SIG 10, 21 & 25 CONFERENCE 2020 - NOW ONLINE



Process-oriented Research on Learning in Contemporary Society

People learn through interaction. Both inside and outside educational institutions, interactions are especially relevant for learning. Within these interactions, factors like artifacts, a shared frame of reference, and a more general educational and societal context play an important role. The shared conference of EARLI SIG 10, 21 and 25 investigates a process-oriented approach to learning. Central to the conference are methodological and theoretical approaches for tracing learning in interaction and linking micro-level processes within the sequential organization of interaction to macro-level (learning) outcomes. Furthermore, two aspects of contemporary society are emphasized: the use of digital technologies, with a focus on their role in learning and interaction, and the reciprocal relationship between interactional dynamics and the opportunities and challenges of multicultural and multilingual society.

The SIG-conference 2020 was to be hosted by the University of Groningen and the NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences and to take place at the University of Groningen. Due to (the consequences of) the global Coronavirus outbreak, the conference in Groningen will be transformed into an online conference. Details regarding the organizing of online conference will be announced shortly.


RUG Logo


NHL Stenden logo


  • October 2019
    First call for proposals
  • December 15th 2019
    Submission system opens
  • January 6th 2020
    Second call for proposals
  • EXTENDED: February 25th 2020 (February 15th 2020)
    Deadline for submission of proposals
  • April 1st 2020
    Notification of acceptance of proposals
  • May 25th
    Registration deadline for presenters
  • EXTENDED: June 22nd
    Registration deadline
  • July 1st-3rd 2020
    the Online Conference


For the full programme with presenter details, please see this link. 


For presentation abstracts, please see the file below:

Conference Structure


For a modifiable Google Calendar version with presenter details, please see this link. 

Kindly note: The times presented behind this link are marked in CEST. Once you download the event to your personal calendar, it is automatically converted to your timezone. To download a single session, click on the exact session you wish to take part in. To download the entire conference event, click on the blue plus icon on the low right corner of the site behind the link.

FAQ's about schedule and time zones

Q: I cannot find information about which time zone the times are communicated in. How do I know how to interpret the schedule?

A: all times communicated in the overall structure (image above), the google calendar (Behind the link above), and downloadable program PDF (attached above) are presented in CEST (Central Europe: Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Oslo, Stockholm). By using the time zone blocks on the left side of the overall conference structure (image above), you can check time differences with your personal time zone. 

Q: How do I know if the google calendar shows the times in my time zone?

A: The website behind the link automatically shows all times in CEST (Central Europe: Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Oslo, Stockholm). You can download individual sessions to your personal google calendar by clicking the session you are interested in. You can also download the whole program by clicking a blue plus sign on the low right corner of the site. Make sure to check that your personal google calendar shows events in your own time zone. 


Q: I am interested in a specific symposium. How will I find information on when the symposium takes place?

A: All invited symposia and the time when they take place are presented on this website below. You can find out when it takes place in your personal time zone in three ways: 

1) The invited symposia are numbered. You can see the number of the symposium below, use this number to find it from the overall structure and then use the time zone blocks on the left of the structure to see when it takes place in your time zone

2) You can click the google calendar link and download the event to your personal google calendar by clicking on the event on the google calendar. Your personal google calendar will automatically show the event in the time zone it is set to communicate time. 

3) Use the PDF program below to see the whole program, with all sessions and presenter details. Please note that this PDF communicates all times in CEST (Central Europe: Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Oslo, Stockholm).


