[Xmca-l] Re: Of Possible Interest to the XCMA/CHAT Family

[Ana Marjanovic-Shane]

Dear all,

Thanks for starting this thread about drama in education. I recently
published a paper that takes a critical stance toward Heathcote's drama in
education approach and other approaches to education that are based on
some form of drama, play and/or improv - *"Spoilsport" in Drama in
education vs dialogic pedagogy*.
To play a "spoilsport" myself, in this paper, I claim that Drama in
Education belongs to an educational paradigm that is mainly based on
socialization of students into the socially recognized valuable practices,
values and understanding of the world, which are heavily based on
agreement, collaboration and following of the authority, without students
having legitimate rights and a possibilities to critically disagree,
provide different points of view and question the existing social
practices, values and ways of understanding the world. In other words, in
this educational paradigm - students' disenssus, critical approach to
testing different ideas, views, desires, values, etc. is actively
suppressed, or at best limited, curbed and restricted.

In the paper I provide a detailed analysis of (a part of) the same video
posted here earlier - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owKiUO99qrw.  Below
is the abstract of my paper. If interested - you can get it at Dialogic
Pedagogy Journal website -
http://dpj.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/dpj1/article/view/151

So, what do you think?

Ana

____ ____ ____ ____ ____
"Spoilsport" in Drama in education vs dialogic pedagogy
Abstract

 In this paper two educational paradigms that both attempt to overcome
alienation often experienced by students in the conventional education.
These two educational paradigms are embodied in different educational
practices: First, Drama in Education in its widest definition, is based on
the Vygotskian views that human cognitive, semantic (meaning-making), and
social-emotional development happens in or through play and/or imagination,
thus within the imagined worlds. Second, Critical Ontological Dialogic
Pedagogy, is based in the Bakhtin inspired approach to critical dialogue
among the “consciousnesses of equal rights” (Bakhtin, 1999), where
education is assumed to be a practice of examination of the world, the
others and the self. I reveal implicit and explicit conceptual similarities
and differences between these two educational paradigms regarding their
understanding the nature of learning; social values that they promote; the
group dynamics, social relationships and the position of learners’
subjectivity. I aim to uncover the role and legitimacy of the learners’
disagreement with the positions of others, their dissensus with the
educational events and settings, and the relationships of power within the
social organization of educational communities in these two diverse
educational approaches. I explore the legitimacy of dissensus in these two
educational approaches regarding both the participants’ critical
examination of the curriculum, and in regard to promoting the participants’
agency and its transformations. In spite of important similarities between
the educational practices arranged by these two paradigms, the analysis of
their differences points to the paradigmatically opposing views on human
development, learning and education. Although both Drama in Education and
Dialogic Pedagogy claim to deeply, fully and ontologically engage the
learners in the process of education, they do it for different purposes and
with diametrically opposite ways of treating the students and their
relationship to the world, each other and their own developing selves.

<http://dpj.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/dpj1/article/view/151>





On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 1:58 PM Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:

> The central thematic therefore ;
> *making people care about things is the core of learning.
>
> This process of coming to care may be that consciousness is  in the 1st
> place not a matter of *I think* but of *I can*
> I want to explore the phenomena of the *phantom limb* that occurs when a
> person who has lost an arm in actuality continues to feel pain in what is
> now a virtual limb which continues to be sensed [felt] as painful.
> Merleau-Ponty took this phenomena as a clear example of how phenomena
> becomes embodied or *endowed* in the experience of the person.
> The invention of a device called a *virtual reality box* was created by
> Ramachandran. The way *virtual* and *reality* are put in conjunction is
> significant. The 1st term occurs in the realm of the non-existent [virtual]
> the 2nd term in the realm of the actual [reality].
>
> In the virtual reality box a mirror is placed and the one actual arm is in
> the box. When the person looks into the box he *sees both arms* because the
> box creates a reverse symmetrical image. The person visually is presented
> with an embodied or endowed right and left arm.
> The person is then instructed to move the phantom left arm into the left
> side of the box and move the real right arm into the right side of the box.
> The patient looked down, saw two arms, and was able to move *both* arms at
> the same time.
> When this was done the person's *synesthetic* response embodied two normal
> arms. The absent arm became present virtually. The phantom limbs arm then
> is extinguished in that virtual arm, hence the phantom limb and its
> sensations were *extinguished*. This virtual reality box shows how
> consciousness is in the first place not a matter of *I think* but in the
> 1st place is a matter of *I can*.
>
> Shifting back to the virtual reality *stage* where drama is a process of
> *I can* I sense a similar process of the play of conjunction between the
> virtual PLACE/zone and the actual PLACE/zone.
> If learning is in the 1st place learning to care then this caring is in
> the 1st place endowing experience with *I can* prior to the experience of
> cognizing as *I think*.
> The place of the *speaking voice* as the *I can* process when in the
> presence of an audience is also meaningFULL  [subject matter that matters]
> becoming endowed through learning [as coming to care for things as the
> subject matter that matters].
> I hope this reflection has some resonance with understanding knowing as
> occurring in the 1st place as an undergoing of an experience as a process
> occurring within virtual actual places.
>
>
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>
> From: Helen Grimmett
> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:09 PM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Of Possible Interest to the XCMA/CHAT Family
>
> Beautifully put Sue, and exactly why I believe infusion of the arts into
> the curriculum is so important. There is nothing quite like 'living' a
> concept for understanding it and feeling why it matters.
>
> This sometimes gets me into trouble with other arts educators who are
> adamant that each of the arts needs to be taught for its own sake and
> inherent value rather than 'reduced' to its utilitarian value of enhancing
> learning in other subjects. But I don't see why these are two mutually
> opposing positions. All children deserve access to quality arts education
> that teaches arts skills and processes, but surely the point of learning
> these skills is to put them to use in making life more meaningful. If the
> arts help make learning in other subject areas more meaningful then surely
> that helps strengthen the case for quality arts education rather than
> diminish it.
>
> Thanks for introducing me to another aspect of Heathcote's work too. I'm
> very familiar with Teacher-in-role and the Mantle of the Expert, but had
> never heard of 'Rolling Role'. I'm looking forward to reading the book!
>
> Cheers,
> Helen
>
> --
> *Dr HELEN GRIMMETT *
> Lecturer in Primary and Early Years Education
> Professional Experience Liaison - Primary
>
> *Education*
> Monash University
> Room 159, Building 902, Berwick Campus
> 100 Clyde Road
> Berwick VIC 3806
> Australia
>
> T: +61 3 9904 7171
> E: helen.grimmett@monash.edu <name.surname@monash.edu>
> monash.edu
>
>
> The Practice of Teachers' Professional Development: A Cultural-Historical
> Approach
> <
> https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/professional-learning-1/the-practice-of-teachers-professional-development/
> >
> Helen Grimmett (2014) Sense Publishers
>
>
>
>
> On 26 February 2016 at 06:51, Susan Davis <s.davis@cqu.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > Good questions and reflections Larry and David,
> >
> > Heathcote believed that through drama you could situate students
