This paper investigates classroom flow considered as a collective emotional state that manifests while students are involved in learning, distinguishes between attentive and participatory flow and points to define a dialogical flow. Building on a sociocultural approach we observed a range of lessons and investigated how flow happened also in relation to space arrangements and by introducing technological devices into the lesson. This enabled us to analyze the ongoing of class flow, and to identify lessons modes, different ways of classroom interaction. We then observed when creativity and collective thinking were fostered in emergent and spontaneous ways (Molinari & Canovi. 2016). We found that certain kinds of lessons can incentive dialogical thinking but both spatial transformation or using technology are not are sufficient to arise dialogical flow. There is a potential in dialogical flow to teach thinking and encourage collective agency. Still further research is needed to indicate how education can take collective emotions into account to promote dialogical flow and teaching thinking. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that it is possible to observe group flow and to put forward a schema for the analysis of flow as well as an understanding of its educational role to increase classroom creativity and potential – we use an analytic tool for this study based on ‘the dialogic framework for analyzing classroom talk’ of Wegerif and Mercer 1998. In our study, we sustain that it is possible to analyze classroom data in this way and we put forward suggestions for why this is significant. Key words: Classroom Flow, Group Thinking, Collective Emotions, Collective Agency, Teaching Thinking, Classroom Creativity.

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. Boyd, M. P., & Markarian, W. C. (2011). Dialogic teaching: Talk in service of a dialogic stance. Language and Education, 25(6), 515-534. Hollenstein, T. (2013). State space grids. New York: Springer. Molinari, L., & Canovi, A. G. (2016). Seizing the Unexpected and Creative Meaning Making in the Unfolding of Classroom Interaction. Educational Process: International Journal, 5(3), 254-263. Sawyer, R. K. (2014). Group creativity: Music, theater, collaboration. Psychology Press. Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (1998). Software design to support discussion in the primary curriculum. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(3), 199-211.