Essay: Drama as a teaching subject

There are many pre-conceptions on what drama as a teaching subject really is. Stereotypically, it is thought that drama is simply a fun lesson or merely a ‘continuation of childhood play’ (Royka,2002). Michael Gove has previously claimed that drama will not benefit a student regarding employment or further opportunities, although creativity continues to be in the top three best attributes from employers alongside, critical thinking and problem solving (Norris,2018). Drama allows students to put what they’re learning into context and help them to question and explore the world around them. (Doyle, 1993).
The dispute that a lot of people associate with drama, is that it is challenging to measure how much learning has taken place, unlike other subjects that are theory based and can be measured objectively in exams and written work. In contrast to those other subjects, drama goes beyond the curriculum and helps students to understand and question both life and self (Hornbrook, 1998) In a Farmers article it is stated that Drama is a statutory part of an English lesson within the National Curriculum for England. I believe that this should not be the case, as Drama needs to be a stand-alone subject and not squashed into any of the core subjects to make the lessons ‘more interesting’.
Slade previously wrote that ‘One of the great gifts of life is to know how to play.’ (Slade, 1995. P.2). Slade’s theory is more about free play with no boundaries or inhibitions. I personally believe that Slade’s theory and the essence of play is what brings drama to life and takes you on a journey. ‘Journey is very important in child play.’ (Slade, 1995. P.4) Slade theory of play also teaches the art of sharing just as you teach children they have to share. ‘if the expression of drama is inbuilt in a child’s nature, then it must be harnessed and used in a guided and civilised way.’ (Slade, 1995). Slade’s philosophy is a powerful inspiration for other leading thinkers in the education sphere, such as Dorothy Heathcote, with their emphasis on sharing responsibility with students and creating a safe environment to explore, to create and learn. Thus there is a broader school of thought around empowering students, with less rigidity in the structure of lessons; still designed to achieve the learning set out under the curriculum but through deep exploration. It is this concept that I try to embed within my own teaching methods. In this essay I will explore different literature advocating development through drama, but also understanding its critiques in order to arrive at an informed view on the possibilities that it offers. I will assess the impact of this teaching style on teaching outcomes, and reflect on my own experiences to consider how development through drama has become a central component of my teaching approach.
The rationale behind essence of play, according to Peter Abbs, is that drama is rooted in play and is a natural portal for experimentation and discovery. Thus Slade developed a child-centric philosophy, the essence of play, involving an environment which would enable children to express themselves through play and emerge as adolescents possessed with “cleanliness, tidiness, gracefulness, politeness, cheerfulness, confidence, ability to mix, thoughtfulness for others, discrimination, moral discernment, honesty and loyalty, ability to lead companions, reliability, and a readiness to remain steadfast under difficulties” (Slade, 1954). Though the essence of play implicitly encourages the teacher to largely stand aside, Slade’s position was that the role of the teacher is not undermined, because the discovery must take place in a structured lesson and the quality of the work must be continuously developed. However, Slade also believed that interventions from the teacher should be selective so as “not to interfere with the children’s creativity” (Abbs, 1987).
O’Toole et al point out that a common issue with Slade’s philosophy was a difficulty in effectively implementing a largely unstructured approach into the highly systematised education system. They note that this position was drastically changed through Brian Way’s book, Development Through Drama, particularly due to the exercises it included and which offered a means for practical implementation of Slade’s philosophy (as the exercises are primarily open-ended and provide opportunities for pupil direction). Way was aligned with Slade in the sense that both saw drama as a means for human development, with Way been “concerned with using drama’s holistic and experiential nature to develop all aspects of [students]” (O’Toole et al, 2009).
Dorothy Heathcote was similarly concerned with the use of drama as a tool to develop students and prepare them for the vagaries of adult life. Though there is some debate as to whether Dorothy Heathcote adequately defended drama as a valuable subject in itself, or merely promoted drama as a pedagogical tool to enhance learning outcomes, there is no question that her techniques have been highly influential in guiding the delivery of education in many schools. Heathcote’s emphasis on sharing responsibility with pupils as part of her Mantle of the Expert toolkit is a natural evolution on the essence of play championed by Slade, and acted (and continues to act) as a refreshing antidote to conventional styles centred on one-way knowledge transfer, rote learning and frequent testing.
