In conversations about pedagogy, researchers often overlook how physical space and movement shape teacher sensemaking. This article offers a comparative case study of classroom videos using a dynamic visual method to map embodied interaction called “interaction geography.” Our analysis proposes an integrative framework to study classroom interactions and teacher movement over space and time comprised of four salient characteristics within lessons: trails, landmarks, material routines, and circulation patterns. We discuss how this visual method and framework can be used and expanded by classroom researchers and teachers as a starting point to better understand teaching as a situative and spatial practice, a crucial step in characterizing responsive forms of instruction. This work has implications not only for teachers and teacher educators but also for architects, administrators, and researchers concerned with the physical design of classrooms.
BallD. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373–397.
2.
BangM.MedinD. (2010). Cultural processes in science education: Supporting the navigation of multiple epistemologies. Science Education, 94(6), 1008–1026.
3.
BersonI. R.BersonM. J.McKinnonC.AradhyaD.AlyaeeshM.LuoW.ShapiroB. R. (2023). An exploration of robot programming as a foundation for spatial reasoning and computational thinking in preschoolers’ guided play. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 65, 57–67.
4.
BlaisdellB. (2020). The right to the classroom: Seeking spatial justice in kindergarten. Urban Review, 52, 152–171.
5.
BorkoH.JacobsJ.EiteljorgE.PittmanM. E. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 417–436.
6.
BuckleyC. A.WaringM. J. (2013). Using diagrams to support the research process: Examples from grounded theory. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 148–172.
7.
BrykA.SchneiderB. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation.
8.
CalandraB.RichP. J. (Eds.). (2014). Digital video for teacher education: Research and practice. Routledge.
9.
CalarcoJ. M. (2011). “I need help!” Social class and children’s help-seeking in elementary school. American Sociological Review, 76(6), 862–882.
10.
CazdenC. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Heinemann.
11.
ClevelandB.FisherK. (2014). The evaluation of physical learning environments: A critical review of the literature. Learning Environments Research, 17, 1–28.
12.
CohenD. (2011). Teaching and its predicaments. Harvard University Press.
13.
CohenE. G.LotanR. A. (2014). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.
14.
DunleavyT. K. (2015). Delegating mathematical authority as a means to strive toward equity. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 8(1), 62–82.
15.
EhrenfeldN.HornI. (2020). Initiation-entry-focus-exit and participation: A framework for understanding teacher groupwork monitoring routines. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 103(7), 251–272.
16.
EllisR. A.GoodyearP. (2018). Spaces of teaching and learning: Integrating perspectives on research and practice. Springer.
17.
EricksonF. (2004). Talk and social theory: Ecologies of speaking and listening in everyday life. Polity Press.
18.
Fernandez-NietoG. M.AnP.ZhaoJ.Buckingham ShumS.Martinez-MaldonadoR. (2022). Classroom dandelions: Visualising participant position, trajectory and body orientation augments teachers’ sensemaking. In CHI 22: Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Article 54, pp. 1–7). ACM.
19.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
20.
GoemanM. (2013). Mark my words: Native women mapping our nations. University of Minnesota Press.
21.
GreenoJ. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.
22.
GrossmanP. L.StodolskyS. S. (1995). Content as context: The role of school subjects in secondary school teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(8), 5–23.
23.
GutiérrezK. D.HiggsJ.LizarragaJ. R.RiveroE. (2019). Learning as movement in social design-based experiments: Play as a leading activity. Human Development, 62(1–2), 66–82.
24.
GutiérrezK. D.RogoffB. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25.
25.
HackettA. (2014). Zigging and zooming all over the place: Young children’s meaning making and movement in the museum. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 14(1), 5–27.
26.
HagenahS.ThompsonJ. (2021). Teachers’ attempts to respond to students’ lived experiences. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(5), 537–557.
27.
HägerstrandT. (1970). What about people in regional science?Papers in Regional Science, 24(1), 7–24.
28.
HallR.StevensR. (2015). Interaction analysis approaches to knowledge in use. In di SessaA. A.LevinM.BrownN. J. S. (Eds.), Knowledge and interaction (pp. 88–124). Routledge.
29.
Herbel-EisenmannB. A.BreyfogleM. L. (2005). Questioning our patterns of questioning. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 10(9), 484–489.
30.
HiebertJ.GallimoreR.GarnierH.GivvinK. B.HollingsworthH.JacobsJ.ChuiA. M.WearneD.SmithM.KerstingN.ManasterA.TsengE.EtterbeekW.ManasterC.GonzalesP.StiglerJ. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study. National Center for Education Statistics.
31.
HornI.GarnerB. (2022). Teacher learning of ambitious and equitable mathematics instruction: A sociocultural approach. Routledge.
32.
HornI. S.LittleJ. W. (2010). Attending to problems of practice: Routines and resources for professional learning in teachers’ work-place interactions. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 181–217.
33.
IngoldT. (2007). Lines: A brief history. Routledge.
JordanB.HendersonA. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.
36.
KeltonM. L. (2021). Mathematics learning pathways on a school fieldtrip: Interactional practices linking school and museum activity. Visitor Studies, 24(2), 220–242.
37.
LampertM. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. Yale University Press.
38.
LampertM.CobbP. (2003). Communication and language. In KilpatrickJ.MartinW. G.SchifterD. (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 237–249). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
39.
Langer-OsunaJ. M. (2016). The social construction of authority among peers and its implications for collaborative mathematics problem solving. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 18(2), 107–124.
40.
