http://delicious.com/stacks/view/Krkd4R
Hope this is done as required!
Saturday, 26 November 2011
Task 6C
I want to review three pieces of literature broadly related to my inquiry. The working “short title” of the topic is “ in what ways can all the parties involved in the education of primary school-children, benefit from the contribution which live theatre can provide”.
There has been little research work done on this topic, and it has in consequence been difficult to identify suitable literature to review. I have settled on the following –
* UCL Research Ethics Committee Guidance Note 1, “Research involving children”
* “All Our Futures” A report of the National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education
* “Theatre in Education” (various publications)
1. The UCL Research Ethics Committee is a respected academic based group, set up to review and provide advice to researchers carrying out research projects, which have an ethical dimension. Guidance note 1 on “Research Involving Children” was produced a few years ago to provide a general framework within which, the committee would consider projects involving children. I felt it was important for me to know what the professional approach would be, in the light of my own intention to interview children as one of the key groups participating in my inquiry. The guidance note gives me more scope to talk to children without formal and informed parental consent than I had expected. As I understand the requirements, the nature of my project, the fact that the names of the children will not be recorded, and the classroom environment of the survey will avoid the need for a time consuming complicated approval process. I will need to explain my approach to the ethical issues in my inquiry plan.
2. “All Our Futures” is a report published in 1999 with the following terms of reference –“To make recommendations to the Secretaries of State on the creative and cultural development of young people through formal and informal education: to take stock of current provision and to make proposals for principles, policies and practice”. The prestigious committee, which produced the report was chaired by Professor Sir Ken Robinson. The key message of the report is that there needs to be a better balance in education, in setting national priorities, in the structure and organisation of the school curriculum, in methods of teaching and assessment, and in relationships between schools and other agencies. The report is full of assertions and anecdotal evidence about the need for better balance, but does not seem to draw on robust information to support its conclusions. That was disappointing, and may be the reason why many of the detailed recommendations have been ignored by governments. For me section 8 of the report is the most relevant to my interest in the role of theatre in primary education. It covers the creation of partnerships between schools and outside organisations, with the objective of implementing collaborative activities aimed at providing creative and cultural experiences for children at their school. The report makes a number of specific recommendations about how participation might be achieved. However both section 8 and section 9 (on resources and funding) are, I think, naïve about how such partnerships might be funded. In fact in my work I have found more realism and innovation about how partnerships can be funded than the report shows. My next review follows through to a few “theatre” initiatives, which have picked up on the participation theme.
3. “Theatre in Education” (TIE) has become a generic term for an initiative started in 1965 at the Belgrade Theatre in Coventry, as a separate art form and educational activity. A group consisting of actors, teachers and social workers were brought together to create a community outreach team. The outreach team created a project called, “PowWow”, which took a group of children and first introduced them to an actor playing a Cowboy. Later the children were introduced to an actor playing an Indian kept in a cage as a prisoner by the Cowboy. The children were given information about both characters and their opposing views in the situation and given the choice of whether or not to free the Indian. The project had successfully merged theatre and education for the first time. TIE has progressed from this point and although it differs from its original form, its primary aim is to use theatre and drama to create a wide range of learning opportunities across the whole curriculum. TIE companies will take a particular curriculum subject or topic and build a show and/or workshop around it. There are now a number of different groups and companies offering a wide range of theatrical experiences for children. These vary from scaled down west-end musicals to participation workshops aimed at combating drug abuse or anti-social behaviour. My own company Image Musical Theatre specialises in turning a moral tale into a musical performance. These are performed at schools, with participation by some children and after a general workshop for all children. The whole event is funded on a commercial basis. I have searched in vain for reports of research based evidence that TIE can provide a significant benefit to the education of
primary schoolchildren. There is a great deal of anecdotal evidence and opinion about the benefits of TIE, but I would like to see some systematic research. Work done by the University of Durham into the impact of drama on pupils language and mathematics abilities in two primary schools is interesting but of limited scope. The Cambridge Primary Review (CPR) is detailed and claims to be evidence based, but does not research the role of theatre in education specifically. It is however a “must” for all interested in primary school education. Many of the views expressed in CPR echo those in “All Our Futures” that a better curriculum balance is needed.
