personal experiences directly connect to science content; example: “Give an example of pollution in your environment). A directed content analysis (Hsieh and Shannon (2005), which used an adapted ICAP coding scheme to guide coding (Wang et al., 2015), was employed to extract frequencies of cognitive engagement behaviors students displayed when they responded to the teacher prompt (2 raters, 94% agreement). To further investigate the relationship between teachers’ prompt type and students’ engagement level, a fisher’s exact test was conducted (p= 0.0005).

101 Results from the content analysis found that overall when teachers assigned integrated prompts, students more often displayed constructive engagement behaviors compared to when assigned science or personal prompts (Table 1). The implications of the findings are that the way science activities are contextualized to students’ personal experiences can support student engagement, which is of importance to educators and researchers.

References American Psychological Association, Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education. (2015). Top 20 principles from psychology for preK–12 teaching and learning. Retrieved from http:// www.apa.org/ed/schools/cpse/top-twenty-principles.pdf Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. Doi: 10.1080/00461520.2014.965823. Flipgrid. Ignite Classroom Discussion. (n.d.). Retrieved July 09, 2018, from https://flipgrid.com/ Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307400105 Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. Rivet, A.E. and Krajcik, J.S. (2008), Contextualizing instruction: Leveraging students' prior knowledge and experiences to foster understanding of middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45: 79-100. doi:10.1002/tea.20203 U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP), 2015 Science Assessment. Wang, X., Yang, D., Wen, M., Koedinger, K., & Rosé, C. P. (2015). Investigating how students' cognitive behavior in MOOC discussion forums affect learning gains. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, 226–233. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560568.pdf

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for the Proportion of Student Responses within Prompt Type. Science Personal Integrated

ICAP Category:

Interactive 0.94 % 4.24 % 1.50 %

Constructive 57.08 % 43.22 % 61.65 %

Active 41.98 % 44.07 % 24.81 %

Passive -- 8.47 % 12.03 %

Total Science: 212 Total Personal:118 Total Integrated:133

Note. Each cell includes a percentage, which indicates the proportion of student responses within each prompt type and ICAP category. For example, it can be read as 42.0% of student responses to Science-based prompts (total= 212) fell into the Active ICAP engagement category.

102

Changes in Thinking and Planning about Curricular Coherence Influenced by a PD: A Case Study Nessrine Machaka, Christina Krist University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign [email protected]; [email protected]

Keywords: Coherence, NGSS, Science teaching, Meaningful practice, Knowledge building

Abstract: This lightning talk proposal is about how teachers think about curricular coherence while planning for science instruction and how their thinking and planning shifts as the result of a professional development (PD) expertise. This talk is intended for feedback about related literature that would motivate this topic, advice regarding methods of analysis, and general feedback about this study and similar ones. The authors are a Ph.D. student and her advisor, an Assistant Professor, in the Curriculum & Instruction Department of the College of Education at UIUC. This research in progress is a study for the student’s early research project in her Ph.D. program. The key questions that will be addressed in this study are: “How are teachers thinking about coherence while planning for instruction?” and “How is their thinking and planning changing as a result of a PD focused on coherence from students’ perspectives?”. Reiser, Novak, and McGill (2017) highlight a growing national consensus based on the Framework for K-12 Science Education and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) that encourages a greater coherence in K-12 science education. The researchers define a coherent unit as one that has “a sense of unity” and that engages students in a “meaningful practice that builds knowledge” (Reiser, Novak & McGill, 2017, p. 1). The researchers state that the way most of the science units flow might make sense for curriculum designers or teachers, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is similarly logical from the students’ perspectives. Therefore, we’re interested in exploring what the teachers think about their own instruction regarding coherence, how they think concepts make sense from their students’ perspectives, and whether these ideas are affected by the 4-days PD they have attended. Specifically, we’re interested in the teachers’ ‘lesson images’ which are defined as “the teacher’s envisioning of the possibilities and contingencies related to a lesson” (Morine-Dershimer, 1978, p. 18). The theoretical background we use to frame this study is the cognitive theory of teacher learning which will help us guide our assumptions about what counts as learning and understand the teachers’ lesson-structure knowledge, which is an important body of knowledge that teaching

103

relies on (Russ, Sherin & Sherin, 2016). The shift in classrooms that NGSS is motivating requires reframing how teachers shift the epistemic and power structures in their classroom (Reiser, Novak & McGill, 2017). Thus, inspired by Russ, Sherin, and Sherin (2016) for what counts as a change in the cognitive model, we aim to look for changes in mental representations and beliefs about epistemology. The data sources that will be used to make inferences about teacher knowledge of coherence in science teaching are pre-and post-PD video-recorded interviews of two middle- school science teachers in a midwestern state. A PD focused on coherence from the students’ perspectives was held online during a span of four days and a pre- and post-PD interview was conducted with each teacher. Finally, teacher talk from the interviews will be analyzed to make claims about teachers’ perspectives of coherence in their teaching through inductive thematic data analysis followed by a discussion of the findings. Inductive thematic data analysis is still vague since the coding depends on the data collected, and the analysis is still in progress.

References Morine-Dershimer, G. (1978). Planning in Classroom Reality: An In-depth Look. Educational research quarterly, 3(4), 83-99. Reiser, B. J., Novak, M., & McGill, T. A. (2017). Coherence from the students’ perspective: Why the vision of the framework for K-12 science requires more than simply “combining” three dimensions of science learning. In Board on Science Education Workshop “Instructional Materials for the Next Generation Science Standards. Russ, R. S., Sherin, B. L., & Sherin, M. G. (2016). What constitutes teacher learning. Handbook of research on teaching, 391-438.

104

The affordance of Identity Supportive Design of Digital Environments on Adolescent African-American Girls’ STEM Identity Shelana K. Martin University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign [email protected]

Key words: STEM Identity, STEM Interest, Informal and formal Learning, Racial stereotypes

Abstract

This research aims to investigate hidden racial stereotypes in STEM identity internalized by African American women. One of the gaps presented in the literature on Identity development within STEM is the intersectionality of race and gender. In past research, most counter- stereotypic interventions in STEM have targeted gender stereotypes1. Little research has been done on Racial Stereotypes concerning STEM Identity2. My research proposes to reshape education in that a conversation needs to be facilitated with African American girls at a young age regarding identifying in STEM or having an interest in STEM majors, fields, and future careers. James Paul Gee in his work showed that in order to have positive STEM Identities, students must feel that they can see themselves in those roles-- as a Mathematician, Astrophysicists, or Marine Biologist, to name a few 3. There is a need for more representation within STEM. Due to this lack of representation of black women in STEM, there has become a stigma of women within these fields not being able to persevere due to cognitive dissonance of one’s own value and failing identity within STEM specific fields4. From primary to higher education Black girls must continually be encouraged to dream, create, and innovate so that representation is increased and sustained5. It is not enough to simply imply insert technologies as an identity-building intervention but to design the technologies to fit the underlying goal of positively affecting ideologies that shape the STEM identity development process. These racial justice issues continue to plague most public and private educational systems, but by changing the mindset of students and parents alike we could catalyze changes to the persistent issues regarding the representation of Black women in STEM. Using a research design that includes surveying Black female undergraduates as well as current black female professionals hidden stereotypes that students/Professionals harbor internally and address those accordingly to positively affect the mindset of Black girls’ STEM identity. Expected findings are that after the completion of data collection will show innate patters amongst black women in regard to their attitude towards their identity in STEM. Implications for this work will be increased understanding of some causes of disparities in African American women in STEM with a promising approach for mitigating these forms of thinking at a young age, and potentially national scope of future impact. The goal is to also show that through my finding that this is not an isolated event but a common experience amongst the various background of black women. With shining a light on this pressing issue, we can replicate the basis of this project for other underrepresented groups in STEM. By doing this work we can inform creators of STEM curriculum and programs better on how to be encouraging with this type of identity development for students of color. To better engage students, we must value how they view themselves and

105 create environments that foster change within the educational system and communities alike. The work does not stop here but is continual until the equity in education becomes the norm.

