Proceedings of the International scientific and practical conference ―Science at the Frontier of Civilizations: Challenges and Perspectives‖ (December 27-29, 2025) / Publisher website: www.naukainfo.com. – Helsinki, Finland, 2026. – 252 p.

219 This level examines: transformation of group dynamics; formation of collective sensitivity; co-creation of meaning; reciprocal shaping of individual, community, and environment. It allows coherence to be studied as a socio‑ecological process. 4.8. Integrated Methodological Architecture The methods form a unified whole: phenomenology → inner experience; embodied observation → behavioural markers; ecological ethnography → environment; narratives → meaning; action research → transformation; ecosystemic inquiry → collective dynamics. Together they allow the coherent state to be studied as an internal, external, and relational system simultaneously. SECTION 5. RESULTS AND KEY OBSERVATIONS (English Version) 5. Results of Pilot Implementation and Key Observations The pilot application of the Coherent State Model within a natural educational environment provided early empirical indicators of how human state, embodiment, awareness, and environment mutually shape one another. These findings are not framed as ―effectiveness outcomes‖ but as emergent markers of how the model operates in real-life conditions. 5.1. Changes in Internal Regulation of Learners Analysis of daily observations and child self-reports demonstrated: greater bodily awareness and clearer identification of internal signals; reduced impulsive reactivity and increased capacity for pausing before action; improved emotional stability, especially among neurodivergent children. These results resonate with embodiment research, yet extend it by showing that state-integration, not isolated regulation of body or emotion, is the central mechanism. 5.2. Changes in Teacher–Learner Interaction The model produced visible relational effects: enhanced sense of safety and trust, improved teacher attunement to the child’s state, reduction of interpersonal conflicts. This strongly aligns with Taggart’s work on ethics of care, professional presence, and affective-moral sensitivity. 5.3. Human–Environment Interaction