In my own small and very limited way I want the results of my inquiry to make a small contribution to the body of information on how theatre can contribute to the education of primary schoolchildren.
There has been little research work done on this topic, and it has in consequence been difficult to identify suitable literature to review. I have settled on the following –
* UCL Research Ethics Committee Guidance Note 1, “Research involving children”
* “All Our Futures” A report of the National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education
* “Theatre in Education” (various publications)
1. The UCL Research Ethics Committee is a respected academic based group, set up to review and provide advice to researchers carrying out research projects, which have an ethical dimension. Guidance note 1 on “Research Involving Children” was produced a few years ago to provide a general framework within which, the committee would consider projects involving children. I felt it was important for me to know what the professional approach would be, in the light of my own intention to interview children as one of the key groups participating in my inquiry. The guidance note gives me more scope to talk to children without formal and informed parental consent than I had expected. As I understand the requirements, the nature of my project, the fact that the names of the children will not be recorded, and the classroom environment of the survey will avoid the need for a time consuming complicated approval process. I will need to explain my approach to the ethical issues in my inquiry plan.
2. “All Our Futures” is a report published in 1999 with the following terms of reference –“To make recommendations to the Secretaries of State on the creative and cultural development of young people through formal and informal education: to take stock of current provision and to make proposals for principles, policies and practice”. The prestigious committee, which produced the report was chaired by Professor Sir Ken Robinson. The key message of the report is that there needs to be a better balance in education, in setting national priorities, in the structure and organisation of the school curriculum, in methods of teaching and assessment, and in relationships between schools and other agencies. The report is full of assertions and anecdotal evidence about the need for better balance, but does not seem to draw on robust information to support its conclusions. That was disappointing, and may be the reason why many of the detailed recommendations have been ignored by governments. For me section 8 of the report is the most relevant to my interest in the role of theatre in primary education. It covers the creation of partnerships between schools and outside organisations, with the objective of implementing collaborative activities aimed at providing creative and cultural experiences for children at their school. The report makes a number of specific recommendations about how participation might be achieved. However both section 8 and section 9 (on resources and funding) are, I think, naïve about how such partnerships might be funded. In fact in my work I have found more realism and innovation about how partnerships can be funded than the report shows. My next review follows through to a few “theatre” initiatives, which have picked up on the participation theme.
3. “Theatre in Education” (TIE) has become a generic term for an initiative started in 1965 at the Belgrade Theatre in Coventry, as a separate art form and educational activity. A group consisting of actors, teachers and social workers were brought together to create a community outreach team. The outreach team created a project called, “PowWow”, which took a group of children and first introduced them to an actor playing a Cowboy. Later the children were introduced to an actor playing an Indian kept in a cage as a prisoner by the Cowboy. The children were given information about both characters and their opposing views in the situation and given the choice of whether or not to free the Indian. The project had successfully merged theatre and education for the first time. TIE has progressed from this point and although it differs from its original form, its primary aim is to use theatre and drama to create a wide range of learning opportunities across the whole curriculum. TIE companies will take a particular curriculum subject or topic and build a show and/or workshop around it. There are now a number of different groups and companies offering a wide range of theatrical experiences for children. These vary from scaled down west-end musicals to participation workshops aimed at combating drug abuse or anti-social behaviour. My own company Image Musical Theatre specialises in turning a moral tale into a musical performance. These are performed at schools, with participation by some children and after a general workshop for all children. The whole event is funded on a commercial basis. I have searched in vain for reports of research based evidence that TIE can provide a significant benefit to the education of
primary schoolchildren. There is a great deal of anecdotal evidence and opinion about the benefits of TIE, but I would like to see some systematic research. Work done by the University of Durham into the impact of drama on pupils language and mathematics abilities in two primary schools is interesting but of limited scope. The Cambridge Primary Review (CPR) is detailed and claims to be evidence based, but does not research the role of theatre in education specifically. It is however a “must” for all interested in primary school education. Many of the views expressed in CPR echo those in “All Our Futures” that a better curriculum balance is needed.
