One of the most powerful takeaways from researching and reading about embodied learning has been from Winn (2003), in sharing that “our physical behavior often externalizes our thinking and extends cognition beyond our brain,” (p. 11). Human beings are not mind readers and thus the nature of embodied learning encompasses the physical aspect of learning as well as the visual aspect of learning. As an educator, when I see students at their desk, reading through a worksheet or textbook, I can only hope that they are understanding and learning the information in front of them. Embodied learning activities allow us, as educators, to visually see the ways in which our students are thinking. It is a method of thinking out loud without needing words. Winn (2003) goes on to discuss many examples of activities that utilize embodied learning, of which he discusses the idea of presence. This is “the belief that you are “in” the artificial environment, not in the laboratory or classroom,” (p. 14). This idea of presence is something that I think is required to get all the benefits available from embodied learning. Students need to buy-in and the nature of the activities needs to allow for this buy-in to occur.
One of the ways to create this buy-in can be to immerse students in the environment. Kamarainen et al. (2013) utilized embodied learning through environmental education field trips. Students were given the opportunity to experience augmented reality and utilize probeware to study different aspects of water. Though the water from the pond they studied could have been brought to them into their classroom, the augmented reality experience would not have been the same and thus immersing students in this kind of learning environment brought forward results of “a positive shift in their attitudes about their ability to understand focal topics and do science related skills,” (Kamarainen et al., 2013, p. 549). The nature of this learning experience required students to be physically involved with their learning experience.
There were many other examples of embodied learning experiences brought forward by Stevens (2012). For example, a complex plane is made life size so that students are able to physically navigate their own bodies through addition and multiplication problems (Stevens, 2012). Often when students come into a math classroom, they expect to be sitting at their desks working through problems either alone or maybe in a small group. An embodied learning activity is going to challenge these norms and allow students to utilize their physical bodies and the physical space of the classroom. The nature of this activity with the complex plane requires buy-in from students and that starts with the excitement and buy-in from their teacher. Embodied learning can be really powerful and even outside the box. It requires however, that students let go of their expectations and maybe even their previous understanding of how they learn in the math and science classroom.
References
Kamarainen, A. M., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., Browne, A., Mazzuca, D., Tutwiler, M. S., & Dede, C. (2013). EcoMOBILE: Integrating augmented reality and probeware with environmental education field trips. Computers & Education, 68, 545-556.
Stevens, R. (2012). The missing bodies of mathematical thinking and learning have been found. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 337-346.
Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness, and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-114.