Hornbrook Education Dramatic Art

8/13/2019 Hornbrook Education Dramatic Art

1/83

AcknowledgementsThe author and publisher would like to thank the following for permission to

reproduce copyright materials:

B.T. Batsford Limited for an extract fromDrama and Educationby B.Watkins; Century utchinson Limited for extracts from the following

books:Dorothy Healhcote; Drama as a Learning Mediumby!Betty "aneWagner# and Teaching Drama; A Mind of Many Wondersby $orah %organ

and "uliana &axton; 'a(id Clcgg and )obin *emberton!Billing for an

extract from Teaching Drama,published by!+ni(ersity of London *ress#,-,;Drama Broadsheet, the /ournal of the $ational 0ssociation for the

Teaching of 'rama# for 1igure , in Chapter 2;

.%.&.3.# for extracts fromEnglish for ages 5-! andDrama 5-! in the

"urriculum Matters series; The London 4ast 0nglian 5roup and the 6nner

London 4ducation 0uthority for extracts from a pilot scheme syllabus for

5C&4 'rama and Theatre 0rts 7'ramatic 0rt8 ! %ode 66# %odular; $ew

Theatre 9uarterly for the 4nglish translation of the performance analysis

uestionnaire# translation by &usan Bassnett.

Wc would also like to thank %artine 1ranck and %agnum *hotos for

permission to use the photograph on the co(er# from a performance by Le

Theatre du &oleil of #$%& The 'rench (e)olution, *ear one+

4(ery effort has been made to trace and contact copyright holders but in a

few instances without success. We apologie for any errors or omissions in

the abo(e list# and would be grateful for notification of any corrections that

+6

Child drama and after -

Learning through drama ,=

2 The *layers: 'orothy# 5a(in and the $ew %uggletonians%ystifications and dramatic midwifery ,

s settlement 2-$ew ideologues =2

0nything you can do .

'rama and the struggle for the arts =D 'ramatic Tension: Barricades and Bewilderment

)eaction and inter(ention in the ,-s E2Bewilderment and acuiescence EE


2/83

7lalls to the barricades: 1reirc# Boal and the radical left E-F!?GHIIII the future J,

VIContents

*art Two 'rama!in!education: 6nterpreting the TextJ The 3mnipotent &elf

0uthenticity and the self JThe psychological imperati(e >,*henomenology# uni(ersale and the fallacy of indi(idualism >J

> appening on the 0estheticThe art forms of school drama >-

The tradition of 4nglish ,$aturalism and and the theatre E

&ignificant 2$otes ,>E

Bibliography ,-6ndex 2


3/83

V

(i Contents

*art Two 'rama!in!education: 6nterpreting the TextJ The 3mnipotent &elf0uthenticity and the self J

The psychological imperati(e >,*henomenology# uni(ersale and the fallacy of indi(idualism >J> appening on the 0esthetic

The art forms of school drama >-The tradition of 4nglish ,

$aturalism and and the theatre E &ignificant 2

$otes ,>EBibliography ,-


4/83

6ndexMN

2

k

x Prefacethe place of performance and the study of dramatic texts. The reportAs

authors see the ?mounting of school productions and acti(e in(ol(ement in

community or touring theatreA as ?of immense (alueA. $e(ertheless# for

drama teachers like myself# who long ago fought for the independence of

their sub/ect from 4nglish# the working groupAs uite genuine enthusiasm

for drama is tempered somewhat with a sense of de/a )u+ We ha(e been here

before. 0lso# at a time when secondary headteachers are hurriedly

reorganising their curriculum structures to bring art. music# drama and dance

together in ?arts clustersA of one kind or another# 5C&4 boards are

scrambling to satisfy the demand for creati(e arts syallabuses# and the new

BT4C in *erforming 0rts is galloping like the 5ood $ews from 5hent to

the countryAs 14 colleges# the curricular re!coupling of drama to 4nglish

does seem peculiarly inapposite.

*erhaps we are ill!ad(ised to seek for too much consistency in thego(ernmentAs new curriculum. By all accounts# it was expeditiously cobbled

together as (ery much a second order political matter. %ost obser(ers

belie(e that local management will ha(e a much more profound effect on

the countryAs education than the national curriculum. Whate(er the

philosophy underlying the go(ernmentAs simple ten!sub/ect prescription 76

attempt to unearth some of it in this book8# the grammar school ideal of Tory

*arty mythology will not be what emerges from the (arious working groups

and committees of professional educators. Who would ha(e thought that e0-

Blac1 2a3er editor Brian Cox# for example# once scourge of the

progressi(ests# would# twenty years later# find himself being praised by the

$ational 0ssociation for the Teaching of 4nglish for his stand against the

crudities of parsing and learning by roteK


5/83

1oremost among the professionals concerned to protect the best of current

practice against the winds of political opportunism are % 6nspectors of

&chools. Within weeks of the publication ofEnglish for Ages 5 to !, in "uly

".--# %6As#Drama 5 to ! appeared in their "urriculum Matters series.6n the documentAs first introductory paragraph# %, assure us that drama is

?a practical artistic sub/ectA# ranging ?from childrenAs structured play#through classroom impro(isations and performances of specially de(ised

material to performances of &hakespeareA. WhileDrama 5 to ! embraces

all the many manifestations of drama in schools# including the use of drama

as a learning method in the context of 4nglish# the picture it paints is of an

arts discipline with its own particular associated skills and ways of

understanding. With careful## strategic reference to the national curriculum#

%6 suggest that ?drama encompasses the art of the theatre and in(ol(es

some of the technologies or the applications of the sciences# as in designing

and making scenery or controlling sound and lightingA. The document

highlights the ?public aspectsA of drama# emphasising tinO way

Preface

?performing and sharing work with others# pro(ide important links between

schools# parents and their communitiesA.

0ll this is (ery positi(e. 6n the same month the $CC 0rts in &chool *ro/ect

came to its formal conclusion with a hugely o(er!subscribed conference at

the +ni(ersity of Warwick. Chastened perhaps by the e(ents of the pre(ious

two years# - per cent of the > arts delegates (oted for attainment targets

rather than the recommended guidelines for the arts. 4arly in ,--# the

British 1ilm 6nstituteAs2rimary Media Education spelt out what attainment

targets in media studies might be like; as 6 write# the 0rts Council iscon(ening a working group to do the same for drama.