In my own small and very limited way I want the results of my inquiry to make a small contribution to the body of information on how theatre can contribute to the education of primary schoolchildren.
Task 6B
Having completed the pilot studies it is clear that I will need to use all four tools in order to complete my inquiry. During the course of the pilot studies the uses and limitations of each tool were exposed.
I will reflect on each tool in the order I employed them.
For my purpose “observation” of the children both in the audience and in the play was a vital first step in my pilot process. The behaviour of both groups of children was different, and being on stage almost continuously gave me a chance to observe both groups at key points in the play, such as when my character of “swallow” dies.
I found that the benefit of “observing” is its flexibility to focus on a single individual, or to take an overview of a whole group, and to get an impression or to log detail over time. As a tool it is quick and with some practice easy to use. It can take random snapshots of behaviour, and allows the observer to stay at arms-length from the subjects of the observation.
The limit of “observation” as an inquiry tool is that it is almost entirely qualitative. It can provide crude quantitative data such as – half the audience were shocked at this point, half were untouched. In the case of the pilot study it did however provide the basis for the interview questions for both the teacher and a fellow cast member.
The use of “interviews” as a tool in the inquiry process is very different from observation. The merits are that they can be tightly controlled through a rigid structure, or unstructured to allow as much freedom of expression as possible, and to allow the interviewee to meander around the subject as thoughts come to mind. But as I become more skilled at conducting interviews it is possible to steer the interview towards certain goals without stifling the answers.
The problem of course with interviewing is that it is inevitably time consuming, and can be more confusing than helpful if there is too much talking around the subject. It can also be tempting to “lead” the interviewee towards preconceived results.
In the case of my pilot study I did feel it a necessary step in the process of designing questionnaires prior conducting a survey. I can see that often a focus group can take the place of interview at the stage of designing a questionnaire. But in my own case I wanted the focus group to have a starting point (the Q/A) from which to finalise the questions and the overall pilot survey process.
The “focus group” is I think a crucial step towards conducting a survey. It has the merit of allowing the inquiry to be reviewed by representatives of all the parties involved. Major pitfalls can be avoided ahead of embarking on the survey. The emphasis as between open and closed questions can be balanced, and if this stage is well done it can provide key perceptions about the inquiry, to allow those perceptions to be tested quantitatively. For example if it became obvious that children are primarily interested in the entertainment provided by a play, there is little point in pursuing any other perceptions, which children might have.
The problem with using focus groups is that they are always time-consuming if real value is to be obtained. Also the logistics of getting together good representatives from all the parties can prove problematic.
A “survey” is I think a step in the inquiry process, which cannot be avoided if meaningful data is to be obtained. Even so, unless it is possible to have a statistically meaningful sample in the survey the results will have to be qualified in that respect. In the case of my own inquiry it will be impossible to have a large enough sample to be statistically meaningful, and I am already thinking about how best to qualify the results and also how to describe not only what the sample is, but what it isn’t.
The merits of a survey are that it can be very precisely defined to provide reliable data, for commercial purposes. Or it can provide a wide-ranging collection of answers, if that is required, but which are difficult to analyse if quantitative data is needed.
The limits of a survey are that it is expensive, time-consuming, and can only give reliable data on the questions asked. So the objective of the inquiry needs to be carefully defined. The questions must accurately reflect the aims of the inquiry. Failing that the results of the inquiry will be little more than a random collection of anecdotal evidence.
In the field I want to inquire about there is already a great deal of anecdotal evidence to support “Theatre in Education” (TIE). But so far as I have been able to find out, there is very little hard evidence, based on the use of systematic inquiry tools, to point the best way forward for TIE in these difficult economic times.