For the manual for participants, please see:

For the manual for presenters, please see:

KEYNOTE: Thursday July 2nd @ 10:30–11:30 CEST

We are happy to announce our keynote speaker:  

Dr. Sara Hennessy (University of Cambridge): Exploring the role of educational technology use in supporting learning through dialogue

Dialogic approaches based on active student participation, open-ended discussion, and respectful critique of different perspectives are increasingly found to support student learning. Micro-level analyses of interactional sequences in particular yield important insights into the processes involved. Yet dialogic interaction is not very commonly observed in educational settings around the world. Recent advances in research indicate that – increasingly prevalent – digital technology has important pedagogical affordances for educational dialogue. Again, educators have typically not exploited its full interactive potential, with some exceptions. My work in this area draws on theories of sociocultural learning asserting that all human activity is mediated by artefacts and learning involves appropriating the shared norms, values and practices of a community. In particular, it has explored the mediating role of ‘digital knowledge artifacts’ jointly created and manipulated during activities designed to foster collaborative knowledge building using objects of joint reference. These artefacts bring in new modes of interaction with others’ ideas. They are provisional records embodying the ongoing, collective – social and cognitive – activity. Interacting with digital artefacts can facilitate development of a sustained line of co-inquiry that extends the space and timescale of dialogue. This talk includes some of the methodological challenges arising in analysing sequences of multimodal dialogue taking place as it unfolds over time. It is illustrated with examples from classroom practice and draws out implications for researchers and educators.

Dr. Sara Hennessy is Reader in Teacher Development and Pedagogical Innovation in the Faculty of Education at the University of Cambridge. She is co-founder of the interdisciplinary Cambridge Educational Dialogue Research (CEDiR) group ( Her research focuses on technology-mediated classroom dialogue, especially use of interactive display screens and mobile devices; teacher professional development; and analytic schemes for looking at the quality of dialogue. She co-led a large-scale ESRC-funded project exploring the relationship between dialogic teaching in schools and student outcomes ( Sara is a co-author of the book Research methods for educational dialogue published by Bloomsbury in early 2020. She has also worked with teachers as co-researchers, bridging research and practice through developing and refining theory together. Sara also now leads the University of Cambridge team within the multi-million pound DFID-funded EdTech Research and Innovation Hub ( The Hub researches how effective uses of EdTech can support education systems change in low-income countries.

INVITED SYMPOSIUM 1: Wednesday July 1st @ 16:15–18 CEST

How art or artistic practices can promote spaces for learning and development?

Organiser: Nathalie Muller Mirza, Université de Genève, Switzerland

Chair: Valerie Tartas, University of Toulouse 2, France

Discussant: Michele Grossen, University of Lausanne, Switzerland


This symposium examines the links between art and development from a sociocultural and narrative perspective in psychology and education. It will attempt to answer the following question: How do artistic practices (theatre, writing, literature) in education and training create spaces for learning and development, and under which conditions?  This question will be explored through three dimensions, which we consider interdependent: 1) the relationship between artistic activities and the construction of knowledge (e.g. in what ways do literary or theatrical writing activities support the construction of new knowledge?, 2) that of pedagogical innovation (in what way do these activities lead teachers or trainers to rethink teaching-learning practices?), 3) that of the practices of researchers themselves (in what way do these objects of study invite researchers to develop new ways of thinking about their approach to data collection, participation, analysis and restitution?). Based on research conducted in the field of theatre, narratives, writing and literature in different educational contexts (school, university, adult education or more informal situations), the papers will attempt to shed light on the interactional processes at play and the conditions under which artistic activities make it possible to create a new relationship between learners (students, adult participants and researchers) to knowledge, to themselves and the world.


Artistic practices and “self” development in educational settings

Valérie Tartas, University of Toulouse 2, France; Nathalie Muller Mirza, Université de Genève, Switzerland


The Everyday Aesthetic of Narrative Learning

Colette Daiute, The Graduate Center, CUNY, United States


Reviving Higher Education through Performing Arts

Laure Kloetzer, Institute of Psychology & Education, Switzerland; Ramiro Tau, University of Geneva, Switzerland; Simon

