Drama Tuesday - But does drama education really work?

/

 I have titled this post provocatively  and purposefully.

One of the questions we need reassurance about is whether what we do really works and how it works?

Research in drama education is more likely to be qualitative rather than quantitative. That probably says something about drama education researchers. Therefore it is interesting to find newly published research that focuses on mixed methods research using quasi-experimental pre-post-test design. It is also research that explores the role of drama education pedagogy in creative thinking, perspective taking as an underlying process “that explains both creative thinking and the development of socio-emotional competencies by permitting the child to see from another person’s perspective, providing several ideas-solutions for a problem (creative thinking), as well as understanding other people’s emotions and motivations (theory-of-mind).”  In other words, the focus on drama education is through its impact on the  broader field of the psychology of creativity. 

So often in my professional life I have been asked to answer the “doubting Thomas” sceptics who want “proof” that drama education really does what it says. 

And, perhaps too often, as advocates for drama education we have been reluctant or unwilling or unable to provide the answer to the question. Leave aside that the concept of “proving something” is a flawed logic, there are questions that we as drama education researchers need to address. 

I was recently re-reading Michael J. Finneran’s thesis Critical Myths in Drama as Education, and reminded about the sometimes hazy constructions of drama education that are provided. Celume and Zenasni note that while there is evidence of positive effects of drama education pedagogies, 

…we agree with several authors (Goldstein et al., 2017; Winner et al., 2013) who establish that there is a number of drama-based studies that lack scientific rigor, presenting an absence of controlled trials (Joronen et al., 2012), which results in there being little evidence to support the crucial role of pretence activities in children development (Lillard et al., 2013). (2022)

The evidence or our practice – strongly recorded in qualitative research – does provide a sound foundation for our field, yet can be too easily dismissed or ignored. Not that I am arguing for more quantitative research. But there is research in allied fields for us to notice.

The important question for us is to answer the critics who demand “proof” of our claims. 

Youth Arts Incorporated

How do we know if drama education works? 

Really works?

The discussion in this newly published research provides some clues to how drama works.

In drama we often talk about being in the moment and out of the moment simultaneously – the concept of metaxis. To my mind this aligns with the concept identified as perspective taking. The active processes of learning and reflection that we build into our drama education activities are also directed towards developing “a wide range of cognitive, social, and emotional competencies in children, such as social relationships and behaviors, empathy, humour, emotional understanding, and Theory of Mind (ToM)”.

What do you think?

Bibliography

Celume, M.-P., & Zenasni, F. (2022). How perspective-taking underlies creative thinking and the socio-emotional competency in trainings of drama pedagogy. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 39. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0275202239e200015

Finneran, M. J. (2008). Critical Myths in Drama as Education. (Ph.D.). University of Warwick, Warwick.