PERSPECTIVE article

Front. Educ., 02 December 2021

Sec. Educational Psychology

Volume 6 - 2021 | https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.712626

Translating Embodied Cognition for Embodied Learning in the Classroom

  • 1. Department of STEM Education and Teacher Development, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Dartmouth, MA, United States

  • 2. Department of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Dartmouth, MA, United States

Article metrics

View details

33

Citations

19,2k

Views

4,6k

Downloads

Abstract

In this perspective piece, we briefly review embodied cognition and embodied learning. We then present a translational research model based on this research to inform teachers, educational psychologists, and practitioners on the benefits of embodied cognition and embodied learning for classroom applications. While many teachers already employ the body in teaching, especially in early schooling, many teachers’ understandings of the science and benefits of sensorimotor engagement or embodied cognition across grades levels and the content areas is little understood. Here, we outline seven goals in our model and four major “action” steps. To address steps 1 and 2, we recap previously published reviews of the experimental evidence of embodied cognition (and embodied learning) research across multiple learning fields, with a focus on how both simple embodied learning activities—as well as those based on more sophisticated technologies of AR, VR, and mixed reality—are being vetted in the classroom. Step 3 of our model outlines how researchers, teachers, policy makers, and designers can work together to help translate this knowledge in support of these goals. In the final step (step 4), we extract generalized, practical embodied learning principles, which can be easily adopted by teachers in the classroom without extensive training. We end with a call for educators and policy makers to use these principles to identify learning objectives and outcomes, as well as track outcomes to assess whether program objectives and competency requirements are met.

Minding the (Brain) Gap

Currently, there is paradox in education: a focus on evidence-based research but an abandonment of the theories (Matsushita, 2017). For example, effective performance in clinical settings requires the integration between theory and practice. Yet there is a gap between theoretical knowledge as taught in the classroom and what K-12 students experience and learn (Hashemiparast et al., 2019). Furthermore, teachers’ action-based classroom research, while often promoting student achievement, is often absent of robust links to theory and is liable to neglect the application of a deductive, empirical framework. One reason for this dearth of informed practice is a lack of a framework for translating theory to practice, and in this instance, linking embodied cognition and embodied learning to effective teaching.

To promote informed research-based decisions in education, the No Child Left Behind Act (2002) mandated “scientifically based” research, which was replaced by Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) calling for “evidence-based” interventions. Still, few educators are privy to the research advances in the science of learning (Weinstein et al., 2018). Further, the limited awareness of recent theoretical and empirical evidence in cognitive science constrains the dissemination and adoption of research findings. There is a need for collaborative models that emphasize a bidirectional flow from researchers to practitioners (Nutley et al., 2009). Indeed, McKenney (2018) notes: “Although many studies in the learning sciences describe potential implications of policy or practice, few elaborate on how recommendations can be implemented” (p. 1).

Specifically, as Wilcox et al. (2021) point out there continues to be a significant “research to practice gap”. For example, Roediger (2013) writes:

We cannot point to a well-developed translational educational science in which research about learning and memory, thinking and reasoning, and related topics is moved from the lab into controlled field trials (like clinical trials in medicine) and the tested techniques … are introduced into broad educational practice. We are just not there yet … (p. 1).

Furthermore, one of the nation’s foremost education researchers and policy analysts, Linda Darling-Hammond, argues that the rapid pace of our knowledge of human development and learning has impacted the emerging consensus about the science of learning and increased our opportunities to shape more effective educational practices (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Yet, she adds, to take advantage of these advances requires integrating insights across multiple fields and connecting them to our knowledge of successful approaches.

In this perspective piece, we adapted a translational research model for the learning sciences to inform teachers, educational psychologists, and practitioners on benefits of Embodied Cognition (EC) and Embodied Learning (EL) applications for the classroom.

Translational Science: The Need for a Bridge

Translational science research emphasizes a need for appropriate professional development that fosters interdisciplinary approaches (Gilliland et al., 2017) for quickly turning biomedical findings from the laboratory, clinic, and community into interventions to improve the health of individuals and the public (NCATS-NIH, 2020). That said, to meet the challenges of collecting and disseminating the latest cognitive-science empirical research on learning, we adapted a model of translational science (Rubio et al., 2010). We call our model the Translational Learning Sciences Research for Embodied Cognition and Embodied Learning1. Our model leverages the empirical findings on EC from psychology and learning theory to provide an overarching theory for why embodied-based learning works. The call for translational research for the benefit of education is not new, although the term translational has only recently been applied in fields other than the natural sciences2. Here, we provide a framework for why these examples work and what generalized learning principles can be derived from these examples to impart educators with useful practice. Our model curates EC research across multiple learning fields (e.g., STEM, reading/language, social-emotional learning) while focusing on how researchers are beginning to implement both low-stakes embodied learning activities in the classroom and also those based on sophisticated technologies of AR, VR, and mixed reality (step 1 and 2 of our model). Our model then extracts generalized EL principles that can be easily used in the classroom as a starting point for researchers, teachers, policy makers, and designers to work together (step 3) to help translate and disseminate the latest research and create validated learning platforms and activities based on EC principles (step 4). The goal is to accelerate the process of transforming laboratory discoveries into new pedagogical approaches to improve learning outcomes. Before we discuss the details of our model, however, we present a quick history of EC and EL and why it matters to education.

Rethinking Thinking

Over the last forty years there has been a paradigm shift in Psychology, in which human thinking is now viewed as inseparably linked with the body and the environment (e.g., Varela et al., 1991; Wilson, 2002; Abrahamson, 2004; Hutto, 2007; Chemero, 2009; Fugate et al., 2018). Embodied views of thinking suggest that it is deeply dependent on features of the physical body of the learner, where the body plays a significant causal or constitutive role in cognitive processing (Kumar, et al., 2018; Wilson and Foglia, 2011). Such embodied views of cognition are based on bodily and neural processes of perception, action, and emotion (e.g., Hauk et al., 2004; James, 2010; Vinci-Booher and James, 2020, to name a few). For example, research also shows that simply observing another’s gestures and movements can activate the mirror neuron system in the learner’s brain to aid in learning through imitation (Rizzolatti et al., 1996). This finding has led to the suggestion that the mirror neuron system may be the mechanism for imitative EC (Rizzolatti et al., 1996; Iacoboni et al., 2005; Iacoboni, 2009).

We owe a great deal to developmental psychologists whose theoretical insights are affirmed by the latest neuroscientific evidence (e.g., Piaget and Cook, 1952; Piaget, 1968; Montessori, 1969; Vygotsky, 1978; Kolb, 1984; Dewey, 1989; Rogoff, 1990). Indeed, Vygotsky (1926/1997) wrote: “Thought is action … your capacity to enact the concept as perceptuomotor activity” (pp. 161–163). Philosophically, Merleau-Ponty (1962) posited that people perceive the world first and foremost through their bodies, a type of inter-corporeality which he referred to as “enfleshment.”

Although there are many theories of EC, all are united in their emphasis on the body and draw upon two common themes. First, the body and the world (environment) are integral to forming, integrating, and retrieving knowledge. To that end, knowledge is grounded or situated in the interactions between the individual and the environment. Grounding might occur when words or linguistic metaphors bind together individual, heterogenous instances underlying abstract concepts (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980; Mazzuca and Borghi, 2019)3. Second, knowledge is simulated: Thinking, or the use of knowledge, is re-experiencing the bodily states that were activated at the initial time of encoding, as experienced by a person’s individualized interactions with the world (Barsalou, 1999; Barsalou, 2008; Gallese, 2009).

Recently, EC has expanded its reach into “4E cognition”, which suggests people’s cognitive activity is not only embodied, but also “extended, enacted, and embedded” in the perceptual and interactive richness of their environment (see Gallagher in Rowlands, 2010). Abrahamson et al. (2021) advanced Enactivism (Varela et al., 1991) as a philosophical framework that captures “thinking as situated doing” for classroom learning. The emphasis is placed on students’ experience as their source knowledge rather than on the teacher transmitting content (Petitmengin, 2007). For example, a learner and their surrounding environment constitute a system, in which the learner’s thoughts, actions, and metacognitive awareness/verbalizations (Flavell, 1979; Bernstein, 1996) may promote the discovery of new relations between their body and environment (Suwa, 2006).

Both Teaching and Learning Need to Be Re-examined

Our current educational delivery systems (i.e., teacher education, pedagogy, curriculum) and approaches can be traced back to “disembodied” views of human thinking. Specifically, much of teaching pedagogy/curriculum continue to view learning as abstracted and separate from the body (Macrine, 2002) and fails to understand the latest psychological and neuroscientific evidence from EC. Similarly, teacher training/pedagogy, while emphasizing constructivist’s approaches, tends to devolve-in-practice to positivist’s skills in preparation for standardized tests (Klein et al., 2019). According to Nathan (2012), teaching continues to focus on foundational knowledge or “formalism first”. Specifically, formalism first “incorrectly advocates the teaching/mastery of formalisms often considered prerequisite to applied knowledge” [that] “privileges formal, scientific knowledge over applied knowledge” (Nathan, 2012, p.126). Further, Nathan asserts that formalisms only gain their meaning with embodied experiences through real-world interaction and therefore the experiences are what ground formalisms, not the other way around. Similarly, Wertsch (1985) noted that a construct is shared when the action and affordances are experienced with the adult and contextualized in the real world.

Rethinking Learning

Derived from EC principles, EL constitutes a contemporary pedagogical theory that emphasizes the use of the body in educational practice, as well as student-teacher interaction both in and outside the classroom (Smyrnaiou and Sotiriou, 2016; Kosmas and Zaphiris, 2018; Georgiou and Ioannou, 2019). EL posits that a person’s own actions (and the observation of others’ actions) interact with environmental affordances, and together scaffold the process of learning.