References

Gee, J. P. (2000). Chapter 3: Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of research in education, 25(1), 99-125

Dou, R., Hazari, Z., Dabney, K., Sonnert, G., & Sadler, P. (2019). Early informal STEM experiences and STEM identity: The importance of talking science. Science Education, 103(3), 623-637.

Hernandez, P. R., Schultz, P., Estrada, M., Woodcock, A., & Chance, R. C. (2013). " Sustaining optimal motivation: A longitudinal analysis of interventions to broaden participation of underrepresented students in STEM": Correction to Hernandez et al. (2013)

Moore, I. N. (2018). Investigating the motivation orientations and racial identity of black women in STEM (Order No. AAI10689759). Available from PsycINFO. (2062878500; 2018-26093-240). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/2062878500?accountid=14553

Morton, T. R., & Parsons, E. C. (2018). # BlackGirlMagic: The identity conceptualization of Black women in undergraduate STEM education. Science Education, 102(6), 1363-1393.

106 Engaging Social Studies Pre-Service Teachers in Technology Tool Design

Bahare Naimipour1, Mark Guzdial1, Tamara Shreiner2 University of Michigan-Ann Arbor1, Grand Valley State University2 [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Keywords: educational technology, participatory design, conjecture map, teacher adoption, K- 12, data literacy

Abstract: We are working with social studies pre-service teachers to inform the design and evolution of new data literacy technology tools for social studies classrooms. Data literacy is the ability to read, analyze, interpret, evaluate, and argue with data and data visualizations. State standards require students to develop data literacy because it is an important competency in social studies education. Unfortunately, few social studies teachers have had training in teaching data literacy (Shreiner, 2019; Shreiner & Dykes, 2020). Pedagogical support through discipline- specific data visualization technology can help teachers incorporate inquiry-based data literacy instruction into their social studies curriculum. We have had three Participatory Design (PD) sessions about data visualization tools with social studies teachers. We provided activity sheets (Wilkerson, 2017) to scaffold social studies teachers’ use of data manipulation and visualization tools as design probes. In each PD session, pre-service teachers evaluated up to three existing programming and non-programming-based data visualization tools (Naimipour et al., 2020). They helped us to identify design features that best met their instructional and usability needs. After each PD session, we used ‘conjecture mapping’ to organize the data as well as compare PD sessions in a more systematic fashion (Sandoval, 2014). This resulted in rich design feedback which has informed the iterative development of our tools. We used the feedback and analysis we received in the first and second session on existing tools as input to design and then test our first non-programming prototype in the third session (Figure 1). While there were minor differences in how the first two sessions were designed, the teachers’ evaluations were different from one another. Pre-service teachers with more experience teaching or using technology appeared to value the student perspective on technology more, while those less experienced valued their perceived ease of use more. The third PD session elicited more details behind why the pre-service teachers preferred one tool over another. The greater detail might have been caused by modifications that we made to the third session, based on our conjecture map analysis, to improve the participatory nature of the session. The pre- service teachers did not know one of the tools was our prototype, yet more than half preferred our prototype over the other two tools. Further sessions and analysis are necessary to make more generalizable conclusions about the characteristics social studies teachers would like to see in a pedagogical tool they would consider adopting in their classroom. Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (Lee et al., 2003) we hypothesize that our data literacy technology will be adopted because it is co-designed to be inclusive and representative of the social studies teacher community. Our work informs other researchers who are considering using PD for developing K-12 technological interventions. Our results suggest that our prototype can function as a scaffold between existing non-programming and programming data visualization tools with features that social studies teachers see valuable.

107

Figure 1: DV4L prototype used in third PD session

References

Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. (2003). The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12(1), 50.

Naimipour, B., Guzdial, M., & Shreiner, T. (2020). (in press). Engaging Pre-Service Teachers in Front-End Design: Developing Technology for a Social Studies Classroom. In 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE).

Sandoval, W. (2014). Conjecture mapping: An approach to systematic educational design research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 18–36.

use of data visualizations in historical reasoning: A think-aloud ׳Shreiner, T. L. (2019). Students investigation with elementary, middle, and high school students. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 43(4), 389–404.

Shreiner, T. L., & Dykes, B. (2020, April). Teaching Data Literacy for Social Studies: Teacher Practices, Beliefs, and Knowledge. [Roundtable Session]. American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA.

Wilkerson, M. H. (2017). Teachers, students, and after-school professionals as designers of digital tools for learning. In Participatory Design for Learning (pp. 125–138). Routledge.

108 Reimagining Elementary Teacher Interviews as Modes of Critical Dialogic Inquiry Ada Okun Boston University [email protected]

Keywords: methodology, interview, dialogic, reciprocity, critical inquiry

This talk presents a critical reflection on interview methodology, focused on the purposes and processes for engaging in conversations with teachers about issues of power in their classrooms. I examine the “method assemblage” (Law, 2004) of a study that conducted interviews with teachers, part of a larger project that seeks to understand how elementary teachers learn to lead classroom discussions that support deep disciplinary learning and disrupt normative expectations of disciplines, children, and teaching. Through a critical account of interview method, I work to imagine a differently structured form of inquiry between researchers and teachers. This analysis draws on frameworks which assume that research methodology is value-laden and politically consequential—not simply a set of tools for collecting data, but a form of relationship with individuals and communities (Smith, 2012) that can either reproduce and sustain or interrupt and transform historically structured power hierarchies (Bang & Vossoughi, 2016; Mendoza, Kirshner, & Gutiérrez, 2018). Methodological analysis must account for the assemblage (Law, 2004) of questions, frameworks, contexts, techniques, goals, and implications involved in research, and the power relations that underlie these (Smith, 2012). Counter to methodologies rooted in the onto-epistemic assumptions of Western colonialism—e.g., objectivity, rationality, hierarchy, and singularity (Bang, 2017; Law, 2004; Mignolo, 2011; Smith, 2012)—I turn to perspectives which center community membership, answerability, dialogicality, and multiplicity (Dance, Gutiérrez & Hermes, 2010; Hermes, 1999; Philip, Bang & Jackson, 2018; Shotter, 2006). These frameworks invite the question: how might a commitment to reciprocal, dialogic research relationships inform the redesign of conversations between researchers and teachers about issues of power in classroom disciplinary learning? I examine an iteration of interview cycles conducted with five teachers across two urban districts in the northeastern United States. Cycles with each teacher included pre- and post-interviews and video-based reflections following observations of classroom discussions in English Language Arts, mathematics, and/or science. I reflect on methodological questions that emerged through the design, implementation, and analysis phases of this work. Data for the present methodological reflection include interview protocols and transcripts, field notes, meeting notes from design and analysis teams, analytic and methodological memos, and personal written reflections on positionality and process. Analytic techniques are still taking shape, but emerging questions relate to:

109

➢ Processes for grounding and continuing relationships with teachers beyond periods of data collection; ➢ Racial identity and norms of whiteness on an all-white research team working primarily with white teachers (Frankenberg, 1993); ➢ The researcher’s role in co-constructing meaning during interviews, particularly around socially silenced issues of race and power (Frankenberg, 1993; van den Berg et al., 2003); and ➢ Approaches to analyzing interview transcript data that move away from a representational-referential orientation toward one of dialogical responsivity (Shotter, 2006) and correspondence (Ingold, 2013).