I hope that my inquiry will go a little way to providing some hard evidence.
I will reflect on each tool in the order I employed them.
For my purpose “observation” of the children both in the audience and in the play was a vital first step in my pilot process. The behaviour of both groups of children was different, and being on stage almost continuously gave me a chance to observe both groups at key points in the play, such as when my character of “swallow” dies.
I found that the benefit of “observing” is its flexibility to focus on a single individual, or to take an overview of a whole group, and to get an impression or to log detail over time. As a tool it is quick and with some practice easy to use. It can take random snapshots of behaviour, and allows the observer to stay at arms-length from the subjects of the observation.
The limit of “observation” as an inquiry tool is that it is almost entirely qualitative. It can provide crude quantitative data such as – half the audience were shocked at this point, half were untouched. In the case of the pilot study it did however provide the basis for the interview questions for both the teacher and a fellow cast member.
The use of “interviews” as a tool in the inquiry process is very different from observation. The merits are that they can be tightly controlled through a rigid structure, or unstructured to allow as much freedom of expression as possible, and to allow the interviewee to meander around the subject as thoughts come to mind. But as I become more skilled at conducting interviews it is possible to steer the interview towards certain goals without stifling the answers.
The problem of course with interviewing is that it is inevitably time consuming, and can be more confusing than helpful if there is too much talking around the subject. It can also be tempting to “lead” the interviewee towards preconceived results.
In the case of my pilot study I did feel it a necessary step in the process of designing questionnaires prior conducting a survey. I can see that often a focus group can take the place of interview at the stage of designing a questionnaire. But in my own case I wanted the focus group to have a starting point (the Q/A) from which to finalise the questions and the overall pilot survey process.
The “focus group” is I think a crucial step towards conducting a survey. It has the merit of allowing the inquiry to be reviewed by representatives of all the parties involved. Major pitfalls can be avoided ahead of embarking on the survey. The emphasis as between open and closed questions can be balanced, and if this stage is well done it can provide key perceptions about the inquiry, to allow those perceptions to be tested quantitatively. For example if it became obvious that children are primarily interested in the entertainment provided by a play, there is little point in pursuing any other perceptions, which children might have.
The problem with using focus groups is that they are always time-consuming if real value is to be obtained. Also the logistics of getting together good representatives from all the parties can prove problematic.
A “survey” is I think a step in the inquiry process, which cannot be avoided if meaningful data is to be obtained. Even so, unless it is possible to have a statistically meaningful sample in the survey the results will have to be qualified in that respect. In the case of my own inquiry it will be impossible to have a large enough sample to be statistically meaningful, and I am already thinking about how best to qualify the results and also how to describe not only what the sample is, but what it isn’t.
The merits of a survey are that it can be very precisely defined to provide reliable data, for commercial purposes. Or it can provide a wide-ranging collection of answers, if that is required, but which are difficult to analyse if quantitative data is needed.
The limits of a survey are that it is expensive, time-consuming, and can only give reliable data on the questions asked. So the objective of the inquiry needs to be carefully defined. The questions must accurately reflect the aims of the inquiry. Failing that the results of the inquiry will be little more than a random collection of anecdotal evidence.
In the field I want to inquire about there is already a great deal of anecdotal evidence to support “Theatre in Education” (TIE). But so far as I have been able to find out, there is very little hard evidence, based on the use of systematic inquiry tools, to point the best way forward for TIE in these difficult economic times.
I hope that my inquiry will go a little way to providing some hard evidence.
Wednesday, 16 November 2011
Task 6A
After reading the course reader and some of the references, I carried out this task in almost the reverse order to the list in the task summary. The order I used was observation, interview, focus group and survey.
I wanted to make the task as relevant to my inquiry as possible, and in the first place critically reflected on the nature of the process, which my current touring performance is a part of. The purpose was to identify the parties involved in the process and the part each one plays.