While EC uses similar approaches to active learning, EL includes a variety of body-based techniques (i.e., gestures, imitations, simulations, sketching, and analogical mapping) (Alibali and Nathan, 2007; Weisberg and Newcombe, 2017) that hold promise for understanding the role of action and experience in early development, as well as to scaffold learning in more formal educational settings (Kontra et al., 2012). Following suit, embodied design is a pedagogical framework that “seeks to promote grounded learning by creating situations in which students can be guided to negotiate tacit and cultural perspectives on phenomena under inquiry” (Abrahamson, 2013, p. 224).

Our Model: Translational Learning Sciences Research for Embodied Cognition and Embodied Learning

In light of recent empirical demonstrations of how EC/EL works, our model of Translation Learning Sciences Research for Embodied Cognition and Embodied Learning has seven goals: 1) making sense of and disseminating clinical and empirical research findings; 2) closing the gap between research and application; 3) combining cognitive science and pedagogy to share pertinent information; 4) improving teaching and learning through embodied applications; 5) confirming or debunking current trends, (i.e., neuromyths); 6) elucidating conceptual frameworks for sensorimotor and body-based learning; and 7) recommending curriculum, designs, taxonomies, technology, and development to inform policy.

From these goals, we outline the following four action steps: 1) Promote the multidirectional and multidisciplinary integration of basic embodied research to elucidate or to debunk current trends in teaching and learning; 2) Compile the embodied research to be analyzed, translated, and make connections to improve pedagogical approaches, with the long-term aim of improving teaching and learning; 3) Develop and disseminate resources and tools to help individuals at all levels of expertise develop a better understanding of EL; 4) Focus on the creation of appropriate embodied curriculum and the development of taxonomies to identify objectives, and track outcomes that will assess whether program objectives and competency requirements are being met. We believe that our model can serve as an expeditious way to systematically collate, translate, and disseminate the latest embodied research geared towards improved learning outcomes. In other words, this is where science meets the real world of schooling.

In a larger research project, we have addressed steps 1 and 2 by carefully curating examples from leading experts to show how EC can be integrated into classroom practice (Macrine and Fugate, 2020). Such research examples are based on behavioral and neuroimaging experimentation in the fields of language and reading comprehension, STEM, and social-emotional knowledge. By way of a few noteworthy examples, Kiefer et al. (2015) found that young students who relied on physically writing (compared to typing) had improved word reading and word writing. James (2010) found that four-to-five year-old participants, who had practiced writing letters through handwriting (but not other ways), showed adult-like brain activation when subsequently viewing letters. Further, college students demonstrated better recall of handwritten notes vs. typed notes (Mangen et al., 2015). In addition, Glenberg and colleagues (Glenberg and Kaschak, 2002; Glenberg et al., 2008; Glenberg and Gallese, 2012) showed how vocabulary acquisition can be enhanced by shared communication and physical pantomime, both which allow for the grounding of information to concrete objects. In another example, Boaler and colleagues (Boaler et al., 2016) demonstrated how finger perception predicted learning math all the way through college, and that young children with good finger-based numerical representations showed better arithmetic skills. In addition, the panoply of motion-based technologies and interactive-user gaming platforms have allowed VR and AR designers to create technology-enabled EL experiences. Such technologies range from gesture-based to full-body interactive technologies, with the latter making up fewer options and focusing mainly on VR and AR technologies (Trninic and Abrahamson, 2012; Johnson-Glenberg, 2018; Georgiou and Ioannou, 2019).

Several of these researchers, and numerous others working within the field of learning design and practice, have turned such research findings into EL technologies for the classroom. As an example, the Moved by Reading approach uses simulation or “acting-out” in two stages to enhance reading (Glenberg et al., 2004). In the first stage, called physical manipulation, children manipulate toys to simulate the story that they are reading. The second stage is called imagined manipulation, where children are taught how to mentally simulate or imagine doing the actions. The authors found that physical and imagined manipulations contributed to larger gains in memory and comprehension than dis-embodied reading approaches. Gomez and Glenberg (2022) demonstrated the importance of pantomiming while reading new physics content. Abrahamson and colleagues designed multiple, successful embodied instruction design applications, called Mathematical Imagery Trainers (MITs). In one high technology-based project known as the Kinemathics project (Abrahamson et al., 2011), students move their arms in proportional distances to measurements of similar magnitude displayed on a screen. Using a trial-and-error approach, correct answers turn the screen green and incorrect ones turn it red, which reinforces the rules underlying the relationship (i.e., a 1:2 rule). And, in another specialized application, Abrahamson and Lindgren (2014) developed MEteor, an interactive MR simulation that uses a laser and floor-projected imagery. In this application, students use their bodies to simulate an orbit around a virtual planet to learn about formal concepts such as gravitational acceleration and mass.

Perhaps just as important is that many of these applications can be adapted to students with learning disabilities. Indeed, advances in EL have been utilized with students with ASD (De Jaegher, 2013; Eigsti, 2013; Eigsti, 2015), deaf students, and students with motor impairment (Kosmas et al., 2019; Tancredi et al., 2022).

In the remainder of this perspective, we focus on steps 3 and 4 of our model. Step 3 advocates for a coordinated effort - a type of interactive educational/cognitive-science consortium - among researchers, educational psychologists, teachers, school psychologists, policy makers, and textbook publishers to translate and disseminate/share the latest findings, applications, and implementation of the latest developments. These include bringing such issues to the attention of: 1) university-affiliated design-based research laboratories; 2) school personnel–primarily teachers but also technology experts and principals; 3) parents—as individuals and via various organized bodies–invested in school policy on infrastructure, resources, and pedagogy; 4) non-profit education-promoting groups, who are hampered neither by publication nor sales constraints; 5) commercial educational-technology companies with forward-thinking strategies; and 6) reporters, bloggers, etc. who cover the educational beat and can bring these issues to the attention of the wider public, including city, state, and federal policymakers. These many—and in rare occasions collaborations among them—could hasten the experimental application of cutting-edge research in the form of convivial instructional resources. For example, a national database of open-science materials and data could be coordinated to allow any teacher to use the materials and to contribute to “open science”, which has become popular already in psychology4.

To begin to address step 4, we have extracted the following key appropriate embodied principles (Table 1) for future practitioners, researchers, and teachers to guide the research-to-practice transition.