I seek to explore these questions as methodological openings, to inform the design of future “withness” conversations (Shotter, 2006; Warren et al., 2020) in which researchers and teachers engage in joint inquiry around issues of power in classroom practice—co-constructing the inquiry design, pursuing shared questions, and analyzing data collaboratively (Dance et al., 2010; Smith, 2012; Stinson & Bullock, 2015). Reconceptualizing teacher interviews as forms of dialogic problem-posing (Freire, 1970/2009) has the potential to delink (Mignolo, 2011) from hegemonic frames and practices that have historically shaped ethnographic research (Dance et al., 2010; Smith, 2012) and to open toward relationally responsive (Shotter, 2006), ethically responsible (Dillard, 2000) methods that prefigure, among adults, the liberatory learning environments that educators and researchers might create with children (Philip et al., 2018).

References Bang, M. (2017). Towards an ethic of decolonial trans-ontologies in sociocultural theories of learning and development. In I. Esmonde & A. N. Booker (Eds.), Power and Privilege in the Learning Sciences: Critical and Sociocultural Theories of Learning (pp. 115–138). New York: Routledge. Bang, M., & Vossoughi, S. (2016). Participatory design research and educational justice: Studying learning and relations within social change making. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 173–193. Dance, L. J., Gutiérrez, R., & Hermes, M. (2010). More like jazz than classical: Reciprocal interactions among educational researchers and respondents. Harvard Educational Review, 80(3), 327-352. Dillard, C. B. (2000) The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen: Examining an endarkened feminist epistemology in educational research and leadership. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(6), 661-681. Frankenberg, R. (1993). White women, race matters: The social construction of whiteness. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota Press.

110

Freire, P. (2009). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum. (Original work published 1970) Hermes, M. (1999). Research methods as a situated response: Toward a First Nations’ methodology. In L. Parker, D. Deyhle, & S. Villenas (Eds.), Race is...Race isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies in education (pp. 83-100). Boulder: Westview Press. Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. New York: Routledge. Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. New York: Routledge. Mendoza, E., Kirshner, B., & Gutiérrez, K. D. (Eds.). (2018). Power, equity and (re)design: Bridging learning and critical theories in learning ecologies for youth. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing. Mignolo, W. D. (2011). Epistemic disobedience and the decolonial option: A manifesto. Transmodernity, 1(2), 3–23. Philip, T. M., Bang, M., & Jackson, K. (2018). Articulating the “how,” the “for what,” the “for whom,” and the “with whom” in concert: A call to broaden the benchmarks of our scholarship. Cognition and Instruction, 36(2), 83-88. Shotter, J. (2006). Participative thinking. In A. Escobar & D. Rocheleau (Eds.), How nature speaks: The dynamics of the human ecological condition (pp. 106–126). Durham: Duke University Press. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books. Stinson, D. W., & Bullock, E. C. (2015). Critical postmodern methodology in mathematics education research: Promoting another way of thinking and looking. Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal [25th Anniversary Issue], 29, 1–18. Van den Berg, H., Wetherell, M., & Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (2003). Introduction. In H. Van den Berg, M. Wetherell, & H. Houtkoop-Steenstra (Eds.), Analyzing race talk: Multidisciplinary perspectives on the research interview (pp. 1-9). Cambridge University Press. Warren, B., Vossoughi, S., Rosebery, A. S., Bang, M., and Taylor, E. (2020). Multiple ways of knowing: Re-imagining disciplinary learning. In N. Suad Nasir, C. D. Lee, R. Pea, and M. McKinney de Royston (Eds.), Handbook of the Cultural Foundations of Learning. New York: Routledge.

111

Finding the “Right Word”: Constructing Understandings of Inclusion Through Interactions Christopher P. Ostrowdun University of Calgary [email protected]

Keywords: inclusion, figured worlds, interaction analysis, preservice teachers, representations

Abstract:

This paper applies interaction analysis to teacher education to examine how preservice teachers’ (PSTs) construct an understanding of inclusion. Existing research has focused on the outcomes rather than the processes of teacher learning (Walkoe & Luna, 2019) and the Learning Sciences has traditionally given limited attention to issues around equity, diversity, and inclusion (Esmonde & Booker, 2017). With 14-25% of K-12 students considered disabled or requiring significant learning supports, inclusion impacts every teacher and student (National Centre for Education Statistics, 2019). How teachers support students’ needs is shaped by their experiences and teacher training (Sharma et al., 2008). Unfortunately, little research has examined the fine-grained processes of how PSTs construct understandings of inclusion. I explored the following research question: How do PSTs construct their understanding of inclusion and disability using drawings? Methods The study context was of a Canadian Bachelor of Education course about diversity and inclusion where students created collaborative drawings of inclusion. Participants were video recorded while creating and discussing their drawings in small groups. Using interaction analysis (Jordan & Henderson, 1995), I examined the moment-to-moment processes of how PSTs used conceptual resources to represent their understanding of inclusion. I used the lens of figured worlds, to identify how the participants negotiated “which particular characters and actors are recognized, significance is assigned to certain acts, and particular outcomes are valued over others” (Holland et al., 1998, p. 52) within an inclusive environment. Findings One participant group (of 19) drew a map with paths to various treasure chests, where each treasure represented a competency accessible by multiple pathways. The group was asked to draw inclusion and go beyond mere depictions of accommodations and diverse students in a shared space. Inadvertently, the group interpreted this prompt as a restriction from drawing a classroom and they pivoted to an abstract approach without expectations of what should be there, compared to an additive approach of drawing a typical classroom (e.g., desks, chairs) dressed with inclusive features (e.g., assistive technology). The group members cycled through offering an idea, debating its merit, and deciding whether to include it in the drawing. For instance, one person suggested treasure chests could represent “knowledge” but when the group did not affirm the idea, the group member rejected the term as not being “the right word” and instead suggested “competencies” which the group affirmed. The group member cited competencies as a term from the new curriculum which they elicited as an authoritative source to support their bid, even though they never explained its connection to inclusion.

112

Significance While subtle, such pivots meant the difference between pursuing different epistemological perspectives (e.g., knowledge transmission versus competencies and higher order thinking) in defining inclusion. From the drawing, there would be no way of knowing that competences was, in part, the result of a failed bid by a group member for another term. The findings show how PSTs construct an understanding of inclusion and underscore how fluid and laden with concerns for social positioning such processes can be.

References

Esmonde, I., & Booker, A. N. (Eds.). (2017). Power and privilege in the learning sciences: Critical and sociocultural theories of learning. Routledge. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Harvard University Press. National Centre for Education Statistics. (2019). Children and Youth with Disabilities. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgg.asp Sharma, U., Forlin, C., & Loreman, T. (2008). Impact of training on pre‐service teachers’ attitudes and concerns about inclusive education and sentiments about persons with disabilities. Disability & Society, 23(7), 773–785. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590802469271 Walkoe, J. D. K., & Luna, M. J. (2019). What we are missing in studies of teacher learning: A call for microgenetic, interactional analyses to examine teacher learning processes. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 29(2), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2019.1681998

113 Informal Learning Spaces: Extending the Experience in the Time of COVID-19 Emily Holm Tobin University of Washington [email protected]

Keywords: early childhood, informal learning

Abstract: Some of the most important learning opportunities for young children occur with a caregiver in informal learning environments (ILEs), which may refer to a variety of public spaces, such as museums, zoos, aquariums, botanical gardens, and natural areas (Paris 2002). The aim of this work is to explore how informal learning environments (ILEs) can enhance opportunities for caregivers and young children (ages birth to 5) to connect their visit experience to their everyday lives. This survey is part of a larger project by the author which includes field observations and caregiver interviews (delayed, and likely to be modified by COVID-19). The survey is intended to provide an initial context from ILEs for the experiences of caregiver-child dyads.