Things are on the mo(e# and there is much still to play for. 6n looking at

some of the paradoxes of drama!in!education 6 shall try to make sense of

them against the background of this wider and fast!changing historical

scene. 6n proposing ways forward 6 shall be re(ealing no secret formula# no

transforming educational medication. %y modest aim is to offer drama

teachers ways of recognising# legitimating and de(eloping what is best in

their practice# in all its rich (ariety# so that curricular ob/ecti(es may be

articulated with more confidence and clarity.

0lthough the form of this book is unapologetically theoretical# it is not abook which itself proposes a pedagogic theory. 6t aims to be descripti(e and

interpretati(e rather than prescripti(e and definiti(e. 6n that o(er!worked

aphorism# it starts where teachers are# in the e(eryday experience of their

classes and out!of!school drama acti(ities# and it attempts to bring to all that

enthusiasm# integrity and expertise# a structure whereby we may better

understand both what we ha(e been doing and where we might go.

6n proposing ?dramatic artA as a form which is both social and sociable 6

ha(e been much influenced by the work of the late )aymond Williams. is

&traightforward commitment to acti(e democracy and a good common

culture together with his refusal to regard as anything but extremely difficultthe processes of getting there ha(e been a constant inspiration. Closer to


6/83

home# , would like to thank &ian 4de# &ally odgson# 0ndy


7/83

,

The Plot: The Rise of Drama-in-education

Noble savages in an English ArcadiaTheory# and the challenge it implicitly presents to empiricism and ?common

senseA# is (iewed# like ideology# with some suspicion by a culture

traditionally disposed to fa(our practical ways of doing things. For yearsthe drama-in-education community has been conventionallyinstrumental in ust this !ay" generally #referring to discussand #rogress !orking methods rather than to !orry toomuch about their theoretical or ideolo gical im#lications. QQQQQQQowe(er# simply to ignore the existence of theory in the conduct of human

affairs is to render oursel(es powerless in the first instance to interpret

e(ents and then to influence them. Formulating theories is the!ay !e make sense of our ex#erience by givingourselves meaningful structures !ithin !hich it maybe ex#lained$6 would argue that the ways we ha(e been encouraged to talk about drama!

in!education and its characterising practices arc in the grip of implicit

theories of this kind. 6n the struggle o(er methodology# which

has dominated the school drama debate for o(er thirty

years# they ha(e long since been buried in theassumptions which inform the debate itself. 6t is my intentionin this book to bring some of these theories out into the open.

6mmanent to this pro/ect will be my belief that for drama to legitimate itself

within education it must be theorised within culture and history as a

demonstrably social form. %y de(eloping critiue of current practice will

show the extent to which drama!in!education has been traditionally pre!

'3C+picd with the pri(atisation of experience# a paradox nowhere better

exemplified ill#hi in its sell!imposed isolation from generally accepted

ideas #IRSIIII i6h .iiiiO 6 will argue that far from being a radicalising process#

this


8/83

44ducation and 'ramatic 0rt

pri(atisation has manacled school drama to narrow forms of indi(idualism

which ha(e inhibited access to our dramatic culture.

The distincti(e discourse of educational drama arises from a series of inter!connected assumptions associated with the progressi(e education

mo(ement. This mo(ement# in turn# has its origins in the re(olutionary spirit

of late eighteenth!century )omanticism# so that in "ean!"acues )ousseauAs

model of pre!ci(ilised man 4sic free from the corrupting influence of city

life# his noble savageimbued with natural goodness whose infallibleguide was his feelings# we may recognise the ghostly prototype of the

paradigmatic student of educational drama.,

The autonomy of consciousnessad(ocated by

%ousseau"with its extention into a uni(ersality of moral feeling#where the source of moral rectitude is seen to reside not in the hands of thegods and their earthly representati(es# but in the authentic examination of

the self# ?the true and uncorrupted conscienceA# lies at the heart of the

challenge that was to be offered to con(entional ethics by )omanticism. 2

This idea of a sub/ecti(e morality accessible through an awareness of our

true feelings also permeates thinking about school drama. 6t has long been

supposed that pupils engaged in the spontaneous impro(isation and role!

playing of the drama lesson can lose themsel(es /ust sufficiently for their

?deeply feltA# and by implication#genuine, morality to re(eal itself.

&avin 'oltonputs it succinctly when he proposes that while ?in theunreality of the classroomA #u#ils (may ado#t an intellectual#osture of acce#ting the notion of shades of o#inion"!hat surfaces in drama is their real feelings)$)eal feelings and personal (alues are thus concepts common to )omanti!

cism and drama!in!education. 6n both# they indicate a commitment to a

pri(ate world of sensation where cogniti(e endea(our is often confined to

knowledge about what one truly feels. )ousseau# of course# also had strong

(iews about drama. is well!known polemic against "ean le )ond

dA0lembert#E

who had suggested that the city of 5ene(a might impro(e itsamenities by building a theatre# re(eals not so much a puritanical dislike of

pleasure# but rather a perception of theatre art as leading to the falsification

of the self. To be sure# the cramped# odorous playhouses of eighteenth!

century 1rance can hardly ha(e been places of moral or spiritual self!

enhancement. 1or )ousseau# committed as he was to the authentic (oice of

conscience# the actor on the stage deliberately distanced himself from the

uni(ersality of moral feeling# thus diminishing his own authenticity by

?counterfeiting himself# by ?putting on another character than his ownA.

the replacement of those ?exclusi(e entertainments which close up a small

number of people in melancholy fashion


9/83

The )ise of 'rama!in!education J

in a gloomy ca(ern# which keeps them fearful and immobile in silence and

inaction#A with open!air festi(ities of communal participation:

Let the spectators become an entertainment to themsel(es; make them actorsthemsel(es; do it so that each one sees and lo(es himself in the others.

We can see clearly reflected in drama!in!education both )ousseauAs deep!

seated suspicion of the entire apparatus of theatrical illusion# his distaste for

?counterfeitingA# as well as his enthusiasm for the home!made authenticity of

participatory drama.

Certainly# in the contemporary context# it might fairly be said that real

feelings and personal (alues ha(e no more a place on the stages of &haftes!

bury 0(enue or the &outh Bank than they did on those of eighteenth!century

*aris. owe(er# already there are problems here. We should be careful of

making too easy a distinction between the ?falseA world of the theatre andthe ?genuineA world of human interaction. 0lso# although we often speak

confidently of our real feelings# how is it possible for us to make a

distinction between the feelings we ha(e so that we may intelligibly say of

some that they are true and of others that they are falseK 1urthermore# who is

to mediate between your morality and mine when our ?true and uncor!rupted

consciencesA lead us to different conclusionsK These 7peculiarly modern8

dilemmas will be much my concern in the argument that follows# for they lie

at the heart of educational drama.