The parties I identified are-
* my employer “Image Musical Theatre”
* the staff of the schools where we perform
* other members of my cast
* the parents of the children at the schools
* the children in the audience
* the children selected to take part in the performance
For the pilot work I wanted to focus on the children, who should be the main beneficiaries of the whole effort. It is my intention to cover all the above parties in the full inquiry.
1. I started by observing the reactions of the children at each stage in visits to schools. On the basis of the observations I thought of a number of questions, which I piloted with a member of my cast and a teacher.
2. I have already posted blogs about the pilot interviews I have undertaken.
3. The next step was to form a pilot focus group to review the outputs from the pilot interviews, and to formulate a short questionnaire covering a small part of my inquiry subject. The purpose was to check if open questions are as appropriate as closed questions in the context of my inquiry.
4. The pilot survey, which I then carried out on a mixed group, showed that it would be necessary to use both forms of questions in order to obtain both qualitative and quantitative data for my inquiry. It would be best to design different but related questions for each of the parties.
Pilot questionnaires
Children in the audience
1. Did you enjoy the play?
2. What did you like most ?
3. Why did you like it the most?
4. Was there anything about the play you did not like?
5. Why did you not like it?
6. Did you understand the play?
7. What do you think it was about?
8. Would you like to see another play soon?
Children in the play
1. Did you enjoy being in the play?
2. What did you like most about that?
3. Why did you like it the most?
4. Was there anything you did not like about being in the play?
5. Why did you not like it?
6. Would you have liked it better to just watch the play?
7. Did you understand the play?
8. What do you think it was about?
9. Would you like to see another play soon?
I wanted to make the task as relevant to my inquiry as possible, and in the first place critically reflected on the nature of the process, which my current touring performance is a part of. The purpose was to identify the parties involved in the process and the part each one plays.
The parties I identified are-
* my employer “Image Musical Theatre”
* the staff of the schools where we perform
* other members of my cast
* the parents of the children at the schools
* the children in the audience
* the children selected to take part in the performance
For the pilot work I wanted to focus on the children, who should be the main beneficiaries of the whole effort. It is my intention to cover all the above parties in the full inquiry.
1. I started by observing the reactions of the children at each stage in visits to schools. On the basis of the observations I thought of a number of questions, which I piloted with a member of my cast and a teacher.
2. I have already posted blogs about the pilot interviews I have undertaken.
3. The next step was to form a pilot focus group to review the outputs from the pilot interviews, and to formulate a short questionnaire covering a small part of my inquiry subject. The purpose was to check if open questions are as appropriate as closed questions in the context of my inquiry.
4. The pilot survey, which I then carried out on a mixed group, showed that it would be necessary to use both forms of questions in order to obtain both qualitative and quantitative data for my inquiry. It would be best to design different but related questions for each of the parties.
Pilot questionnaires
Children in the audience
1. Did you enjoy the play?
2. What did you like most ?
3. Why did you like it the most?
4. Was there anything about the play you did not like?
5. Why did you not like it?
6. Did you understand the play?
7. What do you think it was about?
8. Would you like to see another play soon?
Children in the play
1. Did you enjoy being in the play?
2. What did you like most about that?
3. Why did you like it the most?
4. Was there anything you did not like about being in the play?
5. Why did you not like it?
6. Would you have liked it better to just watch the play?
7. Did you understand the play?
8. What do you think it was about?
9. Would you like to see another play soon?
Tuesday, 15 November 2011
Task 5C
My personal view of professional ethics, has not been changed, by reading the references on this topic. In fact I have found that some of the reading material has obscured rather than clarified the issues.
In this blog I want other course participants and course supervisors, to understand the view I take on ethical matters and why.
I am clear that a formal philosophical analysis, and a theoretical ethical framework, do not for me, take the professional issues posed, by my inquiry further forward. As someone who holds to Christian values, there is no better ethical and moral guide for me.
