Volume 5 Issue 3 (2016)

Seizing the Unexpected and Creative Meaning Making in the Unfolding of Classroom Interaction

pp. 254-263  |  Published Online: September 2016  |  DOI: 10.12973/edupij.2016.53.6

Luisa Molinari, Ameya G. Canovi


This is a theoretical article on creative meaning making in classroom interaction, with a focus on the unfolding of cognitive, relational, and emotional aspects of teaching and learning, often tied to one another. To accomplish this goal, we integrate studies from two theoretical backgrounds, i.e., the historical cultural theory and the developmental system theory principles. We have focused on several fields of research. First, we have summarized works on micromoments of creativity. Second, we have considered studies that have taken a process view on emergent opportunities for creativity. Third, we have focused on creativity in original thinking and the transformation of a relevant object of learning into a learnable. Finally, we have considered research on the rise of learning collective emotional side, conceptualized in terms of class mood and flow. We have concluded by stressing that, beyond the methodological challenges, this literature offers striking indications for a deeper understanding of classroom processes and learning opportunities.

Keywords: creativity, emotional experience, classroom interaction, microtransitions, class mood


Abbott, J. A. (2000). “Blinking Out” and “Having the Touch” Two Fifth-Grade Boys Talk about Flow Experiences in Writing. Written Communication, 17(1), 53-92.

Abdul Halim, H., Kingsbury, M., & Drage, C. (2013). Nurturing Creativity: Whose Wisdom Is of Most Worth? Creative Education, 4, 1–4.

Armstrong, A. C. (2008). The fragility of group flow: The experiences of two small groups in a middle school mathematics classroom. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27(2), 101-115.

Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Nurturing creativity in the micro-moments of the classroom. In K. H. Kim, J. C. Kaufman, J. Bear, & B. Sriraman (Eds.), Creatively Gifted Students are not like Other Gifted Students: Research, theory, and practice (pp. 3-16). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies, 25(1), 53-69.

Boyd, M. P., & Markarian, W. C. (2011). Dialogic teaching: talk in service of a dialogic stance. Language and Education, 25(6), 515–534.

Catala, A., Jaen, J., Pons, P., & Garcia-Sanjuan, F. (2014). Playful creativity: Playing to create games on surfaces. In A. Nijholt (Ed.), Playful user interfaces (pp. 293-315). Singapore: Springer.

Cornelius, L. L., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (2004). Power in the classroom: How the classroom environment shapes students’ relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 467-498.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The systems Model of Creativity. Netherlands: Springer.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: HarperPerennial.

Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The Stance Triangle. In R. Englebretson (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 140–182). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Eadie, T., & Lymbery, M. (2007). Promoting creative practice through social work education. Social Work Education, 26(7), 670-683.

Egbert, J. (2004). A study of flow theory in the foreign language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 60(5), 549-586.

Englebretson, R. (Ed.) (2007). Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Ervin-Tripp, S. M. (1976). Speech acts and social learning. In K. H. Basso, & H. Selby (Eds.), Meaning in anthropology (pp. 123-153). University of New Mexico Press.

Ford, D. H., & Lerner, R. M. (1992). Developmental systems theory: An integrative approach. London: SAGE.

Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Gillespie, A., & Zittoun, T. (2010). Using resources: Conceptualizing the mediation and reflective use of tools and signs. Culture & Psychology, 16(1), 37-62.

Gonzalez Rey, F. L. (2009). Historical relevance of Vygotsky’s work: Its significance for a new approach to the problem of subjectivity in psychology. Outlines, 1(1), 59–73.

Goodwin, C. (2007). Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse & Society, 18(1), 53-73.

Grossen, M. (2010). Interaction analysis and psychology: a dialogical perspective. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 44(1), 1-22.

Hollenstein, T. (2013). State space grids. New York: Springer.

Jóhannsdóttir, T., & Roth, W. M. (2014). Experiencing (Pereživanie) as developmental category: Learning from a fisherman who is becoming (as) a Teacher-in-a-Village-School. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies, 15(3), 54-78.

Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1-12.

Kirkendall, A., & Kirshen, A. S. (2015). Encouraging creativity in the social work classroom: Insights from a qualitative exploration. Social Work Education, 34(3), 341–354.

Kumpulainen, K., Lipponen, L., Hilppö, J., & Mikkola, A. (2014). Building on the positive in children’s lives: A co-participatory study on the social construction of children’s sense of agency. Early Child Development and Care, 2, 211-229.

Leontiev, A. A. (1992). Ecce Homo. Methodological Problems. Multidisciplinary Newsletter for Activity Theory, 11(12), 41-44.

Lindqvist, G. (2003). Vygotsky’s theory of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 245-251.

Lunkenheimer, E. S., Shields, A. M., & Arbor, A. (2012). Flexibility and attractors in context: Family emotion socialization patterns and children’s emotion regulation in late childhood. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 16(3), 269–291.

Majlesi, A. R., & Broth, M. (2012). Emergent learnables in second language classroom interaction. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(3-4), 193–207.

Mameli, C., & Molinari, L. (2013). Interactive micro-processes in classroom discourse: Turning points and emergent meanings. Research Papers in Education, 28(2), 196-211.

Mason, J. (2002). Researching your own practice. The discipline of noticing. London: Routledge Falmer.

Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge.

Molinari, L., & Mameli, C. (2013). Process quality of classroom discourse: Pupil participation and learning opportunities. International Journal of Educational Research, 62, 249-258.

Morais, M. F., & Azevedo, I. (2011). What is a Creative Teacher and what is a Creative Pupil? Perceptions of teachers. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 12, 330–339.

Muller Mirza, N., Grossen, M., de Diesbach-Dolder, S., & Nicollin, L. (2014). Transforming personal experience and emotions through secondarisation in education for cultural diversity: An interplay between unicity and genericity. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 3(4), 263–273.

Ochs, E. (1992). Indexing gender. In A. Duranti, & C Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 335-358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ochs, E. (1996). Linguistic resources for socializing humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Şahin, C. A. F. (2014). The effectiveness of mentoring strategy for developing the Creative Potential of the Gifted and Non-Gifted students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 14, 47–55.

Sameroff, A. J. (1995). General systems theories and developmental psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental Psychopathology: Vol. 1 Theory and methods (pp. 659-695). New York: Wiley.

Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for innovation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 41-48.

Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Shneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158-176.

Stone, L. D., & Thompson, G. A. (2014). Classroom mood and the dance of stance: The role of affective and epistemic stancetaking in the development of a classroom mood. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 3(4), 309-322.

Veresov, N. (2010). Forgotten methodology: Vygotsky’s case. In A. Toomela, & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Methodological thinking in psychology: 60 years gone astray? Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: Braziller.

Yi, X., Plucker, J. A., & Guo, J. (2015). Modeling influences on divergent thinking and artistic creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 62–68.




► Journal Metrics

  • Acceptance rate 9%
  • 1.8 (2022) CiteScore (Scopus)
  • Q3 (2022) CiteScore Best Quartile
  • 0.294 (2022) Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)
  • 0.612 (2022) Source-Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 


EDUPIJ Statistics from Scopus

CiteScore: 1.8, view Scopus page

SCImago Journal & Country Rank


► Educational Process: International Journal is member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 


► New issue coming soon! (Volume 13 Issue 1, 2024)