6f not in its playhouses# historically 4ngland did pro(ide more fertile and

stable ground for the seeding of these particular products of )omanticnaturalism than the turbulent politics of nineteenth!century 1rance were able

to offer. Without the home!grown images of political despotism that

inspired the cataclysmic# liberationist (isions of their 4uropean counterparts#

4nglish )omantic artists turned instead to attack the

economic despotism of the 6ndustrial )e(olution.This theysaw as callous and philistinic# fundamentally at odds with the arcadian

indi(idualism of %ous seau)s (uncorru#ted conscience). Theexpanding working!class ghettoes of the new cities were the antithesis of

naturalism# their inhabitants as far from ideals of simple pastoral nobility

that it was possible to imagine. 0gainst the bleak# dehumanising townscapesof industry the 4nglish )omantics fielded# not a class!based politics of

re(olution# but the sensibility of the radical indi(idual. uman liberation

was to come about not as a result of class struggle# but through lo(e#

creation and self!expression. ThereO was to 6.c a re(olution of feeling# a

new self!awareness# leading to a

tiuiiiii# more progressi(e# humanism.


10/83

I *+,, iiiuiii and Dramatic .rtWriting nl 6A%6W3+ld dominate the timetable alongside crafts like Car!

pi iin(# W6A666


11/83

The )ise of 'rama!in!education-

now declared such spontaneous ?acting outA to be necessary for the childAs

adeuate de(elopment. This kind of performance# flowing apparently from

the unconscious inner world of the child# could thus not only claim a secure

place among those arts processes already dedicated to the exploration of

sub/ecti(e feeling# but by (irtue of its psychological imperati(e# could alsoclaim to transcend them. 1rom being an innocent di(ersion# drama# through

the offices of psychology# had become a fundamental need.

'rama both of the less and more formal kinds# for which children# owing to

their happy lack of self!consciousness# display such remarkable gifts# offers

further good opportunities of de(eloping that power of expression in

mo(ement which# if the psychologists are right# is so closely correlated with

the de(elopment of perception and feeling.

Brought in from the cold by the child

psychologists and psycho!therapists of the ,-=sand ,-Es# drama was now in a position to make

its mark on the school curriculum. 6t was to presentits credentials not# as first might be expected# in the form

of a body of theatrical skills and practices# but as a

psychological process# dedicated to the aesthetic and

de(elopmental ?needsA of the young.QQQQQQ With their acceptance#drama in schools may be seen as the crowning achie(ement of 4nglish

progressi(ism# embracing as it does all that mo(ementAs ma/or precepts.The universality of moral feeling and the #rimacy ofthe subective" the authentication of the self throughthe exercise of the creative faculty" the need to #lay1these are the cherished tro#es of drama-in-education$They encapsulate its humanity as well as its nai(ety# holding together a

(ision of a better world# but# as wc shall see# lacking still the crucial political

and social dimension through which such a (ision might be realised.

/hild drama and afterBy the outbreak of the &econd World War all the guiding principles of

school drama were in circulation. The war itself ga(e new impetus to

thinking about education# pro(iding the will and circumstance for the

structural changes necessary for the incorporation of drama in the post!war

curriculum. This wartime debate pro(ed to be the historical backdrop

VXYZ[PR\ ]] before which the disparate philosophical elements of

school drama progressed from the educational fringes into legitimacy. 6n

,-E= the 4ducational 'rama 0ssociation was founded# and in the same year

Peter Sladewas appointed 'rama 0d(iser for &taffordshire; by ,-J,school drama wasrecei(ing all important %inistry of 4ducation recognition.


12/83

, 4ducation and 'ramatic 0rt

6t is true that many schools still include little or no drama in any part of their

curriculum# but so many others do find room for it in one form or another

that drama can now be regarded as an established and worthwhile part of

school life.AE

'espite his early struggles# Peter Sladewas soon to findhimself estab lished within an increasingly fashionable

new progressi(ism. By the time his seminal book "hild Drama was

published in ,-JE#,=thephilosophy which inspired it was

gaining significant influence in thecorridors of

educational policy!making. &ladeAs book 7together with

its popular pocket!sied follow!up which appeared four

years later,>

8 came to inform the practice of a newlycreated generation of drama teachers.QQQQQQQ

The post!war population bulge and the expanding teaching force of the

,->s had created an urgent need for more teacher!trainers.,A &choolteachers

with drama backgrounds ranging from 4nglish and amateur dramatics to

licentiateships from the speech and drama academies suddenly!found

themsel(es swept into the new or enlarged teacher!training colleges on a

wa(e of progressi(ist enthusiasm# and entrusted with the preparation of

students in 4ducational 'rama. Well!intentioned and

optimistic# but themsel(es often desperately ill!prepared# they turned to the only theoryavailable# and that lay in the pages of "hildDrama+77777777

Like /i2ek# *eter &lade belie(ed that the creati(e acti(ity of childrenshould not be measured by adult standards; he argued that Child 'rama ?is

an 0rt in itself. 6n the classroom he stressed the im#ortance ofnon interference in the natural creative #rocess#QQQQQQsuggesting that the teacher should instead become a ?lo(ing allyA# notcriticising or directing but perhaps drawing a groupAs attention ?to some

little piece of beauty they may ha(e missedA. Conscious no doubt of the

force of the child!psychology argument# he emphasised the distinction

between the spontaneous processes of classroom drama# ?drama in the

widest senseA# and the theatre ?as understood by adultsA.

Theatre means an ordered occasion of entertainment and

shared emotional experience; there are actors and

audience ^ differentiated. But the child# if unspoiled#

feels no such differentiation# particularly in the early

years ^ each person is both actor and audience.,


13/83

By ele(ating classroom drama in a way which sought not only to distance it

from general theatre practice but also to in(est it by implication with a

superior moral status# Slade inherited the aesthetic of%ousseau)s romantic naturalism and inscribed it

irrevocably in contem#orary theories of drama inschools. 6ndeed# such was the depth of this ideological commitment that

The )ise of 'rama!in!education ,,

drama teachers soon found themsel(es redefining the word ?dramaA itself#

corralling it and branding it into the exclusi(e ser(ice of their practice. To

this day there are drama teachers who will happily subscribe to a semantic

sleight of hand _`Z_\XRZ\ Z\V\]] whereby ?dramaA

gathers to itself all the affirmati(e elements of the discourse# such ascreati(ity# sincerity and need# while ?theatreA has to resign itself to a

thoroughly non!progressi(e and disapprobatory residue of illusion#

inauthenticity and irrele(ance.