This stage of the work involved a survey of informal learning professionals (n=58) across the country and has a particular focus on what impacts, if any, COVID-19 has had on their institution’s digital offerings, engagement, and how they view the impact their institution has outside of the physical space. The professionals surveyed represent a variety of ILEs, including museums, zoos, and natural areas. Questions centered around “early childhood” (as defined by each ILE) as an audience, but questions about offerings for other populations were also included. This survey was intended to provide context for observations of boundary crossing experiences of young child (ages 0-5)-caregiver dyads across visits to two different ILEs, and in their daily life.

Preliminary results and implications Survey results indicate that since the effects of COVID19, more ILEs are thinking about how to bring the experience that they offer outside of the physical space. This is something that many informal learning professionals want to continue to focus on beyond the effects of COVID19, if they have the resources available to them. This study aims to contribute to a larger conversation on the impact of ILEs in the lives of young children and their families.

References Paris, S. (2002). Perspectives on object-centered learning in museums. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

114 Exploring “with whom” in the analysis process: broadening our perspectives to include interdisciplinary co-designers Lauren Vogelstein Vanderbilt University [email protected]

Keywords: Interaction analysis, embodiment, qualitative methods, participatory

Abstract: In the spirit of bringing half-baked ideas to LSGSC I want to initiate a conversation about what it means to co-design learning environments and then analyze them with co-designers who do not identify as learning scientists themselves.

While the Learning Sciences is grounded in designing innovative and ecologically relevant learning environments (Brown, 1992), researchers have developed methods that challenge notions of power and voice in the design process (Bang at al., 2016; Bang, Vossoughi, 2016; Gutiérrez & Jurow, 2016). Philip and colleagues continued to push this work, asking scholars to specify for what, for whom and with whom (Philip, Bang, & Jackson, 2018) in scholarship, making the political and ethical dimensions of our work explicit. I am interested in expanding “with whom” we work from the design through the publication process and beyond. Since the design process is an iterative one in which important learning happens through analysis, with whom we analyze our designs must influence what stories we tell about them and thus what we learn and share in this field about how learning happens.

Last summer, for my dissertation I co-designed activities for a one-week coding, math, and art camp for middle school students with two professional dancers, Sarah & Darius. Prior to this I was involved in a two-year ethnographic project studying the practices of these professional dancers in their dance company (Vogelstein, 2020). Our co-design process was grounded in an important shared relational history (Jackson et al., 2020) that allowed us to collaboratively design new hybrid learning spaces where the expressive potential of people moving together was seen as an important site for computational and mathematics learning.

A year after the camp, I started an analysis for my dissertation with questions about how Sarah & Darius’s design contributions were related to the students’ engagement and learning during the camp. If felt strange doing this alone so I quickly invited Sarah & Darius to join1. Although we have just started our joint analysis, content logging videos and writing memos that we share and discuss, I am already starting to see the influence of their perspectives and voices in what and how we attune to the embodiment of the activities we are trying to understand. The heterogeneity in our group brings methods of dance noticings in conversation with methods of Interaction Analysis and is proving to be extremely generative. Although Jordan and Henderson (1995) made the case for analyzing recordings with many analysts so that multiple perspectives would be included in analyses, they wrote about bringing together researchers with different perspectives. In this project, bringing new comers to the method, but experts in attending to embodied interactions, is proving to open new possibilities for noticings in our work such as

1 It is important to note that Sarah & Darius are being paid for their participation as artist's work is often not paid and taken for granted in many settings.

115 positioning students’ movements that might traditionally be framed as disruptive as important choreographic and compositional choices.

References

Bang, M., Faber, L., Gurneau, J., Marin, A., & Soto, C. (2016). Community-based design research: Learning across generations and strategic transformations of institutional relations toward axiological innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(1), 28-41.

Bang, M., & Vossoughi, S. (2016). Participatory design research and educational justice: Studying learning and relations within social change making.

Brown, Ann L. "Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings." The journal of the learning sciences 2.2 (1992): 141-178.

Gutiérrez, K. D., & Jurow, A. S. (2016). Social design experiments: Toward equity by design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 565-598.

Jackson, A., Vogelstein, L., Clark, H., Lindberg, L., Thompson, N., & Uttamchandani, S. (2020). Learning Together: Reflections at the Intersection of Friendship, Research, and Learning Processes. Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, 2020, 657-660.

Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The journal of the learning sciences, 4(1), 39-103.

Philip, T. M., Bang, M., & Jackson, K. (2018). Articulating the “how,” the “for what,” the “for whom,” and the “with whom” in concert: A call to broaden the benchmarks of our scholarship.

Vogelstein, L. (2020) Physical Research: Professional Dancers Exploring Collective Possibilities in a Solidifying Substrate. Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, 2020, 737-739.

116 What’s Interesting and What’s Not? Using Learning Contexts to Inform Educational Videogame Design

Sherry Yi University of Illinois, [email protected]

Keywords: educational game design, informal learning, interest triggering, interest development, design features

Abstract: This presentation discusses how learning contexts inform educational videogame design. There is a current need for research that investigates interest development within digital learning contexts.

Interest, separate from engagement and motivation, serves as an important motivational variable for learners (Hidi, 1990; Krapp, 1999). To briefly illustrate the shared relationship between these three variables, imagine an individual who is working a job for the sake of earning a high salary. Interest impacts and reacts to both engagement and motivation in this instance. First, the individual can be actively involved—otherwise known as a sign of engagement (Furrer and Skinner, 2003)— in the job but possess no interest in the job tasks or clients. Second, the individual is extrinsically motivated by financial gains, which in turn affect interest’s reciprocal relation to goals, self-regulation, self-efficacy, and achievement value (Renninger & Hidi, 2011). Research has shown that the presence of interest in learners can lead to improvement in attitudes and a willingness to learn (Potvin & Hasni, 2014) and achievement and performance in school (Harackiewicz & Hulleman, 2010). Interest triggering in educational psychology literature refers to the activation of interest that leads to engagement (Renninger & Bachrach, 2015).

One unexplored method of interest triggering is through the use of videogames, which have been found to maintain or increase intrinsic motivation for learning (Gee, 2004; Habgood & Ainsworth, 2011). This study attempts to bridge the gap between interest development and videogame design through a review of the literature on interest triggering features across learning contexts (e.g., classrooms, afterschool programs, museums) and across age groups (i.e., K-12, university), and mapping key interest triggering features to educational game design in a theoretical model. Seventeen articles spanning across a multitude of learning settings were identified from Scopus, PsychINFO, Google Scholar, and EBSCO. Results that matched the criteria of being relevant to interest in one or more of the following were reviewed: 1) development, 2) design, 3) measurement, and 4) within a learning context. Existing empirical studies that examine interest development and videogames amounted to eight articles, thus the author added an additional nine articles on game design studies that informed on the design of interest triggers.