Henein, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland


“Ways with Worlds”: Bringing Improvisational Theater into Play with Reading

Kevin Leander, Vanderbilt University, United States

INVITED SYMPOSIUM 2: Wednesday July 1st @ 16:15–18 CEST

Diversity as a challenge - Challenges to diversity: approaches in 2020

Organiser: Gudrun Ziegler, Luxembourg multi-LEARN Institute, Luxembourg

Chair: Alessio Surian, Università degli Studi di Padova, Italy

Discussant: Charles Max, University of Luxembourg,  Luxembourg 


Diversity and heterogeneity is a key working field in the 21st century and is understood in different ways including mixing, questioning, challenging, and, too often, distancing and rejecting. Fluxes of people, their backgrounds and orientations; streams of data, not only in terms of languages or approaches to numbers but also regarding access to information and participation; and waves of (ever) new inventions and globalized phenomena and concerns have marked (and fundamentally determined) work in education and other areas of the humanities. Yet, the already often felt (and addressed) concern of the fuzziness of concepts (be it diversity, interculturality, culture (!), gender, …)  seems to be particularly apparent as we speak in 2020: As the pandemic globalizes, discussions from the beginnings of modern/European concepts of democracy and equity make it to the surface, while students and workers access a (heterogeneous) digital presumed “normal” and participation to any activity in the “here and now” is marked by “risks” (e.g., tracking, testing) rather than potential and opportunity (to learn for instance). As this symposium is held in the context of 2020’s tormented times, it aims to go back to the initial concern of working on “diversity” in the context of education, focusing particularly on higher and adult education.  More specifically, the papers will provide data-driven examples of processes in education where diversity is key to the actual learning process, yet show, how the very idea of diversity is challenged by the current “new” and in that respect - globalized - remote learning frameworks.


Students are stories: individual experiences of intercultural group work in engineering education

Becky Bergman, Gothenburg University, Sweden


“Et là, ça se passe!” - How learning the diverse “new” is (was?) engineered in interaction

Gudrun Ziegler, Luxembourg multi-LEARN Institute, Luxembourg


Topicalizing the pandemic and challenging boundaries of diversity in the digital wilds

Sylvi Vigmo, University of Gothenburg, Sweden


INVITED SYMPOSIUM 3: Thursday July 2nd @ 17–18:45 CEST

Learning from Learners: Power, Resistance and  Learners' Voices in an Era of Uncertainty

Organisers: Mike Cole, University of California, San Diego, United States; Charles Underwood, University of California, Berkeley,  United States; Mara Mahmood, University of California Berkeley, United States; Sophina ChoudryUniversity of Manchester, United Kingdom; Arturo Cortez, University of Colorado, Boulder, United States; Alfredo Jornet, University of Oslo, Department of Teacher Education and School Research, Spain; Antti Rajala, University of Helsinki, Finland; Michael Bakal, University of Berkeley, United States; M. Lisette Lopez, Univeristy of California, Berkeley, United States; Kalonji Nzinga, University of Colorado at Boulder, United States; José Ramón Lizárraga, University of Colorado,  United States

Chairs: Mara Mahmood, University of California Berkeley, United States; Charles Underwood, University of California, Berkeley, United States; Kalonji Nzinga, University of Colorado at Boulder, United States

Discussants:  Angela Booker, University of California, San Diego, United States; Anna Stetsenko, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York, United States


This symposium engages panelists and participants in the exploration and re-conceptualization of “learners’ voices” from a cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) perspective that approaches education as a struggle to overcome dominant paradigms that thwart learners’ development and agency in the face of an uncertain future. As part of a larger effort to re-generate CHAT, this symposium will articulate and elaborate the concept of "learners’ voices" as a tool for guiding students, teachers, researchers, activists, and policy-makers in re-orienting pedagogy to cultivate their critical voices, empowering learners to become agentive sociopolitical actors in charge of their own futures-in-the-making. The concept of voice has been used in educational research, design and practice for calling out and naming the hidden power relations in systems of oppression and plays a role in learner-centered approaches (Corbett & Wilson, 1995) culturally-relevant pedagogies (Ladson-Billings 1994; Lee, 2006), hybrid language education (Gutiérrez, 1999), and critical race theories and pedagogies (Mensah, 2019). 

Panelists reconceptualize voice as “learners’ voices” broadly to convey agentive engagement in meaning making in the face of unequal power relations. While the panelists work in different social contexts (see presentation abstracts) all employ the concept of “learners’ voices” and explore ways of encouraging multivoicedness, speaking truth to power, and recognizing learners’ voices as an educational necessity in an uncertain global context. The structure of the symposium encourages dialogue designed to promote the collective co-construction and development of the concept of "learners’ voices" as a critical tool for expanding our understanding of teaching and learning.


