Activating STEAM Learning in Young Children Through Aha-Experiences: Supporting Creativity and Aesthetic Sensitivity in Infants and Toddlers

Abstract

This research explored the occurrence of aha-experiences in young children during participatory creative processes within STEAM learning. The study aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the specific conditions that contribute to the emergence of these aha-experiences. A series of activities were designed and implemented as part of a participatory observation study at the Municipal Center for Early Childhood Education and Care in Tokyo, Japan. The STEAM sessions involved the use of a Wind Tunnel and colorful scarves, engaging infants and toddlers in exploratory interactions with the device and materials alongside their classmates, teachers, and the first author, referred to as researcher T. Through video recordings, the researchers conducted microanalysis of the collected data. The findings confirmed that children’s aesthetic sensitivity was activated during aha-experiences. Furthermore, this heightened sensitivity encouraged active participation from their teachers in the creative process. The study employed a socio-cultural approach to creativity theory to interpret these aha-experiences in the context of STEAM learning. It highlighted the participatory nature of creativity and the role of aesthetic sensitivity in young children’s learning. Additionally, the study provided insights for educators and caregivers on how to support the development of creativity in infants and toddlers within STEAM learning environments.

1. Introduction

1.1. STEAM Learning Overview

The STEM learning framework was introduced in the United States in the 1990s by the National Science Foundation. In early 2000s, this framework spread across the United States and broadened its emphasis by including an “A” for arts (STEAM) (Yakman, 2008). Arts include language, fine, physical, manual, and liberal arts. The liberal arts, in particular, are often foundational to other fields because they encompass social science, psychology, philosophy, theology, history, sociology, politics, and civics. Yakman (2008) reviewed each discipline within STEAM and developed a pyramid model for the framework (Figure 1). This model places content-specific knowledge at the base, followed by discipline-specific, multidisciplinary, integrative, and life-long learning at the top. The inclusion of arts, particularly the liberal arts, is essential and can be positioned at the foundational level, along with content-specific disciplines.

The dissemination of STEAM learning enables interdisciplinary learning (Payton et al., 2017). In particular, when students are challenged to address social problems which happen in the real world, the STEAM learning framework encourages them to adopt interdisciplinary approach rather than a single disciplinary approach (Roberts & Schnepp, 2020); this approach enhances the engagement level of students’ problem-solving skills, creativity, and critical thinking (MacDonald et al., 2020; Sochacka et al., 2016).

Figure 1. Simplified and recreated by the first author, originally from Yakman’s STEAM pyramid model (Yakman, 2008).

Figure 1. Simplified and recreated by the first author, originally from Yakman’s STEAM pyramid model (Yakman, 2008).

1.2. STEAM Learning in Early Childhood Education

In Section 1.1, the STEAM Learning framework, an interdisciplinary approach, was introduced, and the influence of STEAM learning in higher education was mentioned. This section focuses on young children’s learning to review the STEAM learning process and research in early childhood education.

STEAM learning enhances infants’ and toddlers’ cognition and social emotional developments (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018), in addition to promoting young children’s problem-solving skills (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018; Hedda, 2012), creativity, and executive function (Bucher & Pindra, 2020).

Infants’ and toddlers’ observable exhibition of developmental skills are described in

Table 1. Infant and toddler approaches to learning and cognitive development related to STEAM (simplified and recreated by the first author; originally from Bucher and Pindra (2020).

Developmental Skills	Observable Infant and Toddler Behaviors
Initiative and Curiosity	-shows eagerness and curiosity as a learner
	-initiates actions with materials
Creativity and Inventiveness	-experiments with different uses for objects
	-observes
	-uses understanding of causal relationships
Reasoning and Problem-solving	-uses a variety of stargates, imagination and creativity to solve problems
	-uses special awareness to understand properties of objects and their movement in space
	-applies new situations

. Young children’s initiative and curiosity are observable in how they begin action with materials (Bucher & Pindra, 2020).

In Bucher and Pindra’s work (Bucher & Pindra, 2020), action researchers looked at the episode from Reggio Emilia to categorize the behavior under developmental skills. Young children’s initiative and curiosity are observable in their initial actions with materials (Table 1). Infant and toddler creativity and inventiveness are observable in experiments with different uses for objects, as well as their flexibility in actions and behavior (Bucher & Pindra, 2020). Infant and toddler’s problem-solving is categorized to use a variety of strategies, imagination and creativity to solve problems. It is also applied to new situations.

Previous studies on STEAM learning in early childhood education are not only limited, but also only a few practice reports existed. Research based on data and detailed analysis is not reported.

1.3. STEAM Learning in Japanese Context

To frame the present research in the local context, we outline STEAM learning in Japan. STEM learning was first implemented in higher education to promote the use of digital technology and the integration of design and the arts rooted in the definition of “A”. “A” and “E” are often combined to be considered a concept of design. In Japanese higher education, teachers encourage students to find social problems by themselves to solve and promote STEAM learning in integrated subjects (Ohtani, 2021).

In the Japanese early childhood education framework, STEAM learning practices have only recently begun (Sakata & Kumano, 2006), and discussions around adding “A” to STEM learning or defining the role of “A” remain limited. Further research on STEAM learning practices and discussions on the role of adding “A” to STEM enrich Japanese early childhood education. Sakata and Kumano (Sakata & Kumano, 2017) provided practical and theoretical recommendations for STEM learning in early childhood education, offering four key suggestions. First, they emphasized the importance of encouraging close observation as a foundation for scientific learning. Second, they advocated for selecting themes that are relevant to children’s daily lives and natural science activities. Third, they highlighted the critical role of teachers’ language and active involvement. Fourth, they recommended the implementation of activities in small groups to enhance learning. Based on Sakata and Kumano’s four suggestions (Sakata & Kumano, 2017), the present study structured STEAM activities to encourage close observation in small groups, using wind and colorful fabrics—materials familiar to children from their everyday experiences.

Section 1.4 discusses problem-solving processes and aha-moment studies to further the exploration of aha-moments in children. Section 1.5 introduces creativity studies that focus on socio-cultural creativity, and Section 1.6 discusses infant and toddler aesthetic sensitivity.

1.4. Aha-Experience in the Problem-Solving Process in Young Children

The problem-solving process in the STEAM learning framework is crucial. In particular, aha-experiences in problem solving are important in individual and collaborative learning (Weisberg et al., 2023). Aha-moments in STEAM learning enhance young children’s cognition and creative engagement (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018). For instance, encountering and observing novel events promote young children’s cognitive development (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018), as they encounter surprise or wonder; this surprise leads creative engagement, motivating them to share something novel and surprised.