0s well as a mistrust of adult theatre# the primacy of self!expression and the

disco(ery! of moral truth by inner reflection uickly became recognised as

characterising features of the new &ladian aesthetic.

... in this drama# two important ualities are noticeable ^

a8sor3tion andsincerity+ 0bsorption is being completely

wrapped up in what is being done# or what one is doing# to the

exclusion of all other thoughts ... &incerity is a complete form

of honesty in portraying a part# bringing with it an intense

feeling of reality and experience ...U

This emphasis on the acti(e and spontaneous participation of children in

dramatic games and impro(isations draws our attention to another of school

dramaAs inherent dilemmas; that of e(aluation. 6f the teacherAs relationship

with Child 'rama was (itally non!critical then how was it possible to know

to what extent its educational aims were actually being realisedK 0ttempts to

deal with this problem ha(e led to children being assessed not on how much

they know or by what skills they ha(e acuired# or indeed by some measure

of originality of response# but on their degree of complicity with thestructure set up by the teacher. Those members of the class who are 7or who

at least seem to be8 most sincerely absorbed in what the teacher has planned

for them are# by this token# the most meritorious; those eually absorbed in

ri(al acti(ities# such as chattering or looking out of!the window# the least so.

What is surfacing here is the dilemma surrounding Caldwell CookAs belief

in ?right conductA. 'espite his enthusiasm for spontaneity and his desire not

to criticise# &lade himself was in little doubt about the rules of the play of

lifeA.

*ointing out the need for cleanliness and good manners will often help them

7the lads in the school8 to grow up and be more acceptable to the young


14/83

women . . . 5irls do not lake kindly to rather ragged# rough mannered

clowns who spoil the drama period.

6n 6in thai 0ristotle might lia(N #(undrislood# honour is due to those with

6. .in 6 iii tit 6n mid S#GIIIR milliners This tendency to assess acuiescence

in the

!


absence of any other acceptable criteria is still much in e(idence# as we shall

.sec.

'espite these reser(ations# there is no doubt that the pioneer work of *eter

&lade in those years following the war enthused huge numbers of young

teachers and succeeded in establishing drama as a force in state education.

The $ewsom )eport of ,->= which expressed its concern o(er the

education systemAs apparent failure with the less able# ga(e much credenceto the psycho!therapeutic role of drama in countering the ?social

maladroitncss and insensiti(ityA of ?less giftedA young people. 0rt# according

to $ewsom# and 4ducational 'rama in particular# should be regarded not as

a ?frillA# but as a way of helping young people ?to come to terms nidi

themsel(esA.

By playing out psychologically significant situations# they can work out

their own personal problems.2,

The idea that school drama has much to do with childrenAs psychological

ad/ustment to their social circumstances figured prominently in the rash of

handbooks which followed the success of "hild Drama+ *robably the mostnotable of these was Brian WayAsDe)elo3ment Through Drama+ *ublished

in ,-> in the wake of The Plo!den %e#ort)sendorsement ofprogressi(ism.De)elo3ment Through Dramapro(ided /ust the right mix of

theory and practical ad(ice to stimulate and inspire a second wa(e of young

drama teachers in the enormous# post B.4d# expansion.223ayreinforced&ladeAs distinction between ?theatreA and ?dramaA#but largely

abandoned his idea of Child 'rama as 0rt in fa(our of a

comprehensi(e theoryof personal de(elopment.Belie(ing#

along with the child psychologists# that play is practice for adult life# andhypothesising that it is an instincti(e need artificially suppressed after early

childhood# 3aysaw school drama as a means of restoringthe ?naturalA de(elopmental processes which play

encourages:

1ully de(eloped people will seldom make poor or uninteresting

drama# e(en though it may not be brilliant ... drama# far from being

new# is closely interwo(en in the practical implementation of both

the spirit and the substance of e(ery 4ducation 0ct that has e(er

been passed# especially the idea of the de(elopment of the wholeperson.2=


15/83

3n closer inspection# the ?whole personA# the uniue ?human essenceA for

whom WayAs drama lessons ha(e been a gradual nurturing process# turns out

to be a decent# law!abiding liberal humanist# the heir surely of )ousseauAs

noble sa(age# sensiti(e# tolerant# imaginati(e and reflecti(e# fitting in

The )ise of 'rama!in!education ,=

well to the social en(ironment# yet managing to be creati(e and original

7within acceptable limits8.

Through the mid!,->s and early ,-s book after book professed to

demonstrate how drama!in!education de(eloped ?self!confidenceA# or en!

couraged ?personal awareness and an awareness of othersA# or taught chil!

dren how to co!operate in groups# or fostered ualities of ?tolerance and

understandingA# or helped children to become more ?self!disciplinedA. E"ust

about the only thing school drama made no claims to do# and by this time

many teachers would ha(e been puled to ha(e it suggested# was to euipyoung people with an understanding of their dramatic culture.

Learning through drama

There !as a tendency in the 4567s and 4587s fordrama teachers to be content !ith the assum#tionthat as long as their #u#ils !ere sufficiently(absorbed) in their im#rovisations then they !ere(develo#ing) satisfactorily. QQQQ Books offering catalogues of?ideas for dramaA proliferated# and teachers dipped liberally into menus of

themes such as ?ConflictA# or ?The 1amilyA or ? 1airgroundA. owe(er# on

the whole they felt no particular obligation lo contextualise the drama nor to

attempt to impro(e the performance skills of their classes; instead they tried

hard not to interfere 7unless discipline demanded it8 with the ?natural

creati(ityA of their groups. 3ften children were led through imaginati(e

exercises of one kind or another# or more freuently encouraged to play

energetic drama games before collapsing into small groups to make up plays

to be performed 7time permitting8 at the end of the lesson. &uch educational

scepticism as there was about these practices could be dismissed asstraightforwardly reactionary# with the confident assumption that more

traditionally minded teachers who might express worries about the noise and

apparent anarchy of the drama class would# gi(en lime# become aware of its

assuredly self!e(ident (alue.