Participatory Design Research for Climate Resilience and Activism

Michael Bakal, University of Berkeley, United States


“Trump Would Just Get Sucked Into a Black Hole”: Youthful Digital Imaginings of New Futures

José Ramón Lizárraga, University of Colorado, United States; Arturo Cortez, University of Colorado, Boulder, United States


Contradictory Activities Leading to Differential Learning in a Heterogeneous Mathematics Classroom

Sophina Choudry, University of Manchester, United Kingdom


“It’s Rigged!”: The Disruption That Reverberates When Youth Vocalize That the System Is Fixed

M. Lisette Lopez, Univeristy of California, Berkeley, United States; Kalonji Nzinga, University of Colorado at Boulder, United States


Learners’ Voices and the Transformation of Schooling Towards a Sustainable Society

Alfredo Jornet, University of Oslo, Department of Teacher Education and School Research, Spain; Antti Rajala, University of Helsinki, Finland

INVITED SYMPOSIUM 4: Friday July 3rd @ 10:30–12:15 CEST

Process-oriented analyses of interaction; showcasing qualitative and quantitative techniques

Organiser: Myrte Gosen, University of Groningen, Netherlands; Frans Hiddink, NHL University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands

Chair: Marjolein Deunk, University of Groningen, Netherlands 

Discussant: Jan Berenst, University of Applied Sciences Leeuwarden, Netherlands


Learning is a socially situated, dynamic process in which knowledge and skills are built over the course of time. The person who learns often does so in the context of help by another person; i.e., knowledge is co-constructed in a mutual process that takes place over time (Granott, 2002; Sorsana, 2008; Mercer & Littleton 2007). In classroom settings, this process often takes the shape of teacher-student interaction, or student-student interaction (Littleton & Howe 2010; Markee 2015).

To analyze this process of mutual co-construction of knowledge, several approaches can be used. This symposium aims to showcase various qualitative and quantitative approaches for researching the processes at work in these interactions. Each approach highlights either the student or the teacher perspective in a micro level analysis of real time classroom interactions.

The researchers in this symposium all analyzed the same two fragments from an existing data set (Van Vondel, 2017). Both fragments originate from a Dutch Science and Technology lesson series in grade 5/6 (students aged 10 to 12). Children were given a problem-solving task to work on in small groups. During the video recorded fragments, the same teacher interacts with two groups of four children. The symposium illustrates how data can be analyzed in a variety of ways, using constructs that may have slightly different interpretations, depending on the chosen approach.

The discussant will go into the relationship between the insights that different approaches provide and into the possibilities and desirability of methodological triangulation in this field of classroom interaction research.


Pupils' knowledge building as a co-constructed process; a quantitative approach

Henderien Steenbeek, Hanze University of Of Applied Sciences, Netherlands; Naomi de Ruiter, University of Groningen, Netherlands


Quantitative analyses of teacher-student interactions: what patterns make up learning?

Mayra Mascareño, University of Groningen, Netherlands; Elisa Kupers, University of Groningen, Netherlands


Teacher facilitating practices during inquiry-based learning: A conversation-analytic perspective

Myrte Gosen, University of Groningen, Netherlands; Annerose Willemsen, Faculty of Arts, University of Groningen, Netherlands; Tom Koole, University of Groningen, Netherlands


Students working together: a qualitative analysis of conversational problem-solving practices

Jan Berenst, University of Applied Sciences Leeuwarden, Netherlands; Marjolein Deunk, University of Groningen, Netherlands; Frans Hiddink, NHL University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands

INVITED SYMPOSIUM 5: Friday July 3rd @ 10:30–12:15 CEST

The Role of Theory in Process-oriented Research

Organiser: Nina Bonderup Dohn, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