Furthermore, in the STEAM learning framework, the occurrence of aha-moment prompts young children to discover something novel, to reflect and repeat multiple times (Kallery et al., 2022), to creatively generate hypothesis and trial and error (Hong et al., 2017), creatively generate hypothesis and trial and error (Hong et al., 2017), and finally, to be curious (Kudryavtsev, 2011), nurturing a spirit of inquiry.

Only two studies have been conducted on infants and school-aged children’s aha-experience. First, in a study of infants, parental observation reports indicated that aha is experienced even by infants in their third week of life (Haugen et al., 2024). In this report of an infant’s aha-experience, a parent defined an aha-experience as a moment when the infant had been working on it for some time, and suddenly, with surprise, there was a new thing that was known or discovered (Haugen et al., 2024). In the second study, school-aged children between 7 and 11 years of age were asked to report “Oh!” and “Ah!” and surprise, along with the moments of encountering new knowledge, and the things they had never encountered before were reported (Weisberg et al., 2023).

There were only two previous studies on the aha-experience of young children, and none of them empirically captured and analyzed the occurrence of aha-experiences (Haugen et al., 2024; Weisberg et al., 2023). The reason for the lack of research accumulation was that the aha-experience of young children was limited in verbal and physical expressions and required a developmentally appropriate research methodology (Topolinski & Reber, 2010; Haugen et al., 2024). Regarding children whose language development and physical expression were still developing, the characteristics of aha-experiences specific to children were not clarified. It is worth clarifying the characteristics of aha-experiences through research methods that were in line with children’s development.

Aha-experiences are synonymous with aha-moments or -reactions (American Psychological Association, n.d.). However, experiences and moments exhibit different lengths of time. According to the dictionary definition, an “experience” is obtaining knowledge or skills by doing, seeing, or feeling a thing (Oxford University Press, n.d.a). A “moment” is a very short period (Oxford University Press, n.d.b) Thus, the difference between an aha-moment and an aha-experience is not defined and should be investigated. Herein, young children’s aha-moments are empirically recorded for identifying the feature of aha-moment in STEAM learning.

In this study, aha-moments refer to an event that is instantaneous and occur over a short period of time in seconds. The term aha-experience refers to a general term for multiple occurrences of instantaneous aha-moments. Furthermore, aha-experiences in children are found and defined to include various utterances (Weisberg et al., 2023). For instance, in previous studies (Weisberg et al., 2023), “Oh!” and “Ah!” have been reported. However, infants and toddlers struggle to pronounce consonants, and Aha’s “ha” sounds are difficult to utter. Instead, adults or older children can pronounce “Oh!”, “Ah!”, and “Aaah!” easier. This study specifically focuses on moments of surprise that are often accompanied by the utterance of “Aaah”.

Research on infants’ and toddlers’ “aha” and “aaah” moments in the context of STEAM learning is scarce. Capturing these moments and conducting a detailed microanalysis of the data could provide valuable insights to enhance and promote STEAM learning for young children.

1.5. Participatory Creativity

Creativity has been explored by psychologists and has traditionally been discussed as one of the abilities of an individual (Vygotsky, 1978). Glăveanu (2009) reviewed and clarified three paradigm shifts in the study of creativity and introduced the cultural psychology perspective in creativity research. Creativity research has evolved through three paradigmatic stages: the Genius stage (He, the lone Genius), the Creative Person stage (I, the Creative Person), and the social stage (We, social cultural psychology) (Glăveanu, 2010). The Genius stage, rooted in ancient Greek and Roman traditions, was characterized by elitism and essentialism (Negus, 2004). Due to its focus on the outstanding abilities of individuals, this stage became known as the “He-paradigm” in creativity studies. Next, the Creative Person stage, or “I-paradigm”, emerged. J.P. Guilford, a psychometrician, suggested that the field must be aware of importance of creativity in education during his presidential speech at the American Psychological Association (Guilford, 1950). Guilford’s address was heard, and psychologists investigated personal traits, creativity, and the relationship of the two. They also explored creativity in relation to the personal attributes of individual personality and intelligence (Amabile, 1996). Additionally, the I-paradigm was described as a democratization of creativity (Weiner, 2012), which expanded the idea of creativity in everyone’s capability from special individuals of the Genius stage. The third stage is the social stage, which describes that creativity exists in the interaction and collaboration of people (Montuori, 2003). Howard E. Gruber shifted the focus from personal traits to the products of creative work. Gruber and Barrett (1974) also concluded from case studies that human creativity has developed as a survival skill within systems. Furthermore, Csikszentmihalyi (Csikszentmihalyi & Csikszentmihalyi, 1988; Csikszentmihalyi, 1999) proposed the idea to locate creativity as creative production among a person, a social system and a domain. Sawyer and DeZutter (2009) explored Csikszentmihalyi’s socio-cultural preservatives of creativity and proposed distributed creativity. In a group work case, distributed creativity occurs within a give-and-take process, where participants contribute to one another’s creation. This give-and-take process is labeled as collaborative emergence (Sawyer & DeZutter, 2009).

Moreover, Glăveanu (2009) proposed the definition of creativity from the cultural psychological standpoint that describes that creativity is in both individual and collaborative cultural processes. Glăveanu (Glăveanu, 2010) theoretically explained that we participate in the creativity process from birth. Glăveanu (2010) also applied the distributed creativity theory to human action. For instance, the idea that creative human action does not happen in isolation and creativity is always found within society and culture. Glăveanu (2010) developed Mel Rhodes’ four P’s of creativity—person, product, process, and press (Rhodes, 1961)—into five As: actors, audiences, artifacts, actions, and affordances (Glăveanu, 2010).

However, Clapp (2016) argued upon Glăveanu (2013)’s Five As model, arguing that creativity theories must move beyond the dichotomy of individual vs. social perspectives. He proposed expanding the conversation to include invention and innovation, which encompass both individual agency and the socially distributed nature of exploration, a concept he termed participatory creativity (Clapp, 2016). Participatory creativity (Clapp, 2016) was developed through the after-school activity data analysis of high school students; however, it has not been explored in relation to children. Studies of participatory creativity in children are crucial, and there are no proven studies to date.

In the present research, Clapp’s definition of participatory creativity was employed to empirically examine participatory creativity in young children.

Creativity is discussed in in-group and collaborative learning contexts. The developmental psychologist Vygotsky (Vygotsky, 1978) proposed the Zone of Proximal Learning Theory to demonstrate how learning with adults or more competent peers enables learning beyond where the child is currently positioned.