There were some dissenting (oices. "ohn *ick and 'a(id Clegg both raised

fundamental uestions about the theory and practice of drama in schools#

bin after brief defensi(e flurries and a general closing of ranks# their

concerns receded into obscurity.2J

3ne of the handful of practitioners who responded in print to ClcggAs I

hiilleugc was a lecturer atA the +ni(ersity of $ewcastle upon Tyne#


16/83

Dorothy 9eathcote. 6n a letter published in ,-=# eathcoteagreed with llliA


17/83

the ?sub/ecti(e processA. ?Drama for understanding)or?drama for knowingA became key concepts in a new language of

?authenticityA# ?negotiationA and ?uni(ersalsA# whereby it was argued that by

manipulating dramatic impro(isation# children could be led to an ?authentic

experienceA# a so!called ?deep knowingA# of the essential truths of the human

condition. )ather than being the sub/ect of pedagogy# drama!in!education

became a sophisticated form of pedagogy itself.

6t should not be forgotten that these changes were being brought about

against a background of educational contraction. By the early ,-s the

number of specialist initial training courses in drama teaching had fallenfrom o(er fifty in the mid!,-s to only se(en. While this to some extent

reflects a more general cutback in teacher education# the relati(e drop in

drama courses was particularly se(ere. There were many drama teachers at

this time understandably willing to see eathcote and her new methodology

as the potential sa(iours of their discipline.

Thus it was that# despite &chools Council recommendations for a more

eclectic approach#!j the dissection and analysis of cathcoteAs methodology

The )ise of 'rama!in!education

,J

came to mark out the parameters of acceptable drama in schools. Likewise#

the charismatic ualities of her remarkable presence began to bewitch the

increasing numbers of drama teachers who came to watch and participate in

her workshops; two early con(erts described her work as ?breathtakingA.^

By ,--# a comprehensi(e account of her techniues#Dorothy Heathcote:Drama as a Learning Medium, was on the shel(es of 4nglish bookshops.

1or ordinary teachers inspired by her inno(ati(e way of working# the old

handbooks of themes for drama now seemed paltry. $ew collections of

lesson ideas by drama specialists with ordinary school experience translated

eathcoteAs idiosyncratic skills# such as (teacher-in-role)# intomanageable techniues for die classroom.=,Less happily# as we shall see# a

fierce sectarianism gripped drama!in!education as ranks closed around the

new methodologies. 0 host of eulogies flowed from the pens of eathcote

de(otees during the ,-s# ranging from the worthy to the unshamefacedly

messianic# but all united in their de(otion to the words and deeds of thisremarkable figure. 4(en after her retirement from $ewcastle in ,-># past

accounts of eathcoteAs drama workshops were still being dissected and

analysed by her admirers for the wisdoms they might offer up.

+nfortunately# for some at least# the return from 'amascus pro(ed to be a

sobering experience. The newly con(erted# not unnaturally# attempted to

imitate eathcoteAs techniues back in their classrooms# but confronted with

the frustrations of their forty!minute lessons and the daily battles of the

school many teachers saw themsel(es as failing to li(e up to her exacting

standards 7see 0ppendix 08. 1or others# it has to be said# the eathcote

re(olution simply passed them by. 'espite its persuasi(e methodology and

its (ery considerable claims on the curriculum# e(idence suggests that this


18/83

latest manifestation of drama!in!education was rather less successful in

engaging with the day!to!day practice of drama teaching than might be

thought from reading the literature.

While this chapter has been by way of a contextualiscd history of an

educational mo(ement# 6 ha(e also attempted to set the scene for some of

the agruments which follow. Thus# while tracing the de(elopment of drama!

in!education from its ideological origins in late eighteenth!century

)omanticism through to its emergence as an expressi(e form within pro!

gressi(e education and its acceptance onto the 4nglish school curriculum#

certain key dilemmas ha(e been identified. 6 wish now to look more closely

at two principal players in our story and examine the strange but powerful

fusion of practice and personality which sustained their hierarchical domi!

nance o(er drama!in!education in the ,-s.

;

The Pla!ers: Doroth!" #a$in and the %ew&uggletonians

7 9ill gi)e 3o9er unto my t9o 9itnesses, and they shall 3ro3hesy one

thousand and t9o hundred and threescore days + ++

7)e(elation ,,.8

Mystifications and dramatic midwifery

It is impossible to embark upon an examination of the complex texture ofdrama!in!education in the ,-s without acknowledging at an early stage

the o(erarching presence ofDorothy 9eathcote and &avin'olton.0lthough by this time both had long been members of uni(ersitydepartments# their domination of thinking about practical# classroom drama

during the ,-s was comprehensi(e# at least as influential as *eter &ladeAs

had been for an earlier generation of drama teachers. They managed to

inspire in their supporters a tenacious VRY_RZ[]] loyalty to the forms

of dramatic pedagogy which they ad(ocated# forms which by the mid!,-s

seemed to many set to change irre(ocably the agenda of drama!in!education.

6n the e(ent# as we shall see# history was not to deal kindly with their

(ersion of drama as cross!curricular pedagogy# and the impact of the new

methods on actual classroom practice was in reality (ery much more modest

than has often been claimed. 0lso# although the radical seriousness

represented by techniues such as ?teacher!in!roleA blew through the aimless

games and impro(isations of many drama classrooms of the ,-s with the

promise of a new purposefulness# this alone is not enough to explain the

way these two practitioners maintained a such a grip on the field for o(er a

decade.


19/83

6n ,-JE# *eter &lade had painted a (i(id picture of the magical world of

Child 'rama# which he claimed should remain for the child a realm of

mystic secrecyA.,&ubseuent literature abounds with similar sentiments.