The author proposes a model that captures interest triggering dimensions for learners across a variety of learning contexts and age groups, and features a reiterative loop between socio- emotional (companionship, competition & collaboration, immersion, and productive failure) and cognitive-physical (conversation & guidance, feedback from others, hands-on experience, and structural support) experiences. This model is significant to the literature as it summarizes key interest triggering features across different learning contexts and serves as a practical reference

117 for researchers and practitioners. Additionally, there have been no attempts thus far to the author’s knowledge that investigates the commonality of interest triggers across learning contexts and videogames.

The author hopes to gain experience in sharing her research to a general audience and attain feedback on the empirical work intended for journal publication.

References

Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.148 Gee, J. P. (2004). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Education + Training, 46(4), 175–178. https://doi.org/10.1108/et.2004.00446dae.002 Habgood, M. P. J., Ainsworth, S. E., & Benford, S. (2005). Endogenous fantasy and learning in digital games. Simulation and Gaming, 36(4), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878105282276 Harackiewicz, J. M., & Hulleman, C. S. (2010). The importance of interest: The role of achievement goals and task values in promoting the development of interest. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(1), 42–52. Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational research, 60(4), 549-571. Krapp, A. (1999). Interest, motivation and learning: An educational-psychological perspective. European journal of psychology of education, 14(1), 23-40. Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85–129. Renninger, K. A., & Bachrach, J. E. (2015). Studying triggers for interest and engagement using observational methods. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.999920 Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2011). Revisiting the conceptualization, measurement, and generation of interest. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 168-184.

118

Explore Self-reflection and Strategic Thinking in a Gaming Setting Yilang Zhao University of Wisconsin – Madison [email protected]

Keywords: self-reflection, strategic thinking, game based learning, roguelike card game

Abstract: This presentation introduces a preliminary empirical study themed in investigating how self- reflection would enhance strategic thinking in the learning setting of a roguelike card game. The goal of this study is to explore the role of self-reflection in learner’s strategy building process to elucidate how learners are able to make better choices and decisions in playful learning experiences. The self-reflection model used in this study is adapted from Mislevy and Haertel's (2006) Evidence-Centered Design framework, which categorizes the learning tasks, learner’s performance, and target learning content into three models, the task model, evidence model, and student model. Correspondingly, the aim of our self-reflection model is to inspire learners to think about what they have completed while working on the learning tasks and encourage them to try a more thoughtful way to learn through play. Additionally, this study researches strategic thinking, a type of meta-cognition that requires learners to clearly understand the elemental conditions of a problem and produce solutions by recognizing the pattern of that problem (Hong & Liu, 2003). Thus, the research question of this study is how self-reflection in a playful learning experience can contribute to the development of strategic thinking. In order to answer this research question, we plan to recruit about 10 participants who have various levels of gaming experiences. All the participants will be grouped into a treatment group in which they will play a game with the self-reflection model and a control group that allows them to play freely. During the experiment, a roguelike card game called Slay the Spire will serve as the main instrument and the participants will be asked to play aloud, which enables the researchers to capture their thoughts at real time. Also, the audio will be recorded and later transcribed for further analysis. As for the data analysis methods, in this study, we plan to implement a mixed method that is primarily quantitative and supplementally qualitative. Quantitatively, we will construct regression models for both groups and conduct tests to examine whether two groups are statistically different. Qualitatively, the discourse data of participants will be utilized to support the statistical findings. It is plausible that assisting learners to involve in deep thoughts about how their previous behaviors impact their performance would help them make better choices, if the potential results demonstrate significant between-group differences. Moreover, the results of qualitative analysis might help us identify how different playstyles influence their thoughts about their learning. The theoretical implication of this study is to reveal the underlying mechanics of how self-driven thinking produces strategies in informal learning environments. Although strategic thinking is an ability that requires a long time to develop, using a self-reflection model can be a feasible way to help students understand their learning better. As for the practical contribution, instructors can design their own tools for their students to generate self-reflection to improve their way of thinking in the learning activities.

119

References Hong, J.-C., & Liu, M.-C. (2003). A study on thinking strategy between experts and novices of computer games. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(2), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00013-4 Mislevy, R. J., & Haertel, G. D. (2006). Implications of Evidence-Centered Design for Educational Testing. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice, 25(4), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2006.00075.x

120 Defining, Measuring, and Teaching Computational Thinking

Avery Harrison1, Hannah Smith2, Katerina Tsarava3 Learning Sciences and Technologies, Worcester Polytechnic Institute1,2, USA Hector Research Institute of Education Sciences and Psychology, University of Tübingen, Germany3

Keywords: computational thinking, STEM education, game-based learning, cognitive assessment

Abstract: Computational thinking (CT) is broadly considered a set of skills to systematically investigate problems, design systems, and formulate solutions that could be implemented with or without an information-processing agent. CT skills extend beyond computer science, encompassing a way of thinking which is applicable across disciplines (Weintrop et al., 2016). As computers become an integral aspect of modern society, students should understand how to apply CT skills across subject areas (Basu et al., 2016). However, questions remain around defining CT, measuring CT, and developing feasible methods for CT instruction in schools (Basu et al., 2016). Although there is a generally accepted definition of CT and its components (e.g., abstraction, decomposition, debugging, data collection and analysis; Barr & Stephenson, 2011; Shute et al., 2017; Weintrop et al., 2016), there are few, if any, widely agreed upon elements of CT within those components. This lack of shared understanding across the field complicates efforts to develop assessments and instructional methods. Additionally, measurable evidence of CT varies across age groups, projects and contexts, increasing difficulty to develop appropriate measures (e.g., Tang et al. 2020). The Defining, Measuring, and Teaching Computational Thinking panel will lead a conversation with emerging scholars about grey areas in the field such as ways to identify, measure, and teach CT in different contexts through playful activities, an effective way to promote CT (e.g., Kafai and Burke, 2015; Weintrop et al. 2016b). Speakers 1 and 2 are doctoral students at Worcester Polytechnic Institute on a project that has developed a browser-based game editing and playing technology and curriculum framework. Speaker 1 will present the goals, products, and outcomes of this project, including the technology and framework to help middle school teachers use this curriculum and student outcomes to date (Smith et al., in press). Speaker 2 will present efforts made and obstacles faced to define and assess students’ CT skills in the context of this project. Speaker 3 is a PhD candidate at the University of Tübingen. She will present findings on the cognitive definition of CT in preschool, primary, and university level students, as well as the learning outcomes of a blended curriculum from a randomized controlled trial with primary students in Germany (Tsarava et al., 2019). Together, these presentations will introduce projects that foster CT and address challenges in defining CT and developing appropriate measures. The panel will feature three 10-minute presentations followed by a guided discussion with the audience. Speaker 2 will moderate, introducing each speaker, monitoring time, and leading the discussion. The discussion will encourage audience input on the following questions: How do you define and identify measurable components of CT? What are ways to teach CT and help teachers integrate CT curricula into their classes? And, what are ways to effectively measure and teach CT outside of traditional programming environments? By posing these questions, we hope to spark a discussion among emerging scholars that will contribute to larger conversations in the field that

121 are necessary to develop and integrate systematic CT instruction and assessment into K-12 education.