Chair: Alexandra Nordström, University of Helsinki, Finland

Discussant: Nina Bonderup Dohn, University of Southern Denmark,  Denmark


Different approaches to research on education and learning take different stances on the role of theory in informing (or not) empirical investigations. At one end of a continuum are neo-positivist claims that any theoretical outset will necessarily be biasing so research should proceed from objective, theory-free data. At the other end are post-humanistic statements to the opposite effect, i.e. that lack of theoretical reflection on presuppositions will incur research that is seriously, often ethically condemnably, prejudiced. In SIG 25 on Educational Theory, the meta-discussion of the role of theory is a recurrent theme, along with, of course, discussions of the merits, flaws and compatibilities of specific educational theories. In our experience, it is also an issue for continuous discussion for researchers within other areas of educational research. For this Invited Symposium for SIG 25, we have called upon the three SIGs co-organizing this year’s conference to “combine forces” on the issue: We have asked representatives of each SIG to reflect on and discuss with one another the role of theory within process-oriented research (i.e. the overarching conference theme), potentially with a perspective to the processes of change that education is experiencing in these disturbing corona-times.


Dialoging with theory in Process-oriented Learning Research: Challenges and Perspectives

Nathalie Muller Mirza, Université de Genève, Switzerland; Valérie Tartas, University of Toulouse 2, France


Process-oriented research on changing sociomaterial ecologies in HE - In the wake of the pandemic

Sylvi Vigmo, University of Gothenburg, Sweden


What do theories do? Sociopolitics of educational theory in the rise of the COVID-19 pandemic

Alfredo Jornet, University of Oslo, Department of Teacher Education and School Research, Spain





Workshop 1: Sharing online workplace dilemmas in the international classroom to foster the development of a shared professional discourse


Roelien Wierda & Ron Barendsen, InnovationLab, NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands


In this workshop, participants will be introduced to and get to work with the first prototype of an online tool to facilitate and scaffold the sharing of workplace dilemmas in an international context.


Face-to-face (f2f) peer consultation or “intervision” is traditionally a structural part of Dutch teacher training programmes under the assumption that “intervision” – or the structured discussion of workplace dilemmas during school placements – will bridge the gap between workplace learning and formal learning and that “intervision” will lead to short-term improved professional performance. However, extensive research has demonstrated that this is not the case. What can be demonstrated, however, is that participants develop a shared professional discourse (Joyce & Showers, 2002). Moreover, face-to-face intervision has a number of limitations (Wierda & Barendsen, 2011), which will be discussed during the workshop. To meet these drawbacks, an online intervision tool is being developed within the framework of the Comenius Senior Fellowship programme (Netherlands Initiative for Education Research). The current project expands on earlier studies (2011, 2012) where the hypothesis was that online intervision – in combination with f2f peer consultation - leads to a stronger development of the shared professional discourse than f2f intervision alone.

The online intervision tool is being developed as an integral part of the multifunctional educational platform MySchoolsNetwork and focuses on the added value of sharing workplace dilemmas in an international setting. The tool will include the following specifications:

• A “room” where workplace dilemmas can be shared, explored and discussed, thus enabling student teachers of different nationalities to learn from each other and develop a shared cross-border professional discourse

• Scaffolding on the basis of the Peer Consultation Incident method (Hendriksen, 1997)

• The possibility to engage in formal and more informal communication on the basis of a personal profile and discussion tool

• Different roles – trainee, novice, expert – to facilitate different levels of engagement (Wenger, 2012)

• Possibility to add metadata to posted workplace dilemmas to facilitate a searchable database


During the workshop, some analyses of online interactional data of prior research (2011) will be shown. Besides, the prototype of the online tool will be demonstrated. In addition contributions – i.e. workplace dilemmas - uploaded by preservice teachers from different nationalities during the first pilot phase will be discussed.  During the brainstorm phase of the workshop we will explore how and to what end the uploaded material can be analysed and what kind of opportunities you see for your own research projects.