1.6. Aesthetic Sensitivity

For young children, the A in STEAM learning represents aesthetic sensitivity, which influences all senses and helps shape children’s ethics and behavior (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018; Vecchi, 2010). The sensory exploration of infants and toddlers frame their first approach to exploring the world (Vecchi, 2010), and their aesthetical sensitivity contributes to problem solving and creativity (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018). Using aesthetic sensitivity, young children assess and understand the world around them (Vecchi, 2010). For example, infants and toddlers touch different textures or put objects into their mouths to investigate their world and connect with the surroundings and themselves (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018). Additionally, these sensory exploratory processes allow collaborative problem-solving and creativity (Vecchi, 2010).

Respecting young children’s sensory exploration and their development of participatory creativity (Section 1.4) promotes play- and inquiry-based learning to let young children explore and expand their world.

1.7. The Objective of the Study

Previous research has theoretically explained that even infants and toddlers engage in creative processes (Glăveanu, 2009), but this has not been empirically identified. In addition, young children’s aha-moments were reported in only two studies (Haugen et al., 2024; Weisberg et al., 2023) and needed more research accumulation.

Thus, the current study aimed to describe thoroughly the participatory creativity process and aha-experiences in young children within STEAM learning activity sessions. More specifically, the concrete situations in which participatory creativity and aha-experiences occur were described and analyzed. Through STEAM activity sessions with the Wind Tunnel and the microanalysis, three research questions were set:

• How is participatory creativity constructed in young children?
• How do aha-experiences occur in children’s STEAM learning?
• What is the role of aesthetic sensitivity in children’s STEAM learning?

By answering these questions, educators and caregivers could help support young children’s STEAM learning, with a particular focus on participatory creativity and aha-experiences.

2. Methods

2.1. The Project

To design this study, the Wind Tunnel was selected as one of the STEAM learning activities. This selection was based on its prominence within the PlaySpace exhibit at Boston Children’s Museum, which is renowned for pioneering STEAM learning and exploratory experiences for infants and toddlers. Although the Wind Tunnel has been featured in the PlaySpace, there has been no reported behavioral microanalysis of infants, toddlers, and their caregivers engaging with this activity.

This study adapted the Wind Tunnel activity from the PlaySpace to the Municipal Center for Early Childhood Education, modifying its exploratory setting to suit the different contexts. A behavioral microanalysis was conducted to investigate the participatory creativity processes and “aha” experiences of young children within STEAM learning. Additionally, soft scarves were selected as materials to ensure safety and appropriateness for the infant and toddler participants.

During the sessions, the Wind Tunnel and colorful scarves were utilized, and researcher T invited children and their classroom teachers to explore the Wind Tunnel and the colorful scarves. These STEAM activities were selected for two main reasons. First, the Wind Tunnel activity enabled the visualization of the wind power and the movement of the scarves. The children looked at the movement of the scarves closely (Tishman, 2018) and wondered why and how the scarves flew (Edwards et al., 2011). They also explored the device and materials at their own pace. Furthermore, the movement of the scarves varied with each time, which also attracted their attention.

Second, the Wind Tunnel allowed multiple ways to play. For instance, participants could observe the flying scarves, catch the scarves as they fell, and use various materials to experiment if they flew or not. It was envisioned that this activity session included multiple play approaches to engage young children in the creative process.

2.1.1. Device

The Wind Tunnel (Figure 2 and Figure 3) (Miyasato et al., 2019) was created by the first author and one of the center’s staff who was in charge for cleaning and fixing furniture and was also good at making things out from scrap. Researcher T was familiar with the Wind Tunnel and had experience installing and utilizing it in an informal indoor educational setting. With her experience and together with the staff, the Wind Tunnel was created for the children and teachers to explore.

The Wind Tunnel had set a circulator underneath the Table, which was covered by metal mesh to prevent children from inserting their fingers or any small objects. A clear polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tunnel was placed on top of the circulator to keep the wind in the tunnel. An opening of 15–20 cm was created between the metal mesh and the clear PVC tunnel to allow children and adults to insert their hands and blow objects into the tunnel. The metal mesh covered the circulator to prevent children from inserting their fingers or any small objects into the circulator. This Wind Tunnel was portable, allowing it to be easily moved to different rooms or hallways.

2.1.2. Materials

A total of 20 polyester-made play scarves were prepared and set in one box for children and teachers (Figure 4). Ten colors were chosen, with two scarves of each color, allowing a maximum of 10 children to easily share them during group activities. Each scarf measured 60 cm × 60 cm. These colorful scarves were selected because they are lightweight and easily moved by wind. Aligning with the study aim to demonstrate developmentally appropriate activity, the colorful scarves were selected to attract infants and toddlers. Researcher T expected from her experience that these polyester-made scarves enable participants to see through the fabric and offer various ways to play. Under the teachers’ supervision, the scarves were deemed safe in terms of suffocation risks.

2.1.3. Participants

The participants of this project included 27 children (13 girls and 14 boys) aged from 6 months to 36 months and eight teachers.

Table 2. The overview of the STEAM activity sessions: detailed information on participating children, teachers, and activity locations.

	0-Year-Old Class	1-Year-Old Class	2-Year-Old Class	Total
Age Range	6 months to 12 months old	13 months to 24 months old	25 months to 36 months old	6 months to 36 months old
Number of Children	6	10	11	27
Number of Teachers	3	2	2	7
Number of Assistent Teachers	0	1	1	2
Activity Location	0-year-old classroom (Figure 5 and Figure 6)	the entrance space (Figure 7)	the entrance space (Figure 7)	n/a

presents the number of children, the age range of children, the number of teachers in each classroom, and the activity location within the center. The location of the project was the Municipal Center for Early Childhood Education and Care in Tokyo, Japan.

For this project, the first author, researcher T, facilitated and participated in the activity. The participatory observation method (Guest et al., 2013) was employed, allowing researcher T to both engage in and facilitate the activity. She simultaneously observed and evaluated the environment to determine the most appropriate types of materials. Two undergraduate students documented the sessions with a handheld video camera.

2.1.4. Set-Up

Considering 0-year-old children’s daily life schedule and mobility, activities were held within their classroom. A 0-year-old class primarily consisted of crawling infants and toddlers who were just beginning to stand. For the first three sessions, the Wind Tunnel was set close to the classroom door (Figure 5) to help children become familiar with the device and its environment. From the fourth to sixth times, the subject children became more familiar with the device, camera, and researcher T, and the teachers agreed to move the Wind Tunnel into the center of the classroom space (Figure 6). The location of the Wind Tunnel was adjusted to the middle of the classroom from the fourth to the last session because the children showed more interest. Both the teachers and researcher T recognized that the children were more familiar with the device and activities than during the first sessions.