References

Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: what is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48-54. Basu, S., Mustafaraj, E., & Rich, K. (2016). CIRCL Primer: Computational Thinking. In CIRCL Primer Series. Retrieved from http://circlcenter.org/computational-thinking Kafai, Y.B. & Burke, Q. (2015). Constructionist Gaming : Understanding the Benefits of Making Games for Learning. 50, 4 (2015), 313–334. Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158. Smith, H., Harrison, A., Ottmar, E., Arroyo, I. (in press). Developing Math Knowledge and Computational Thinking Through Game Play and Design: A Professional Development Program. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE) Journal. Tang, X. Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers and Education. 148, April (2020), 103798. Tsarava, K., Leifheit, L., Ninaus, M., Román-González, M., Butz, M. V., Golle, J., Trautwein, U., & Moeller, K. (2019). Cognitive correlates of computational thinking: Evaluation of a blended unplugged/Plugged-in course. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. October (2019). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3361721.3361729. Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127-147. Weintrop, D., Holbert, N., Horn, M. S., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Computational Thinking in Constructionist Video Games. International Journal of Game-Based Learning. 6, 1 (2016), 1–17.

122 Who’s in Charge? Creating an Environment of Care in Out-of-School Learning Spaces

Ari Hock, University of Washington, [email protected] Robbin Riedy, University of Colorado, [email protected] Sherry Yi, University of Illinois, [email protected]

Keywords: moral philosophy, ethics of care, values, research design, out-of-school learning

Abstract: This panel presentation raises questions about how learning environments can be designed to explicitly engage with issues of care. We approach this by surfacing values inductively, grappling with tensions, and designing to address these tensions across different learning contexts and research stages. Drawing on moral philosophy (MacIntyre, 1999), ethics of care literature (Gilligan 2014; Noddings 2012) and critical caring ethics (Thompson 1998; Antrop-Gonzalez & de Jesus, 2006), we discuss what participants in our respective research settings care about and how they are cared for. We emphasize the need in caring for subjects to fully understand them under their particular situation (Van Manen, 2016). We argue that with the increase of community-engaged research, it is more important than ever to develop ethics of care that are context- and project-specific. Exploring three research sites, we address these key questions:

1. Given that no learning or research context is value neutral, how do we as researchers navigate tensions between competing values? 2. How can we design learning environments that center community values ?

Site 1 is a technology company that is a dominant economic force in several sectors, employing hundreds of thousands of people across the world. Research focused on how corporate employees negotiate personal values with the perceived values of their company. Over the course of ten weeks, data were collected through interviews, participant diaries, and a focus group.

Site 2 is a genetics lab within a large nature and science museum. Within the lab, volunteer scientists enrolled museum guests in research studies designed to explore the connections between genetic variations and experiences of sweet, sour, and bitter tastes. Over the course of a three-year National Institutes of Health-funded study, researchers conducted 105 site observations and 65 interviews.

Site 3 features after school summer camps funded by the National Science Foundation serving underrepresented youth, using the popular video game Minecraft as a vessel to trigger interest in STEM learning. Campers were invited to explore hypothetical versions of Earth throughout the five- day experience. Data collected through surveys and interviews informed the design of the intervention and participants’ STEM interest and play preferences.

Putting these sites into conversation, e interrogate the often implicit belief that learning and research settings are value-neutral. In order to develop an ethic of care that is context-specific, researchers

123 must surface values through data collection that attends to positionality, compares conflicting reports, and uncovers beliefs about taboo subjects. Ultimately, learning environments should be a space for critical discussion and culturally responsive interventions (Ladson-Billings, 2014) which prioritize the needs of the most marginalized people (Paris, 2011).This work is an effort to denaturalize the values which are taken for granted within learning and research settings. We consider whose values are most salient, and argue that community values should be a starting point (Philip, Bang, & Jackson, 2018) regardless of methodological approach.

In our interactive session we will ask participants to break into small groups to discuss how the key research questions apply to their own work and research context.

Table 1: Applying Key Question 1 to each site Given that no learning or research context is value neutral, how do we as researchers identify competing values?

Site 1: During the first interview, participants drew a timeline of important life events (e.g. volunteer work, career history) to surface personal values. In subsequent interviews, Participants were asked about the sociopolitical impact of their company, and whether they perceived any moral incongruities between their personal values and those of their company. There was also a focus group in which participants discussed these issues with each other.

Site 2: Longitudinal interviews with volunteers and staff using an interview protocol that included questions about what was important in the lab, followed by a comparative analysis of interviews.

Site 3: The partnership between the university laboratory and local youth center was built on mutual interest. The lab covered the cost and time of a 5-day summer camp intervention, while the youth center accommodated the research team’s schedule, helped with facilitation of IRB consent forms, and provided research participants. We primarily worked with adolescents who viewed researchers as authoritative figures, which may have caused tensions when researchers’ approached an interview with desired results in mind.

Table 2: Applying Key Question 2 to each site How can we design learning environments that center community values?

Site 1: There would need to be a space for employees to be able to engage in critical dialogue within teams, across teams, and across organizations about the impact of their work. This would likely require new laws protecting employees from being fired at-will, as well as new systems for collaboration across stakeholder groups.

Site 2: The lab experience was designed according to critical caring, and humazing principles. Attending to race and ethnicity, culturally specific ways of engaging were practiced (including family events).

Site 3: We should design learning environments with an understanding that people of different

124 socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds may approach topics with a different sense of value (e.g., seeing no value or practicality in science). One intervention that works with one particular, homogenous group is likely not going to work in the same way when approaching a different group.

References

Antrop‐González, R., & De Jesús, A. (2006). Toward a theory of critical care in urban small school reform: Examining structures and pedagogies of caring in two Latino community‐based schools. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(4), 409–433.

Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2011). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life. Haymarket Books.

Gilligan, C. (2014). Moral injury and the ethic of care: reframing the conversation about differences: moral injury and the ethic of care. Journal of Social Philosophy, 45(1), 89–106.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: aka the remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 74-84.

MacIntyre, A. (1999). Social structures and their threats to moral agency. Philosophy, 74(3), 311-329.

Noddings, N. (2012). The caring relation in teaching. Oxford Review of Education, 38(6), 771–781.

Paris, D. (2011). ‘A friend who understand fully’: Notes on humanizing research in a multiethnic youth community. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 24(2), 137–149.

Thompson, A. (1998). Not the color purple: Black feminist lessons for educational caring. Harvard Educational Review, 68(4), 522–555.

Van Manen, M. (2016). Researching lived experience: human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Routledge.

125 Using Critical Lenses to Address Power and Privilege in an Uncertain Educational Future Alexa W.C. Lee-Hassan1, Christopher Ostrowndun2, Marrok Sedgwick1, & Joanne Moliski1 University of Illinois at Chicago1, University of Calgary2 [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Keywords: power, critical theories, trauma, remote learning, disability