To fully understand Mantle of the Expert, it is helpful to follow the path of Heathcote’s work, which Cecily O’Neil segmented into three distinct phases. Initially, Heathcote’s practices were described as ‘living-through drama’, with students often invited to provide a theme or scenario to be played-out. This was underpinned by a belief that pupils would be most engaged in the lesson where they had involvement in co-creating the content. This progressed to teaching where the teacher had more involvement in the situation and in preparing a context to help guide the activities to be undertaken by the student. This reflected Heathcote’s objective that teaching delve into the curriculum in considerable detail. Eventually Heathcote’s techniques evolved into the Mantle of the Expert, where pupils are asked to take responsibility for specific roles and to undertake meaningful tasks in order to obtain a collective objective. O’Neil commented that Mantle of the Expert has “strong links with play but because students are invited to take on responsibility for purposeful tasks, they don’t feel ‘babyish’” (O’Neill, 2015). Under Mantle of the Expert, the classroom becomes the location for different kinds of establishments where enterprise may be engaged in, as signposted by careful ‘language’ such as written language and reading and interpretation of a variety of systems. The language is initially framed by the teacher but progressively assumed by the students as their own. Within the enterprise, students “accept responsibility for… their clients needs and… [are] engaged in the research and skills essential for making the enterprise truthful” (O’Neill, 2015).
To an extent, Heathcote’s techniques were an interpretation or response to the prevailing socio-economic environment of the time. The 1960s were a time of creativity and ambition in education (much to do with the pioneering approaches of Slade) and Heathcote’s initial emphasis on student-led content could be said to reflect popular usage of drama at the time, with its focus on expression and spontaneity. Conversely, the 1980s witnessed profound economic and political change and thus Heathcote’s focus on role and responsibility could be seen as an attempt to enfranchise young people and develop a sense of affinity to society that seemed to be slipping away. At the heart of Mantle of the Expert, Heathcote places a view of humankind immersed in a world “with other agents and in community with them” such that “they face the task, not just intelligently but intelligibly and responsibly”. Parallels to the context in which Mantle of the Expert was forged can be drawn to the educational framework prevailing in more recent times, which arguably has been limited by the setting of narrow curricular goals. This suggests the use of a technique such as Mantle of the Expert continues to be relevant to achieve those objectives that Heathcote sought to achieve over 30 years ago.
Across Heathcote’s writings there are a number of pieces of advice that can be used to refine and improve teaching techniques. In her 1978 paper, Heathcote challenges teachers to observe children at play and interact with them in a composed fashion. She discourages the use of judgement and assumptions, asserting that “I must… have the ability to see the world through my students”, to “constantly… renew my view of each pupil”, to “stop believing things other people tell us about children”, and “to give everyone a fresh start each morning”. In this paper, Heathcote notes astutely that students may not have the “vocabulary” (in this context more akin to life experiences) to actively participate and engage with the teacher in scenarios that are ‘made-up” and explains that a good teacher must be able to negotiate with their class with impact in order to foster their engagement. In her 1971 paper, Heathcote expands on the need for close observation and to refrain from judgement. She provides an example of a boy with learning difficulties who has been tasked with selecting clothes suitable for a slave driver in King Herod’s entourage. In this example, the boy extracts a hangman’s black mask and cap. Heathcote firstly presents a response of “wrong period; must intervene”, asking of this “how much would have been buried which was just on the point of emerging?”. Heathcote advocates that “at some stage the anachronism may be pointed out… but the child’s need should dictate the timing of this” (Heathcote, 1971). Heathcote urges the teacher to explore the student’s perspective and “through that permission to widen into more subtle and generously based [learnings]”.