Both 1-year-old and 2-year-old children required open space for their active movements; thus, the teachers and researcher T agreed to facilitate then activities in an open hallway outside of their classroom (Figure 7).

Due to the size of the Wind Tunnel, 6 to 8 children joined the activity at a time. However, the interests of the children and their natural rhythms were prioritized. If some children wanted to continue longer, the teachers and researcher T communicated to prioritize their interests to continue playing. Conversely, if any children wanted not to play, the teachers and researcher T communicated with the other teachers to let the children engage with something else.

2.1.5. Ethical Considerations

Regarding ethical considerations, a consent form with information was provided to the representative of the Municipal Center for Early Childhood Education and Care, and all parents on behalf of children signed it. All participants’ names were converted to anonymous. The participants were allowed to withdraw from the study at any time. Additionally, a consent form with this publication information was signed by the representative of the center that was cited in one of the following cases. All interview participants were also allowed to withdraw from the interview and study at any time. This research was conducted with the approval of the University Research Ethics Review Committee.

2.2. Data Collection and Analysis

Section 2.2.1 discusses the data collection, and Section 2.2.2 describes the data analysis.

2.2.1. Data Collection

The data were collected at the Municipal Center for Early Childhood Education and Care in Tokyo, Japan. Children, along with the teachers and researcher T, participated in the activity sessions between June to July 202X. Due to each classroom’s schedule and timing, the 0-year-old class experienced six sessions, while the 1-year-old and 2-year-old classes experienced five sessions each. Each session lasted from 10 min to 50 min. Depending on the children and teachers’ daily morning schedule, the children’s active level of the day, the number of children, and the timing of the lunch time, the teacher and the researcher T communicated to decide the length of each session.

The digital video data were collected by two GoPro Hero 10 and Canon EOS Kiss X10. One GoPro was mounted on the wall, and another GoPro was set on the opposite side of the space to record static digital video data. As researcher T facilitated and participated in the activity sessions, she was unable to document the activities in real time. To supplement the GoPro stationary observation data, two undergraduate students assisted by documenting the sessions using a handheld video camera. Video recordings were the primary tool for data collection, and informal interviews before and after the sessions with the teachers supplemented the data. These informal interview data and field note data provided children’s behavioral background. For instance, the teachers’ informal interview data offered the developmental milestone of children who were about to stand up in the 0-year-old class. Most of the 0-year-old children were able to sit up but were not yet capable of standing up independently. Understanding these developmental stages helped researcher T in preparing appropriate materials tailored to each group’s abilities.

2.2.2. Data Analysis

A total of 16 sessions, amounting to 14 h 51 min of digital video footage, were analyzed. Each recorded activity session data lasted from 11.48 min to 48.16 min. To align with the objectives of this study, adopting behavioral microanalysis to investigate infants and toddlers’ aaah-moments in STEAM learning.

In the first step, the digital video data were analyzed by the video analysis software program ELAN (Lausberg & Sloetjes, 2009). ELAN is a video analysis and annotation instrument for audio and video recordings. ELAN allowed for the extraction and detailed annotation of utterances and behaviors from the children, teachers, and researcher T. Specifically, it described their utterances, gaze, facial expressions, and movements of the neck, arms, and hands down to the second for precise analysis.

In the second step, the number of aaah-utterances were counted in entire microanalysis data. To capture the details of aaah-utterances, 2 s before and after the aaah-utterances were trimmed to be counted as one unit. This one unit was regarded as an aaah-moment. This approach was used because infants have short attention spans compared to that of adults and move quickly, so it is necessary to capture actions and speech in seconds.

Two sessions were selected because of the densest occurrence of aaah-utterances. In addition to the frequency of these utterances, the sessions were chosen for theoretical reasons, which are detailed below, along with a description of how these selected sessions differed from others. Regarding theoretical reasons for selecting sessions, in young children’s habituation theory (Tsang, 2012), infants and toddlers respond with surprise to novel environments and phenomena but become habituated after repeated exposure. However, in the 3rd and the 4th time of activity sessions, the young children appeared to experience aaah-moments and still exhibited their interest towards the Wind Tunnel activity. This phenomenon explained why the Wind Tunnel activity sessions were attractive after several times of sessions for participating children.

In the third and final step, the selected two sessions were transcribed to the two cases based on the ELAN microanalysis data. Transcriptions are presented in Section 3.

3. Results and Discussion

An overview of the activity session for Case#1 and Case#2 is shown in Table 3. The results consist of Case#1 (0-year-old child, Table 4, Section 3.1, Figure 8, Figure 9 and Figure 10) and Case#2 (2-year-old child, Table 5, Section 3.2, Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13) to compare the differences between infants and toddlers. To protect the personal information of the participating young children and teachers, line drawings were created based on the recorded video (Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10, Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13).

The two cases were selected due to the densest occurrences of aaah-utterances in entire sessions. In addition, two cases highlighted the differences in developmental perspectives. Table 3 shows an overview of the activity session for Case#1 and Case#2 including the occurrences of aaah-utterances (time), duration of entire activity time (minutes), and time of inserting and flying scarves in the Wind Tunnel (time). The time of inserting and flying scarves in the Wind Tunnel was counted as one unit of time when the child, teacher, or researcher T inserted the scarves into the Wind Tunnel and the scarves fell down. This one unit of time happened right before the aaah-utterance. Both in Table 4(Case#1) and Table 5 (Case#2), when the participating child, teacher, or researcher T inserted the scarves and it flew out from the Tunnel, the aaah-utterance tended to occur.

Table 3. The differences between Case#1 and Case#2 including the occurrence of aaah-utterance (time), duration of entire activity time (minutes), and time of inserting and flying scarves in the Wind Tunnel (time).

	Case#1 0-Year-Old Child	Case#2 2-Year-Old Child
Age Range	from 6 months to 12 months	from 25 months to 36 months
Name of the Participating Child	Keita	Aki
Occurrence of Aaah-utterance (time)	7	3
Duration of Entire Activity Time (minutes)	28.2	19.2
Time of inserting and flying scarves in the Wind Tunnel (time) (marked as ◯ in Table 4 and Table 5)	6	9

Table 3. The differences between Case#1 and Case#2 including the occurrence of aaah-utterance (time), duration of entire activity time (minutes), and time of inserting and flying scarves in the Wind Tunnel (time).

