Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:30:15 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
99 ERC SES 08 M: The Role of Teachers in Shaping Language Learning Environments
Paper Session
| ||
    | ||
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper Do mixed-SES classes support reading? A 7-year longitudinal study 1: Doctoral School of Education, University of Szeged; 2: MTA-SZTE Digital Learning Technologies Research Group; 3: Budapest Institute for Policy Analysis; 4: Institute of Education, University of Szeged Presenting Author:Educational inequality remains a central concern in European education systems, particularly in countries characterized by early selection and strong socioeconomic stratification. While family socioeconomic status (SES) is consistently estimated to be a significant correlate of achievement and attainment (see e.g. Liu et al., 2022), recent causal and quasi-experimental evidence suggests that SES has only weak effects on learning rates once children enter school (Song et al., 2025). This discrepancy raises a key theoretical question: if family SES does not substantially shape learning trajectories directly, do SES-related effects manifest through other, indirect channels? One possible explanation points to the role of educational contexts, especially the socioeconomic composition (SEC) of schools and classrooms. Socioeconomic stratification can influence learning environments through multiple indirect pathways, including peer interactions (Cooc & Kim, 2017), teaching quality (Varga, 2009), teacher expectations (Gentrup et al., 2024), and parental involvement (Barg, 2019). Since Coleman et al. (1966), SEC has repeatedly been found to predict student achievement over and above individual socioeconomic status, with meta-analytic SEC-achievement correlations far exceeding the SES-achievement correlation levels (Liu et al., 2022). Whether these compositional patterns mark real effects remains debated: observed associations may reflect genuine compositional influence, a statistical artifact of aggregation that disappears once individual SES and prior achievement are adequately controlled, or mean prior ability for which SEC merely serves as a proxy (Marks, 2015; Sciffer et al., 2022). What unites both sides of this debate is the assumption that classroom composition is adequately summarised by its mean SES. However, this collapses two distinct features, a class's mean level and the shape of its SES distribution, into a single indicator. Moving beyond these mean-based measures, we introduce SES-distributional representativeness (SES-DR): a distribution-sensitive indicator capturing how closely a classroom's SES distribution resembles that of the wider student population, operationalised as one minus the Kolmogorov-Smirnov distance between the two distributions, residualised on mean class SES. Applied alongside class-mean SES to longitudinal data, it lets us ask whether a classroom's average socioeconomic level, or the breadth of its socioeconomic mix is more important for childern's skill development. The study addresses two research questions:
From a theoretical perspective, mean classroom SES and SES-DR can be interpreted as complementary indicators capturing different dimensions of the same contextual effect within the Sen–Bourdieu–Bernstein framework (Hart, 2012; Dimopoulos & Koutsampelas, 2024): they capture the volume and distribution of economic, social, and cultural capital available in the classroom. The European and international relevance of the study is twofold. First, Hungary represents an extreme but informative case within Europe, as international assessments consistently rank it among the most socioeconomically stratified education systems in the OECD (OECD, 2019). Second, the analytic framework and the SES-DR indicator are portable to other national contexts and international large-scale assessments. By focusing on distribution-sensitive measures of classroom composition, the study contributes to the debate on whether and how socioeconomic mixing can support equity and skill development for low-SES children without high developmental costs for higher-SES children. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The analysis draws on nationwide longitudinal data from the Hungarian Educational Longitudinal Program, following a cohort of students from Grade 3 (fall) to Grade 8 (spring) (N ≈ 6,211 students in 283 classes across 155 schools). Reading literacy was assessed at four time points (Grades 3, 4, 6, and 8) using item-anchored tests aligned with national and international frameworks, with increasing proportions of inferential and evaluative items at higher grades (Hódi et al., 2020, 2025). To place achievement scores on a common developmental scale, we estimated a Rasch model and WLE scores and derived plausible values, standardized to a Grade-3 mean of 500 and a standard deviation of 100 (EAP/PV reliability ≈ .88). Family SES was operationalised as an equal-weight composite of two z-standardised sub-indices: parental education and household material resources. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation with 100 datasets, generated via a random-forest chained-equations algorithm. This approach follows current recommendations for complex longitudinal educational data, allowing for flexible functional forms and interactions, using a large set of auxiliary variables, and reducing bias under missing-at-random assumptions (Wijesuriya et al., 2025). We estimate latent growth-curve structural equation models with empirically determined growth trajectories. Latent intercepts and slopes are regressed on individual SES, mean class SES, SES-DR, and a rich set of student- and class-level controls (e.g., baseline mathematics achievement, self-regulation, class size, gender, and demographic variables). Subgroup-level models are used to assess heterogeneity in the estimated associations across SES-quartiles. Standard fit diagnostics indicate excellent fit (RMSEA = 0.023, CFI = 0.996, SRMR = 0.006). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The analyses show that classroom socioeconomic composition is associated with students' reading development between Grades 3 and 8, net of individual SES, prior achievement, and other controls. Class-mean SES is the dominant predictor: it is positively related to reading growth across the entire SES distribution (b ≈ 0.14; p < .001), and this association strengthens rather than attenuates once class-mean prior achievement is controlled for. Beyond mean SES, SES-DR shows a positive but non-significant association with reading growth in the pooled sample. Heterogeneity analyses confirm this pattern: class-mean SES predicts faster growth across all SES quartiles, with the largest estimate among lower-middle-SES students, while SES-DR is never negative in any subgroup. Among classes with similar mean SES levels, socioeconomic mixing therefore does not slow the reading development of higher-SES students, while placement in higher-SES classrooms supports growth across the spectrum. This means that the level of the classroom, and not the breadth of its SES distribution, is what matters. References Barg, K. (2019). Why are middle-class parents more involved in school than working-class parents? Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 59, 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2018.12.002 Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. U.S. Government Printing Office. Cooc, N., & Kim, J. S. (2017). Peer influence on children’s reading skills: A social network analysis of elementary school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109 (5), 727–740. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000166 Dimopoulos, K., & Koutsampelas, C. (2024). Towards a new approach for understanding educational inequality: The Sen-Bourdieu-Bernstein theoretical framework. International Journal of Educational Research, 125, 102347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2024.102347 Gentrup, S., Olczyk, M., & Lorenz, G. (2024). Teacher stereotypes and teacher expectations at the intersection of student gender and socioeconomic status. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 56 (1–2), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000291 Hart, C. S. (2012). Aspirations, education and social justice: Applying Sen and Bourdieu. Bloomsbury Publishing. Hódi, Á., Tóth, E., & Nikolov, M. (2025). Interactions among text formats and reading processes in young learners’ L1 reading literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 60 (1). https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.595 Liu, J., Peng, P., Zhao, B., & Luo, L. (2022). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement in primary and secondary education: A metaanalytic review. Educational Psychology Review, 34 (4), 2867–2896. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09689-y Marks, G. N. (2015). Are school-SES effects statistical artefacts? Evidence from longitudinal population data. Oxford Review of Education, 41 (1), 122–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.100661 OECD. (2019). Pisa 2018 results (volume II): Where all students can succeed. https://doi.org/10.1787/b5fd1b8f-en Sciffer, M. G., Perry, L. B., & McConney, A. (2022). The substantiveness of socioeconomic school compositional effects in Australia: Measurement error and the relationship with academic composition. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 10, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-022-00142-8 Song, Q., Liu, Y., & Tan, C. Y. (2025). Effects of family socioeconomic status on educational outcomes in primary and secondary education: A systematic review of the causal evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 37 (2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10004-8 Varga, J. (2009). A tanárok elosztása a különböző szociokulturális hátterű tanulókat tanító iskolák között [Distribution of teachers among schools teaching students from different sociocultural backgrounds]. In K. Fazekas (Ed.). Oktatás és foglalkoztatás [Education and employment]. HAS Institute of Economics. Wijesuriya, R., Moreno-Betancur, M., Carlin, J. B., White, I. R., Quartagno, M., & Lee, K. J. (2025). Multiple imputation for longitudinal data: A tutorial. Statistics in Medicine, 44 (3–4). https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.10274 99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper Teacher Perspectives on Ability Grouping in Israeli ESL Classrooms: Ethical Dilemmas and Alternative Strategies Ben Gurion University, Israel Presenting Author:This paper examines how ability grouping policies are enacted in everyday English as a Second Language (ESL) classroom practice, with a particular focus on teachers’ instructional decision-making, professional agency, and ethical reasoning. While ability grouping and mixed-ability instruction have been extensively debated in terms of student outcomes, much of this research has focused on system-level effects or achievement data. Comparatively little attention has been paid to how teachers experience, interpret, and negotiate grouping structures in their day-to-day pedagogical work. This gap is especially significant in linguistically diverse and high-stakes educational contexts, where language education functions as a key mechanism of selection and access. The present study addresses this gap by foregrounding teachers as central actors in the enactment of grouping policy. The study is guided by the following research question: How do different