In drawing the classroom into an ongoing act where the pupils must actively participate, respond to the actions of the teacher and perform roles as they consider best fits the briefing (subject to subtle influence and guidance from the teacher), I see parallels to the messages conveyed by Augusto Boal in his seminal work – Theatre of the Oppressed. In his preface in 2000, Boal urges the audience to become the character, to show guidance and a path to righteousness, and in so doing become free to “invade the scene and appropriate the power of the actor” (Boal, 2000).
The involvement of everyone in the class, rather than a simple transmittance of information from the teacher to the students, is closely aligned to Boal’s own methodology, which encourages the audience (in our learning environment – the students) to take on the role of protagonist. Boal discusses assuming the means of theatrical production, and explains that man must “first of all, control his own body, know his own body, in order to be capable of making it more expressive. Then he will be able to practice theatrical forms in which by stages he frees himself from his condition of spectator and takes on that of actor” (Boal, 1978). Boal contrasts the obedient and passive spectator on the one hand to the actor, a protagonist who has ceased to become a subject, on the other hand. When Boal initially wrote his methodology in Theatre of the Oppressed, there was an overt political tone with Boal using spectator action as a parallel for social action and seizing the political initiative from the dominating ruling elite. However it is the thoughts of Boal in latter years (as he revisits the lessons to be drawn from his earlier work), that draws me to the version of drama that he portrays and allows me to draw parallels to the essence of play that I seek to perpetuate in my own classes.
Specifically, I note an interesting passage in Boal’s 2008 preface to Theatre of the Oppressed. When talking about the study of Shakespeare, Boal urges that such study does not entail solely the study of historical theatre, but rather the “history of humanity”, because the student is able to learn about the environment, culture and behaviourisms that were prevalent at the time of Shakespeare’s writings. Boal continues that to study these things is to “discover ourselves…. discovering ourselves, and change the world”. Whilst the reference to more profound societal change is apparent, it is interesting to see an increased emphasis on the development of self, a substantially more introspective view than could be inferred at the time that Theatre of the Oppressed was initially produced. In addition, there is a passage in Boal’s 2000 preface (in which Boal talks about the origins of Ancient Greek theatre), where Boal talks about Thespis. Boal describes the story of how Thespis interacted with his audience and deviated from the conventional stories told in the theatres of Greece at the time. When directly challenged, Thespsis rebutted strongly that through his actions he was propagating the truth. Boal explains that “without realising it, Thespis had created the protagonist… who stands alone… who rebels, thinks and acts for himself” Boal goes on to explain that the protagonist “finds out who he was, opening up new paths, revealing the possible.” In this text, it is clear that Boal links the actions of the protagonist to self-development and discovery. In the context of the classroom, one of the tasks is to turn all of the students into protagonists and thus aid their self development.
There is some empirical evidence to support a number of benefits from adopting the approach advocated in this essay. Berinstein and Magalhaes studied the essence of play approach amongst a group of children living in Zanzibar, Tanzania. From a starting point that play is recognised as a fundamental building block for development, they sought to validate some of its tangible benefits. They acknowledge at the beginning of their paper that play is essential for development including cognitive, social and emotional aspects, and point to its recognition as a right of every child by the UN Commission for Human Rights as testament to this idea. Bernistein and Magalhaes use Photovoice (the combination of relevant photos of children at play, together with commentary by the children on those photos) to capture the everyday reality and developed evidence-based conclusions. The authors found that, for their subjects, play was not formally organised nor was it frequently encouraged by adults. Instead, the play was “self-driven, and about waking the body up and occupying free time” (Bernigstein and Magalhaes, 2009). Nonetheless, the authors found that despite the lack of encouragement from adults (and lack of direction about use of play to fuel social, cognitive and physical development), the children still valued play and integrated it into their daily routine. The authors connect this to sociocultural theories of play. These theories connect play to understanding of social norms and conventions, the development of self-identity, and as a way to adapt to adulthood and the environment in which children grow-up in. This supports the idea that the Essence of Play taps into the innate desires and ambitions of children and helps serve an important educational and societal goal to assist them in preparing for and thriving in their adult life.