TABLE 1

EC principle and generalized adviceDomainScientific findings* = classroom-vetted K-12Classroom resources/LinksSpecific teaching principle
1) The use of body-based learning (i.e., sensorimotor learning, including using whole-body and fingers, and gesturing).ReadingVocabulary acquisition, reading comprehension skills, and cued and spontaneous recall rely on connecting linguistic elements (e.g., the words and phrases in the linguistic input) to sensorimotor capacity (e.g., the perceptual or motor skills to which those linguistic elements refer) [Glenberg and Kaschak (2002), Glenberg et al. (2004)*, Kaschak et al. (2005), Pulvermuller (2005), Glenberg et al. (2007), Marley et al. (2007)*, Glenberg (2008), Glenberg et al. (2009)*, Glenberg et al. (2011)*, Zwaan (2014), Kaschak et al. (2017)*].Embrace and Moved by Reading programs https://www.movedbyreading.com/Teachers can encourage word learning and language comprehension through: 1) dialogic reading, in which the adult asks questions related to the text that are intended to prompt dialogue; 2) “acting out” vocabulary or sentences through play with a physical representation of content depicted in the text; and 3) performing iconic actions to illustrate word meaning through gesture or pantomime.
Teachers should promote body-based learning, including self-generated actions involving touch, sight, drawing, and writing.
—ReadingTaking notes with pen and paper (vs. typing) encourages summative understanding because of the slowness (but also richness) of physically writing [Mueller and Oppenheimer, (2014)].—For language and material comprehension, teachers can encourage students to handwrite notes that are summative (and less dictated). Students’ self-generated, summative arguments actions can be more powerful than memorization or writing notes verbatim.
—ReadingReading from print books (rather than digitally on computers or tablets) can enhance kinesthetic and tactile feedback and can improve information general comprehension. [Mangen (2008), Mangen et al. (2013)*, Delgado et al. (2018), Mangen et al. (2019)].—Teachers can encourage paper books or electronic reading displays (e.g. Kindle), which more closely simulate the physicality of print books, especially for longer passages.
—HandwritingExploring letters visual-haptically (vs. visual only) improves handwriting and is important for letter learning and early literacy [Naka (1998)*, Longcamp et al. (2003), Bara et al. (2004)*, Longcamp et al. (2005), Longcamp et al. (2008), Mangen and Velay (2010), Bara and Gentaz (2011)*, James and Engelhardt (2012), Kiefer et al. (2015)*, Mangen et al. (2015), Mangen and Balsvik (2016), James (2017)].—Teachers can encourage learning to write by hand.
—Math and ScienceFinger use and perception predict mathematics achievement [Berteletti and Booth (2015), Boaler et al. (2016)].YouCubed Team: https://www.youcubed.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Finger-Activities-vF.pdfTeachers can encourage solving mathematical problems with real-world objects, rather than solving comparable symbolically presented problems.
—Math and ScienceMathematical attainment is related to interceptive timing ability and is learned through perceptually guided actions that instantiate the concept as a movement form [Abrahamson (2004)*, Abrahamson (2007)*, Gracia-Bafalluy (2008)*, Reinholz et al. (2010)*, Abrahamson et al. (2011)*, Abrahamson (2014), Abrahamson et al. (2014)*, Abrahamson and Trninic (2015)*, Giles et al. (2018), Abrahamson et al. (2020)].3D Multiplication Table (Embodied Design Laboratory): https://edrl.berkeley.edu/design/3d-multiplication-table/Teachers can provide multi-dimensional experiences in mathematics, which include multiple opportunities to see and experience concepts through touch, sight, drawing, and writing in words.
Math Imagery Trainers (MITs) MIT-Proportion and MIT-Parabola (Embodied Design Laboratory)
https://edrl.berkeley.edu/design/mathematics-imagery-trainer/
Kinemathics (Embodied Design Laboratory): https://edrl.berkeley.edu/projects/kinemathics/
Combinations Tower (Embodied Design Laboratory): https://edrl.berkeley.edu/design/combinations-tower/
YouCubed Team: https://www.youcubed.org/tasks/
4-Blocks NetLogo (Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling) http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/docs/
Dice Stalagmite NetLogo (Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling): https://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/DiceStalagmite
—Math and ScienceHuman capacity to perceive the environment in new ways is predicated on learning to move in new ways because perception of scientific concepts is inherently for action [Mechsner et al. (2001), Alibali and Nathan (2012)*, Walkington et al. (2019), Nathan et al. (2020)].Block Stalagmite (Embodied Design Laboratory): https://edrl.berkeley.edu/design/4-block-stalagmite/Teachers can create conditions that enact movement that captures the dynamical sense of a concept.
The Eye Trick (Embodied Design Laboratory): https://edrl.berkeley.edu/design/the-eye-trick/
MEteor: Developing Physics Concepts through Body-based Interaction with a Mixed Reality Simulation (Lindgren et al., 2016)
The Hidden Village: Mathematical Reasoning through Movement https://multiplex.videohall.com/presentations/1662
Magna-AR: https://www.vieyrasoftware.net/physics-toolbox-ar
PhysicsToolbox: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.chrystianvieyra.physicstoolboxsuite&hl=en_US
HistoBlocks: https://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/HistoBlocks
The Marbles Scooper: https://edrl.berkeley.edu/design/the-marbles-scooper/
Data science K-12 initiative: https://www.youcubed.org/resource/data-literacy/
SMALLab Learning, LLC: https://www.smallablearning.com/research
Ratio and Proportion (Phet Interaction Simulations): https://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/ratio-and-proportion.
—Math and ScienceGestures are spontaneous or purposeful movements of the body that often accompany speech, serve as a way to convey ideas, and predict the quality of one’s argument in mathematics and sciences (e.g. physics) [Kontra et al. (2015), Johnson-Glenberg et al. (2016)*, Johnson-Glenberg and Megowan-Romanowicz (2017), Johnson-Glenberg (2018), Megowan‐Romanowicz (2022)].—Teachers can consider how gestures support understanding and reveal learners’ struggles and understandings.
Teachers can directly interact with learners’ gestures when describing their embodied experiences with embodied learning technologies by: (1) pointing out/highlighting aspects of the gesture; and/or (2) contributing new dynamic gestural imagery to the gesture.
Teachers can attend to not only what learners say, but also to learner’s movements, idiosyncratic forms of perception, and how learners interpret their embodied experiences. Noticing these behaviors can help teachers prompt perceptual-motor activity at timely moments.
2) Imitative body-based learning from others, including attention to other’s body movements.Socio-EmotionalObservational learning is important for acquiring and communicating knowledge. The mirror neuron system (MNS) responds robustly to observation and imitation of face and hand actions [Iacoboni et al. (2005), Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007), Caspers et al. (2010), Caramazza et al. (2014), Aziz-Zadeh et al. (2018), Ferrari and Coudé (2018), Keysers et al. (2018), Butera and Aziz-Zadeh (2022)].Teachers can engage in demonstrating a skill, and students should engage in subsequent imitation or emulation to enhance observational learning.
Teachers need to be attentive to students’ whole-body learning experiences and intentionally incorporate movement into learning activities, which can increase the connection between the physical environment and academic goals through situated learning. Teachers should assess students’ developing understanding by attending to both their gestures and body language.
—AllStudents learn through repeatedly attempting to reconstruct actions performed by others, and follow action goals of others [Flanagan and Johansson (2003), Gerofsky, (2011)*, Hall and Nemirovsky (2012), Gredebäck and Falck-Ytter (2015), Vogelstein et al. (2019)].—Teachers can use goal-directed human movement to illustrate new concepts.
Teachers can use simple bodily movements to help learners understand more advanced concepts (e.g., opposing forces as argument opposition) as they develop.
3) Responsive TeachingSocio-EmotionalTeacher and students who engage in joint attention experience more positive affect, likely attributable to increased agency [Steinbrenner and Watson (2015), Grynszpan et al. (2017)].—Teachers can engage in joint attention with the student by encouraging collaborative situated interactions.
Teachers should support student engagement by monitoring what the individual is doing, encouraging them to come up with their own strategies and reflect.
—AllIntercorporeal attunement (i.e., responsiveness) is bidirectional, that is, students attune to teachers. In conversations, even multi-person discussions, speakers are constantly returning to each other. This is a rapid, iterative, and reciprocal process [Radford and Roth (2011), Shvarts and Abrahamson (2019)].—Teachers can create a classroom climate that encourages students to express and discuss how concepts “look,” “move,” “feel,” etc.
Teachers can make instructional decisions based on what they can see that was not understood.
—AllResponsive teaching involves: 1) drawing out, attending to, and engaging with aspects of learners’ ideas that have potential disciplinary value or substance; and 2) engaging in ongoing proximal formative assessment (e.g., continuously monitoring students’ ideas to adapt instructional support in the moment) [Robertson et al. (2016), Flood et al. (2020), Flood et al. (2022)].—Teachers can try to reformulate learners’ ideas to help them extend and connect these ideas with new disciplinary understandings. One way to achieve this is through the practice of revoicing, (i.e., recasting learners’ multimodal contributions by repeating some content) yet also reformulating (modifying the content of) and/or elaborating (adding new content to) the ideas learners have shared.
—Special NeedsIndividuals with motor and sensory impairment will have different experiences over time that shape how they come to understand the world, mandating the need for including “inclusive design” [Ma (2017), Abrahamson et al. (2019), Chen et al. (2020), Tancredi et al. (2022)].Balance Board Math (Embodied Design Laboratory/Tancredi: https://edrl.berkeley.edu/projects/balance-board-math/
Magical Musical Mat (Embodied Design Laboratory/Chen): https://edrl.berkeley.edu/projects/magical-musical-mat/
SignEd|Math (Embodied Design Laboratory/Krause): https://edrl.berkeley.edu/projects/signedmath/
4) Use of manipulatives with relevant affordances (including AR/VR but also “simpler” actions)AllAugmented reality (AR) technologies enhance and expand opportunities to learn through moving and can improve both visuospatial capabilities and enhanced student-reported interest leading to more accurate performance (vs. traditional instruction) [Carbonneau et al. (2013), Lindgren and Johnson-Glenberg (2013), Abrahamson and Lindgren, (2014), Donovan et al. (2014), Carbonneau and Marley (2015), Johnson-Glenberg et al. (2016)*, Lindgren et al. (2016)*, Johnson-Glenberg and Megowan-Romanowicz (2017), Vieyra et al. (2020), Donovan and Alibali (2021), Donovan and Alibali (2022), Megowan-Romanowicz (2022); Vierya and Vierya (2022)*].Titans of Space (Drash VR LLC): http://www.drashvr.com/titansofspace.htmlTeachers can encourage the use of concrete manipulatives (e.g., blocks, chips, Dienes blocks, Geotiles, balance scales, paper clips, popsicle sticks, and beanbags) and computerized or AR technologies created and vetted for learning.
Teachers should root themselves in practices that exemplify interaction that supports conceptual modeling, including digital simulations as well as physical manipulatives, especially for STEM fields.Catch a Mimic (Embodied-Games.com): www.embodied-games.com
—AllAll technologies have their own material affordances and sensorimotor contingencies, which frame and constrain a person’s interaction with a device [Gibson (1979), Gaver (1991), Kamii et al. (2001), Moyer (2001)].—Teachers can consider the following when deciding whether and how to use a given manipulative: 1) identifying the target concept, considering how the object under consideration relates to the target concept; 2) considering what actions the object affords; and 3) considering how those actions relate to the target concept.
—AllManipulatives are most effective when their design enables students forms of sensorimotor engagement that prompt diverse ways of reasoning related to the content, as well as coordinating among these different ways of reasoning [Abrahamson et al. (2014)].——
5) Bodily-based sensory awareness of internal states
Teachers should encourage students to express pride, enjoyment, and hopes about their learning, and engage in positive attitudes about the efficacy of body-based learning.		Socio-EmotionalBody-based approaches and therapies which lead to the disambiguation of affective states can improve emotion regulation and perception of emotion, as well as improve attention and performance in the classroom [O’Conner et al. (2017), Jagers et al. (2019)].CASEL: https://casel.org/resources/Teachers can capitalize on teaching emotion vocabulary and mindfulness to individuals to not only improve emotional interactions and regulation, but also to improve attention, focus, and cognitive awareness, which all facilitate academic performance.
—Socio-EmotionalIndividuals higher in granularity report more flexible emotional regulation abilities [Barrett et al. (2001), Boden et al. (2012)], have a less reactive coping style [Tugade et al. (2004)], and are less biased by incidental emotions when making moral decisions [Cameron et al. (2013), Fugate and Wilson‐Mendenhall (2022)].—Teachers can label student’s emotional states and include socio-emotional learning (SEL) into the classroom. Emotions can be labeled and incorporated into the category knowledge about human behavior.
—Socio-EmotionalKnowing one’s own feelings may also help with understanding others’ feelings [Saarni (1997)].——
—Socio-EmotionalThe awareness practices that characterize mindfulness-based interventions are thought to improve emotion regulation by cultivating a more fine-grained awareness of what is occurring in one’s mind [Hill and Updegraff (2012), Roemer et al. (2015), Carsley et al. (2018)].—Teachers can consider adding in mindfulness practices into the classroom.

Key Principles for Translational Learning Sciences Research for Embodied Cognition and Embodied Learning.

The final step will be for educators and policy makers to use these principles to develop taxonomies of embodied curriculum, identify learning objectives and outcomes, and track outcomes to assess whether program objectives and competency requirements are met. Specifically, “in situ” assessments will be needed, as retrospective measures of learning (e.g., written tests, etc.) are at odds with the very nature of EL (Georgiou and Ioannou, 2019). As Roschelle et al. (2011) point out: “Meaningful educational change almost always involves coordinating and aligning related changes (e.g., in curriculum, technology use, pedagogy, assessment, and school leadership)” (p. 33).