The ethics I apply in my professional life are generally guided by those values.
That is not to say that some issues, in particular some human rights questions, have absolute answers. They are matters of opinion, which have arguments both in favour and against. Many of these questions are covered by law or conventions and rules and therefore are open to interpretation. So although on paper there is clarity about what should or shouldn’t be done, resolution of disputes still end up in a court of law and therefore subject to the uncertainty of a legal process. Sometimes justice is not actually done even if it is “seen to be done”. The practice of court decisions can sometimes lead to incorrect ethical decisions.
Going back to my original thought that my behaviour is guided by Christian values. That is my personal choice, and not one I advocate is right for everyone. Nor does it necessarily imply religious faith. Although I form ethical views on the basis of the values I have expressed, I have never had to take life or death decisions based on them. But that does not stop me having views on such matters. For instance at the time of writing this note, Muammar Gaddafi and his son have just been summarily executed by the Libyan freedom fighters. Many people believe that was the right outcome. I do not believe that execution can ever be right, even if it is carried out after a trial. “An eye for an eye” was never one of my guiding commandments.
There are other guiding principles, which I hold to, such as respect, integrity, having sympathy, always doing my best, not harming anyone and helping people in need. I do not ever need to worry over what is the right thing to do. That is not to say I always do the right thing. But I know when I am behaving badly and not according to my principles.
So in summary, what I have learned from the reading fits into the theoretical framework will provide a working approach to some of the ethical questions I am likely to face in my inquiry. However when the theoretical approach gives answers, which conflict with my answers, I will need to think through the implications and act accordingly.
I am also interested in the interplay between ethics and politics, which is not a matter covered in much detail in the readings and references. For example as many social and medical issues move into the realms of human rights and fairness they are often determined in an EU arena and context, rather than at national level. So over time and as the dominant political mood changes, and as the over-riding economic situation changes, ethical decisions do change. How people are allowed to be treated, depends to some extent on how well off we feel. This is particularly true in employment issues.
Also as the influence of pressure groups on political decisions, increases, the behaviour of governments is subject to ongoing change. Implementation of party manifestos becomes problematic for the government, particularly where sensitive social issues are concerned. So although ethical behaviour is a moving target, I believe that the underlying values I hold to still hold good. Wrong actions can never be justified by political correctness.
All this may seem a long way from my inquiry topic. However, recently, the play I am appearing in was accused of being too political for young children, even though it was written well over a hundred years ago. It is in fact a tale of ethical and moral behaviour, which was allegedly portraying unacceptably “old-fashioned” values. I and my cast colleagues did not enter into the argument.
My enquiry topic will need to involve a number of parties, including my employer, other cast members, school staff, pupils, and parents. So there will be a range of ethical questions to address, some of which, will be informed by the subject matter of the readings. So I will find them useful to use as a reference against my subjective approach.
The interplay between the parties will need sensitive handling in say focus groups, when they sit down together. Also writing up the views expressed through say questionnaires will need to be done with care.
I am also a little concerned about the size of sample groups, to ensure that the results are statistically significant. I will need to take advice on this issue. But the scope of the inquiry may have to be limited by the time available to do the “leg-work” to obtain results, which are statistically valid.
In this blog I want other course participants and course supervisors, to understand the view I take on ethical matters and why.
I am clear that a formal philosophical analysis, and a theoretical ethical framework, do not for me, take the professional issues posed, by my inquiry further forward. As someone who holds to Christian values, there is no better ethical and moral guide for me.
The ethics I apply in my professional life are generally guided by those values.
That is not to say that some issues, in particular some human rights questions, have absolute answers. They are matters of opinion, which have arguments both in favour and against. Many of these questions are covered by law or conventions and rules and therefore are open to interpretation. So although on paper there is clarity about what should or shouldn’t be done, resolution of disputes still end up in a court of law and therefore subject to the uncertainty of a legal process. Sometimes justice is not actually done even if it is “seen to be done”. The practice of court decisions can sometimes lead to incorrect ethical decisions.