	Case#1 0-Year-Old Child	Case#2 2-Year-Old Child
Age Range	from 6 months to 12 months	from 25 months to 36 months
Name of the Participating Child	Keita	Aki
Occurrence of Aaah-utterance (time)	7	3
Duration of Entire Activity Time (minutes)	28.2	19.2
Time of inserting and flying scarves in the Wind Tunnel (time) (marked as ◯ in Table 4 and Table 5)	6	9

Table 4. ELAN’s analysis transcripts of Keita and teacher in the Wind Tunnel activity session are shown in chronological order (time in seconds): Case#1.

¹ (SC) indicates scarves. ² (T) indicates teachers. ³ (R) indicates researcher. ⁴ (IN) indicates the child and teachers’ inserting behavior.

Table 4. ELAN’s analysis transcripts of Keita and teacher in the Wind Tunnel activity session are shown in chronological order (time in seconds): Case#1.

¹ (SC) indicates scarves. ² (T) indicates teachers. ³ (R) indicates researcher. ⁴ (IN) indicates the child and teachers’ inserting behavior.

Table 5. ELAN’s analysis transcript of Aki and his teacher during the Wind Tunnel activity session, presented in chronological order (in seconds): Case#2.

¹ (SC) indicates the scarves. ² (f) indicates the child caught scarves by face and number indicates the time of caught scarves. ³ The number indicates the time of caught scarves by face. ⁴ (IN) indicates the child and teachers’ inserting behavior. ⁵ (h) indicates the child caught scarves by hands ⁶ The number indicates the catch time by hands.

Table 5. ELAN’s analysis transcript of Aki and his teacher during the Wind Tunnel activity session, presented in chronological order (in seconds): Case#2.

¹ (SC) indicates the scarves. ² (f) indicates the child caught scarves by face and number indicates the time of caught scarves. ³ The number indicates the time of caught scarves by face. ⁴ (IN) indicates the child and teachers’ inserting behavior. ⁵ (h) indicates the child caught scarves by hands ⁶ The number indicates the catch time by hands.

3.1. Case#1

The results of Case#1 showed two findings that contributed to the emergence of aaah- moments. The first finding pertains to “the color, texture, and movement of scarves”, while the second finding involves “Keita and his teacher’s joint attention and aaah-moments”.

In Case#1, Keita, a 12-month-old boy, was present along with his classroom teacher and Mana, a 7-month-old girl. Researcher T stayed on Keita’s right side. Keita experienced an aha-moment as he pointed his fingers toward the flying scarf. Together with aaah-utterances and pointing gestures, Keita’s gaze followed the scarves’ movement from the bottom of the Wind Tunnel to the outside of the tunnel to fly out.

3.1.1. Setting

It was the third time of exploring the Wind Tunnel at the Municipal Center for Early Childhood Education and Care in the morning. As soon as researcher T entered the 0-year-old children’s classroom to set-up the device and materials, Keita approached by crawling.

On the right side of Keita, classmate Mana and the teacher, and on the left side, researcher T, stood with bent knees, surrounding the Wind Tunnel. Researcher T began laying down scarves on the floor for the children and classroom teachers to explore. Keita repeatedly picked up and held the yellow scarf.

3.1.2. Result: Aaah-Moments in Keita, 12 Months Old

Keita approached the Wind Tunnel, stood, and pulled himself up to stand. In the past few weeks, he was able to stand by holding on something. In Table 4, Keita and the teacher’s gaze, facial expressions, hands, and speech are shown in chorological order (time in seconds). The dot circle shows the part representing one unit of time from the child, teacher, or researcher T inserting the scarves into the Wind Tunnel and the scarves flying out from the top. When the teacher put scarves into the Wind Tunnel, Keita, looking up from under the Wind Tunnel, exclaimed “Aaah!” while following the movement of the scarves flying up (Table 4, time 6.2 s, Figure 8). As the scarves flew out of the tunnel and descended, Keita exclaimed “Aaah!” and opened his mouth simultaneously (Table 4, time 6.3 s, Figure 8). After the scarves descended to the floor, Keita lowered his gaze but quickly attempted to push the scarves into the tunnel, trying to fly another scarf (Table 4, time 6.3 s, Figure 9). Keita tried to insert from the bottom of the Wind Tunnel repeatedly, yet the power of the wind from the bottom was too strong that Keita struggled to insert the scarf at once. Additionally, the size of the scarf was too large to hold for Keita that he used both hands and arms to hold the scarf against the wind (Table 4, time 6.5 s–6.6 s and time 7.0 s–7.1 s, Figure 9). Keita had to hold the Table to keep himself standing (Figure 8 and Figure 9).

Keita pointed at the flying scarf. His classroom teacher, who sat next to Mana, responded to Keita’s pointing, looked at the flying scarf, and clapped her hands (Table 4, time 6.5 s–6.6 s, Figure 10).

Keita held another scarf and made eye contact with researcher T while putting scarves into the tunnel (Table 4, time 7.0 s–7.1 s). While following the scarf flying up from the top of the tunnel, he pointed and exclaimed, “Aaah!”, indicating that the scarf did not fall because it got caught on the string hanging from the ceiling (Table 4, time 7.0 s–7.1 s). Picking up another scarf from the floor, Keita looked at researcher T again, exclaimed “Aaah!”, opened his mouth wide, followed the direction of the scarf with his eyes, and pointed at the direction where the scarf was flying (Table 4, time 7.0 s–7.2 s, Figure 10).

Figure 8. Keita looked up at the flying scarf with his mouth open. From his back, his teacher supported him not to fall as his neck and back bent further back to follow the flying scarf (Table 4, time 6.2 s).

Figure 8. Keita looked up at the flying scarf with his mouth open. From his back, his teacher supported him not to fall as his neck and back bent further back to follow the flying scarf (Table 4, time 6.2 s).

Figure 9. Keita was trying to insert the scarf to the bottom of the Wind Tunnel (Table 4, time 6.3 s).

Figure 9. Keita was trying to insert the scarf to the bottom of the Wind Tunnel (Table 4, time 6.3 s).

Figure 10. Keita pointed his finger at the flying scarf, and his teacher looked at the scarf (Table 4, time 7.0 s–7.1 s).

Figure 10. Keita pointed his finger at the flying scarf, and his teacher looked at the scarf (Table 4, time 7.0 s–7.1 s).

3.1.3. Discussion

The objective of the current study was to explore the occurrence of aha-experiences in young children as they engaged in participatory creative processes within the context of STEAM learning. This study also aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the specific circumstances that contribute to the emergence of aha-moments.