Summary and Future Directions

Our Translational Learning Sciences Research for Embodied Cognition and Embodied Learning came about because there is a need for an expeditious pipeline to get the latest cognitive science and empirically validated educational applications out to the public. Our model provides a bi-directional conduit in which research findings and applications can flow quickly. We are advancing our model as a vehicle to continue to collate vetted examples of EL as they relate to EC theory. Our model is aimed at informing EL in an earnest way through a translational science approach5. We hope that it encourages cognitive science and educational researchers to offer and make their research available across the fields of educational psychology, educational policy, and teacher education to improve student outcomes and classroom pedagogy. We want to improve communication between scientists and practitioners and to avoid the occurrence of misconceptions, such as neuromyths to shape their pedagogies (Tan and Amiel, 2019). Our model was developed to reimagine how educators can access reliable research to inform their own pedagogy to create a more equitable and just schooling for all.

While we applied this new education-based translational research model to embodied cognition for teaching and learning, we believe that our model can also be used in different educational research contexts. Thus, this approach could provide a vehicle for the dissemination of theory-driven empirical findings translated into evidence-based classroom practice and enable bi-directional suggestions for future research, best practice, and theory development. Ultimately, the continued development of such pathways will lead to the advancement of—and efficient translation of—the latest cognitive science and educational psychology research findings for the educational community.

Statements

Author contributions

SM and JF contributed to all aspects of the article including model development and writing, as well as approved the submitted version.

Funding

A Subvention Grant was awarded by the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth's Office of the Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Professor Dor Abrahamson for his advise on this paper.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

1.^Steps adapted from the National Institutes of Health NCATS (2020) and Rubio et al. (2010).

2.^For example, in 2015 APA launched a new journal called Translational Issues in Psychological Science. In 2015, Kaslow identified “Translating Psychological Science for the Public” as one of her APA presidential initiatives, and appointed a task force to develop new strategies to communicate psychology to the public, with the idea that psychology can one day resemble the public’s knowledge of—and demand for—medical information.

3.^Other theories suggest that there is no grounding necessary because there are no mental representations (Gallagher, 2005; Hutto, 2005; Thompson, 2007; Chemero, 2009; Hutto and Myin, 2012; Hutto and Myin, 2017).

4.^see https://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2019/02/open-science.

5.^Such a “translation” of psychology research to classroom-practice has, however, been done for research on metacognition (Flavell, 1979) (e.g. Tanner, 2012; Beach et al., 2020). Beach and colleagues have an entire manual on the role of metacognition in teaching and learning, highlighting four key findings that are similar in effect to our extracted teaching principles for embodied cognition.

References

  • 1

    AbrahamsonD. (2004). “Embodied Spatial Articulation: A Gesture Perspective on Student Negotiation between Kinesthetic Schemas and Epistemic Forms in Learning Mathematics,” in Proceedings of the Twenty Sixth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Editors McDougallD. E.RossJ. A. (Windsor: Preney), 2, 791–797.

  • 2

    AbrahamsonD. (2007). “Handling Problems: Embodied Reasoning in Situated Mathematics,” in Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Editors LambergT.WiestL. (Lake Tahoe: University of Nevada), 219–226.

  • 3

    AbrahamsonD. (2013). “Toward a Taxonomy of Design Genres: Fostering Mathematical Insight via Perception-Based and Action-Based Experiences,” in Proceedings of the 12th Annual Interaction Design and Children Conference (IDC 2013). Editors HourcadeJ. P.MillerE. A.EgelandA. (New York, NY: The New School & Sesame Workshop), 218–227.

  • 4

    AbrahamsonD. (2014). Building Educational Activities for Understanding: An Elaboration on the Embodied-Design Framework and Its Epistemic Grounds. Int. J. Child-Computer Interaction2 (1), 1–16. 10.1016/j.ijcci.2014.07.002

  • 5

    AbrahamsonD. (2017). “Embodiment and Mathematics Learning,” in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Out-Of-School Learning. Editor PepperK. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.), 1, 248–252. 10.4135/9781483385198.n98

  • 6

    AbrahamsonD. (2021). Grasp Actually: An Evolutionist Argument for Enactivist Mathematics Education. Hum. Dev.1, 1–17. 10.1159/000515680

  • 7

    AbrahamsonD.LindgrenR. (2014). “Embodiment and Embodied Design,” in The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. Editor SawyerR. K.. 2nd ed. (Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press), 358–376.

  • 8

    AbrahamsonD.TrninicD. (2015). Working Out: Mathematics Learning as Motor Problem Solving in Instrumented Fields of Promoted Action. In Knowing and Learning in Interaction: A Synthetic Agenda for the Learning Sciences. Editors diSessaA. A.LevinM.BrownN. J. S.. New York, NY: Routledge, 212–235.

  • 9

    AbrahamsonD.DuttonE.BakkerA. (2021). “Towards an Enactivist Mathematics Pedagogy,” in The Body, Embodiment, and Education: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Editor StolzS. A. (New York: Routledge).

  • 10

    AbrahamsonD.FloodV. J.MieleJ. A.SiuY.-T. (2019). Enactivism and Ethnomethodological Conversation Analysis as Tools for Expanding Universal Design for Learning: The Case of Visually Impaired Mathematics Students. ZDM Maths. Edu.51 (2), 291–303. 10.1007/s11858-018-0998-1

  • 11

    AbrahamsonD.GutiérrezJ.CharoenyingT.NegreteA.BumbacherE. (2012). Fostering Hooks and Shifts: Tutorial Tactics for Guided Mathematical Discovery. Tech. Know Learn.17 (1–2), 61–86. 10.1007/s10758-012-9192-7

  • 12

    AbrahamsonD.LeeR. G.NegreteA. G.GutiérrezJ. F. (2014). Coordinating Visualizations of Polysemous Action: Values Added for Grounding Proportion. ZDM Maths. Edu.46 (1), 79–93. 10.1007/s11858-013-0521-7

  • 13

    AbrahamsonD.NathanM. J.Williams-PierceC.WalkingtonC.OttmarE. R.SotoH.AlibaliM. W. (2020). The Future of Embodied Design for Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Front. Edu. (5), 147. 10.3389/feduc.2020.00147

  • 14

    AbrahamsonD.TrninicD.GutiérrezJ. F.HuthJ.LeeR. G. (2011). Hooks and Shifts: A Dialectical Study of Mediated Discovery. Tech. Know Learn.16 (1), 55–85. 10.1007/s10758-011-9177-y

  • 15

    AlibaliM.NathanM. J. (2007). “Teachers' Gestures as a Means of Scaffolding Students' Understanding: Evidence from an Early Algebra Lesson,” in Video Research in the Learning Sciences. Editors GoldmanR.PeaR.BarronB.DerryS. J. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 349–366.

  • 16

    AlibaliM. W.NathanM. J. (2012). Embodiment in Mathematics Teaching and Learning: Evidence from Learners' and Teachers' Gestures. J. Learn. Sci.21 (2), 247–286. 10.1080/10508406.2011.611446

  • 17

    AlibaliM. W.YoungA. G.CrooksN. M.YeoA.WolfgramM. S.LedesmaI. M.NathanM. J.Breckinridge ChurchR.KnuthE. J. (2013). Students Learn More when Their Teacher Has Learned to Gesture Effectively. Gest.13 (2), 210–233. 10.1075/gest.13.2.05ali

  • 18

    Aziz-ZadehL.Gamez-DjokicV. (2016). Comment: The Interaction Between Metaphor and Emotion Processing in the Brain. Emot. Rev.8 (3), 275–276. 10.1177/1754073915595098

  • 19

    Aziz-ZadehL.KilroyE.CorcelliG. (2018). Understanding Activation Patterns in Shared Circuits: Toward a Value Driven Model. Front. Hum. Neurosci.12, 180. 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00180

  • 20

    BaraF.GentazE. (2011). Haptics in Teaching Handwriting: The Role of Perceptual and Visuo-Motor Skills. Hum. Mov. Sci.30 (4), 745–759. 10.1016/j.humov.2010.05.015

  • 21

    BaraF.GentazE.ColéP.Sprenger-CharollesL. (2004). The Visuo-Haptic and Haptic Exploration of Letters Increases the Kindergarten-Children's Understanding of the Alphabetic Principle. Cogn. Dev.19 (3), 433–449. hal-00733557. 10.1016/j.cogdev.2004.05.003

  • 22

    BarrettL. F.GrossJ.ChristensenT. C.BenvenutoM. (2001). Knowing What You're Feeling and Knowing What To Do About It: Mapping the Relation Between Emotion Differentiation and Emotion Regulation. Cogn. Emot.15 (6), 713–724. 10.1080/02699930143000239

  • 23

    BarsalouL. W. (1999). Perceptual Symbol Systems. Behav. Brain Sci.22 (4), 577–609. 10.1017/S0140525X99002149

  • 24

    BarsalouL. W. (2008). Grounded Cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol.59, 617–645. 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639

  • 25

    BeachP. T.AndersonM. R. C.JacovidisJ. N.ChadwickK. L. (2020). Making the Abstract Explicit: The Role of Metacognition in Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from: Available at: https://www.ibo.org/globalassets/publications/ib-research/policy/metacognition-policy-paper.pdf.

  • 26

    BerkowiczJ.MyersA. (2018). Why Professional Development Fails. EdWeek, January 14, 2018. Retrieved from: Available at: https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-why-professional-development-fails/2018/01.

  • 27

    BernsteinN. A. (1996). “On Dexterity and Its Development,” in Dexterity and Its Development. Editors LatashM. L.TurveyM. T. (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).

  • 28

    BertelettiI.BoothJ. R. (2015). Perceiving Fingers in Single-Digit Arithmetic Problems. Front. Psychol.6, 226. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00226

  • 29

    BoalerJ. (2019). Limitless Mind: Learn, Lead, and Live without Barriers. Harper Collins.