LarnellG. V.BullockE. C. (2018). A socio-spatial framework for urban mathematics education: Considering equity, social justice, and the spatial turn. In BartellT. G. (Ed.), Toward equity and social justice in mathematics education (pp. 43–57). Springer.
41.
LaveJ. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3(3), 149–164.
42.
LeeC. D. (1995). A culturally based cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching African American high school students skills in literary interpretation. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 608–630.
43.
LefebvreH. (1991). The production of space. Basil Blackwell.
44.
LimF. V.O’HalloranK. L.PodlasovA. (2012). Spatial pedagogy: Mapping meanings in the use of classroom space. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42(2), 235–251.
45.
LouieN. L. (2018). Culture and ideology in mathematics teacher noticing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 97, 55–69.
46.
LynchK. (1960). The image of the city. MIT Press.
47.
MaJ. Y.MunterC. (2014). The spatial production of learning opportunities in skateboard parks. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(3), 238–258.
48.
MannB.DudekJ. (2023). Education policy is spatial policy: Using spatial imaginaries to enhance education policy research. Policy Futures in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103231186296
49.
MarinA. (2020). Ambulatory sequences: Ecologies of learning by attending and observing on the move. Cognition and Instruction, 38(3), 281–317.
50.
MarinA.Headrick-TaylorK.ShapiroB. R.HallR. (2020). Why learning on the move: Intersecting research pathways for mobility, learning and teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 38(3), 265–280.
51.
Martinez-MaldonadoR.SchulteJ.EcheverriaV.GopalanY.ShumS. B. (2020). Where is the teacher? Digital analytics for classroom proxemics. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(5), 741–762.
52.
MonahanT. (2002). Flexible space and built pedagogy: Emerging IT embodiments. Inventio, 4(1), 1–19.
53.
O’ConnorM. C.MichaelsS. (1993). Aligning academic task and participation status through revoicing: Analysis of a classroom discourse strategy. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 24(4), 318–335.
54.
ParisD. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97.
55.
PhilipT. M. (2019). Principled improvisation to support novice teacher learning. Teachers College Record, 121(6), 1–32.
56.
RoseberyA. S.OgonowskiM.DiSchinoM.WarrenB. (2010). “The coat traps all your body heat”: Heterogeneity as fundamental to learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(3), 322–357.
57.
RosenthalR.JacobsonL. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The Urban Review, 3(1), 16–20.
58.
RubelL. H.NicolC. (2020). The power of place: Spatializing critical mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 22(3), 173–194.
59.
ScollonR.ScollonS. W. (2003). Discourses in place: Language in the material world. Routledge.
60.
Sengupta-IrvingT. (2021). Positioning and positioned apart: Mathematics learning as becoming undesirable. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 52(2), 187–208.
61.
ShahN.ColesJ. (2020). Preparing teachers to notice race in classrooms: Contextualizing the competencies of preservice teachers with antiracist inclinations. Journal of Teacher Education, 71(5), 584–599.
62.
ShapiroB. R.GarnerB. (2021). Classroom interaction geography: Visualizing space & time in classroom interaction. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(5), 769–783.
63.
ShapiroB. R.HallR. (2018). Personal curation in a museum. In Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (Article 158). ACM.
64.
ShapiroB. R.HallR.OwensD. (2017). Developing & using interaction geography in a museum. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(4), 377–399.
65.
ShapiroB. R.SilvisD. (2023). Animated movements, animating methods: An interaction geography approach to space and affect in early childhood education. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687984231212723
66.
SherinM. G. (2000). Facilitating meaningful discussion of mathematics. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 6(2), 122–125.
SiskinL. S. (2014). Realms of knowledge: Academic departments in secondary schools. Routledge.
69.
SojaE. W. (1989). Postmodern geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory. Verso.
70.
SteinM. K.GroverB. W.HenningsenM. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488.
StraussA. L.CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.
73.
TaylorK. H. (2017). Learning along lines: Locative literacies for reading and writing the city. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(4), 533–574.
74.
WeinsteinR. S. (2009). Reaching higher: The power of expectations in schooling. Harvard University Press.
75.
ValsinerJ. (1987). Culture and the development of children’s action: A cultural-historical theory of developmental psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
76.
van EsE. A.SherinM. G. (2002). Learning to notice: Scaffolding new teachers’ interpretations of classroom interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 571–596.
77.
VoH.Huesemann-OdomP. (2022). Using interaction geography to explore building occupant behaviors in virtual reality: A pilot study. Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences, 1(11), 1–7.
78.
VygotskyL. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
79.
WeilandT.PolingL. L. (2022). Taking a spatial turn in mathematics teacher education. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 11(1), 57–67.
80.
WuG.YangX.ZhaoL. (2023). Application of interaction geography analysis in interaction analysis of smart classroom. Journal of Distance Education, 41(5), 86–92.
81.
YackelE.CobbP. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458–477.
82.
YanL.Martinez-MaldonadoR.Gallo CordobaB.DeppelerJ.CorriganD.GaševićD. (2022). Mapping from proximity traces to socio-spatial behaviours and student progression at the school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6), 1645–1664.
83.
YeomanP.WilsonS. (2019). Designing for situated learning: Understanding the relations between material properties, designed form and emergent learning activity. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2090–2108.
84.
YoungF.ClevelandB. (2022). Affordances, architecture and the action possibilities of learning environments: A critical review of the literature and future directions. Buildings, 12(1), Article 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12010076
85.
ZimmermanH. T.LandS. M.MaggioreC.MilletC. (2019). Supporting children’s outdoor science learning with mobile computers: Integrating learning on-the-move strategies with context-sensitive computing, Learning, Media and Technology, 44(4), 457–472.