1: Color, Texture, and Movement of Scarves: Materials Stimulating the Emergence of Aaah-Moments

Keita looked up at the scarf (Table 4, time 6.5 s–6.6 s) with his mouth open and said “Aaah!” to point his finger at the scarf that was just about to fall. He repeatedly tried to put the scarf into the tunnel to fly out, looked up at it, and unconsciously exclaimed “Aaah!” several times. Keita’s series of interactions with the scarf and utterances showed that his aesthetics was activated toward the flying scarf and his mouth was open, saying “Aaah!” and with his finger pointing to share his aesthetics with the teacher.

When Keita’s aaah-utterance occurred, his aesthetics was activated for two reasons. First, the color and texture of the scarves were attractive for children to observe their movements. Researcher T chose the colorful scarves for young children because they are sensitive to different colors. The significance of material selection is practically accumulated by the atelierista and teachers at Reggio Emilia (Vecchi, 2010; Daly & Beloglovsky, 2015; Schwall, 2005) the gentle texture of the scarves invited children to touch and catch them. The scarves held the features of opaqueness, color, and lightweight nature, and they attracted children to be immersed into the different dimensions of the world (Vecchi, 2010). The scarves’ color shades in the air also attracted the children.

Second, the movements of the scarves stimulated the children’s aesthetics. Together with the wind, the scarves flew unexpectedly and differently every time. The wind blew from the circulator located underneath the Table. The combination of the wind and the scarves created phenomena that attracted the children. The unexpected movements of the wind invited the children to insert the scarves repeatedly. The children expected a similar movement of the scarves each time, but the wind never blows the scarves as expected, in the same way or direction. This unexpected movement of the scarves also stimulated the children’s wonder toward the materials and the air.

These results confirmed the importance of the selection and combination of materials to design STEAM learning activities. The young children were sensitive to the color, texture, and movement of the materials. Stimulating their sensitivities to the materials led to activating their aesthetics naturally in the context.

2: Keita and His Teacher’s Triadic Joint Attention and Aaah-Moments

Keita and his classroom teacher or researcher T made eye contact several times (Table 4, time 6.4 s and time 7.0 s–7.1 s), and Keita’s pointing gesture (Table 4, time 7.0 s–7.1 s and time 7.2 s,) showed joint attention (Liszkowski et al., 2006) between Keita, his teacher, and the flying scarf.

Joint attention is recognized as a key social developmental milestone in young children, describing the tri-relationship between an infant, their caregivers, and an object. When an infant points to an object and their care giver looks or points to the same object, this interaction is called triadic joint attention (Liszkowski et al., 2006).

In the Case#1 results, Keita’s finger pointed at the scarves, which were shooting out from the tunnel at the same time, and he exclaimed “Aaah!” and then looked at his teacher. The teacher immediately reacted to his aaah and pointed to respond to him by clapping (Table 4, time 12.5 s). Nonverbally, Keita communicated with his teacher through pointing together with his aaah-utterance, and the teacher responded with clapping and aaah-utterances.

Additionally, joint attention was supported by the close relationship between Keita and his teacher. Keita had his teacher, whom he wanted to share his findings with, i.e., the flying scarves. This close relationship supported Keita’s motivation to repeat the inserting of scarves several times. Keita was able to pick up the fallen scarf and insert it into the Wind Tunnel all by himself, but it took a while to insert a scarf as his hand strength was relatively low against the power of the wind. Considering his height and hand–eye coordination developmental level, the power of the wind and reaching the Wind Tunnel’s height were beyond his developmental level.

3: The Differences Between Aaah-Moments and Aaah-Experiences

Previous studies have not distinguished aha-moments and aha-experiences (Section 1.4); however, the results of this study confirmed that aaah-moments repeatedly happened in a short period of time. In this sense, it can be suggested that aaah-moments and aaah-experiences can be categorized differently. In Table 4, time 6.2 s, time 6.3 s, time 6.5 s–6.6 s, time 7.0 s–7.1 s, time 8.2 s–8.4 s, and time 12.5 s, aaah-utterances were observed within a two-second duration. Each moment was brief, and Keita’s aaah-utterances as he looked at the scarves fall were repeated several times. In each moment, either Keita, the teacher, or the researcher inserted the scarves to the Wind Tunnel, and the scarves flew up and fell. Keita repeated this behavior several times. The multiple times of repeated short aaah-moments can be labeled as aaah-experiences based on the differences between the definitions of “moment” and “experience” (Section 1.4).

The results of this study suggest that the concepts of aaah-moment and aaah-experience can be distinguished. Several sequences of aaah-moments could be categorized as aaah-experiences. The reason for this distinguishment was because, particularly in the young children, their surprise and behavior changed in a short period of time and happened repeatedly. The shortness of one behavior and its repetition were categorized as characteristics of young children, distinguishing them from adults.

3.2. Case#2

Aki, a 2-year-old child, participated in the activity session alongside his classroom teacher and Hiro, who was on the teacher’s lap. Researcher T participated in the activity session and stayed on Aki’s right side during the session. Aki experienced several aha-moments, raising both arms with his gaze fixed on the scarves and catching them with his hands or face. Three instances of aaah-utterances occurred within 19.2 min.

3.2.1. Setting

On the fourth session day, the 2-year-old children, who had already observed the infants playing with the Wind Tunnel in the 0-year-old class, waited in the hallway outside the classroom where researcher T was preparing. Aki is a 2-year-old boy, and Hiro is a 18-month-old girl sitting on the classroom teacher’s lap. As soon as the door opened, they rushed from the classroom into the hallway. The children picked up scarves one after another and began placing them into the Wind Tunnel.

3.2.2. Result: Aaah-Moments in Aki, Age 2

Aki, along with his teacher, had his gaze, facial expressions, hand gestures, and utterances recorded and described in Table 5. The dot circle in Table 5 shows the part representing one unit of time from the child, teacher, or researcher T inserting the scarves into the Wind Tunnel and the scarves flying out from the top.

Aki’s teacher sat behind him throughout the activity but rarely entered his line of sight. His gaze was focused on the scarves and the Wind Tunnel. From the teacher’s perspective, her gaze was focused on Aki’s back and on Aki’s attempt to fly the scarves in the Wind Tunnel.