Abstract: With unprecedented shifts in education globally, learning scientists have been tossed into uncharted waters as teaching and learning transition into online, hybrid, and “socially- distanced” contexts. These changes have created new challenges and opportunities and amplified existing inequities of power and privilege. This panel represents a working group attempting to grapple with how power, privilege, trust, and trauma affect teaching and learning in this new era. We reflect on how our practices have shifted and to develop ideas for how critical theories can undergird research, design, and teaching in the Learning Sciences moving forward. Participant Perspectives: Lee-Hassan’s research focuses on applying Gutiérrez’s (2018) rehumanizing mathematics to teaching prospective teachers. They worry about the dehumanizing potential of remote and “socially-distanced” learning leading to involuntary surveillance (Vossoughi & Escudé, 2016) and an increase in didactic, “remedial” instruction, harming marginalized students (Gholson, & Martin, 2019). They hope that, instead, this collective trauma can motivate us to prioritize wellness, community, empowerment, and joy. Ostrowdun’s research focuses on how preservice teachers constructed understandings of inclusion and disability by creating and discussing drawings, which he analyzed through the lens of figured worlds (Holland et al., 1998). Most participants framed their understandings of inclusion in terms of face to face learning contexts, leaving uncertainty about how inclusion might be addressed in remote/online learning and how teacher education could support such contexts. Ostrowdun’s work contributes to using figured worlds as a lens to examine and construct approaches to social justice issues, such as Esmonde’s (2014) study of social justice math worlds. Sedgwick’s research uses critical disability studies and DisCrit (Annamma, et al, 2016) lenses to problematize special education learning environments that serve children and youth with unruly bodies (Erevelles, 2000), especially neurodevelopmental disabilities. He especially seeks to support development of learning environments that engage these youth as transformative intellectuals (Morales-Doyle, 2017). In the context of a global pandemic, the educational opportunities that these youth engage in have novel affordances and limitations. Moliski focuses on the mental health of engineering students and its impact on learning. They work from a trauma-informed framework (Burke-Harris, 2018) to investigate preventative programming and use data mining to gauge the wellness of engineering students as a group. Moliski has increasingly encountered barriers of institutional silos in fostering student learning

126 (Diamond et al., 2002). They are cautiously optimistic and curious about what the decentering of the school as the learning environment can mean for students. Panel Plan/Description: This panel is an opportunity for the Learning Science graduate student community to explore emergent themes, expose underlying biases, and build solid, critical foundations towards more equitable futures of radical joy. First 30 minutes: panel discussion of the following questions: ● What fundamental assumptions is the current context pushing us to reconsider? ● What concerns do you have based on your work and experience that you worry may be overlooked? ● What suggestions or concerns do you have about LS theory and practice moving forward? ● What critical hope is guiding/inspiring you? Last 15 minutes: discussion with the audience.

References: Annamma, S.A., Connor, D.J., Ferri, B.A. (2016). Dis/ability Critical Race Studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. In Connor, D., Ferri, B., and Annamma, S. (Eds.). DisCrit: Disability Studies and Critical Race Theory in Education. New York & London: Teachers College Press.

Diamond, M. A., Stein, H. F., & Allcorn, S. (2002). Organizational silos: Horizontal organizational fragmentation. Journal for the Psychoanalysis of Culture & Society, 7(2), 280– 296.

Erevelles, N. (2000). Educating unruly bodies: Critical pedagogy, disability studies, and the politics of schooling. Educational Theory, 50(1), 25-47.

Esmonde, I. (2014). “Nobody’s rich and nobody’s poor … it sounds good, but it’s actually not”: Affluent students learning mathematics and social justice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(3), 348–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.847371

Gholson, M. L., & Martin, D.B. (2019). Blackgirl face: Racialized and gendered performativity in mathematical contexts. ZDM, 51(3), 391-404.

Gutiérrez, R. (2018, March). Rehumanizing mathematics: A vision for the future. Presented at Latinx in the Mathematical Sciences Conference. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/D266LYIigS0

Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Harvard University Press.

127 Morales-Doyle, D. (2017) Justice-centered science pedagogy: A catalyst for academic achievement and social transformation. Sci. Educ. 101, 1034-1060.

Vossoughi, S. & Escudé, M. (2016). What does the camera communicate? An inquiry into the politics and possibilities of video research on learning. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 47(1), 42-58.

Burke-Harris, N (2018). The Deepest Well: Healing the Long-Term Effects of Childhood Adversity. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

128 Designing Embodiment into STEM Education

John D. McGinty, University of Wisconsin – Madison, [email protected] Bria Davis, Indiana University, [email protected] James Planey, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, [email protected] Jackson Reimers, Vanderbilt University, [email protected]

Keywords: embodied cognition, embodied design, STEM education

Abstract: Although the 21st century is in its infancy, revolutionary growth in science and technology is propagating an interconnected global knowledge economy (OECD, 2015), challenging educators to prepare students with the knowledge and skills required for solving complex problems arising in novel contexts (Sawyer, 2014). Sadly, international comparisons of 15-year-old students reveal rather mediocre performance in science and mathematics by U.S. students on PISA (2020). In science the U.S. ranks 18th out of 78 participating countries in 2018, attaining the highest rank of 15th out of 41 countries in 2000, and a lowest rank of 29th out of 57 countries in 2006. In math the U.S. ranks 37th out of 78 participating countries in 2018, attaining the highest rank of 20th out of 41 countries in 2000, and a lowest rank of 40th out of 70 countries in 2015.

This panel discusses Embodied Design (Abrahamson & Lindgren, 2014) as an innovative approach to address students’ struggles in science and math, which proposes utilization of educational technologies to engage learners’ perceptuomotor modalities for grounding knowledge. Topic one is: How can technology be designed into learning environments to trigger students’ gestures in a way that the specific body-based actions induced, effectively ground targeted abstract concepts in science and mathematics? James Planey shares his work using mixed-reality body tracking to engage students in the exploration of dynamic equilibrium through two collaborative simulations (Planey & Lindgren, 2018). The simulations leverage population ecology and climate change to encourage paired participants to embody the slope (rate of change) of one input while observing their impact on the larger system through a combination of modeled environment effects and graphed outputs. John McGinty shares work on “The Hidden Village,” a motion-capture video game that utilizes “directed actions” (Nathan & Walkington, 2017, p. 3) to engage students’ action system, which is designed to prompt subsequent dynamic gesture production during proof formulation, and that utilizes pedagogical hints that explicitly connect directed actions to corresponding geometry conjectures to engage students’ language system, which is designed to prompt subsequent transformational speech production during proof formulation.

Topic two is: How can technology be designed into collaborative learning environments to incorporate embodiment through dramatic play and the related concept of theatrical performance to facilitate student perspective taking and meaningful reflection during sense making with scientific concepts? Bria Davis shares work on the intersection between embodied cognition and accessibility within the context of elementary science education. The mixed- reality design uses Science through Technology Enhanced Play (Danish, Enyedy, Saleh, & Lee, 2015) as a platform that affords students opportunities to collectively engage with various representations of complex systems (e.g. the particulate nature of matter) and to demonstrate

129 their conceptual understanding through multiple means of action and expression. Jackson Reimers shares work on a set of learning activities termed “theatrical modeling” in the context of a perspectival approach to solar systems (Reimers & Brady, 2019). Theatrical modeling borrows from dramatic improvisation and participatory theater to support collective, embodied sensemaking about solar systems by making perceptual connections across representations.

References

Abrahamson, D., & Lindgren, R. (2014). Embodiment and Embodied Design. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 358-376). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Reimers, J., & Brady, C. (2019). Maggie Mars: Theatrical Modeling and the Phenomenological Understanding of Solar Systems. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 704-707).

Danish, J., Enyedy, N., Saleh, A., & Lee, C. (2015). Science through technology enhanced play: designing to support reflection through play and embodiment. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 332-339).

Nathan, M. J., & Walkington, C. (2017). Grounded and Embodied Mathematical Cognition: Promoting Mathematical Insight and Proof Using Action and Language. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(9), 1-20.

OECD. (2015). Education Indicators in Focus: How Is the Global Talent Pool Changing? 31(April), Paris: OECD Publishing.

PISA. (2020). Programme for International Student Assessment: PISA Database. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/data

Planey, J., & Lindgren, R. (2018). Embodying Climate Change: Incorporating Full Body Tracking in the Design of an Interactive Rates of Change Greenhouse Gas Simulation. In D. Beck, C. Allison, L. Morgado, J. Pirker, A. Peña-Rios, T. Ogle, J. Richter, & C. Gütl (Eds.), Immersive Learning Research Network (pp. 23–35). Springer International Publishing.