6n creati(e drama work .. . we are helped enormously to soar into the world

of magic and mystery ! the world in which our most pri(ate

'orothy# 5a(in and the $ew %uggletonians

,

and peculiar sel(es obtain that which enables the metamorphosis from

?existingA to ?beingA to happen.2

By contrast# in her early writings# 'orothy eathcote speaks of what she

does with an appealing clarity. ere she is in the same year# ,-># defining

?dramatic impro(isationA:

ery simply it means putting yourself into other peopleAs shoes and# by

using personal experience to help you to understand their point of (iew# you

may disco(er more than you knew when you started.=

owe(er# as the years passed# and forced perhaps by increasing demands to

theorise her practice# this refreshing directness was replaced by a more

con(oluted#RZ\R[]] digressi(e VXZ_RZ\]] style# where

(aluable insights into her dramatic practice became mixed up with

excursions into her #rivate and idiosyncra ticbibliogra#hy. The result produced an effect hardly less mystifying thanthat which had so characterised the writing of her predecessors. This is all

much in e(idence in a published inter(iew with David Davistwentyyears later. ere is a section of that inter(iew which its editor has seen fit tohighlight:

... if theatre is anything to anybody# it is thick description# and if

theatre is to be used for perception# perception will only come

through thick description# this laid upon that# pro(ided that slow

incrementing of one experience on another is filled with ! filled with

/oy.E

Later# 'a(is asks her about 'recht7editorAs emphasis8:6A(e always liked the notion of Brecht ^ 6A(e ne(er read him and 6A(e

ne(er seen him# not in what 6Ad call a real Brechtian production ^ but

always# e(en as a kid# 6 liked the notion of :that 9hich, shall stand forthis ! not the book that looks like the book# but this that shall stand forit. 6 lo(e that# 6 get great pleasure out of it# because 6 3lay, you know# 6

think that is dee3 3lay ! that Q can see 9hat 6 would

%im


20/83

,


mystifying language illustrated abo(e played a ma/or part in eathcoteAs

ascension. 6t helped to en(elop her with an aura of pedagogical magic which

ser(ed both to deflect criticism and to reinforce her mystical status. Time

and time again# the strident assenti(eness of the language used to describeeathcote and her work transforms potential analysis and explanation into

simple expressions of allegiance.

ealhcot!ites often sound like a nauseous# self!congratulatory group# but if

affirmation is genuine it breeds that ?we!feclingA which our reductionist#

mechanistic# techne!orientated society will slowly and ine(itably destroy if

it is not co!operati(ely challenged ... 'orothy eathcote teaches people to

dance with butterflies not fossilie them.

By heroic .. . 'orothy refers to that le(el of experience

wherein a person finds himself at one with the uni(ersal

elements of existence# seeing himself suddenly not as anindi(idual with pri(ate ?worldlyA preoccupations# but as

part of the mystery and magic of creation .. .

When the moment of knowing is born# 'orothy weighs and measures it#

pronounces it fit# and then# most difficult and important of all# gi(es it back

to the person who made and fought for it.-

This last example# which is taken from an extended midwifery metaphor# is

particularly re(ealing# for it combines the image of the plain woman rolling

up her slee(es to do the /ob# with that of the officiating priestess. 0s 0nn

&eeley points out# with respect to this same passage# ?there was a time# after

all# when jwitchU and jmidwifeU referred to the same personA.,&eeley isunderstandably disuieted by the sexual politics of the analogy. owe(er#

this synthesis is likely to remain attracti(e to a discipline which has his!

torically seen itself as uniuely euipped to lead children from the ordinary

to the transcendent# from the ?real worldA of the classroom to an ?awesome

awareness of uni(ersal truthsA.,,With the subseuent need both to sub!

stantiate and ad(ertise its metaphysic# the canonisation of a practitioner

seemingly so specially able to con/ure such transfigurations is then but a

small step. What follows is that casual utterance becomes inscribed as text#

texts become sacred# and dissent is reducible to heresy.

Where(er eathcote goes# she generates excitement and e(en adulationZ\ZR ZRY]]. &he emanates power. er power is like that

of a medium,bringing into the present the distant in time or space# making itcome ali(e in our consciousness through imagined group experience ... 0

spell has to be cast; rituals must be followed; conditions ha(e to be right; the

uni(ersal inherent in this moment must be realied# and sheAs witchlike in

her control leading to this effect.,2

c

'orothy# 5a(in and the $ew %uggletonians ,-


21/83

Keeping it in the family

&avin 'olton)srise to prominence in the shadow of eathcoteallowed him to complement his mentor in significant ways# not least by his

attempts to gi(e eathcoteAs highly intuiti(e methodology respectable

intellectual form. 0s Seeleycomments# 9eathcote)s o!nex#lanations of her !ork (de#end u#on a use oflanguage !hich is idiosyncratic and not accessible tothe traditional tools of academic criticism).,JBolton# onthe other hand# apparently! able to ?play the academic gameA# was rapidly

cast as drama!in!educationAs resident theoretician.

&eeley also re(eals how eathcote was in(ariably constructed by the school

drama mo(ement in con(entionally feminine terms 7?the midwife of creati(e

knowingA8# while Bolton 7?the cool e(aluatorA8 was allowed to fulfil the

expectations of the con(entionally masculine. Certainly# in thearchi(es of drama!in!education the names of

9eathcote and 'olton will remain difficult toseparate# if for no other reason than that they will

be remem bered for ha(ing ?mothered and fatheredA

the pedagogy upon which the reputation of schooldrama was once staked. 1or those who became

com mitted to that pedagogy# howe(er# these twoeminent practitioners arc more likely to be

remembered familiarly as ?Dorothy and &avin)$We 75a(in and 68 were discussing how we realise our own

knowledge# and 6 said that 6 felt that 6 ?burrowed along like a

mole in the darkA# occasionally coming up to look around for a

brief spell# whereas 6 felt 5a(in flew o(er the terrain like an

eagle seeing a large landscape and the patterns of it ...,E

This extract from a piece by eathcote was subseuently much used to

differentiate between what were seen as the complementary attributes of thetwo progenitors. 6ts cosy ?Wind in the WillowsA uality deli(ers a reassuring

message to the offspring# who need little persuasion to respond in like

manner ! ?please# 4agle and %ole# donAt apologise# donAt feel threatenedA. 6n

the manner of families# 'orothyAs and 5a(inAs deflects external criticism

and uickly closes up against attack.

There is another less happy theme in 5a(inAs talk which is concerned with

ideological conflicts between 5a(in# %alcolm )oss and "ohn *ines. %y

own feeling is that this conflict 7made ugly by the ful!iiiiiiiiloiy alliicks on

5a(in iArom()oss8 arises from the nature of the ftCidemic roles shared by

all ihrrr.,J

2


22/83


ere# the disapprobatory use of %alcolm )ossAs surname heightens the

sense of exclusion while at the same time reinforcing the collecti(e

solidarity, of the family itself. 0s for "ohn 1ines# his loyalties are uite clear:

$ow when you ha(e had your hand slapped by someone as good and wise

and noble as 5a(in the best course of action is to stuff it into your armpit

and grimace a little# but uietly in a corner ... &urely we should all re(erence

what he has done and wait calmly but eagerly for the next episodeK ,>

The trouble with this mode of discourse is that it obscures the (ital

distinction we must always make between utterance and uttercr if we are to

attempt a constructi(e e(aluation of what is being said. The employment of

first names# the a(uncular familiarity# the selecti(e use of critical /udgement#

make it almost impossible to prise the text from the personality. 6n a blur of

disciplinary defensi(eness# 5a(in becomes inseparable from 5a(inAs

theories; to challenge the idea is to threaten the person.