Aki picked up a scarf, put it into the tunnel, and confirmed the scarf’s upward movement with the wind up by his hand (Table 5, time 1.4 s–1.45 s). He released the scarf from his hand, watched as the scarf rose from under the Wind Tunnel to the top, and opened his mouth to catch the scarf descending from the top of the Wind Tunnel (Table 5, time 1.4 s–1.45 s). Once Aki successfully caught the scarf, he looked at researcher T, made eye contact, put the scarf back into the Wind Tunnel (Table 5, time 1.4 s–1.45 s), tossed it, and caught the scarf as it descended again (Table 5, time 1.5 s). After placing the scarf back into the Tunnel, Aki, while watching the scarf fall from the top of the Tunnel, spread his hands widely and exclaimed “Aaah!” while catching the scarf (Table 5, Figure 11). Subsequently, without uttering a word, Aki silently repeated the process of placing scarves into the tunnel and caught them four times (Table 5, time 1.4 s–1.45 s, time 1.5 s, time 2.13 s–2.15 s, and time 3.3 s–3.4 s). Later, Aki put a scarf into the tunnel and raised his hand toward the scarf falling from the top to the bottom, but despite exclaiming “Aaah!”, he did not catch the scarf with his hand. Instead, the scarf descended directly onto his face (Table 5, time 4.1 s–4.2 s). Aki’s classroom teacher and Hiro sat behind Aki (Figure 12), and the teacher shouted “Aaah!” (Table 5, time 4.3 s–4.4 s), and Aki looked back at his teacher. Aki’s teacher said, “Aaah!” even if Aki did not utter “Aaah!” and verbally explained how scarves flew in the air. Throughout the session, Aki’s teacher remained sitting behind him.

Figure 11. Aki looked up at the flying scarves that were about to fall above him, with both arms raised and his mouth open (Table 5, time 2.0 s–2.05 s).

Figure 11. Aki looked up at the flying scarves that were about to fall above him, with both arms raised and his mouth open (Table 5, time 2.0 s–2.05 s).

Figure 12. Aki looked up at the scarf as it shot out from the top of the Wind Tunnel (Table 5, time 6.2 s–6.4 s).

Figure 12. Aki looked up at the scarf as it shot out from the top of the Wind Tunnel (Table 5, time 6.2 s–6.4 s).

Figure 13. Aki caught several scarves at once with his face, ending up covered by the fallen scarves (Table 5, time 6.2 s–4 s).

Figure 13. Aki caught several scarves at once with his face, ending up covered by the fallen scarves (Table 5, time 6.2 s–4 s).

3.2.3. Discussion

The present study aimed to explore the occurrence of aha-experiences in young children as they engage in participatory creative processes within the context of STEAM learning. Based on the Case#2 results, two findings that led to the emergence of aaah-moments are discussed in this section. The first finding highlights what contributes to Aki’s aesthetical sensitivity. The second finding discusses young children’s aesthetics within the STEAM learning framework.

1: Aki’s Fascination, Aaah-Moments, and Aesthetical Sensitivity

Aki caught scarves by his face (Table 5, time 6.2 s–6.4 s, Figure 13) with aaah-utterances. Figure 12 illustrates Aki with his hands down on the Table, while in Figure 13 (Table 5, time 6.2 s–6.4 s), he caught the scarves using only his face. He had his arms up to catch the scarves (Figure 12, time 4.4 s–4.5 s) but had his hands down intentionally in Figure 13. This face-catching without hands explains that Aki was fascinated by the flying scarves and intentionally wanted to catch the scarves by his face. As Aki caught the scarves with his face, his aaah-utterance was noted (Table 5), reflecting his fascination with the experience. This sense of wonder prompted his repeated “aaah” utterances throughout the activity.

Furthermore, Baumgart and Kroll (2018) explained that infants and toddlers construct their learning using an aesthetics approach. For instance, when young children line up blocks during play, they naturally follow what they feel is right to fill aesthetic purposes. In Case#2, Aki found what he felt was right to fill his aesthetic purpose—face-catching.

Vecchi (2010) described the meaning of aesthetics and explained that aesthetics starts from sensitivity, perceptions, and subjectivity. Aesthetics was also presented to promote connection between people and objects, sensitivity, and expressiveness (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018). Aki was fascinated with the flying scarves, observing well to catch them for the first several times by hand. Then, he stopped catching them with his hands and then started catching them by his face and forehead. Aki catching the scarves with his face can be interpreted as a sign of his sensitivity to the color and movement of the scarves and his motivation to connect with the world by looking through them. When his face was covered by the scarves, he looked at the world through the transparent scarves and looked through the different colors of the scarves through his aesthetic sensitivity.

Moreover, Aki repeatedly caught the flying scarves with his hands six times while exclaiming “Aaah!” From then on, he caught the scarves with his face instead of his hands. The young children’s preference for repetitive behaviors explains a process of repeatedly catching the falling scarves and then trying new ways of catching them their hands to their face. Regarding the rationale of this repetitive behavior of catching scarves, young children’s aesthetic sensitivity can be considered, supporting such repetitive behavior. Bateson suggested that one of the features of aesthetic sensitivity is to find patterns in the real world (Bateson, 1979). Based on this, young children repeat actions like catching scarves to find patterns in the movement of the targeted object, even experimenting with different ways to achieve the catch.

2: Aki’s Aesthetical Sensitivity and STEAM Learning

In “Aki’s Fascination, Aaah-Moments, and Aesthetical Sensitivity”, Aki’s face-catching was stimulated by aesthetics. In the current study, Aki and his teacher engaged with the Wind Tunnel as a part of STEAM learning. Aki gazed at the scarves and inserted them, flying up the scarves into the tunnel and flying up to the outside of the tunnel. Throughout the process, Aki observed the scarves closely and followed the gaze as the scarves moved (Table 5, Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13). This part corresponds with STEAM learning’s close observation aspect. Close observation in both formal and informal learning settings were defined as slow looking (Tishman, 2018) and were mentioned as important processes of learning environments. Children learn through their aesthetical approach when they feel it is right (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018). The volume and color of the scarves that Aki inserted and caught by his face could be interpreted as what he felt was right. In Aki’s STEAM learning, his aesthetic sensitivity was assumed to be activated through his fascination and close observation. Aki’s fascination and close observation were subtle, almost invisible processes, likely woven into his daily life rather than being categorized into the five STEAM subjects. Through the results of Case#2, young children’s learning can be assumed to be woven into their life experiences rather than divided into STEAM categories.

4. General Discussion

The overall objective of this study was to explore the occurrences of aha-moments in young children during participatory creative processes within STEAM learning. The research questions set are the following:

• How is participatory creativity constructed in young children?
• How do aha-experiences occur in young children’s STEAM learning?
• What is the role of aesthetic sensitivity in young children’s STEAM learning?

Based on the three research questions of this study, three key contributions to the field of STEAM learning in young children are provided. The answer to question #1 is discussed in Section 4.1. Question #2’s answer is discussed in Section 4.2. In Section 4.3, aesthetic sensitivity in the STEAM learning framework is discussed to answer question #3.