  • 30

    BoalerJ.ChenL.WilliamsC. M.CorderoM. (2016). Seeing as Understanding: The Importance of Visual Mathematics for Our Brain and Learning. J. Appl. Comput. Maths.5, 1–6. 10.4172/2168-9679.10003210.4172/2168-9679.1000325

  • 31

    BoalerJ.HumphreysC. (2005). Connecting Mathematical Ideas: Middle School Cases of Teaching & Learning. New York, NY: Heinemann.

  • 32

    BodenM. T.ThompsonR. J.DizénM.BerenbaumH.BakerJ. P. (2012). Are Emotional Clarity and Emotion Differentiation Related?Cogn. Emot.27, 961–978. 10.1080/02699931.2012.751899

  • 33

    ButeraC.Aziz-ZadehL. (2022). “Mirror Neurons and Social Implications for the Classroom,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 34

    CameronC. D.PayneB. K.DorisJ. M. (2013). Morality in High Definition: Emotion Differentiation Calibrates the Influence of Incidental Disgust on Moral Judgments. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.49 (4), 719–725. 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.014

  • 35

    CaramazzaA.AnzellottiS.StrnadL.LingnauA. (2014). Embodied Cognition and Mirror Neurons: A Critical Assessment. Annu. Rev. Neurosci.37 (1), 1–15. 10.1146/annurev-neuro-071013-013950

  • 36

    CarbonneauK. J.MarleyS. C. (2015). Instructional Guidance and Realism of Manipulatives Influence Preschool Children's Mathematics Learning. J. Exp. Edu.83 (4), 495–513. 10.1080/00220973.2014.989306

  • 37

    CarbonneauK. J.MarleyS. C.SeligJ. P. (2013). A Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Teaching Mathematics With Concrete Manipulatives. J. Educ. Psychol.105 (2), 380–400. 10.1037/a0031084

  • 38

    CarsleyD.KhouryB.HeathN. L. (2018). Effectiveness of Mindfulness Interventions for Mental Health in Schools: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Mindfulness9, 693–707. 10.1007/s12671-017-0839-2

  • 39

    CaspersS.ZillesK.LairdA. R.EickhoffS. B. (2010). ALE Meta-Analysis of Action Observation and Imitation in the Human Brain. NeuroImage50 (3), 1148–1167. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.112

  • 40

    CheluleC. G.WoodsD.NathanM. J. (2019). Collaborative Gesture as a Case of Extended Mathematical Cognition. J. Math. Behav.55, 100683. 10.1016/j.jmathb.2018.12.002

  • 41

    ChemeroA. (2009). Radical Embodied Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

  • 42

    ChenR. S. Y.NinhA.YuB.AbrahamsonD. (2020). “Being in Touch With the Core of Social Interaction: Embodied Design for the Nonverbal,” in Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the International Society of the Learning Sciences, (ICLS 2020). Editors GresalfiM.HornI. S. (Nashville: ISLS), 1681–1684.

  • 43

    ConnorC. M.PhillipsB. M.KaschakM.ApelK.KimY. S.Al OtaibaS.CroweE. C.Thomas-TateS.JohnsonL. C.LoniganC. J. (2014). Comprehension Tools for Teachers: Reading for Understanding From Prekindergarten Through Fourth Grade. Educ. Psychol. Rev.26 (3), 379–401. 10.1007/s10648-014-9267-1

  • 44

    Darling-HammondL.FlookL.Cook-HarveyC.BarronB.OsherD. (2020). Implications for Educational Practice of the Science of Learning and Development. Appl. Develop. Sci.24 (2), 97–140. 10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

  • 45

    De JaegherH. (2013). Embodiment and Sense-Making in Autism. Front. Integr. Neurosci.7 (5), 15. 10.3389/fnint.2013.00015

  • 46

    DelgadoP.VargasC.AckermanR.SalmerónL. (2018). Don't Throw Away Your Printed Books: A Meta-Analysis on the Effects of Reading Media on Reading Comprehension. Educ. Res. Rev.25, 23–38. 10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003

  • 47

    DeweyJ. (1989). The Later Works. La Salle: SIU Press, 16, 1925–1953.

  • 48

    DonovanA. M.AlibaliM. W. (2021). Toys or Math Tools: Do Children's Views of Manipulatives Affect Their Learning?J. Cogn. Dev.22 (2), 281–304. 10.1080/15248372.2021.1890602

  • 49

    DonovanA. M.AlibaliM. (2022). “Manipulatives and Mathematics Learning: The Role of Perceptual and Interactive Features,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 50

    DonovanA. M.BoncoddoR.WilliamsC. C.WalkingtonC.PierE. L.AlibaliM. W. (2014). “Action, Gesture and Abstraction in Mathematical Learning,” in Thematic Panel Presented at the Sixth Conference of the International Society for Gesture Studies, San Diego, CA. July.

  • 51

    Dykstra SteinbrennerJ. R.WatsonL. R. (2015). Student Engagement in the Classroom: The Impact of Classroom, Teacher, and Student Factors. J. Autism Dev. Disord.45 (8), 2392–2410. 10.1007/s10803-015-2406-9

  • 52

    EigstiI.–M. (2013). A Review of Embodiment in Autism Spectrum Disorders. Front. Psychol.4, 224. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00224

  • 53

    EigstiI. M.RossetD.Col CozzariG.da FonsecaD.DeruelleC. (2015). Effects of Motor Action on Affective Preferences in Autism Spectrum Disorders: Different Influences of Embodiment. Dev. Sci.18 (6), 1044–1053. 10.1111/Desc.12278

  • 54

    EsopenkoC.GouldL.CummineJ.SartyG.KuhlmannN.BorowskyR. (2012). A Neuroanatomical Examination of Embodied Cognition: Semantic Generation to Action-Related Stimuli. Front. Hum. Neurosci.6, 84. 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00084

  • 55

    Every Child Succeeds Act (ESSA), Public Law No. 114-95, S.1177, 114th Cong. (2015). Retrieved from: Available at: https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ95/PLAW-114publ95.pdf.

  • 56

    FerrariP. F.CoudéG. (2018). “Mirror Neurons, Embodied Emotions, and Empathy,” in Neuronal Correlates of Empathy: From Rodent to Human. Editors MeyzaK. Z.KnapskaE. (London, United Kingdom: Elsevier Academic Press), 67–77. 10.1016/B978-0-12-805397-3.00006-1

  • 57

    FlanaganJ. R.JohanssonR. S. (2003). Action Plans Used in Action Observation. Nature424, 769–771. 10.1038/nature01861

  • 58

    FlavellJ. H. (1979). Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive-Developmental Inquiry. Am. Psychol.34 (10), 906–911. 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

  • 59

    FloodV. J., (2018). Multimodal Revoicing as an Interactional Mechanism for Connecting Scientific and Everyday Concepts. Hum. Dev., 61 (3),145–173.‬‬ 10.1159/000488693‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬

  • 60

    FloodV. J.ShvartsA.AbrahamsonD. (2020). Teaching with Embodied Learning Technologies for Mathematics: Responsive Teaching for Embodied Learning. ZDM Maths. Edu.52 (7), 1307–1331. 10.1007/s11858-020-01165-7

  • 61

    FloodV.ShvartsA.AbrahamsonD. (2022). “Responsive Teaching for Embodied Learning with Technology,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 62

    FugateJ. M. B.MacrineS. L.CiprianoC. (2018). The Role of Embodied Cognition for Transforming Learning. Int. J. Sch. Educ. Psychol.7 (4), 274–288. 10.1080/21683603.2018.1443856

  • 63

    FugateJ. M. B.Wilson-MendenhallC. (2022). “Embodied Emotion, Emotional Granularity, and Mindfulness: Improved Learning in the Classroom,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 64

    GallagherS. (2005). Dynamic Models of Body Schematic Processes. Adv. Conscious. Res.62, 233–250. 10.1075/aicr.62.15gal

  • 65

    GalleseV. (2009). Mirror Neurons, Embodied Simulation, and the Neural Basis of Social Identification. Psychoanalytic Dialogues19 (5), 519–536. 10.1080/10481880903231910

  • 66

    GaverW. W. (1991). “Technology Affordances,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Editors RobertsonS. P.OlsonG. M.OlsonJ. S. (New York, NY: ACM Press), 79–84. 10.1145/108844.108856

  • 67

    GeorgiouY.IoannouA. (2019). Teachers’ Concerns About Adopting Technology-Enhanced Embodied Learning and Their Mitigation through Professional Development. J. Tech. Teach. Edu.27 (3), 335–371.

  • 68

    GerofskyS. (2011). “Chapter 18. Seeing the Graph vs. Being the Graph,” in Integrating Gestures. Editors StamG.IshinoM. (Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins), 245–256. 10.1075/gs.4.22ger

  • 69

    GibsonJ. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton Mifflin.

  • 70

    GilesO. T.ShireK. A.HillL. J. B.MushtaqF.WatermanA.HoltR. J.WilliamsJ. H. G.WilkieR. M.Mon-WilliamsM. (2018). Hitting the Target: Mathematical Attainment in Children Is Related to Interceptive-Timing Ability. Psychol. Sci.29 (8), 1334–1345. 10.1177/0956797618772502

  • 71

    GillilandC. T.SittampalamG. S.WangP. Y.RyanP. E. (2017). The Translational Science Training Program at NIH: Introducing Early Career Researchers to the Science and Operation of Translation of Basic Research to Medical Interventions. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ.45 (1), 13–24. 10.1002/bmb.20978

  • 72

    GlenbergA. M. (2008). “Toward the Integration of Bodily States, Language, and Action,” in Embodied Grounding: Social, Cognitive, Affective, and Neuroscientific Approaches. Editors SeminG. R.SmithE. R. (Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press), 43–70. 10.1017/CBO9780511805837.003

  • 73

    GlenbergA. M. (2011). How Reading Comprehension Is Embodied and Why That Matters. Int. Electron. J. Elem. Edu.4 (1), 5–18.