grouping structures (ability grouping and mixed-ability instruction) shape ESL teachers’ instructional decision-making, professional agency, and ethical reasoning in junior high school classrooms? Rather than evaluating grouping models in terms of effectiveness or attainment, the study adopts a qualitative, teacher-centered perspective to explore how grouping policies are lived and negotiated at the classroom level. It examines how teachers adapt differentiation practices, how they perceive the social and emotional implications of grouping for students, and how grouping arrangements influence their sense of professional autonomy, responsibility, and workload. The theoretical framework integrates perspectives from the sociology of education, sociocultural theories of language learning, and research on teacher agency and policy enactment. At the structural level, the study draws on sociological research that conceptualizes ability grouping and tracking as mechanisms of educational stratification. From this perspective, grouping is understood not merely as a pedagogical strategy, but as a policy instrument that structures access to curriculum, expectations, and educational trajectories. Comparative research across European education systems has shown that early grouping arrangements often reproduce social, linguistic, and socioeconomic inequalities, particularly in subjects such as language education that function as gatekeepers to further educational opportunities. This lens situates ESL grouping within broader European debates on equity, inclusion, and institutional differentiation. At the pedagogical level, the study is informed by sociocultural theories of language learning, which conceptualize learning as socially mediated and interaction-driven. Language development is understood as emerging through participation in meaningful communicative practices, peer interaction, and access to diverse linguistic resources. These perspectives have strongly influenced European approaches to inclusive and heterogeneous language classrooms. At the same time, they highlight the pedagogical tensions teachers face when attempting to sustain inclusive participation while maintaining appropriate levels of cognitive and linguistic challenge for learners with diverse profiles. Finally, the study draws on scholarship on teacher agency and policy enactment, which conceptualizes teachers as active interpreters and mediators of educational policy rather than passive implementers. Teacher agency is understood as relational and structurally conditioned, shaped by institutional arrangements, accountability regimes, and professional cultures. This perspective is particularly relevant in European contexts where teachers are increasingly expected to reconcile inclusive policy discourses with performance-oriented assessment systems. By foregrounding teachers’ ethical reasoning and professional judgment, the study illuminates how grouping policies redistribute pedagogical responsibility and emotional labor across different instructional models. Although empirically situated in Israeli junior high schools, the study is analytically framed as a critical comparative case. The Israeli context shares key characteristics with many European systems, including early ability grouping, high-stakes language assessment, and increasing linguistic and cultural diversity. By examining teachers’ lived experiences across contrasting grouping structures, the study offers conceptually transferable insights into how grouping policies shape classroom practice, teacher agency, and educational equity, contributing directly to European and international discussions central to ECER. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study adopts a qualitative, interpretivist comparative case study design to examine how ESL teachers experience and enact ability grouping and mixed-ability instructional models in junior high school contexts. A qualitative approach was selected to capture teachers’ professional reasoning, ethical deliberations, and situated decision-making processes, which are not readily accessible through outcome-oriented methodologies. The research focuses on two state junior high schools operating under contrasting organizational arrangements: one implementing between-class ability grouping in English and one adopting a mixed-ability instructional model. The cases were selected through purposive sampling to enable analytical comparison within broadly similar institutional and socioeconomic conditions. Rather than evaluating the effectiveness of grouping models, the study explores how different structural arrangements shape teachers’ pedagogical practices, sense of agency, and perceptions of equity in everyday classroom life. The design is informed by comparative education research that emphasizes contextualized, practice-based analysis over causal inference, allowing grouping to be examined as a lived policy phenomenon rather than a technical intervention. Data were generated through semi-structured interviews with ten ESL teachers, five from each school, all with a minimum of four years’ experience teaching English at the junior high level and direct involvement in differentiation and instructional planning. Interviews lasted 45–60 minutes and were conducted in English. Prompts addressed experiences with grouping structures, approaches to differentiation, perceptions of student engagement and identity, and ethical or emotional dilemmas arising from grouping decisions. To enhance analytic credibility, the study also incorporated a targeted analysis of instructional artefacts, including core textbooks and representative classroom worksheets used in routine practice. These materials were selected in consultation with teachers and examined for linguistic and cognitive demand, scaffolding, and opportunities for extended language use. Data analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis framework, combining inductive coding with theoretically informed interpretation. Interview transcripts formed the primary analytic corpus, while artefacts were used to contextualize and corroborate teacher accounts. Ethical approval was obtained from relevant institutional bodies, all participants provided informed consent, and pseudonyms were used to ensure confidentiality. The design supports analytic generalization and offers conceptually transferable insights relevant to European debates on inclusion, tracking, and teacher professionalism. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The study suggests that neither ability grouping nor mixed-ability instruction functions as an inherently equitable or pedagogically optimal solution in ESL classrooms. Instead, each grouping structure shapes instructional practice, teacher agency, and student experience in distinct and often contradictory ways. Ability grouping is associated with clearer instructional focus and curricular alignment, supporting lesson planning and classroom manageability, while simultaneously constraining flexibility, limiting peer interaction, and reinforcing fixed academic identities for students placed in lower tracks. Mixed-ability instruction, by contrast, appears to foster inclusion, social integration, and collaborative learning, yet places substantial cognitive, emotional, and organizational demands on teachers, particularly in sustaining appropriate levels of challenge for diverse learners. Across both contexts, teachers emerge as central mediators of grouping policy rather than passive implementers. They exercise professional judgment to navigate tensions between differentiation, equity, and institutional accountability, often developing pragmatic strategies such as flexible grouping, adaptive task design, and differentiated use of materials. These strategies mitigate some of the limitations of each grouping model but do not eliminate the structural constraints embedded in grouping systems. Overall, the findings shift the focus of the grouping debate from questions of effectiveness toward issues of enactment, teacher agency, and ethical responsibility. By foregrounding teachers’ lived experiences, the study contributes qualitative insight into how grouping policies are realized in practice and underscores the need for systemic conditions that support sustainable, equity-oriented language education. These conclusions speak directly to European debates on tracking, inclusion, and teacher professionalism. References Boaler, J. (2003). Setting, social class and survival of the quickest. In A. Bishop (Ed.), Mathematics education (pp. 205-228). Routledge. Boaler, J. (2008). Promoting ‘relational equity’ and high mathematics achievement through an innovative mixed‐ability approach. British Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 167-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01411920701532145 Callahan, R. M. (2005). Tracking and high school English learners: Limiting opportunity to learn. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 305-328. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.3102/00028312042002305 Cohen, Z. A., Lefstein, A., & Author 2, Y. (2022). ‘He doesn’t deserve to be in the higher track’: Teachers’ justifications in student tracking discussions. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 43(4), 543-555. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2020.1858759 Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Sage. https://www.ucg.ac.me/skladiste/blog_609332/objava_105202/fajlovi/Creswell.pdf Erling, E. J., Foltz, A., Siwik, F., & Brummer, M. (2022). Teaching English to linguistically diverse students from migration backgrounds: From deficit perspectives to pockets of possibility. Languages, 7(3), 186. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/languages7030186 Feniger 2, Y., Bar-Haim, E., & Blank, C. (2021). From social origin to selective high school courses: Ability grouping as a mechanism of securing social advantage in Israeli secondary education. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 76(1), 100627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2021.100627 Feniger, Y., Mcdossi, O., & Ayalon, H. (2015). Ethno-religious differences in Israeli higher education: Vertical and horizontal dimensions. European Sociological Review, 31(4), 383-396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcu092 Francis, B., Connolly, P., Archer, L., Hodgen, J., Mazenod, A., Pepper, D., Sloan, S., Taylor, B., Tereshchenko, A., & Travers, M.-C. (2017). Attainment grouping as self-fulfilling prophesy? A mixed methods exploration of self-confidence and set level among year 7 students. International Journal of Educational Research, 86, 96-108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.09.001 Francis, B., Taylor, B., & Tereshchenko, A. (2019). Reassessing 'ability' grouping: Improving practice for equity and attainment. Routledge. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336322183_Reassessing_'Ability'_Grouping_Improving_Practice_for_Equity_and_Attainment Marsh, H. W. (1987). The Big-Fish–Little-Pond Effect on academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(3), 280–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.79.3.280 Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293-336. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.2307/1170460 Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford University Press. Taylor, B., Hodgen, J., Tereshchenko, A., & Gutiérrez, G. (2022). Attainment grouping in English secondary schools: A national survey of current practices. Research Papers in Education, 37(2), 199-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1836517 99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper Cultural Features Fostering Children’s Engagement in Language-Oriented Play Pedagogy Tampere University, Finland Presenting Author:Topic This proposal is part of a broader doctoral dissertation examining children’s engagement in language-oriented play pedagogy in early childhood education. Situated within Nordic traditions of play pedagogy, it focuses on 6- to 7-year-old children and investigates how cultural features of play, defined as narratives, roles, objects, and cultural symbols, support children’s engagement. Engagement is the central phenomenon under study, conceptualized as active, embodied, and sustained participation, while language-oriented objectives, such as sound awareness and letter recognition, are embedded within play narratives as meaningful story components that children interact with. The study will employ a novel, child-led, play-pedagogy-based method to examine how cultural features foster children’s engagement in language-oriented play pedagogy. Cultural features structure participation by providing tangible and symbolic resources that children use to communicate and co-construct play. Examining these features shows how engagement emerges within a socially and culturally organized context and how Nordic play traditions balance curricular language-oriented objectives with children’s agency. This analysis clarifies how culturally structured play fosters engagement and informs both theory and practice in play-based pedagogy. Research Question How do the cultural features of play pedagogy promote children’s engagement in language-oriented play pedagogy? Objective The objective of this study is to investigate how cultural features of play pedagogy provide social, cultural, and material resources that foster children’s engagement in language-oriented play pedagogy. Engagement is examined across three dimensions:
The study will investigate how cultural features actively mediate and scaffold engagement, and will employ a novel, child-led play-pedagogy method consisting of six narrative-based play sessions. It will explore how engagement is enacted and sustained when children interact with narrative components containing language-oriented objectives. Conceptual and Theoretical Framework The study is grounded in sociocultural theory (Bodrova & Leong, 2024; Rogoff, 2016; Vygotsky, 1978) and complemented by an enactive perspective on language, particularly Di Paolo’s concept of linguistic bodies (Di Paolo et al., 2018). From a sociocultural perspective, engagement arises through participation in culturally meaningful activities, where children collaboratively explore language-oriented objectives within shared play narratives (Hakkarainen, 2008; Zuckerman, 2017). Additionally, the enactive perspective emphasizes that engagement is enacted through coordinated verbal and bodily actions, including gestures, posture, gaze, facial expressions, and vocal qualities (Di Paolo et al., 2018). Together, these perspectives provide a holistic framework for understanding engagement as a socially, culturally, and embodied phenomenon emerging through interaction with others and with material environments. Cultural Features in Play Pedagogy and Engagement Drawing on Nordic traditions of play pedagogy, Lindqvist’s (1995) concept of playworlds emphasizes adults and children playing together to co-construct imaginary worlds. Hakkarainen (2008) expands this by incorporating problem-solving within play narratives. Narratives are collaboratively developed through characters that integrate problem-solving and language-oriented objectives embedded in the play narrative (Hakkarainen, 2008; Zuckerman, 2017). Cultural features, defined as narratives, roles, objects, and symbols, structure participation and meaning-making in play. Meaningful narratives, such as familiar fairy tales, guide action and sustain engagement by creating dramatic tension and exploring fundamental conflicts, including fear–security and power–equality (Hakkarainen & Bredikyte, 2013). Roles enable children to adopt and negotiate culturally meaningful positions. Objects and cultural symbols, such as a map with mysterious letters that invite interpretation, serve as mediational tools anchoring attention, supporting symbolic transformation, and fostering language use (Lindqvist, 1995; Zuckerman, 2017). These features scaffold dialogue, problem-solving, and participation in play. From an enactive perspective, they provide affordances linking action and interaction, shaping how children participate and sustain engagement (Di Paolo et al., 2018; Sparaci & Gallagher, 2023). Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study adopts an action research design (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988), employing iterative cycles of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting to examine how cultural features of play foster children’s engagement in language-oriented play pedagogy. (1) During February–March 2026, a novel play-pedagogy-based method was developed as a research tool for examining children’s engagement. The method consists of six play sessions structured around a shared narrative that integrates language-oriented objectives, such as sound awareness and letter recognition. Cultural features meaningful to children are embedded in the narrative as analytic affordances, enabling examination of how these features invite, sustain, and shape engagement during play. (2) The method was piloted in one pre-primary group in April 2026 to test its usefulness and refine both the play design and analytic focus. In line with action research principles, the pilot sessions were implemented iteratively, with refinements based on observed engagement. This