Conference Agenda

Research Question and Theoretical Framework

This contribution addresses a central and enduring question in educational research: Under what motivational conditions does effective learning occur, particularly in formal educational contexts where intrinsic interest cannot be assumed? Building on recent developments in cognitive neuroscience, the study revisits dominant motivational frameworks in education, most notably Self-Determination Theory (SDT), and proposes an alternative theoretical perspective for understanding motivated learning.

The core research question guiding this work is:

How can insights from the cognitive neuroscience of memory refine our understanding of motivation in learning, and how might these insights inform the design of educational environments that support effective learning even in the absence of intrinsic motivation?

SDT has had a strong influence on European and international educational policy and practice, particularly through its emphasis on autonomous (intrinsic, identified, and integrated) motivation as a prerequisite for deep and meaningful learning. While the value of autonomy-supportive environments is well established, the theory has been increasingly questioned with regard to its applicability in everyday classroom settings, where learners frequently encounter repetitive tasks, externally defined goals, and content of low initial interest. These challenges are shared across educational systems internationally, making the question of how to sustain learning motivation highly relevant beyond any single national context.

The theoretical framework of this study draws on recent neuroscientific research on multiple memory systems and neuromodulatory processes involved in learning. Rather than conceptualizing motivation primarily along an intrinsic–extrinsic continuum, the framework distinguishes between two types of motivational goal states-interrogative and imperative-and the distinct neural systems they engage. Interrogative goals are associated with exploratory, reward-oriented learning processes, supported by dopaminergic modulation of hippocampal activity, leading to the formation of rich, relational memory representations. In contrast, imperative goals, centered on punishment avoidance and fear of failure, are associated with amygdala-driven modulation of perirhinal cortex processes, resulting in more fragmented, item-based memory representations.

From this perspective, the effectiveness of learning is not determined solely by whether motivation is intrinsic or extrinsic, but by whether learning environments activate reward-based or punishment-based neural pathways. This reframing allows for a more nuanced understanding of motivation that aligns with empirical findings from cognitive neuroscience and responds to critiques of SDT raised in international research.

A key educational implication explored in this work concerns the design of learning and assessment environments. Drawing on examples such as gamification, the framework highlights how educational settings can reduce the salience of failure, increase opportunities for repeated success, and thereby promote interrogative goal states. Such design principles are particularly relevant across diverse European and international educational systems, where standardised testing, high-stakes assessment, and curricular constraints often heighten anxiety and undermine sustained engagement.

By integrating neuroscientific insights with educational theory, this study contributes to ongoing international debates on motivation, learning, and instructional design. It offers a theoretically grounded alternative framework that complements existing motivational theories and provides practical implications for educators, researchers, and policymakers working in varied cultural and institutional contexts.

This study explores the impact of grammar-based sentence construction activities on students’ written production in higher chemistry education. The research is grounded in the idea that subject learning and language development can and should be integrated in non-language classrooms through structured pedagogical support. In the proposed approach, students regularly construct chemistry-related sentences using specially designed grammar cards that prompt the use of specific linguistic structures, such as passive voice, comparative forms, conditional clauses, and linking phrases, while maintaining scientific accuracy.

The central research question of the study is: How does the systematic use of grammar-guided sentence construction during chemistry lessons influence students’ written performance in terms of grammatical accuracy, syntactic complexity, and clarity of subject-specific meaning? The primary objective is to examine whether targeted grammatical scaffolding embedded in subject teaching can enhance students’ academic writing without reducing cognitive engagement with disciplinary content.

The study is theoretically informed by Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), sociocultural theory, and functional approaches to grammar. From a CLIL perspective, chemistry serves as a meaningful context for language use, supporting the simultaneous development of content knowledge and academic literacy. Sociocultural theory frames the grammar cards as mediational tools that scaffold learners’ writing within their zone of proximal development. Functional and genre-based views of grammar underpin the focus on language as a resource for meaning-making in scientific discourse, particularly for explaining processes, expressing cause–and–effect relationships, and structuring arguments.

The research adopts an international perspective by addressing widely recognised educational priorities, including interdisciplinary teaching, the development of academic writing across the curriculum, and transparent assessment of both content and language.

Literature Review

The integration of language development within subject teaching has been widely discussed in contemporary educational research, particularly within the framework of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and language-aware teaching. Numerous studies emphasize that subject learning and language learning are inseparable processes, as academic understanding is constructed and demonstrated through language, especially in written form (Coyle, Hood & Marsh, 2010).

Research on language across the curriculum highlights that students often experience difficulties not because of conceptual misunderstandings, but due to insufficient control of academic language structures required for explaining, comparing, and justifying ideas in subject-specific contexts (Schleppegrell, 2004). In science education, including chemistry, writing tasks frequently demand complex grammatical constructions such as passive voice, conditionals, and comparative structures, which are not always explicitly taught in subject lessons. As a result, students’ written performance may underestimate their conceptual understanding (Halliday & Martin, 1993).

Several studies demonstrate that explicit focus on grammatical form within meaningful subject contexts can positively affect learners’ written accuracy and complexity. According to Ellis (2006), form-focused instruction is most effective when grammatical structures are embedded in communicative and cognitively demanding tasks rather than isolated drills. Similarly, research by Gibbons (2009) shows that scaffolding academic language through structured supports enables learners to gradually appropriate discipline-specific discourse.