  • 74

    GlenbergA. M.GalleseV. (2012). Action-Based Language: A Theory of Language Acquisition, Comprehension, and Production. Cortex48 (7), 905–922. 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.010

  • 75

    GlenbergA. M.KaschakM. P. (2002). Grounding Language in Action. Psychon. Bull. Rev.9 (3), 558–565. 10.3758/bf03196313

  • 76

    GlenbergA. M.BeckerR.KlötzerS.KolankoL.MüllerS.RinckM. (2009). Episodic Affordances Contribute to Language Comprehension. Lang. Cogn.1 (1), 113–135. 10.1515/langcog.2009.006

  • 77

    GlenbergA. M.GoldbergA. B.ZhuX. (2011). Improving Early Reading Comprehension Using Embodied CAI. Instr. Sci.39, 27–39. 10.1007/s11251-009-9096-7

  • 78

    GlenbergA. M.GutierrezT.LevinJ. R.JapuntichS.KaschakM. P. (2004). Activity and Imagined Activity Can Enhance Young Children's Reading Comprehension. J. Educ. Psychol.96, 424–436. 10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.424

  • 79

    GlenbergA. M.JaworskiB.RischalM.LevinJ. (2007). “What Brains Are for: Action, Meaning, and Reading Comprehension,” in Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions, and Technologies. Editor McNamaraD. S. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers), 221–240.

  • 80

    GomezL. E.GlenbergA. (2022). “Embodied Classroom Activities for Vocabulary Acquisition,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 81

    Gracia-BafalluyM.NoëlM. P. (2008). Does Finger Training Increase Young Children's Numerical Performance?Cortex44 (4), 368–375. 10.1016/j.cortex.2007.08.020

  • 82

    GredebäckG.Falck-YtterT. (2015). Eye Movements During Action Observation. Perspect. Psychol. Sci.10 (5), 591–598. 10.1177/1745691615589103

  • 83

    GrynszpanO.MartinJ. C.FossatiP. (2017). Gaze Leading Is Associated With Liking. Acta Psychol. (Amst)173, 66–72. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.12.006

  • 84

    GulamhusseinA. (2013). Teaching the Teachers: Effective Professional Development in the Era of High Stakes Accountability. Columbus, OH: National School Board Association, Center for Public Education. Available at: http://conference.ohioschoolboards.org/2017/wp-%20content/uploads/sites/17/2016/07/1pm111317A114Job-embedPD.pdf.

  • 85

    HallR.NemirovskyR. (2012). Introduction to the Special Issue: Modalities of Body Engagement in Mathematical Activity and Learning. J. Learn. Sci.21 (2), 207–215. 10.1080/10508406.2011.611447

  • 86

    HarrisonL. A.KatsA.WilliamsM. E.Aziz-ZadehL. (2019). The Importance of Sensory Processing in Mental Health: A Proposed Addition to the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and Suggestions for RDoC 2.0. Front. Psychol.10, 103. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00103

  • 87

    HashemiparastM.NegarandehR.TheofanidisD. (2019). Exploring the Barriers of Utilizing Theoretical Knowledge in Clinical Settings: A Qualitative Study. Int. J. Nurs. Sci.6, 399–405. 10.1016/j.ijnss.2019.09.008

  • 88

    HaukO.JohnsrudeI.PulvermüllerF. (2004). Somatotopic Representation of Action Words in Human Motor and Premotor Cortex. Neuron.41 (2), 301–307. 10.1016/S0896-6273(03)00838-9

  • 89

    HillC. L.UpdegraffJ. A. (2012). Mindfulness and Its Relationship to Emotional Regulation. Emotion12 (1), 81–90. 10.1037/a0026355

  • 90

    HorvathJ. C.DonoghueG. M.HortonA. J.LodgeJ. M.HattieJ. A. C. (2018). On the Irrelevance of Neuromyths to Teacher Effectiveness: Comparing Neuro-Literacy Levels Amongst Award-Winning and Non-Award Winning Teachers. Front. Psychol.9, 1666. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01666

  • 91

    HostetterA. B.AlibaliM. W. (2019). Gesture as Simulated Action: Revisiting the Framework. Psychon. Bull. Rev.26 (3), 721–752. 10.3758/s13423-018-1548-0

  • 92

    HuttoD. D. (2005). Knowing What? Radical Versus Conservative Enactivism. Phenom. Cogn. Sci.4 (4), 389–405. 10.1007/978-1-4020-5558-4_710.1007/s11097-005-9001-z

  • 93

    HuttoD. D. (2007). “Folk Psychology Without Theory or Simulation,” in Folk Psychology Re-Assessed. Editors HuttoD. D.RatcliffeM. (Dordrecht: Springer), 115–135.

  • 94

    HuttoD. D.KirchhoffM. D.AbrahamsonD. (2015). The Enactive Roots of STEM: Rethinking Educational Design in Mathematics. Educ. Psychol. Rev.27 (3), 371–389. 10.1007/s10648-015-9326-2

  • 95

    HuttoD. D.MyinE. (2012). Radicalizing Enactivism: Basic Minds Without Content. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • 96

    HuttoD. D.MyinE. (2017). Evolving Enactivism: Basic Minds Meet Content. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • 97

    IacoboniM. (2009). Imitation, Empathy, and Mirror Neurons. Annu. Rev. Psychol.60, 653–670. 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163604PMID: 18793090

  • 98

    IacoboniM.Molnar-SzakacsI.GalleseV.BuccinoG.MazziottaJ. C.RizzolattiG. (2005). Grasping the Intentions of Others With One's Own Mirror Neuron System. Plos Biol.3, e79. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030079

  • 99

    Immordino‐YangM. H.DamasioA. (2007). We Feel, Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education. Mind, Brain Edu.1 (1), 3–10.

  • 100

    JagersR. J.Rivas-DrakeD.WilliamsB. (2019). Transformative Social and Emotional Learning (SEL): Toward SEL in Service of Educational Equity and Excellence. Educ. Psychol.54 (3), 162–184. 10.1080/00461520.2019.1623032

  • 101

    JamesK. H. (2010). Sensori-Motor Experience Leads to Changes in Visual Processing in the Developing Brain. Dev. Sci.13 (2), 279–288. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00883.x

  • 102

    JamesK. H. (2017). The Importance of Handwriting Experience on the Development of the Literate Brain. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.26 (6), 502–508. 10.1177/0963721417709821

  • 103

    JamesK. H. (2022). “The Embodiment of Letter Perception: The Importance of Handwriting in Early Childhood,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 104

    JamesK. H.EngelhardtL. (2012). The Effects of Handwriting Experience on Functional Brain Development in Pre-Literate Children. Trends Neurosci. Educ.1 (1), 32–42. 10.1016/j.tine.2012.08.001

  • 105

    Johnson-GlenbergM. C. (2018). Immersive VR and Education: Embodied Design Principles That Include Gesture and Hand Controls. Front. Robot. AI. 10.3389/frobt.2018.00081

  • 106

    Johnson-GlenbergM. C. (2022). “Evaluating Embodied Immersive STEM VR Using the Quality of Education in Virtual Reality Rubric (QUIVRR),” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 107

    Johnson-GlenbergM. C.Megowan-RomanowiczC. (2017). Embodied Science and Mixed Reality: How Gesture and Motion Capture Affect Physics Education. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic.2 (24), s41235. 10.1186/s41235-017-0060-9

  • 108

    Johnson-GlenbergM. C.Megowan-RomanowiczC.BirchfieldD. A.Savio-RamosC. (2016). Effects of Embodied Learning and Digital Platform on the Retention of Physics Content: Centripetal Force. Front. Psychol.7, 1819. 2016. Article. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.018197

  • 109

    KamiiC.LewisB. A.KirklandL. (2001). Manipulatives: When Are They Useful?. J. Math. Behav.20 (1), 21–31. 10.1016/S0732-3123(01)00059-1

  • 110

    KaschakM. P.ConnorC. M.DombekJ. L. (2017). Enacted Reading Comprehension: Using Bodily Movement to Aid the Comprehension of Abstract Text Content. PLoS One12, e0169711. 10.1371/journal.pone.0169711

  • 111

    KaschakM. P.MaddenC. J.TherriaultD. J.YaxleyR. H.AveyardM.BlanchardA. A.ZwaanR. A. (2005). Perception of Motion Affects Language Processing. Cognition94, B79–B89. 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.06.005

  • 112

    KaslowN. J. (2015). Translating Psychological Science to the Public. Am. Psychol.70 (5), 361–371. 10.1037/a0039448

  • 113

    KeltonM. L.MaJ. Y. (2018). Reconfiguring Mathematical Settings and Activity Through Multi-Party, Whole-Body Collaboration. Educ. Stud. Math.98 (2), 177–196. 10.1007/s10649-018-9805-8

  • 114

    KeltonM. L.MaJ. Y. (2020). Assembling a Torus: Family Mobilities in an Immersive Mathematics Exhibition. Cogn. Instruction38, 318–347. 10.1080/07370008.2020.1725013

  • 115

    KeysersC.ParacampoR.GazzolaV. (2018). What Neuromodulation and Lesion Studies Tell Us About the Function of the Mirror Neuron System and Embodied Cognition. Curr. Opin. Psychol.24, 35–40. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.04.001

  • 116

    KieferM.SchulerS.MayerC.TrumppN. M.HilleK.SachseS. (2015). Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool Children. Adv. Cogn. Psychol.11, 136–146. 10.5709/acp-0178-7

  • 117

    KilroyE.CermakS. A.Aziz-ZadehL. (2019). A Review of Functional and Structural Neurobiology of the Action Observation Network in Autism Spectrum Disorder and Developmental Coordination Disorder. Brain Sci.9 (4), E75. 10.3390/brainsci9040075

  • 118

    KleinC.LesterJ.RangwalaH.JohriA. (2019). Technological Barriers and Incentives to Learning Analytics Adoption in Higher Education: Insights From Users. J. Comput. High Educ.31 (3), 604–625. 10.1007/s12528-019-09210-5

  • 119

    KolbD. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

  • 120

    KontraC.Goldin-MeadowS.BeilockS. L. (2012). Embodied Learning Across the Life Span. Top. Cogn. Sci.4 (4), 731–739. 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01221.x

  • 121

    KontraC.LyonsD. J.FischerS. M.BeilockS. L. (2015). Physical Experience Enhances Science Learning. Psychol. Sci.26 (6), 737–749. 10.1177/0956797615569355

  • 122

    KosmasP.ZaphirisP. (2018). Embodied Cognition and Its Implications in Education: An Overview of Recent Literature. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Tech.12, 930–936. 10.1999/1307-6892/10009334

  • 123

    KosmasP.IoannouA.ZaphirisP. (2019). Implementing Embodied Learning in the Classroom: Effects on Children's Memory and Language Skills. Educ. Media Int.56 (1), 59–74. 10.1080/09523987.2018.1547948

  • 124

    KrauseC. (2017). DeafMath: Exploring the Influence of Sign Language on Mathematical Conceptualization, 10. Dublin, Ireland: CERME.