Going back to my original thought that my behaviour is guided by Christian values. That is my personal choice, and not one I advocate is right for everyone. Nor does it necessarily imply religious faith. Although I form ethical views on the basis of the values I have expressed, I have never had to take life or death decisions based on them. But that does not stop me having views on such matters. For instance at the time of writing this note, Muammar Gaddafi and his son have just been summarily executed by the Libyan freedom fighters. Many people believe that was the right outcome. I do not believe that execution can ever be right, even if it is carried out after a trial. “An eye for an eye” was never one of my guiding commandments.
There are other guiding principles, which I hold to, such as respect, integrity, having sympathy, always doing my best, not harming anyone and helping people in need. I do not ever need to worry over what is the right thing to do. That is not to say I always do the right thing. But I know when I am behaving badly and not according to my principles.
So in summary, what I have learned from the reading fits into the theoretical framework will provide a working approach to some of the ethical questions I am likely to face in my inquiry. However when the theoretical approach gives answers, which conflict with my answers, I will need to think through the implications and act accordingly.
I am also interested in the interplay between ethics and politics, which is not a matter covered in much detail in the readings and references. For example as many social and medical issues move into the realms of human rights and fairness they are often determined in an EU arena and context, rather than at national level. So over time and as the dominant political mood changes, and as the over-riding economic situation changes, ethical decisions do change. How people are allowed to be treated, depends to some extent on how well off we feel. This is particularly true in employment issues.
Also as the influence of pressure groups on political decisions, increases, the behaviour of governments is subject to ongoing change. Implementation of party manifestos becomes problematic for the government, particularly where sensitive social issues are concerned. So although ethical behaviour is a moving target, I believe that the underlying values I hold to still hold good. Wrong actions can never be justified by political correctness.
All this may seem a long way from my inquiry topic. However, recently, the play I am appearing in was accused of being too political for young children, even though it was written well over a hundred years ago. It is in fact a tale of ethical and moral behaviour, which was allegedly portraying unacceptably “old-fashioned” values. I and my cast colleagues did not enter into the argument.
My enquiry topic will need to involve a number of parties, including my employer, other cast members, school staff, pupils, and parents. So there will be a range of ethical questions to address, some of which, will be informed by the subject matter of the readings. So I will find them useful to use as a reference against my subjective approach.
The interplay between the parties will need sensitive handling in say focus groups, when they sit down together. Also writing up the views expressed through say questionnaires will need to be done with care.
I am also a little concerned about the size of sample groups, to ensure that the results are statistically significant. I will need to take advice on this issue. But the scope of the inquiry may have to be limited by the time available to do the “leg-work” to obtain results, which are statistically valid.
Sunday, 13 November 2011
Feedback from a recent performance
The following extract is from a school news paper produced shortly after we had performed at the school it gives an insight in the children's perception of the event. Whilst this is not suitably focused to use as data for my inquiry it does give a flavour of the issues I am inquiring into and gives me some very useful ideas for the questionnaires.
"On Thursday 29th Sep- tember 2011 a show took place. A group of 3 called IMAGE (Verity Evans, David Brewis and Jude De bont) came to do a show called The Happy Prince. It was a participa- tion show meaning that everyone (including teachers) sang along. Some people got picked out of the audience to have a small role. Every- one enjoyed themselves and sang along even if
they don’t normally sing.
We interviewed the crew. First up was Verity who commented. “I love working with children, it’s a lot of fun. I love act- ing and singing and we have a lot of fun. Also we live together, which is a lot of fun too. I did get nervous when I started but now we’ve done a lot of performances we just have fun. My favourite part is when I give the sapphires to the match
girl.”
We then interviewed David. “It’s lots of fun working with children because everyone says
different things. Acting and singing are some of the many things I love. My cast mates are lots of fun. No, I never get nerv- ous. My favourite part is when all the gold comes
off.”