I would consider formative assessment to be closely associated with the style of teaching described above. This involves the use of evidence on the teaching conducted to a certain point, to inform and adapt the teaching to ensure that needs continue to be met. In this way, formative assessment continues the theme of placing the student at the heart of my teaching methodology. Black and William explain that formative assessment aids the ‘low attainers’ more than the rest, and raises achievement overall. They cite multiple sources of concern around the dearth of feedback provided to students, for example a quote from OFSTED noting that marking, whilst often conscientious, typically lacked guidance on how work might be improved. Black and William therefore plead for greater adoption of formative assessment, explaining that “the commitment must be to teaching through interaction to develop each pupil’s power to incorporate new facts and ideas into his or her understanding”.
For my own teaching style, I believe building relationship of trust and respect not just within drama but within my classroom and the relationships between myself and my pupils as Freire states that a relationship between teacher and student should be mutual if my pupils don’t respect me or I don’t value them I don’t believe there can be a good working relationship and consequently will stop the potentially for the best drama to be created. A technique that can build respect from the student is Dorothy Heathcoat’s ‘Teacher in Role’. A teacher in role exercise “…takes away the built-in hierarchy of the usual teacher-class relationship. When the teacher is in role as a participant in the drama, there is no reason for the students to show undue respect or deference.” (Wagner, 1979; 132). Using this exercise as an example first of all opens up your vulnerability to the students and shows them you’re not afraid to do what you ask of them but also is a way to show the pupils how to perform themselves, as babies learn, they copy and do people learn by seeing and doing rather than just doing, Freire believed that ‘the educator should work alongside the educated; all should learn, all should be active, all should be equal.” (1969; 59).
I used teacher in role within my year 9 classes, while studying the scheme of work Everybody’s talking about Jamie, we have used the skill ‘Roll on the Wall’ to create a character and write a monologue on the feelings towards Jamie. The students were struggling to create a well written piece of drama with a story and different uses of languages except their own. I decided to create a character and a monologue myself and come into class as ‘Jamie’s Mum’ to show the class how it should be done. We then went through the assessment criteria and broke down the monologue I had just performed and marked it, explaining what got the higher marks and what could be improved. We did this, so they could understand how they need to approach and perform their own monologue and also to learn how to peer asses.
Brian Way edited Slade’s book Child Drama and describes drama as an activity that is based on play and not based on direct theatre approaches. While Slade and Way can be associated because of this idea and talks of play, they differ due to the fact that Way believed that drama was an “activity not for showing.” (Bolton; 1984; 24). I personally believe Slades thinking of drama being shown is a lot more effective, you have to do to learn and especially to know what works and what doesn’t, this is a skill you can take to the real world, if you don’t try you will never learn.
Chauhan (2004) explains that if drama was to be used as a pedagogical tool inside schools then the simple drama techniques that get taught from the very beginning like hot-seating are taken to help understand the roles or other human beings they are learning about in any subject. Hot seating can be a great way to develop both drama and literacy skills, says Michael Theodorou. Just let children warm up to the idea first… … Perhaps one of the most popular is hot seating; the process whereby an adult or child adopts a different persona and answers questions in role. (Theodorou, 2011)
One of Freire’s foremost contributions is to peace education, supporting its desire to establish a connection between education and social transformation. Freire asserted that there was no neutrality in education, as it always aided some interests and acted as a hindrance to others. Freire’s thinking was guided by a determination to prove that schooling can be used for freedom. Just as education had been used for oppression, so to could a freedom of education enable students to identify social systems of oppression and prepare themselves to tackle the situations arising from this social state. Further, freedom in education would equip students with the ability to adapt to changing circumstances. Freire steadfastly championed learning based on the reality of students’ own experiences. For example, in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire explains that “The starting point for organising the program content of education or political action must… [reflect] the aspirations of the people” (Freire, 1970).