Workshop 2: Multilingualism to learn or learning to act multilingually? Engaging with multilingual interaction in mainstream education


Joana Duarte, NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences/ University of Groningen, The Netherlands


Although teachers might engage in micro-language policies (Liddicoat & Taylor Leech, 2014), classroom interactions in most mainstream schools are often dominated by national languages, with the exception of foreign or, to a lesser extent, regional minority languages (Duarte, 2016). The typical insistence on the national languages as the main languages of schooling (Kroon & Spotti, 2011) is based on the idea that immersion in each of the target languages triggers the best outcomes, thus leading to language separation pedagogies. As a result, multilingual interaction is (a) still largely under-researched, (b) mostly analysed in the context of language teaching and (c) seldom analysed from a holistic perspective in which multilingualism is seen as a pre-condition and an aim, but also as a procedural part of mainstream instruction (Duarte, 2017).


While there is increasing evidence demonstrating the important role of home language(s) in contributing to students’ cognitive and socio-emotional development and in raising their academic attainment (Cenoz, 2013; Cummins, 2008; Sierens & Van Avermaet, 2014), the vast majority of schools adopt monolingual teaching approaches mostly focused on the promotion of national languages (Kroon & Spotti, 2011), and thus often overlooking pupils’  linguistic and cultural diversity. Recently, however, several multilingual teaching approaches have been put forward which aim to explore the use of multiple languages in teaching and learning (Coste, Moore, & Zarate, 2009; Cenoz & Gorter, 2015; Cummins, 2008).


In this workshop, participants will analyse authentic data from Frisian primary and secondary schools who have developed and implemented an intervention for multilingual education (Duarte & Günther-van der Meij, 2018) focussing on the acknowledgment and use of pupils’ home languages in mainstream education. These include languages of pupils with an immigrant background or a regional minority language, as well as foreign and national languages or dialects. The aim of the workshop is to engage with different frameworks to analyse interaction taking into account the multilingual practices of speakers and to explore different types of multilingual classroom interaction, by understanding teachers’ and pupils’ functional language use (Sierens & Van Avermaet, 2014) during moments of multilingual interaction. The workshop will adopt a sociolinguistic and a didactical perspective on interactional data.


Workshop 3: The politics of learning and education – transformative methodologies and epistemological challenges


Alfredo Jornet Gil, University of Oslo, Norway

Giulia Messina Dahlberg, University of Gothenburg, Sweden

Antti Rajala, University of Helsinki, Finland

Peter Renshaw, The University of Queensland, Australia

Alessio Surian, University of Padova, Italy


This interactive workshop aims to address and engage with the ethical and political dimensions of learning and education. The ecological, economic and political crises of our times cannot go unaddressed by researchers of learning and education. This workshop joins with and expands recent initiatives of critical learning scientists and researchers within the tradition of cultural-historical activity theory to re-theorize learning from a critical perspective, and to examine the cultural and political contexts and consequences of this field of research. The workshop is envisaged as a forum for trans-disciplinary and cross-sectoral dialogue where illustrative cases with data from research projects that engage with the broader focus of the political dimension of learning—including projects that engage formal and informal learning to address issues like climate change— are presented and discussed. There will be space also for the workshop participants to share and discuss issues related to their own research. 


The cases illustrate methods and methodologies that are suitable for addressing these issues. Here, we are particularly interested in the creation and establishment of transformative methodologies that engage with the boundaries between research and practice as well as across research fields, ontologies and epistemologies. Furthermore, we present cases where the data generation enterprise is understood in terms of a reflective journey, in which the researcher’s gaze, in its being “non-predatory”, “de-centred” and “co-present”, is never fixed or static but rather enacts a scientific process that is generative, non-linear and ethically related to the communities in which our participants engage in.


Workshop 4: Seeing, saying, self-reflecting – using art to stimulate critical thinking and intercultural sensitivity


Marjolein Deunk, GION Educational Sciences, University of Groningen, the Netherlands

Mariëtte Hingstman, GION Educational Sciences, University of Groningen, the Netherlands


In this interactive workshop, participants will experiment with Visual Thinking Strategies (VTS, Yenawine, 2013): art-based discussions with the aim of stimulating self-reflection and intercultural sensitivity. After experiencing VTS themselves, participants are invited to analyze and discuss transcribed fragments of VTS-sessions with pre-service teachers.