> > differently in relation to knowledge through them having an actual
> > ‘experience’ of it, in what she called ‘now’ time.  So rather than being
> > told about ‘knowledge', or reading about it as something that happened
> > ‘over there’ to other people, it is about bringing the students into a
> > more immediate experience as they have to consider ‘what would I do in
> > this situation' .  One way she suggests you can do that is by just moving
> > situations and events into the present tense… so if you are doing history
> > and examining a particular event you can set up a context and instead of
> > saying ‘they were’ you say ‘we are’, ‘I am’.  It is in a way an
> > ontological and epistemological shift that is realised through practical
> > action and tasks, so children ‘experience’ knowledge through tasks and
> > action.
> >
> > She says of ‘now’ time:
> > . Things have to be made to matter;
> > . The task must feel important and worthwhile;
> > . There needs to be a valuable and perceivable outcome;
> > . People must enjoy power to influence and operate in the circumstances;
> > . Tasks must create feedback possibilities;
> > . Situation must feel reasonable and genuinely truthful;
> > . People must feel protected from feeling stared at; and
> > . The self-spectator must become alert and be registered. (Tape 9)
> >
> >
> > The skill of the teacher is in then exercising high selectivity in
> > arranging a multiplicity of signs and tools to establish the context and
> > curate the experience so that it activates interest and engagement. She
> > talks of finding the ’thread’ that they can take from their lives into
> the
> > dramatic (or historical) context… and that might be something very simple
> > - taking on role within a family group, putting on a name tag for a role,
> > putting a pencil behind your ear so later in the 'Victorian workroom' you
> > will be able to quickly retrieve it.
> >
> > In terms of learning that matters she really is concerned with having
> > children come to appreciate that learning matters, being deeply concerned
> > with things matters and that if you attend to things and can have an
> > ‘experience’ of knowledge, you will care about it and that learning will
> > stay with you. She was quite fond of a quote by Blake “he who would do
> > good to another must do so in minute particulars”.
> >
> >     As I conclude in the book … Heathcote argued, school is an artificial
> > construct, with mandated curriculum requirements and expectations being
> > imposed from on high, so the engagement process is about making the
> > curriculum accessible and attractive for students so they can become
> > committed and involved enough to learn things that will ‘stick’ and make
> a
> > difference.
> >     This is ultimately about enabling students to have experiences of
> > coming to care about things, and care about things that matter. Through
> > this engagement and commitment process Heathcote hoped that students
> would
> > understand that to achieve anything worthwhile you have to invest energy
> > and pay attention to details, that details matter.  This type of
> > commitment is at
> > the core of meaningful learning: "Making people care about things is the
> > process of learning". (Tape 9)
> >
> >
> > I hope that helps!
> >
> > Cheers
> > Sue
> >
> >
> >
> > On 26/02/2016 12:46 am, "Lplarry" <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >David, Susan,
> > >To ask "How do we get rid of the feeling that what we are doing is a
> > >*dummy run?*
> > >Answer: To realize what really *matters* that is experienced as a
> > >living matter.
> > >David suggesting this is not a question of *being* - focus on the word
> > >*is* but rather to focus on the word *knowing*.
> > >So how does the instructor come to *know* what actually is a subject
> > >matter that *really matters* in contrast to *dummy matters* that are
> > >actually *dead matters*.
> > >Questions: Is this meaning of *knowing* focusing on epistemology and the
> > >notion of *genetic epistemology?*
> > >Is knowing related to *signifying* and contrasted with what known as
> > >*signified*
> > >Susan contrasts acquiring *living* knowledge in contrast to *dead*
> > >formalized knowledge.
> > >David suggests instructors must *know* the difference.
> > >I am now wanting to hear more on how to move beyond developing "dummy
> > >knowledge and to create "places" -zones - in which life is lived within
> > >spaces of subject matters that really matter and make a real
> "difference".
> > >Larry
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: "Susan Davis" <s.davis@cqu.edu.au>
> > >Sent: ‎2016-‎02-‎24 3:34 AM
> > >To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > >Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Of Possible Interest to the XCMA/CHAT Family
> > >
> > >Thanks Robert,