  • 125

    KumarS.TranJ.MosesonH.TaiC.GlennJ. M.MaderoE. N.KrebsC.BottN.JuusolaJ. L. (2018). The Impact of the Virtual Cognitive Health Program on the Cognition and Mental Health of Older Adults: Pre-Post 12-Month Pilot Study. JMIR Aging1 (2), e12031. 10.2196/12031

  • 126

    LaddaA. M.PfannmoellerJ. P.KalischT.RoschkaS.PlatzT.DinseH. R.LotzeM. (2014). Effects of Combining 2 Weeks of Passive Sensory Stimulation With Active Hand Motor Training in Healthy Adults. PLoS ONE9, e84402. 10.1371/journal.pone.0084402

  • 127

    LakoffG.JohnsonM. (1980). Conceptual Metaphor in Everyday Language. J. Philos.77 (8), 453–486. 10.2307/2025464

  • 128

    LauerJ. E.LourencoS. F. (2016). Spatial Processing in Infancy Predicts Both Spatial and Mathematical Aptitude in Childhood. Psychol. Sci.27 (10), 1291–1298. 10.1177/0956797616655977

  • 129

    LindgrenR.Johnson-GlenbergM. (2013). Emboldened by Embodiment. Educ. Res.42 (8), 445–452. 10.3102/0013189X13511661

  • 130

    LindgrenR.TschollM.WangS.JohnsonE. (2016). Enhancing Learning and Engagement through Embodied Interaction Within a Mixed Reality Simulation. Comput. Edu.95, 174–187. 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.001

  • 131

    LongcampM.AntonJ. L.RothM.VelayJ. L. (2003). Visual Presentation of Single Letters Activates a Premotor Area Involved in Writing. Neuroimage19 (4), 1492–1500. 10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00088-0

  • 132

    LongcampM.BoucardC.GilhodesJ. C.AntonJ. L.RothM.NazarianB.VelayJ. L. (2008). Learning Through Hand- or Typewriting Influences Visual Recognition of New Graphic Shapes: Behavioral and Functional Imaging Evidence. J. Cogn. Neurosci.20 (5), 802–815. 10.1162/jocn.2008.20504

  • 133

    LongcampM.Zerbato-PoudouM. T.VelayJ. L. (2005). The Influence of Writing Practice on Letter Recognition in Preschool Children: A Comparison Between Handwriting and Typing. Acta Psychol. (Amst)119 (1), 67–79. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.10.019

  • 134

    MaJ. Y. (2017). Multi-Party, Whole-Body Interactions in Mathematical Activity. Cogn. Instruction35 (2), 141–164. 10.1080/07370008.2017.1282485

  • 135

    MacrineS. L. (2002). Pedagogical Bondage: Body Bound and Gagged in a Technorational World. Body Movements: Pedagogy, Polit. Soc. Change, 133–145.

  • 136

    MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (2020). “Embodied Cognition,” in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education (Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press). 10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.885

  • 137

    MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (2022). Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • 138

    MangenA. (2008). Hypertext Fiction Reading: Haptics and Immersion. J. Res. Reading31 (4), 404–419. 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.00380.x

  • 139

    MangenA.BalsvikL. (2016). Pen or Keyboard in Beginning Writing Instruction? Some Perspectives From Embodied Cognition. Trends Neurosci. Edu.5 (3), 99–106. 10.1016/j.tine.2016.06.003

  • 140

    MangenA.VelayJ.-L. (2010). “Digitizing Literacy: Reflections on the Haptics of Writing,” in Advances in Haptics. Editor ZadehM. H., 385–402. IN-TECH web. 10.5772/8710

  • 141

    MangenA.AndaL. G.OxboroughG. H.BrønnickK. (2015). Handwriting Versus Keyboard Writing: Effect on Word Recall. J. Writing Res.7 (2), 227–247. 10.17239/jowr-2015.07.02.1

  • 142

    MangenA.OlivierG.VelayJ. L. (2019). Comparing Comprehension of a Long Text Read in Print Book and on Kindle: Where in the Text and When in the Story?Front. Psychol.10, 38. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00038

  • 143

    MangenA.WalgermoB. R.BrønnickK. (2013). Reading Linear Texts on Paper Versus Computer Screen: Effects on Reading Comprehension. Int. J. Educ. Res.58, 61–68. 10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002

  • 144

    MarleyS. C.LevinJ. R.GlenbergA. M. (2007). Improving Native American Children's Listening Comprehension Through Concrete Representations. Contemp. Educ. Psychol.32, 537–550. 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.03.003

  • 145

    MatsushitaR. (2017). The Paradox of Evidence-Based Education: From the Decline of Education to Abandonment of the Theories of Education. Esj11, 101–119. 10.7571/esjkyoiku.11.101

  • 146

    MayerC.WallnerS.Budde-SpenglerN.BraunertS.ArndtP. A.KieferM. (2020). Literacy Training of Kindergarten Children With Pencil, Keyboard or Tablet Stylus: The Influence of the Writing Tool on Reading and Writing Performance at the Letter and Word Level. Front. Psychol.10, 3054. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03054

  • 147

    MazzucaC.BorghiA. M. (2019). “Chapter 2. Abstract Concepts and the Activation of Mouth-Hand Effectors,” in Human Cognitive Processing 65: Perspectives on Abstract Concepts: Cognition Language and Communication. Editors BolognesiM.SteenG. (Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins), 43–57. 10.1075/hcp.65.03maz

  • 148

    McKenneyS. (2018). How Can the Learning Sciences (Better) Impact Policy and Practice?. J. Learn. Sci.27 (1), 1–7. 10.1080/10508406.2017.1404404

  • 149

    MechsnerF.KerzelD.KnoblichG.PrinzW. (2001). Perceptual Basis of Bimanual Coordination. Nature414 (6859), 69–73. 10.1038/35102060

  • 150

    Megowan-RomanowiczC. (2022). “Physics and Gesture: Spatial Thinking and Mutual Manifestness,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 151

    Merleau-PontyM. (1962). Phenomenology of Perception [Phénoménologie de la Perception]. New York: Humanities Press.

  • 152

    MontessoriM. M. (1969). The Four Planes of Development. AMI Commun. (2/3), 4–10.

  • 153

    MoyerP. S. (2001). Are We Having Fun Yet? How Teachers Use Manipulatives to Teach Mathematics. Educ. Stud. Maths.47 (2), 175–197. 10.1023/a:1014596316942

  • 154

    MuellerP. A.OppenheimerD. M. (2014). The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard: Advantages of Longhand Over Laptop Note Taking. Psychol. Sci.25 (6), 1159–1168. 10.1177/0956797614524581

  • 155

    NakaM. (1998). Repeated Writing Facilitates Children's Memory for Pseudocharacters and Foreign Letters. Mem. Cognit.26 (4), 804–809. 10.3758/bf03211399

  • 156

    NathanM. J. (2012). Rethinking Formalisms in Formal Education. Educ. Psychol.47 (2), 125–148. 10.1080/00461520.2012.667063

  • 157

    NathanM. J.SchenckK. E.VinsonhalerR.MichaelisJ. E.SwartM. I.WalkingtonC. (2020). Embodied Geometric Reasoning: Dynamic Gestures During Intuition, Insight, and Proof. J. Educ. Psychol.113, 929–948. 10.1037/edu0000638

  • 158

    NathanM. J.WalkingtonC.BoncoddoR.PierE.WilliamsC. C.AlibaliM. W. (2014). Actions Speak Louder With Words: the Roles of Action and Pedagogical Language for Grounding Mathematical Proof. Learn. Instruction33, 182–193. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.07.001

  • 159

    NathanM. J.YeoA.BoncoddoR.HostetterA. B.AlibaliM. W. (2019). Teachers' Attitudes About Gesture for Learning and Instruction. Gest.18 (1), 31–56. 10.1075/gest.00032.nat

  • 160

    NCATS-NIH, (2020). National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Available at: https://ncats.nih.gov/

  • 161

    NIH (2020). Translational Science Spectrum. Available at: https://ncats.nih.gov/translation/spectrum.

  • 162

    No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (2002). P.L. U.S.C.20, 107–110. § 6319.

  • 163

    NutleyS.WalterI.DaviesH. T. O. (2009). Promoting Evidence-Based Practice. Res. Soc. Work Pract.19 (5), 552–559. 10.1177/1049731509335496

  • 164

    O'ConnerR.De FeyterJ.CarrA.LuoJ. L.RommH. (2017). A Review of the Literature on Social and Emotional Learning for Students Ages 3-8: Characteristics of Effective Social and Emotional Learning Programs (Part 1 of 4). REL 2017-245. Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic. Retrieved from: Available at: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/projects/project.asp?projectID=443.

  • 165

    PaigeD. D.SmithG. S.Magpuri-LavellT. (2019). Learning to Improve: Report of a Three-Year Capacity-Building Project Leveraging Professional Development + Coaching to Improve Third-Grade Reading Outcomes. Als07, 193–223. 10.4236/als.2019.74013

  • 166

    Penner-WilgerM.AndersonM. L. (2013). The Relation Between Finger Gnosis and Mathematical Ability: Why Redeployment of Neural Circuits Best Explains the Finding. Front. Psychol.4, 877. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00877

  • 167

    Penner-WilgerM.FastL.LeFevreJ.Smith-ChantB. L.SkwarchukS.KamawarD.et al (2009). “Subitizing, Finger Gnosis, and the Representation of Number,” in Proceedings of the 31st Annual Cognitive Science Society (520–525). Editors TaatgenN.RijnH. V.SchomakerL.NerbonneJ. (Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society).