Visual Thinking Strategies is a structured protocol for discussing art. During a VTS session, a facilitator lets students reflect on a piece of art by asking three questions repetitively: What is happening in this picture? What makes you say that? and What more can we see? Students can bid for the floor to share their thoughts and observations. While a student gives a contribution, the facilitator points to elements in the art work, in order to keep the focus on the work. Subsequently, the facilitator carefully paraphrases the contribution, using more complex or abstract vocabulary when possible and using conditional language (e.g. you suggest this could be a market place instead of this is a market place) to keep space for alternative interpretations. Each contribution is followed up with the question what makes you say that, to invite students to unravel the assumptions they made and to possibly second-guess themselves. Students do not respond to each other directly; all interaction happens via the facilitator. This rather unnatural way of group discussion is used to create a safer and more thoughtful context in which multiple interpretations can exist simultaneously (Moorman et al., 2016).

Initially, VTS was developed for use in museums, to stimulate esthetic development. VTS found its way into primary, secondary and tertiary education in response to suggestions that the method has wider effects than esthetic development only. For example, positive effects are reported on vocabulary, observational skills, critical thinking, empathy, and self-reflection (e.g. Chapman et al. 2014; Cutler & Moeller, 2017; Housen, 2001; Naghshineh et al, 2008).

Empathy and self-reflection are important skills for professionals working in social fields like education. Due to the increasing ethnic-cultural diversity of many contemporary societies, educational professionals need to become more sensitive towards cultural differences. This intercultural sensitivity (Bennett, 1986; Chen, 1997) requires awareness of one’s own perspective (propriospect, Goodenough, 1981; Wolcott, 1991) and how this influences the interpretation and judgement of situations and people. The implicit cultural norms and expectations that are playing a role in the classroom may negatively influence equal opportunities for members of ethnic-cultural minority groups. Because teachers and other educational professionals are often part of the ethnic-cultural majority group, these implicit norms and expectations might be hard for them to recognize (Haddix, 2008). Furthermore, many pre-service teachers are relatively inexperienced with critically reflecting on the topic of ethic-cultural diversity and expressing their thoughts in a nuanced way (Cho & DeCastro-Ambrosetti, 2006; Stoll, 2014).

As part of a teaching innovation project (Deunk et al., 2020), VTS was introduced to 2nd year students of the Primary School Teacher Training Program of the University of Groningen, the Netherlands. The main aim was initiating a process of critical self-reflection and intercultural sensitivity in pre-service teachers, to add to the realization of educational equity in our multicultural society. Data and experiences from this project will be integrated in the workshop.


The SIG 10 & SIG 21 & SIG 25 conference welcomes a broad variety of session types. These formats are designed to create a lively academic dialogue and to accommodate the presentation of research at various stages. 



Symposia provide an opportunity to present research on one topic, often from multiple perspectives, compiling a coherent set of papers for discussion. Symposia sessions are directed by a chair, involving three or four presenters and one discussant, from at least two different countries. We recommend that each individual submission is checked for its own quality and its relevance and coherence to the topic of the symposium prior to formal submission to SIG 10, 21 & 25 conference.

Format:  A symposium is scheduled for 90 minutes, allowing 15 minutes presentation time per speaker, ten minutes for the discussant, and 20 minutes for open discussion.

Paper sessions

Individual paper

Paper sessions are oral presentations of four papers, followed by a discussion with the audience. It is important that empirical papers have data and results, or they will not be accepted. Research that is at a very early stage might be very suitable for Poster or Data sessions. Theoretical papers, of course, are welcome.

Format: Paper sessions are scheduled for 60 minutes. Two presenters are given 15 minutes presentation time followed by 10 minutes for questions. At the end of all presentations, there is a 10-minute open discussion.

Data sessions

Data session

Data sessions provide the presenter with other researchers’ analytical reading of an empirical interaction material. It also provides an opportunity for those who attend to experience how different analytical approaches are used in practice.

