Skip to main content

EDITORIAL article

Front. Educ., 27 March 2024
Sec. Teacher Education
This article is part of the Research Topic Disciplinary Aesthetics: the Role of Taste and Affect for Teaching and Learning Specific School Subjects View all 11 articles

Editorial: Disciplinary aesthetics: the role of taste and affect for teaching and learning specific school subjects

  • 1Department of Teaching and Learning, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
  • 2Education and Administration, Stockholm, Sweden
  • 3School of Teacher Education and Professional Development, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom

Aesthetics concerns, on the one hand, people's feelings of pleasure and displeasure, and, on the other hand, the objects these feelings are directed to, that is, what people find beautiful or ugly (Wickman, 2006). Traditionally aesthetics and affect have been treated as separate from cognition and only rarely has it been studied how they are intertwined when learning a specific content (Wickman et al., 2021). However, recent situated and socio-culturally oriented research has begun to elucidate how aesthetics plays a key role for selection of content, what route learning takes in the classroom and for students' opportunities to develop an interest or taste for a specific school subject (e.g., Sinclair, 2006; Ainsworth and Bell, 2020; Wickman et al., 2021). This Research Topic compiles contributions from researchers examining these topics further.

Aesthetic judgments are not just reports of inner feelings but also concern outer objects and so constitutes an evaluation of what is the case (Dewey, 1934). What beauty there is in educational settings such as mathematical inquiry (Sinclair, 2009), data modeling (Ferguson et al., 2021), writing a literary text (Gilbert, 2016), learning grammar (Ainsworth and Bell, 2020), cooking (Berg et al., 2019), a ball game (Maivorsdotter and Lundvall, 2009), or when art meets science (Hannigan et al., 2021) is a question of taste and is socially constituted, negotiated, and learnt (Bourdieu, 1984). Distinctions of taste make evident preferences of language and representations, procedures and actions, and ways-to-be as a person. Aesthetics is a question of what and whose content is included and excluded from a school subject (Anderhag et al., 2015). The goal of this Research Topic is to explore these little examined topics extensively and to widen the understanding of what may characterize a school-subject-specific aesthetics and what role it may have when teaching and learning different school subjects, separately or as integrated.

The Research Topic is grounded in the notion of disciplinary aesthetics (Wickman et al., 2021), that is, school-subject-specific aesthetics. It focuses on the overarching questions of what may characterize such an aesthetics and what role this may have for teaching and learning in different school subjects. Contributions to the field do not merely examine specific school subjects, such as mathematics and history, but also studies on intersections between school subjects, as for example art and science (Caiman and Jakobson, 2019).

Ainsworth and Bell suggest that explicit grammar learning may evoke aesthetic experience as existing tacit knowledge of language is transformed into declarative knowledge, generating aesthetic-epistemic feelings of fittingness. Albuquerque and Moore suggest that additional language teaching and learning might be enhanced by framing it as “coartistry,” a site for “aesthetic, plurilingual/pluriliterate action, and interaction.” Andrée et al. explore learning in programming, demonstrating the importance of aesthetic judgments for orienting student learning toward the movement of the programmed object and the ways to be as a programmer. Berg et al. show how aesthetic values in teaching home and consumer studies play a key role and are constituted as culinary, production, and bodily aesthetics, relating to, for example, presentation of meals, preprocessing of food and bodily consequences of eating, respectively. Ferguson and White draw on a socio-semiotic pragmatist perspective to explore the synergy between science education aesthetics and climate change aesthetics, advocating for a transformative aesthetics of climate change education. Gåfvels explores the aesthetics involved in teaching and learning floristry, providing examples of aesthetic judgements being constructed in interaction, informed by sensory knowing and communicated through embodied actions. Hannigan et al. present a mixed methodology approach to examine the role of aesthetic experiences and art for learning in marine science when children engage in a series of fieldtrips, workshops and lessons on a marine environment. Karavakou et al. present a theoretical model for analyzing students' aesthetically driven mathematical meaning making, using empirical findings to discuss the prospect of an aesthetically oriented curriculum reform. Nemirovsky et al. draw on Rancière's approach to aesthetics and politics and a case study of a conversation between weavers, anthropologists, and mathematics educators on the nature of knots to discuss the implications of aesthetical entanglements for mathematics learning. Prain et al. adopt Peirce's semiotic theory of signs examining disciplinary aesthetics as enjoyment and appreciation learning within and across the two subjects drama and science. They show how students' taste for both subjects is constituted through signs and signs systems.