> > >It’s great to have the book published as part of your series.  The book
> is
> > >called “Learning that matters: Revitalising Heathcote’s Rolling Role for
> > >the digital age”.
> > >
> >
> https://www.sensepublishers.com/catalogs/bookseries/imagination-and-praxis
> > >/
> > >learning-that-matters/
> > >
> > >For those who haven’t heard of Heathcote before, she was a ‘master’
> > >teacher who achieved international recognition for her teaching practice
> > >in the 70s and 80s - in particular for pioneering processes such as
> Mantle
> > >of the Expert - which use role and fictional contexts to position
> children
> > >as ‘experts’ and active agents in investigative processes. She also
> > >invented this system called ‘Rolling Role’ which is a form of
> > >trans-disciplinary learning - where multiple classes work with the same
> > >common context, but from their particular frame or subject perspective.
> > >The beauty of it is that no one group ‘owns’ the outcome, but groups
> > >regularly ‘publish’ and share artefacts and outcomes throughout the
> > >process, with each group having to use and ‘roll’ the work of what has
> > >gone before.  It was a system she believed was perfectly suited for
> > >revisiting in the digital age… so that is what the book hopes to assist
> > >with… the Vygotskian and CHAT work was very helpful in conceptualising
> and
> > >understanding this work.
> > >
> > >At times reading the work of Vygotsky and Heathcote it felt like they
> > >could have been writing about education today!
> > >
> > >Educational experience, no less than theoretical research,
> > >teaches us that, in practice, a straightforward learning of concepts
> > >always
> > >proves impossible and educationally fruitless. Usually, any teacher
> > >setting out
> > >on this road achieves nothing except a meaningless acquisition of words,
> > >mere
> > >verbalization in children, which is nothing more than simulation and
> > >imitation
> > >of corresponding concepts which, in reality, are concealing a vacuum.
> In
> > >such cases, the child assimilates not
> > >concepts but words, and he fills his memory more than his thinking. As a
> > >result, he ends up helpless in the face of any sensible attempt to apply
> > >any of
> > >this acquired knowledge. Essentially, this method of teaching/learning
> > >concepts, a purely scholastic and verbal method of teaching, which is
> > >condemned
> > >by everybody and which advocates the replacement of acquisition of
> living
> > >knowledge by the assimilation of dead and empty verbal schemes,
> represents
> > >the
> > >most basic failing in the field of education. (Vygotsky 1934/1994a, pp.
> > >356-7)
> > >
> > >
> > >So – getting rid of the dummy run. On the face of it you
> > >have a rather interesting paradox in drama, because it looks like drama
> is
> > >entirely artificial and that the whole thing would be a dummy run – we
> are
> > >only
> > >pretending actually.  And we use words
> > >like pretend and play and in our culture it does suggest that it’s
> > >ephemeral
> > >and there’s no real work/life purpose for it…. So it seems to me we need
> > >to
> > >look and see what it is that makes something NOT feel like a dummy run…
> > >It seemed to me that one of the important aspects of not
> > >being a dummy run is that it matters now, we feel like its urgent now.
> > >(Heathcote 1993, Tape 9)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Cheers
> > >Sue
> > >
> > >
> > >Dr Susan Davis
> > >Senior Lecturer | School of Education & the Arts | Higher Education
> > >Division
> > >CQUniversity Australia, Noosa Campus |
> > >PO Box 1128, Qld 4566
> > >P +61 (0)7 5440 7007 | X 547007 | M +61 400 000 000| E
> s.davis@cqu.edu.au
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On 24/02/2016 12:14 am, "Robert Lake" <boblake@georgiasouthern.edu>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >>​Susan Davis has published a book that weaves LSV, Dorothy Heathcote
> and
> > >>CHAT
> > >>into one seamless, present tense unfolding of "rolling role". If anyone
> > >>would like to write a review of it I can get you a copy. It has been
> five
> > >>years since Heathcote's passing and I suspect her work will become more
> > >>and
> > >>more  important in this era of standardized everything.
> > >>
> > >>*Robert Lake*
> > >>
> > >>https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/2709-learning-that-matters.pdf
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>For a sense of the dynamic of  Dorothy's pedagogy, scroll to about 5
> > >>minutes into this.
> > >>
> > >>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owKiUO99qrw
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
*Ana Marjanovic-Shane*
Dialogic Pedagogy Journal editor (dpj.pitt.edu)
Associate Professor of Education
Chestnut Hill College
phone: 267-334-2905