Acknowledging Affective and Embodied Engagement as Epistemic Diversity

• In Event: Designing for Dignity Affirming Experiences: Leveraging Embodied Learning Toward Equity in Interaction

Abstract

Objectives.
Educators often define “productive” and “engaged” narrowly and overlook how minoritized student groups engage in science. This study aims to challenge this view by highlighting how two girls of color in a novel, technology-enhanced environment leveraged physical and affective sensemaking resources.

Theoretical framework.
Affective engagement research has shown an important link to academic engagement (Reschly & Christenson, 2012). Agarwal and Sengupta-Irving (2019) added two dimensions—epistemic diversity and historicity and identity—to the PDE framework’s (Engle & Conant, 2002) four components—problematizing, authority, accountability, resources—to address power in disciplinary learning settings. In this study, the connection between accountability and epistemic diversity helped redefine students’ affective and embodied engagement as productive.

Methods and data.
In this project, students played as bees in an augmented reality (AR) environment. We analyzed an activity where student pairs foraged for nectar in an AR garden, focusing on one pair: Kayley who from the back of the room directed her partner, Andrea, on where in the AR environment to find a flower with good nectar. Using interaction analysis (Jordan & Henderson, 1995), we investigated how these students leveraged physical and affective sensemaking resources towards productive disciplinary engagement.
Results and significance.
We first noticed affective engagement when Kayley expressed frustration, yelling, “THAT’s not the right flower!” to Andrea, then jumping and stomping (see Table 1). Kayley’s affect then shifted from frustrated to playful: when the teacher asked if her partner found the right flower, Kayley responded, “NOPE, NOpe, nope” in sing-song prosody, with her feet and body bouncing along (see Table 2). Thus, while other students may be discouraged or sad over not meeting the accountability standards of the activity, Kayley practiced epistemic diversity by enjoying herself and engaging in a playful form of accountability.
When Andrea eventually found the flower, Kayley jumped and exclaimed, “Yes!”; lunged towards the teacher proclaiming, “She got it!”; made sing-song “buzz” noises, then danced away. While the proclamation to the teacher was an example of accountability we often see in classrooms, Kayley’s dancing away was a novel way to express accountability—she no longer needed to watch Andrea because the outcome was satisfactory.
In this episode, Kaley adeptly used her body to both participate in the activity, and communicate science understanding. Kayley initially jumped to express disapproval of her partner’s performance, and later to express satisfaction, potentially celebrating the scientific consequences of bees finding good nectar—survival. Similar to children’s ability to fluidly move between different roles (DeLiema et al., 2019), Kayley used her body to express multiple layers of understanding both the activity and the science it modeled. Studying the subtleties of Kayley’s affect and physical movements highlighted the variety of ways she practiced accountability to the activity (her reaction to Andrea’s performance) and to the science phenomenon (her reactions that model how a bee might react). The centrality of Kayley’s body and affect in conveying her productive science engagement highlights the need to design learning environments that privilege and recognize affect and the body as epistemic resources.

Authors

• Sarah Jaewon Lee, Vanderbilt University

• Tessaly Jen, Vanderbilt University

• Lauren Vogelstein, Vanderbilt University

• Noel D. Enyedy, Vanderbilt University