4.1. Participatory Creativity in Young Children

Previous studies have defined that participatory creativity includes the innovative and creative process and the product of interaction among multiple children and teachers (Glăveanu, 2009). Clapp (2016) empirically explored high school students, college students, and adults to investigate participatory creativity. Theoretically, since our birth, participatory creativity is explained to be generated (Glăveanu, 2009); however, no empirical studies have yet reported this. Therefore, this study focused on young children to examine how participatory creativity processes are constructed, and the following two points were identified.

First, we identified the examples of the early stages of the participatory creative process in young children: In Case#1, we observed non-verbal communication through three-way joint attention. In Case#2, the young children and teachers responded to each other both nonverbally with eye contact and verbally with aaah-utterances. In their communication process, the value of the flying scarf was presented by young children with silence, and the teacher reaffirmed the discovery by aaah-utterances and created a new value. This was an early example of participatory creativity. As participatory creativity was structured based on multiple relationships, the participation of significant others constituted a creative participatory process between children and adults.

Second, in both Case#1 and Case#2, the teachers were immediately responsive to the young children’s discoveries, agreed with them, and participated in their creative process. However, the degree of involvement in the participatory creative process was observed to be dependent on the developmental level of the child, the situation, and the relationship between the participants. For instance, Keita’s teacher in Case#1 was behaviorally more explicitly involved than Aki’s teacher in Case#2. Aki’s teacher, however, was indirectly behaviorally involved in his creative process. However, she sat behind Aki, in front of the same phenomena as Aki, and was there for him to support his aesthetic approach and surprise. Although the degree of involvement in the participatory creativity process differed, it was clear that these teachers responded immediately.

4.2. Aaah-Moments and Aaah-Experiences in Young Children

As mentioned in Section 1.4, previous studies have defined the aha-experience in young children as a short, sudden spark of a new idea in the problem-solving process, also as a social experience (Liljedahl, 2005; Webb et al., 2016). In this study, we aimed to explore the emergence of aha-experience and focused on aaah-moments in young children. Research question #2, which explores how aha-experiences occur in young children’s STEAM learning, is addressed in the following section. This section focuses on discussing the emergence of aha-experiences in young children during STEAM learning.

To answer how young children’s aha-experiences occur, the results and discussion relating to both Case#1 and Case#2 guided the aesthetic sensitivity involved in aha-experiences. Through children’s repetitive behavior of trying to fly scarves, the differences between aaah-moments and aaah-experiences were mentioned in Case#1. In Case#2, the repetition of catching scarves was interpreted as one of the aesthetic sensitivities (discussed in Section 3.2.3). Through repetitive behavior, young children activated their aesthetic sensitivity, and their sensitivity led to aaah-utterances. This study supported the idea that young children’s aesthetic sensitivity approach was to feel it was right (Baumgart & Kroll, 2018); promote connection with people, objects, and sensitivity (Vecchi, 2010); and find patterns (Bateson, 1979). These were interpreted as the elements of aesthetic sensitivity and led to aaah-experiences. Moreover, as this study set the STEAM activity sessions that let young children to engage in multiple ways to explore and let them to be attracted by the phenomena, their aesthetic sensitivity was activated and motivated to find connections with people and objects and find patterns.

4.3. Young Children’s Aesthetic Sensitivity in STEAM Learning

In previous studies, Reggio Emilia educators indicated the significance of young children’s aesthetic sensitivity in early childhood education (Vecchi, 2010). Furthermore, Baumgart and Kroll (2018) explained that the “A” in STEAM stands for aesthetic sensitivity. The results of this study support previous findings that the “A” in young children’s STEAM learning stands for aesthetic sensitivity. The analysis in this study suggested the role of aesthetic sensitivity in young children’s STEAM learning in response to research question #3. The characteristic of young children’s aesthetic sensitivity in STEAM learning is woven into their daily lives. In Case#1, young children were mesmerized by the movements and colors of the scarves as they flew and fell, and they opened their mouths and said “Aaah!”. They shared this finding with their teachers. Such aha-experiences are likely to occur in everyday life as well. For instance, in the fall, we admire the falling leaves as they soar and dance in the air. Within this daily experience in nature, we closely observe scarves and fallen leaves in the air and are fascinated by the movements of objects in the air caused by wind power, and they also observe the aerodynamic resistance of the objects. Although young children do not study wind power or physics as a subject, they are fascinated by the phenomena they observe. This aesthetic sensitivity toward scientific phenomena woven into everyday life can be supported as a characteristic of aesthetics in early childhood STEAM learning.

This aesthetic sensitivity toward natural phenomena woven into children’s daily lives was implied to be a characteristic of STEAM learning in early childhood education. Historically, in STEM and STEAM learning establishment, integrated subjects between science subjects and arts are discussed (Yakman, 2008). However, particularly in early childhood education, young children’s learning framework is not divided into the subjects and naturally integrated into a whole learning. The revelation that young children activate aesthetics in their daily lives and during play can contribute to a better understanding of the framework of STEAM learning and aesthetics by caregivers involved in early childhood education. It can be suggested that caregivers can advance their understanding of young children’s learning and enable more optimal engagement and interpretation.

5. Conclusions and Suggestion for Future Research

The purpose of this study was to observe and describe the specific aha-experiences of young children and its situations in participatory creative processes in STEAM learning. Due to the 12-month-old infant’s and 2-year-old toddler’s language development and gesture presentation, a microanalysis by ELAN was conducted using facial expressions, gestures, and behaviors as observational indicators in place of language.

The results confirmed that participatory creativity was generated in infants and toddlers. Moreover, it became clear that infants’ and toddlers’ aesthetic sensitivity was triggered by their entrance by the soaring of the scarves. This study showed the example of children’s aesthetic sensitivity that has triggered the aaah-experiences. Future research should observe and record the occurrence of aha-experiences in diverse contexts to clarify their characteristics. Diverse contexts should be used, including the presence of parents and utilizing different materials. For example, an examination of sound-based and tactile-based materials could be performed to evaluate their influence on aesthetic sensitivity in creative processes.

The implication of this study that even infants and toddlers experience aaah-moments and their aesthetic sensitivity is activated contributes to educators and policy makers designing developmentally appropriate STEAM program and aligning them with global educational objectives.

Furthermore, the limitation of this study is that the relationship between aaah-moments and aha-experiences was not described nor discussed. Collecting more data on the process of aaah-moments and aaah-experiences to discuss how they evolve into adult aha-experiences is necessary.