Lastly we interviewed Jude. “It’s really fun working with children but every day is different because kids are unpre- dictable. I love acting and singing I’ve done it since I was three years old. We have lots of fun together performing and at home. Sometimes I get a bit nervous before the show. I like the part where I’m
the spoilt girl.
We then interviewed the kids in our school that had a role. Firstly we spoke to Caitlin Thorley. “I love acting it’s the best. I wasn’t nervous one bit. I didn’t like my character it just
wasn’t me.” Next we interviewed
Ebony . “I loved helping out. I wasn’t nervous at all. Yes I loved my role, it was very
easy.”
Then we interviewed James . When we asked him if he enjoyed acting he replied. ”Very much I do.” We then asked if he was nervous he said. “No not at all.” Finally we asked if he liked his role he answered. “No - I was hoping I was going to get the Happy Prince but that was the adult’s
part.”
We asked 3 people from the audience Morgan,Lewis
and Mrs Atkins. The first question we asked Morgan was What song did you most enjoy? She replied “The froggy song (The warm up)” The next question was who wasyour favourite character? She said
James because he was funny. The last question was would you like IMAGE to do another play? Morgan answers “Yes because they are very talented.” Next we interviewed
Lewis. For the first question (all the questions are the same for all the audience we interviewed) Lewis answered “The angry song because the woman kept making funny faces.” Then for the next question he answered the happy prince because he was very happy and jolly it was a shame he died in the play. Lastly when we asked him would you like IMAGE to do an- other play he replied “Hopefully but is sad that we will not be here next year to watch them if they do
decide to perform again.”
Last but not least we interviewed Mrs Atkins. For the first question she answered “The angry song because that was the only song I joined in with.” Then she replied the swallow because it did some very nice thing to help. Finally we asked her the last question and she told us “Yes I would love them to come and perform again be- cause it is very entertaining for the
children.”
We all enjoyed watching The Hap- py Prince and hope they will come again next year and the following
years to come. By Chloe and Georgia."
Task 5B
I have now compared my knowledge on the codes of practice/ regulations which guide my actions and activities at my place of work with the actual legislation from professional sources. Whilst I am happy that my knowledge of my ethical obligations to all the parties I engage with is quite good I found that there is a lot of specific legislation about working with children. I was aware of the scope of the law about the relationship between a teacher and the children being taught but now realise that there are specific pieces of legislation for example about non discrimination which I now am aware of in more detail. The work that I and my touring theatre group does brings us all into close contact with young children under 11 and we not only involve them in the performance on stage but also have to ensure their well being often without any member of staff in attendance. We need to make selections from a large group of different ages for a small number of parts and need to achieve a sensible mix of children in the performance. Sometimes our choice backfires and I now know that there is specific legal requirements on us which might be challenged by a child complaining to its' teacher of parent. I have not had time to study the 5 of 6 relevant pieces of legislation in any detail. I realise that I need to do that but outside the work of this module.
Friday, 4 November 2011
Task 5A
I want to consider the codes of practice/regulations which apply in my present job, which is as a member of a touring company (Image Musical Theatre).
The work comprises travelling to schools around the country, setting up scenery lighting and sound system at the schools, which are primary level.We run a short workshop for the whole school, select a group of children to perform small parts in our performance of "The Happy Prince" by Oscar Wilde, and then perform for the whole school.
After we have left the teachers are asked to discus the play with the children.
I want to set out the codes of practice/regulations with reference to the different groups of people we have obligations to. They are-
- The general public - Road traffic acts, and Health and Safety legislation
- Our employer - Contract of Employment, Agency Agreement, General Employment Legislation
- Other cast members - Professional Code of Practice, "Image house rules"
- School Staff - Specific Schools own house rules and LEA codes
- Children (pupils) - CRB requirements, General legislation on the protection of children, Racial discrimination legislation and codes of behaviour
- Parents - When in contact with children to act in a responsible way as a good parent would
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)