The contributions within this Research Topic make both empirical and theoretical contributions to the emerging field of disciplinary aesthetics. Together they provide exploratory responses to the hitherto understudied questions:

• What are the objects (language, procedures, and persons) that are aesthetically included or excluded as part of teaching and learning the subject?

• How can such distinctions be seen to be taught and learned as content of the subject?

Substantively, the studies provide an exploration of how the aesthetic dimensions of each of the academic subjects might be characterized, exemplifying the aesthetic experiences that may arise from engaging with particular kinds of subject content in particular ways. Methodologically, the contributions showcase a range of methods that might be used to capture such aesthetic experiences and the particular aspects of knowledge and/or learning that have the potential to evoke them. These articles provide a flexible suite of methodological and theoretical tools, which might be used in future research to broaden the field of disciplinary aesthetics to include further academic disciplines. They also yield a number of important implications for educators, including suggestions for how teachers might harness the aesthetic dimensions of particular subjects to maximize learning and engagement in the classroom. More broadly, the Research Topic argues for the role of aesthetics in education to be taken seriously, and signposts potentially fruitful avenues for future research.

Author contributions

PA: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CC: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. P-OW: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. SA: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Ainsworth, S., and Bell, H. (2020). Affective knowledge versus affective pedagogy: the cases of native grammar learning. Cambr. J. Educ. 50, 597–614. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2020.1751072

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Anderhag, P., Wickman, P. O., and Hamza, K. M. (2015). Signs of taste for science: a methodology for studying the constitution of interest in the science classroom. Cult. Stud. Sci. Educ. 10, 339–368. doi: 10.1007/s11422-014-9641-9

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Berg, G., Elmståhl, H., Mattsson Sydner, Y., and Lundqvist, E. (2019). Aesthetic judgments and meaning-making during cooking in Home and Consumer Studies. Educare 2, 30–57. doi: 10.24834/educare.2019.2.3

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: a Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge.

Google Scholar

Caiman, C., and Jakobson, B. (2019). The role of art practice in elementary school science. Sci. Educ. 28, 153–175. doi: 10.1007/s11191-019-00036-2

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dewey, J. (1934). Art as Experience. New York, NY: Perigee Books.

Google Scholar

Ferguson, J. P., Tytler, R., and White, P. (2021). The role of aesthetics in the teaching and learning of data modelling. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2021:1875514. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2021.1875514

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gilbert, F. (2016). Aesthetic learning, creative writing and English teaching. Chang. Engl. 23, 257–268. doi: 10.1080/1358684X.2016.1203616

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hannigan, S., Wickman, P. O., Ferguson, J. P., Prain, V., and Tytler, R. (2021). The role of aesthetics in learning science in an art-science lesson. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2021:1909773. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2021.1909773

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Maivorsdotter, N., and Lundvall, S. (2009). Aesthetic experience as an aspect of embodied learning: stories from physical education student teachers. Sport Educ. Soc. 14, 265–279. doi: 10.1080/13573320903037622

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sinclair, N. (2006). Mathematics and Beauty: Aesthetics Approaches to Teaching Children. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Google Scholar

Sinclair, N. (2009). Aesthetics as a liberating force in mathematics education? ZDM Math. Educ. 41, 45–60. doi: 10.1007/s11858-008-0132-x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Wickman, P. O. (2006). Aesthetic Experience in Science Education: Learning and Meaning-Making as Situated Talk and Action. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Google Scholar

Wickman, P. O., Prain, V., and Tytler, R. (2021). Aesthetics, affect, and making meaning in science education: an introduction. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2021:1912434. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2021.1912434

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Keywords: methodology, interest, aesthetics, learning, school subjects

Citation: Anderhag P, Caiman C, Wickman P-O and Ainsworth S (2024) Editorial: Disciplinary aesthetics: the role of taste and affect for teaching and learning specific school subjects. Front. Educ. 9:1396318. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1396318

Received: 05 March 2024; Accepted: 12 March 2024;
Published: 27 March 2024.

Edited and reviewed by: Stefinee Pinnegar, Brigham Young University, United States

Copyright © 2024 Anderhag, Caiman, Wickman and Ainsworth. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Per Anderhag, per.anderhag@su.se

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.