Format: Data sessions are scheduled for 45 minutes. All preparations are made by the presenter. Only give a short introduction to the data material (max 10 min) then let the participants in the session engage with the data and with analytic work: reading the transcripts/watching the video a couple of times and discussing in pairs. Take a round, ask for comments.

Interactive poster sessions


Interactive poster sessions involve five or six posters, visually presenting research studies. The session is chaired by a senior researcher. A short pitch of about 2 minutes for each poster is given to an audience gathered as a group. After the authors’ brief presentation, an in-depth discussion between them and the audience follows. The poster sessions offer researchers the chance to present their work in a visual format and offer more opportunities for interaction and discussion.

Format:  The Interactive Poster session is scheduled for 60 minutes. The presenters will be divided into two groups with 30minutes appointed for each group. Presenters will each give a 1-2 minute pitch of their poster, after which the participants have 20–25 minutes per group to discuss with the presenters. 


Proposals can be submitted through the EARLI website. The extended deadline for submissions is February 25th 2020 midnight CET. The conference accepts proposals for posters, data sessions, paper presentations, and symposia (for more information, see the section SESSIONS). In accordance with EARLI policies, you may not present more than two proposals. In addition, you may act once as the chair of a symposium and once as discussant, for a total of four appearances. You may participate as a non-presenting co-author as many times as you like. The conference program will avoid timetable conflicts for presenting authors, chairpersons, and discussants but not for co-authors.

For single paper, data session and poster submissions, max 250 words short abstract and max 500 words extended abstract are needed. For symposia submission, 250 words short abstract and 500 words extended abstract are needed for each individual paper as well as max 250 words abstract for the whole symposium. 

The proposals will be reviewed according to the following criteria (there are different criteria for empirical and theoretical papers):


Empirical paper

- Relevance to EARLI domain of Learning and Instruction  

- Significance for theory, policy and practice 

- Theoretical framework, conceptual rationale or pragmatic grounding 

- Research method and design for both qualitative and quantitative approaches (research questions, context, participants, data sources, sampling, procedure, ethical issues) 

- Clarity of results and conclusions 

- Overall quality and scientific originality  


Theoretical paper

- Relevance to EARLI domain of Learning and Instruction 

- Significance for theoretical debate 

- Theoretical framework, conceptual rationale or pragmatic grounding 

- Embeddedness in relevant literature 

- Clarity and robustness of theoretical argument 

- Overall quality and scientific originality





In case you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact:


Online Organizing Committee

Rebecca Bergman (University of Gothenburg, Sweden) 

Nina Bonderup Dohn (University of Southern Denmark, Denmark)

Mieke Breukelman (NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences/ University of Groningen, The Netherlands)

Jasmiina Leskinen (University of Helsinki, Finland) 

Mayra Mascareño Lara (University of Groningen, Netherlands)

Nathalie Muller Mirza  (University of Geneva, Switzerland)

Antti Rajala (University of Helsinki, Finland) 

Sylvi Vigmo (University of Gothenburg, Sweden) 

Gudrun Ziegler (Ministry of Education, Luxembourg)


Team Groningen

Marjolein Deunk (University of Groningen, Netherlands)

Myrte Gosen (University of Groningen, Netherlands)

Frans Hiddink (NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands)

Elisa Kupers (University of Groningen, Netherlands)

Naomi de Ruiter (University of Groningen, Netherlands)


Scientific Organizing Committee

SIG 10 - Social Interaction in Learning and Instruction

Nathalie Muller Mirza  (University of Geneva, Switzerland)

Valerie Tartas (University of Toulouse, France) 

Jasmiina Leskinen (JURE) (University of Helsinki, Finland) 


SIG 21 - Learning and Teaching in Culturally Diverse Settings

Sylvi Vigmo (University of Gothenburg, Sweden) 

Gudrun Ziegler (Ministry of Education, Luxembourg)

Rebecca Bergman (JURE) (University of Gothenburg, Sweden) 


SIG 25 - Educational Theory

Antti Rajala (University of Helsinki, Finland) 

Nina Bonderup Dohn (University of Southern Denmark, Denmark)

Alexandra Nordström (JURE) (University of Helsinki, Finland)