From a practical perspective, Freire explained that a child-centric approach could be achieved through dialogue, and a prerequisite for this was to accept equality amongst the participants of the class. Each participant must trust the others and there would also need to be mutual respect and love (care and commitment). Each participant was obliged to question what they knew and, as a consequence, challenge these thoughts and create new knowledge (Freire Institute). This can be juxtaposed to what Freire referred to as the “banking” education pedagogy, in which students are perceived as recipients of information provided by teachers. Freire was fiercely critical of the banking concept, commenting that “…[this] which serves the interests of oppression, is also necrophilic. Based on a mechanistic, static, naturalistic, spatialized view of consciousness, it transforms students into receiving objects. It attempts to control thinking and action, leads women and men to adjust to the world, and inhibits their creative power.” (Freire, 1993) Though Freire sought to provide students with the means to combat oppression, I draw inspiration for my own classes as I consider his pupil-centric methodology a means to inspire radical action amongst my own students. However, this radical action is envisaged to respond to personal issues that my students may find in adolescent or adult life. This is similar to how Boal placed a subtle nuance on his work in later life, reflecting an improved political-economic situation which gave space to focus on personal development and progress.
Throughout my teacher training, including a mixture of lesson observation and leading lessons directly, I discovered that I benefited greatly from Freire’s technique of mutual respect. Within my short time at my first school I was informed by some parties that the children would need to be fearful of me in order to attain their quiet attention and respect, and would in fact need to use a whistle as the most effective means of achieving this. This was something that I did not really agree with or feel comfortable with. In my second school, I explored my own philosophy and explored how I might engender a good relationship with my classes. I leant on Freire’s theory of mutual respect and attempted to developed a friendly relationship which would show my respect for my pupils and their ideas. My hope was that they would reciprocate through an equal amount of respect.
With certain pupils I was compelled to enforce behavioural rules, such as Skinner’s process of ‘conditioning’ in an environment of stimulus, reward and punishment. Skinner believed that the best way to understand behaviour is to look at the causes of an action and its consequences. He called this approach operant conditioning. Through operant conditioning, an individual makes an association between a particular behaviour and a consequence, i.e. behaviour that is followed by pleasant consequences is likely to be repeated, and behaviour followed by unpleasant consequences is less likely to be repeated (Skinner, 1938). I had an example of this within one of my first lessons with a Year 7 class, where there was a student who would not stop talking over his fellow classmates while they were performing. I issued the student with countless warnings and also made him apologise to the whole class, but this still did not work so I opted to eject the student from the lesson. At the end of the lesson the pupil came in to the classroom appearing to be very upset that he had been removed from the class. Subsequent to that lesson, the same student only ever exhibited exemplary behaviour, and I praised the student many times in recognition of this. This provides some anecdotal support for Skinner’s own work on Operant Conditioning, and at the very least evidenced that unfortunately it will not always be able to earn the mutual respect that Freire advocates without enforcing discipline in a controlled and careful manner.
In the process of teaching drama this school year, I have refined my own philosophy through research on the views of different practitioners and personal experience of what I believe has worked well in the classroom, or else has the potential to make a profound impact on the progress of the youths with whom I am trusted to nurture. These views, which are presented throughout the essay above, could be broadly distilled into three important areas. Firstly, I believe in the value of a practical setting for classes, shifting away from the traditional hierarchical nature of the teacher-student relationship. This borrows from the philosophy of play for which Slade and Way were leading proponents, as well as the likes of Heathcote and Boal with their take on active engagement from all participants.
In addition, I consider the engineering of mutual respect a fundamental component of my teaching toolkit, as this ensures that my students consider themselves valued stakeholders in a shared journey of discovery, Symbiotic to this is my obligation to teach with empathy and understanding, exercising careful situational judgement and avoiding a one size fits all approach. I am convinced that a culture of discipline does not necessarily need to be mutually exclusive to this, as Slade himself talks about the need for a teacher to set the right conditions for play (and consequently development).
Finally, and as an overriding theme, I am passionate about putting the foundations in place for students to excel in their adolescent and adult life, by conveying the necessary skills that I believe drama is uniquely placed to deliver. Taught effectively, Drama enables students to work collaboratively and independently in a safe environment, a skill that is much needed within the working world. Most jobs now days are always working with another person and team playing, the skills you learn within drama. That’s what I want to bring to my own lessons as a teacher, I want to be able to set my students up with life skills which I believe drama skills has a lot of the fundamental life ones.