This tendency to conflate personality and agency is not" of course# confinedto the world of school drama# but is a much more general feature of the

twentieth!century consciousness# as many commentators ha(e noted.

)ichard &ennett# for instance# makes the point that# as we are now prone to

accept public exhibitions of authenticity for guarantees of political com!

petence or incorruptibility# a charismatic political leader has no need to

resort to demagogy to retain power.

e can be warm# homey# and sweet; he can be sophisticated and debonair.

But he will bind and blind people as surely as a demonic figure if he can

focus them upon his tastes# what his wife is wearing in public# his lo(e of

dogs ... What has grown out of the politics of personality begun in the lastcentury is charisma as a force for stabiliing ordinary political life.,A

Thus# the charismatic leader is free to display political or intellectual

incompetence# or to admit to ignorance in areas which must seriously

challenge his or her credentials to be a leader# /ust so long as the heart is

worn on the slee(e 7how often did wc hear )onald )eagan definiti(ely

described as ?a nice guyAK8. The cult of personality which is ready to

endorse all manner of actions and pronouncements on the grounds that they

are ?authenticallyA felt by the protagonist# infuses drama!in!education# and

has helped to hold its familial structure together.

'orothy# 5a(in and the $ew %uggletonians2,

Assaulting the ivory towers

4(er since drama teachers first mo(ed away the desks and chairs and asked

the children to ?find a spaceA# educational drama has had ?doingA at the top

of its methodological agenda. There has long been anThere has long been an

assumption that# if drama in school achie(edassumption that# if drama in school achie(ed

nothing else# at leastnothing else# at least it released #u#ils from theit released #u#ils from theconventional structures of teaching andconventional structures of teaching and


23/83

learning for !hich the traditional classroomlearning for !hich the traditional classroomlayout !as such a stark meta#hor" and allo!edlayout !as such a stark meta#hor" and allo!eda ne! #hysical freedom !ithin !hich thea ne! #hysical freedom !ithin !hich the

ex#ression of ideas and feelings might takeex#ression of ideas and feelings might take#lace#lace. 6n the early days ?doingA in this physical. 6n the early days ?doingA in this physicalsense dominated the drama lesson to the exclusionsense dominated the drama lesson to the exclusion

of anything much else.QQQQQQQQQQQof anything much else.QQQQQQQQQQQ

*upils who enter a drama lesson do not want to spend long periods of time

locked in discussion. 0t first the class should consider suggestions uickly#

begin rehearsal and then discuss and rehearse simultaneously# otherwise a

conflict of ideas and personalities de(elops within the groups and nothing is

created.

1or 1airclough here# and for drama teachers like him in the ,->s and early

,-s# so long as pupils were purposefully engaged

in the prescribed acti(i ties# the criteria of Child'rama were considered to be satisfactorily ful !

filled. While the ,-s brought the legitimation of ?discussionA as a (alidconstituent of the new ?learning through drama processA# the legacy of

?doingA is still (ery e(ident among drama teachers. *hysical acti(ity is

considered by many to be a supremely better way of resol(ing difficulties

than mere intellection.This emphasis on ?doingKhas allowed drama to be increasingly identified

with those pupils less likely to reach high le(els of academic attainment.

Drama teachers have thus become institutionally as !ell astem#eramental ly associated !ith the lo!er ability range. Thisallegiance has# in turn# led to a fiercely reductionist (iew of all forms of?academic elitismA. Writers misguided enough to argue for a more

intellectually rigorous approach to the teaching of drama are peremptorily

VR_Z_RZ]] dismissed as those who ?would lead drama in education

away from the classroom where it belongs and towards the slowly

stagnating swamps of academiaA.,-


24/83

resurrect them. Write or speak to me. Write or speak to each other. Write

and speak to yourself# but abo(e all# do it affirmati(ely and trust your own

intuition .. .2,

6t is worth noting that enthusiasm for simple sub/ecti(e experience has not

pre(ented students of theories of dramatic pedagogy from arguing their case

in the most con(oluted RZ\RRY]] ?academicA ways. Thus# many

writers who had sprung to the defence of the idea that one can somehow

sub/ecti(ely 1no9 9hat should 8e done ha(e themsel(es engaged inob/ectifying pro/ects of one kind or another in defence of this same

sub/ecti(ity. 4xamples are plentiful; rigure , is an extract from a piece

entitled ?Three La(ers of %eaning in 'ramaA by an ex!student of

eathcoteAs:

T'R(( )A*(R+ O, &(A%%# % DRA&A .OR)D

&T+'4$Tl amU F jou are7T40C4)

+C'OO)

Figure 1 Teacher, student and o8/ect7role form a triangle in 9hich e)ery3erson as

an = is related to the o8/ect7role, the :it+ The diagram sho9s the 3rimeelements of

drama& t9o 3ersons interrelated to each other 8y their mutual interest in an

o8/ect or arole 9hich is em8odying the theme or as3ects of it +++>>

'orothy# 5a(in and the $ew %ugglctonians 2=

&uch an approach illustrates the highly selecti(e nature of drama!in!cducationAs attacks on theoretical discourse. Writing about school drama

notoriously swings between extremes of obfuscation and honest nai(ety# so

that a simple statement of innocent incomprehension can be held to be a

uite legitimate response when the intellectual going gets tough.2=Within

the family# such candid declarations ser(e only to reinforce the authenticity

of its fa(oured members. 0fter all# as )=eillpointout# did not 'orothy herself benefit from her lack of contact with contagious

academeK

&he ne(er trained as a teacher or taught as a full!time member of

staff in a school# and accounts for what she calls her ?innocenceA of(ision and expression by the lack of early exposure to intellectual

and academic models. 6t is partly this which gi(es her work its

uniue fla(our . . #2E

3nce again# by demonstrating# howe(er briefly# their homely lack of

academic ?pretensionA# their ?genuinenessA as ordinary# common!sense kinds

of people# while implying at the same time that their practices could be

?scientificallyA (alidated if necessary# messengers and messages are /ointly!

endorsed in the terms of the conceptual structures they themsel(es ha(e

helped to build. 6n the chumminess of the conference# theoretical discourse

is not so much understood as measured by its authorAs family status. 6f

?'orothyA chooses to use a language all of her own to describe her practice#


25/83

that is an indication of her uniue powers and our feeble comprehension.