The use of scaffolding tools, such as sentence frames, writing prompts, and grammar cards, has been shown to support learners in producing more coherent and linguistically complex written texts. These tools reduce cognitive load and allow students to concentrate on meaning-making while gradually increasing linguistic sophistication (Swain, 2005). In CLIL and bilingual education contexts, structured language support has been linked to improved use of target grammatical structures in subject writing without negatively affecting content learning (Dalton-Puffer, 2011).

Assessment literature further supports the alignment of instruction and evaluation through criterion-based and formative approaches. Black and Wiliam (2009) argue that transparent criteria and regular feedback enable learners to understand expectations and monitor their own progress.

Education in Finland has had a steady shift towards collaboration especially in the Basic Education level with emphasis on learning together through pupil-centeredness (OPS-LÄHDE). Finnish primary schools’ class teachers see co-teaching to be beneficial especially for differentiating and sharing responsibilities and professional skills (Kokko et al., 2021), but successful implementation requires different aspects, such as administrative support (see Ahonen et al., 2023; Härkki et al., 202), time for planning and negotiations of teaching (Rytivaara et al., 2021) and a balanced professional relationship between co-teachers (Guise et al., 2017).

Simultaneously, since 2016, renewed and built primary school -buildings have included features of innovative learning environments (ILEs), which can be described as more open spaces with possibilities for collaborative aspects and flexibility (OECD, 2017). When put together, there are schools where pupils are being co-taught by several teachers and in new pedagogical spaces that require different pedagogical practices (Cleveland, 2009). Innovative learning environments change the way everyday schooling occurs by demanding more complex use and altering pedagogical and collaborative practices. Recognizing and realizing these changes takes time, and for these changes to be successful, research shows that strong leadership (Mackey et al., 2018), having shared visions for the future (Fletcher et al., 2024) and listening to teachers (Niemi, 2021) are imperative.

In co-teaching perspective, ILEs are seen to enable the use of varied teaching methods compared to more traditional learning spaces (Frelin et al., 2025), but utilizing these spaces may create tensions from the architectural intended usage and teachers’ actual use (Grannäs et al., 2025). For teachers, the amount of co-teaching (Frelin et al., 2025) and collegial support are seen to increase within ILEs (Niemi, 2021).

This presentation, which is based on my on-going dissertation research, examines co-teaching in aforementioned settings, highlighting how co-teaching is being developed, and what are the affordances and experiences in these settings.

I will present the two main research goals of my dissertation, which are to 1) examine how co-teaching is developed and which factors influence it, and 2) map ILEs connection to co-teaching and examine teacher- and pupil experiences. The dissertation articles address these topics through case studies by 1) researching school-level development of co-teaching, 2) exploring pupil and teacher experiences and reflections on the affordances of ILEs and co-teaching, and lastly, 3) by focusing on the values and meanings connected to school building reforms and co-teaching.

These goals are researched through focusing on collaborative teaching, e.g. contextualised team teaching (Härkki et al., 2021), school environment’s change throughout the years, e.g. school environment model (Gislason, 2018) and what the spaces afford with affordance theory (see Gibson, 1979; Mehan, 2017).

Research worldwide consistently shows that effective and quality teaching greatly impacts students' academic achievement (Burroughs et al, 2019; Kyriakides, 2013). Having enough adequately trained teachers, who are recognised as professionals and capable of acting with agency and autonomy, is important in ensuring that schooling contributes to ‘quality learning for all (Sayed et al, 2018). However, teachers can only be successful in their professional roles if they are sufficiently prepared through high-quality Initial Teacher Education (ITE), which is a first step in what should be a continuous and integrated teacher professional development journey.

In Pakistan, ITE programmes have been critiqued for being predominantly theoretical with inadequate support provided to pre-service teachers to be innovative in their classroom practices and responsive to new challenges (Abd-Kadir & Hardman, 2013; Hardman et al, 2015; Mrutu et al, 2022; Opfer and Pedder 2011; Rizvi and Khamis, 2020). Relatedly, education systems around the world are increasingly shifting from knowledge-based to competency-based curricula aimed at student-centred learning, requiring new ways of thinking about teachers’ pedagogical practices as well as their agentic role in the classroom (Benevot et al., 2023; Darling-Hammond et al, 2019; Priestly, Biesta & Robinson, 2016). Teacher professional development, and ITE in particular, must therefore adapt to contemporary education system challenges. This requires a rethink of the current modalities of teacher preparation to empower and professionalise teachers to become agentive professionals, capable of understanding and interpreting the curriculum and appropriately responding to student learning levels and needs in uncertain and rapidly changing contexts (Priestly, Biesta & Robinson, 2016). The training provided to prospective teachers in Pakistan does not reflect a shift to a new form of teaching and learning to ensure equitable and quality learning outcomes (Nayar & Akmar, 2020; Koehler & Mishra, 2009).

In the above backdrop, an intervention-based research study, entitled: Equitable, Quality Teacher Professional Development for Empowerment: Delivering responsive and inclusive initial teacher education through Design Thinking, was undertaken at a private university in Karachi, Pakistan. The study explored how the Design Thinking model for teacher education, which centres on the agentic role of teachers in education innovation, can be adapted through initial teacher education in Pakistan, to improve the quality of ITE in the country.