The Topic Study Group 28 was aimed at addressing all areas of affect, including attitude, anxiety, beliefs, meaning, self-concept, emotion, interest, motivation, needs, goals, identity, norms, values. The different approaches to study affect included psychological, social, and philosophical research perspectives. Moreover, the call for papers explicitly questioned the issue of the mutual relationship between affective constructs and their connection to cognition and other constructs studied in mathematics education, as well as the description of programs for promoting aspects of affect.

The activity of the working group was aimed at:

  • Presenting an overview of the state of the art in the research field of affect in mathematics education, both at the students’ and the teachers’ (pre-service or in-service) level.

  • To identify new trends and developments in research and practice in these areas.

  • To engage participants in a critical reflection of this research field and generate discussion of an agenda for future research on affect in mathematics education.

The participation to the Topic Study Group highlights a growing interest for affective issues: 86 researchers attended as presenting authors. Due to the high number of proposals, it was necessary to carry out a selection of the contributions and to organize parallel sessions, so as to provide adequate time for presentation and discussion. One invited lecture and 20 research reports were presented during regular sessions; additionally, there were 44 oral communications and 21 poster presentations. The final part of each session was devoted to a general discussion and synthesis. Below, we synthesize the contents of the regular sessions.

Regular session 1 was held in plenary mode. After a brief introduction and an ice-breaking activity, Leder gave her invited lecture, presenting an overview of the state of the art of research on affect, with a special emphasis on gender issues. The first regular presentation was given by Bofah and Hannula, who reported a quantitative analysis of motivational beliefs as a mediator between perceived social support and mathematics achievement.

Regular session 2 was devoted to the theme of identity, taking into account both student and teacher perspective. A common feature of these presentations was the effort of broadening the construct of identity, linking it to other theoretical constructs and/or adopting innovative theoretical stances. First, Heyd-Metzuyanim proposed a comparison between research on affect and research on discourse, highlighting overlapping and gaps. More specifically, she suggested the construct of identity as a nexus of the study of affect and discourse. Next, Westaway examined the interplay between teachers’ identities and mathematics pedagogical practices, adopting the methodological and theoretical framework of social realism. This presupposes a historical analysis that includes teachers’ life histories and mathematics histories, and, through this analytic process, the identification of the mechanisms from which teachers’ identities emerge. Then Felix gave a presentation focused on the development of the identity of a mathematics teacher, suggesting that the identity is deeply shaped by the struggle for recognition. More specifically, he analyzed autobiographical stories through the theoretical lenses provided by Honneth’s three levels of recognition, Kelchtermans’ four components of a professional self (or identity) and Heikkinen and Huttunen’s circles of recognition. Finally, Karaolis and Philippou presented their instrument for the study of teachers’ identity, carried out combining a questionnaire and qualitative interviews. Hierarchical cluster analysis led to single out three clusters of teachers, who differ in terms of self-efficacy, motivation, and task orientation.

Regular session 3 was run parallel with session 2. It was devoted to exploring links between affective factors and mathematical activity and performance. Two presentations concerned student affect. Kohen and Tali explored the impact of learning based visualization, embedded with a tool for promoting self-efficacy, on middle students’ achievements and self-efficacy. Fuller and Deshler presented their research on the complex way that anxiety associated to different aspects of the study of mathematics interacts with personality traits. One presentation concerned prospective teachers. Haser investigated pre-service mathematics teachers’ feelings of difficulty when faced to problem posing and problem solving tasks. Finally, Hannula and Oksanen presented a large-scale study on the link between teachers’ beliefs and their students’ affect and achievement, showing that teachers’ beliefs may have a small but statistically significant effect on the development of students’ affect and achievement. More specifically, student achievement and affect developed more positively, when their teachers emphasized student thinking. Learning outcomes were also positively related with teacher efficacy and student affect was found to develop more positively when their teachers emphasized facts and routines.

Regular session 4 was devoted to the study of teacher affect, with a variety of methods and theoretical lenses. The issue of comparative studies was explicitly addressed. Kahlil and Johnson presented their study concerning novice teachers’ “in the moment” affect, as emerging during a mixed-reality simulated classroom. The interpretative lenses they adopted refers to Goldin and colleague’s engagement structures. Laschke and Blömeke focused on future teachers’ motivation to teach, analyzing data from 15 countries. Their study led to reflections on methodological issues such as the use of the same instrument for countries with different cultural and educational traditions. Adeyemi presented a large quantitative study on the relationship between mathematics anxiety and mathematics teaching anxiety among in-service elementary teachers. The study had a specific focus on the influence of gender. Juwe examined the beliefs of mathematics teachers who have special responsibilities in their schools (Mathematics Curriculum Leaders), proposing a comparison between England and Nigeria.

Organized in parallel to session 4, the regular session 5 was focused on student affect. Two main themes emerged: the interplay between affect and mathematical activity in classroom, and the need for theoretical lenses (and consequent methodological instruments) to better understand phenomena. Elizar presented a study of beliefs and attitudes influencing students’ higher order thinking skills in mathematics. Gun and Bulut studied students’ attitude towards mathematics, adopting a tripartite model that encompasses cognitive, affective and behavioral components. Branchetti and Morselli studied the interactions during group work from a socio-cultural perspective and networking with two theoretical lenses: the construct of rational behavior and that of identity. Wilkie studied students’ affect using an open-response inquiry. In her presentation she discussed the methodological design of her study and used affect-related examples to illustrate the insights that researchers and teachers can gain from eliciting open responses from students.

The last regular session was again held in plenary mode. Pieronkievicz and Goldin addressed belief change combining two theoretical constructs: the concept of affective transgression (consciously crossing emotional boundaries established by prior beliefs) and the concept of meta-affect. They concluded their presentation suggesting teachers to address students’ affect explicitly within an emotionally safe teaching environment, and discussed some strategies to this aim. Middleton, Mangu, and Lee presented their study on the impact of motivational variables (Interest, Identity, Self-Efficacy, and Utility) on the career intentions of high schoolers, with particular attention to STEM aspirations. Finally, Achmetli and Schukajlow presented their study drawing from the project MultiMa, where students were asked to construct multiple solutions while solving real-world problems by applying multiple mathematical procedures. Their results indicated that constructing multiple solutions had a positive influence on students’ experience of competence, but no effect on their interest in mathematics.