phase calibrates the method so that play sessions reliably highlight situations in which engagement can be systematically observed. (3) During Autumn 2026–Spring 2027, the refined method will be implemented as the primary tool for data collection and analysis in the main study. Play sessions will be conducted with three pre-primary groups, using video recordings, field notes, and children’s reflections to enable triangulation and strengthen the credibility of observations (Heale & Forbes, 2013). Data Analysis The analysis is based on repeated viewing of video-recorded play sessions, using a multimodal interactional approach (Heath, Hindmarsh & Luff, 2010; Goodwin, 2000). Video data are segmented into interactional episodes, defined as temporally bounded sequences of joint activity emerging from children’s orientations to play. Episode boundaries are identified through shifts in verbal interaction, participation frameworks, embodied orientation, and use of material or symbolic resources, and are analytically derived rather than pre-defined (Jordan & Henderson, 1995; Heath, Hindmarsh & Luff, 2010). Consistent with the study’s theoretical framework, engagement is analysed across three interrelated dimensions: children’s initiative-taking and problem-solving (active participation), bodily interaction (embodiment in dialogue), and continuity of attention and involvement over time (sustained participation). These dimensions provide a framework for identifying how engagement unfolds moment by moment and is sustained within play contexts. Episodes are analysed to examine how cultural features in play, such as narratives, roles, objects, and symbols,mediate participation. For example, a wooden stick may become a magic scepter, enabling shared attention, embodied dialogue, and collaborative problem-solving, making engagement visible within the play context. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Through these interconnected cultural features, engagement is expected to emerge as active, embodied, and sustained participation. Examining them in the broader dissertation will provide insights into how culturally structured play supports engagement in language-oriented play pedagogy and informs the design of child-centered, culturally responsive practices in early childhood education. Cultural features are anticipated to play a central role in scaffolding children’s engagement. Shared narratives, negotiated roles, and meaningful objects and cultural symbols are expected to create conditions that support initiative-taking, sustained attention, and coordinated verbal and bodily participation, allowing engagement to emerge as a holistic, embodied process characterized by collaborative problem-solving and co-construction of meaning. Objects and cultural symbols are likely to function as mediational resources, anchoring attention, supporting symbolic transformation, and sustaining engagement across episodes. Through these resources, children are expected to coordinate speech, gesture, movement, and affect, illustrating how engagement is deeply social, cultural, and embodied. The study is expected to contribute theoretically by extending sociocultural and enactive accounts of engagement, methodologically by demonstrating a structured, narrative-based play-pedagogy method for examining engagement, and pedagogically by informing culturally structured, language-oriented play-pedagogy-based approaches in early childhood education with relevance for Nordic and broader European contexts. References Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. J. (2024). Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early childhood education (3rd ed.). Pearson. Di Paolo, E. A., Cuffari, E. C., & De Jaegher, H. (2018). Linguistic bodies: The continuity between life and language. MIT Press. EDUFI. (2014). National core curriculum for pre-primary education 2014. Finnish National Agency for Education. Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X Hakkarainen, P. (2008). The challenges and possibilities of a narrative learning approach in the Finnish early childhood education system. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(5), 292–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2008.12.008 Hakkarainen, P., & Bredikyte, M. (2013). Kehittävän leikkipedagogiikan perusteet. Majavesi: Kogni. Heale, R., & Forbes, D. (2013). Understanding triangulation in research. Evidence-Based Nursing, 16(4), 98. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2013-101494 Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P. (2010). Video in qualitative research: Analysing social interaction in everyday life. Sage. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0401_2 Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Deakin University Press. Lindqvist, G. (1995). The aesthetics of play: A didactic study of play and culture in preschools (Doctoral dissertation). Uppsala Studies in Education, Uppsala University. Marjanen, K. (2022). Moniaistinen musiikki – leikin, elämysten ja ilon pedagogiikkaa. In I. Ruokonen (Ed.), Ilmaisun ilo (pp. 229–247). PS-kustannus. Rogoff, B., Callanan, M. A., Gutiérrez, K. D., & Erickson, F. (2016). The organization of informal learning. Research in Education, 40, 356–401. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16680994 Sparaci, L., & Gallagher, S. (2023). A kaleidoscope of play: A new approach to play analysis in childhood. Philosophical Psychology, 36(5), 717–748. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2023.2234938 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Zuckerman, G. (2017). The interplay between play and learning. In T. Bruce, P. Hakkarainen, & M. Bredikyte (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of early childhood play (pp. 315–327). Routledge. | ||