Sawyer, K. (2014). Introduction: The New Science of Learning. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 1-18). New York: Cambridge University Press.

130 Investigating the Synergy Between Theatre and Learning Sciences

Lisa Siciliano, University of Illinois at Chicago, [email protected] Laura J. Carter-Stone, Vanderbilt University, [email protected] Jackson E. Reimers, Vanderbilt University, [email protected] Nathan T. Wheeler, University of Wisconsin-Madison, [email protected]

Keywords: theatre, drama, informal learning, arts education Abstract: Learning sciences is a relatively new field with roots in cognitive science, educational psychology, and computer science (Hoadley, 2018). Historically, there has been a dearth of learning sciences research in the arts. There have been, however, a handful of researchers such as Halverson and Sheridan (2014) who have consistently advocated for expanding the scope of what our field studies. We join those who have championed arts research and have developed this panel to specifically investigate the use of theatrical practices as part of interdisciplinary teaching and learning. Additionally, we advance the notion that the discipline of theatre itself including learning goals, content, processes, products, and environments is an area that is especially worthy of attention in our field. Recently, The Journal of the Learning Sciences sent out a call for papers for a special issue entitled “Learning in and through the arts,” seeking to examine the links between arts education and learning sciences. Building upon this recent call, our panel will explore synergies between the learning sciences and learning in the arts, specifically the discipline of theatre. The papers included in this symposium explore the following questions: 1) What might the processes of learning in and through the theatrical arts contribute to the Learning Sciences, especially concerning theoretical tensions in the field? 2) How might the theatrical arts inform designed learning environments? Four doctoral students whose expertise lies in the world of theatre/drama and learning sciences will lead the panel. Carter-Stone will explore the ways that, while learning the art of dramatic improvisation, “players” come to expand their repertoire of modalities to include non-discursive modes of communication and performance, particularly integrating bodily movement, gesture, and sound. This paper will then reflect upon the notion of “representational trajectories” (Halverson, 2013) to consider the possibility for theorizing non-representational forms of learning processes. Reimers will discuss resonances and tensions between scientific and dramatic practices through an examination of data from an extended design study on the uses of participatory theatre in scientific modeling (cf. Lehrer & Schauble, 2015). These resonances and tensions include the role of the body (and bodies) in sensing and knowing; constructions of object- and subjectivity; and perspective-taking as a foundational learning process and product. Ultimately, this paper illuminates some theoretical considerations for hybridizing STEM and art practices. Wheeler will examine innovative 21st century approaches to how people learn, with a particular emphasis on the process of learning through ensemble-based literary adaptation (from page to stage and screen), as well as making devised theatre. Siciliano presents preliminary findings on FORTS, an interactive, immersive theatrical environment and how theatre designers construct learning opportunities for performance. She will also analyze how the audience/actors participate in those opportunities individually and collaboratively.

131 We invite the graduate student learning sciences community, especially those people whose interests involve emotions, collaboration, embodiment, identity, and agency to attend. We hope to join together as next generation learning scientists to expand our field’s vision of what learning is and can be.

References:

Halverson, E.R. (2013). Digital art making as a representational process. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(1), 121-162.

Halverson, E.R., & Sheridan, K.M. (2014). Arts education and the learning sciences. In R.K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 626-646). Cambridge University Press.

Hoadley, C. (2018). A short history of the learning sciences. In F. Fischer, C.E. Hmelo-Silver, S.R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp.11-23). Routledge.

Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2015). Learning progressions: The whole world is NOT a stage. Science Education, 99(3), 432-437.

132 Complex Measures in Complex Learning Environments Gahyun Callie Sung, Eileen McGivney Harvard University [email protected], [email protected] Keywords: Measurement, Multi-Modal Learning Analytics, Virtual Reality, Technology-Mediated Learning This panel addresses the complexity of measuring teaching and learning, particularly how to meaningfully capture the process and outcomes of technology-mediated learning. The impact of technology on learners is often measured through increases in content knowledge, an easy-to- measure but limited dimension of learning outcomes. Measuring learning processes, such as through student motivation, engagement, and attitude changes, however, can track students’ trajectories, illuminate mechanisms of technologies’ impact, and assess student success in the long term (Garcia, 2014; Heckman & Kautz, 2012). These processes may be especially crucial, but also hard to measure, in remote learning contexts. Drawing on one study that leverages quantitative multi-modal data and another using qualitative interviews and observations, the authors discuss different approaches to measuring learning processes and outcomes via complex interactions in remote learning environments. First, Gahyun Callie Sung will present in-progress quantitative research using sensor data to measure features of student-teacher interactions in remote learning. In this study, 75 expert-novice pairs worked together on an engineering task with microcontrollers, and interactions were augmented with real-time gaze data letting each participant see where the other was looking. To measure affective aspects of student-teacher relationships, the study assessed the strength of physiological synchrony using electrodermal and heart rate data, or how similar these signals were between dyads and the quality of their collaboration. One key finding is that the activity context matters, and synchrony varied in hands-on versus direct instruction tasks according to the instructors’ perception of the activity. This finding builds on recent work on synchrony and collaboration (Schneider, Dich & Radu, 2020; Liu et al., 2020). The presentation will discuss the utility and challenges of using EDA data in tracking affect, such as its high temporal resolution and applicability in physical learning environments. Second, Eileen McGivney will present ongoing research to measure learning with virtual reality experiences. While VR is increasingly promoted for use in formal K-12 education settings, much research on how people learn with and experience immersive media continues to be conducted in lab-based settings rather than learning environments (Markowitz et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2017). The presentation focuses on a study of immersive 360 videos for cross-cultural exploration in a remote secondary school. Leveraging virtual qualitative interviews, observations, and surveys, the study assesses changes in student motivation, interest, and self-efficacy, and the effect of diverse learners’ backgrounds on learning outcomes. Eileen will discuss how these methods can be deployed practically in a challenging learning context while measuring meaningful outcomes. Preliminary results will focus on the utility of these methods for capturing complex features of a learning environment, measuring non-academic outcomes, and understanding individual differences. Finally, together the authors will compare and contrast the methods used in their studies, discuss their relative benefits in complex learning environments, and the complexity of meaningfully measuring non-academic learning outcomes. The focus will be on shared challenges faced in both authors’ work, how various quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method approaches can help overcome them, as well as shortcomings of the methods presented in their studies.

133 References Garcia, E. (2016). The need to address non-cognitive skills in the education policy agenda. In Non- cognitive skills and factors in educational attainment (pp. 31-64). Brill Sense. Heckman, J. J., & Kautz, T. (2012). Hard evidence on soft skills. Labour economics, 19(4), 451-464. Liu, D., Dede, C., Huang, R., & Richards, J. (Eds.). (2017). Virtual, augmented, and mixed realities in education. Springer Nature. Liu, Y., Wang, T., Wang, K., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Predicting Collaborative Learning Quality through Physiological Synchrony Recorded by Wearable Biosensors. BioRxiv. Markowitz, D. M., Laha, R., Perone, B. P., Pea, R. D., & Bailenson, J. N. (2018). Immersive Virtual Reality Field Trips Facilitate Learning About Climate Change. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02364 Schneider, B., Dich, Y., & Radu, I. (2020). Unpacking the relationship between existing and new measures of physiological synchrony and collaborative learning: a mixed methods study. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1-25.

134