  • 168

    PetitmenginC. (2007). Towards the Source of Thoughts. J. Conscious. Stud.14 (3), 54–82.

  • 169

    PiagetJ. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co.

  • 170

    PiagetJ. (1968). Six Psychological Studies. D. Elkind (Trans.). New York: Random House.

  • 171

    PulvermüllerF. (2005). Brain Mechanisms Linking Language and Action. Nat. Rev. Neurosci.6 (7), 576–582. 10.1038/nrn1706PMID: 15959465

  • 172

    RadfordL.RothW. M. (2011). Intercorporeality and Ethical Commitment: An Activity Perspective on Classroom Interaction. Educ. Stud. Maths.77 (2), 227–245. 10.1007/s10649-010-9282-1

  • 173

    RasmussenC.StephanM.AllenK. (2004). Classroom Mathematical Practices and Gesturing. J. Math. Behav.23 (3), 301–323. 10.1016/j.jmathb.2004.06.003

  • 174

    RaynerK.FoormanB. R.PerfettiC. A.PesetskyD.SeidenbergM. S. (2001). How Psychological Science Informs the Teaching of Reading. Psychol. Sci.2, 31–74. 10.1111/1529-1006.00004

  • 175

    ReinholzD.TrninicD.HowisonM.AbrahamsonD. (2010). “It's Not Easy Being Green: Embodied Artifacts and the Guided Emergence of Mathematical Meaning,” in Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Annual Meeting of the North-American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME-NA 32). Editors BrosnanP.ErchickD.FlevaresL. (Columbus, OH: PME-NA), 1488–1496.

  • 176

    RizzolattiG.FadigaL.GalleseV.FogassiL. (1996). Premotor Cortex and the Recognition of Motor Actions. Brain Res. Cogn. Brain Res.3 (2), 131–141. 10.1016/0926-6410(95)00038-0

  • 177

    RobertsonA. D.ScherrR. E.HammerD. (2016). Responsive Teaching in Science and Mathematics. New York: Routledge.

  • 178

    RoedigerH. L. (2013). Applying Cognitive Psychology to Education: Translational Educational Science. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest14, 1–3. 10.1177/1529100612454415

  • 179

    RoemerL.WillistonS. K.RollinsL. G. (2015). Mindfulness and Emotion Regulation. Curr. Opin. Psychol.3, 52–57. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.02.006

  • 180

    RogoffB. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Contexts. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

  • 181

    RoschelleJ.BakiaM.ToyamaY.PattonC. (2011). Eight Issues for Learning Scientists About Education and the Economy. J. Learn. Sci.20 (1), 3–49. 10.1080/10508406.2011.528318

  • 182

    RosenbaumL. F.KaurJ.AbrahamsonD. (2020). Shaping Perception: Designing for Participatory Facilitation of Collaborative Geometry. Digit Exp. Math. Educ.6, 191–212. 10.1007/s40751-020-00068-2

  • 183

    RowlandsM. (2010). The New Science of the Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262014557.001.0001

  • 184

    RubioD. M.SchoenbaumE. E.LeeL. S.SchteingartD. E.MarantzP. R.AndersonK. E.PlattL. D.BaezA.EspositoK. (2010). Defining Translational Research: Implications for Training. Acad. Med.85 (3), 470–475. 2010 Mar. 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181ccd618

  • 185

    SaarniC. (1997). Coping With Aversive Feelings. Motiv. Emot.21 (1), 45–63. 10.1023/A:1024474314409

  • 186

    SchenckK. E.WalkingtonC.NathanM. J. (2022). “Groups That Move Together, Prove Together: Collaborative Gestures and Gesture Attitudes Among Teachers Performing Embodied Geometry,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 187

    ShvartsA.AbrahamsonD. (2019). Dual-Eye-Tracking Vygotsky: A Microgenetic Account of a Teaching/Learning Collaboration in an Embodied-Interaction Technological Tutorial for Mathematics. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interaction22, 100316. 10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.05.003

  • 188

    SmyrnaiouZ.SotiriouM. (2016). D2.3 Effective Learning Environments for Inquiry Learning and Teaching. Los Angeles, CA: EU Project CREATIONS. CREATIONS (2015-2018), H2020-SEAC-2014-1CSA, 665917.

  • 189

    SuwaM. (2006). A Cognitive Model of Acquiring Embodied Expertise Through Meta-Cognitive Verbalization. Trans. Jpn. Soc. Artif. Intelligence23 (3), 141–150.

  • 190

    TanY. S. M.AmielJ. J. (2019). Teachers Learning to Apply Neuroscience to Classroom Instruction: Case of Professional Development in British Columbia. Prof. Dev. Edu., 1–18. 10.1080/19415257.2019.1689522

  • 191

    TancrediS.ChenR. S. Y.KrauseC.SiuY-T. (2022). “The Need for SPEED: Reimagining Accessibility Through Special Education Embodied Design,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 192

    TannerK. D. (2012). Promoting Student Metacognition. CBE Life Sci. Educ.11 (2), 113–120. 10.1187/cbe.12-03-0033

  • 193

    ThompsonE. (2007). Mind in Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • 194

    TrninicD.AbrahamsonD. (2012). “Embodied Artifacts and Conceptual Performances,” in Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences: Future of Learning (ICLS 2012), Sydney, Australia. Editors AalstJ. V.ThompsonK.JacobsonM. J.ReimannP. (Sydney: University of Sydney/ISLS), Vol. 1, 283–290.

  • 195

    TugadeM. M.FredricksonB. L.BarrettL. F. (2004). Psychological Resilience and Positive Emotional Granularity: Examining the Benefits of Positive Emotions on Coping and Health. J. Pers.72 (6), 1161–1190. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00294.x

  • 196

    VarelaF. J.ThompsonE.RoschE. (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • 197

    VieyraR. (2018). “Teaching Students Metacognition Through Discipline-Based Research and Technology,” in Einstein Fellows: Best Practices in STEM Education. 2nd Ed. (New York: Peter Lang Inc).

  • 198

    VieryaR.VieryaC. (2022). “Immersive Learning Experiences in Augmented Reality (AR): Visualizing and Interacting With Magnetic Fields,” in Movement Matters: How Embodied Cognition Informs Teaching and Learning. Editors MacrineS. L.FugateJ. M. B. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

  • 199

    VieyraR.VieyraC.PendrillA.-M.XuB. (2020). Gamified Physics Challenges for Teachers and the Public. Phys. Educ.55, 045014. 10.1088/1361-6552/ab8779

  • 200

    Vinci‐BooherS.JamesK. H. (2020). Visual Experiences During Letter Production Contribute to the Development of the Neural Systems Supporting Letter Perception. Dev. Sci.23 (5), e12965.

  • 201

    VogelsteinL.BradyC.HallR. (2019). Reenacting Mathematical Concepts Found in Large-Scale Dance Performance Can Provide Both Material and Method for Ensemble Learning. ZDM Maths. Edu.51 (2), 331–346. 10.1007/s11858-019-01030-2

  • 202

    VygotskyL. S. (1926/1997). Educational Psychology (R. H. Silverman, Trans.). Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC. Original Work Published 1926.

  • 203

    VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Editors ColeM.John-SteinerV.ScribnerS.SoubermanE.. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

  • 204

    WalkingtonC.CheluleG.WoodsD.NathanM. J. (2019). Collaborative Gesture as a Case of Extended Mathematical Cognition. J. Math. Behav.55, 100683. 10.1016/j.jmathb.2018.12.002

  • 205

    WeinsteinY.MadanC. R.SumerackiM. A. (2018). Teaching the Science of Learning. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic.3 (2), 2. 10.1186/s41235-017-0087-y

  • 206

    WeisbergS. M.NewcombeN. S. (2017). How Do (Some) People Make a Cognitive Map? Routes, Places, and Working Memory. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn.42 (5), 768–785. 10.1037/xlm0000200

  • 207

    WertschJ. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the Social Formation of Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • 208

    WilcoxG.MorettL. M.HawesZ.DommettE. J. (2020). Why Educational Neuroscience Needs Educational and School Psychology to Effectively Translate Neuroscience to Educational Practice. Front. Psychol.11, 618449. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.618449

  • 209

    WillinghamD. T. (2009). Three Problems in the Marriage of Neuroscience and Education. Cortex45 (4), 544–545. 10.1016/j.cortex.2008.05.009

  • 210

    WilsonA.FogliaL. (2011). Embodied Cognition. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at: https://philpapers.org/rec/WILEC.

  • 211

    WilsonM. (2002). Six Views of Embodied Cognition. Psychon. Bull. Rev.9 (4), 625–636. 10.3758/BF03196322

  • 212

    ZwaanR. A. (2014). Embodiment and Language Comprehension: Reframing the Discussion. Trends Cogn. Sci.18 (5), 229–234. 10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.008

Summary

Keywords

translational science, embodied cognition, teaching—learning, pedagogy, learning sciences

Citation

Macrine SL and Fugate JMB (2021) Translating Embodied Cognition for Embodied Learning in the Classroom. Front. Educ. 6:712626. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.712626

Received

20 May 2021

Accepted

18 August 2021

Published

02 December 2021

Volume

6 - 2021

Edited by

MarÃ-a Teresa MartÃ-n-Aragoneses, National University of Distance Education (UNED), Spain

Reviewed by

Linda Baker, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, United States

Carlos Santoyo, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico

Updates

Copyright

© 2021 Macrine and Fugate.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Sheila L. Macrine,

†These authors have contributed equally to this work

This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Education

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Share on WeChat

Scan with WeChat to share this article

Article metrics