1or =eelands# ?'orothyAs statements are not mystical ! itAs /ust that theacademic# rigorous# ob/ecti(e# technical /argon .. . doesnAt always exactly

express her intentions as an artistA.2=

The dilemma of a##raisalThis perception has not helped the de(elopment of coherent assessment

procedures for drama in schools# particularly as the ma/or theorists of

7liama!in!cducalion ha(e themsel(es paid (ery little attention to how

achie(ement in drama might be measured. 0t one time# of course# such

maims were thought not to be the concern of educational practices which

deiill willi llir intangible ualities of natural creati(ity and self!expression.

owe(er# in recent years the reuirement for suitable e(aluati(e criteria linn

become increasingly recognised; this has been no less the case in the mix

lliiin in other areas of the curriculum# 4fforts that ha(e been made to

/

?ducation and Dramatic .rt6brmulBtfl e(aluati(e schemes for educational drama strikingly re(eal the

oldAs contradictions and paradoxes. 0s 'erek )owntree explains:

6fwc wish to disco(er the truth about an educational system# we must look

into its assessment procedures ... ow are its purposes and intentions

realiedK To what extent arc the hopes and ideals# aims and ob/ecti(es

professed by the system e(er truly percei(ed# (alued and stri(en for by thosewho make their way within itK The answers to such uestions are to be

found in what the system reuires children to do in order to sur(i(e and

prosper. The spirit and style of student assessment defines the de factocurriculum. ?

We ha(e seen how &ladeAs conception of Child 'rama# with its criteria of

?sincerity and absorptionA# raised difficult uestions about appraisal. These

kinds of problems ha(e continued to beset drama!in!education as it has

resolutely set its face away from theatrical practice and critical aesthetics. 6n

the early days# this dilemma was sharply manifest in the arguments o(er the

drama syllabuses of the Certificate of &econdary 4ducation 7C&48. Thoseteachers who had not re/ected the whole idea of assessment in drama out of

hand tried agonisingly to e(ol(e means of testing ?in(ol(ementA# or the

?authenticity of responseA# or e(en ?de(elopmentA.

0 brief look at the assessment criteria of the first 5eneral Certificate of

&econdary 4ducation 75C&48 syllabuses in drama re(eals similar confu!

sions# this time inspired by the redesignation of school drama as a ?learning

processA. TheLeicestershire Mode


26/83

The lengths to which drama!in!education will sometimes go to exclude

discussion of the theatre from its assessment criteria and the e(aluati(e

incoherence that arises as a conseuence are well exemplified in BoltonAs

post!mortem on a well!documented workshop at the )i(erside &tudios in

,-O.O 0fter a scries of three one!and!a!uarter!hour demonstration lessons

Bolton reflects with some satisfaction on what had been achie(ed with thegroup of children:

What do 6 think they had learntK ... trust; protecting; negotiating meaning;

and containing. 6 claim that each of these is a worthwhile experience for me

and the class to share. But more than that 6 would be satisfied if 6 could

guarantee that they ha(e learned three (itally important things:

,8 a new sensing of dramatic form and a glimmer of what works in the

dramatic process

'orothy# 5a(in and the $ew %uggletonians2J

28 at least a tentati(e grasp that drama is for understanding!this is its

purpose

=8 that this understanding is reached through finding an integrity of feeling.

6 would not expect that the children themsel(es could articulate these points.

6f indeed 6 ha(e planted these seeds then that class and 6 are ready to mo(e

forward with leaps and bounds. 6 may ha(e achie(ed in three lessons 7three

long consecuti(e lessons8 what it takes teachers with their one hour a week

six months to achie(e ! and what those confined to thirty!fi(e minutesperiods ha(e little chance of achie(ing.2

6t is not necessary to pick o(er the bones of this workshop to ha(e (ery

substantial reser(ations about this piece of appraisal. 1or one thing# while it

might reasonably be said that the children had learnt to trust a specific

person# or set of purported facts# 6 am unclear how ?trustA# or for that matter

?containingA or ?protectingA# can e(er be acuired in thisgeneralised sense.0lso# the three ?(itally important thingsA with which Bolton would express

satisfaction seem to be excessi(ely modest outcomes# particularly as there is

no expectation ?that the children themsel(es could articulate these pointsA.

0n unarticulated# ?tentati(e grasp that drama is for understandingA must be

(ery difficult indeed to spot. 3ne is left with the impression that if this really

is all that can come from such prolonged and concentrated educational

drama work# then# as he rightly points out# what hope for the classroom

teacherK

We should be profoundly concerned about the paucity of these outcomes

mid alarmed by the complacency with which they are offered. 6f drama

teachers are being presented with these scarcely sustainable# minimal claims

as a model of e(aluation# it is no wonder that their own more formal

it..sessmcnt schemes are often such a muddle. 0 recent book by $orah

%organ and "uliana &axton# in which the authors ha(e attempted to

construct a comprehensi(e system for teaching drama based on the ideas ofeathcote and Bolton# unwittingly but (i(idly illustrates my point. The


27/83

'93k concludes with a labyrinthine grading scheme# part of which is repro!

duced in 1igure 2.

6f we analyse the substance of what is being appraised here# from the first

693tion# ?What is to be e(aluatedA# there emerges a form of Caldwell

CookAs DSRI conductA# concerning itself with the degree of compliance of

the child with the 6tf+Cturc imposed by the teacher. The second section#

?What is to 8r GSA# 6ncorporates this h/dden agenda of acuiescence 7a

higher &C3rC it awarded to the hoy who has submitted himself 7o the

acti(ity

2> 4ducation and 'ramatic 0rt

'rama as a sub/ect

6mpro(isation: &itting!down drama 'ay 2What is to 8e e)aluated Lance "omments Martyn "omments

0ttendance: 7,8 - 5rudging ,

*unctuality: 7,8 , Late again

)espect for space and

euipment: 7J8

2

-, 2Belongings

spread around

J

)ules of the gameQ

following instructions:

7J8 E Chatting J

omework: 7J8 2 %essy /ournal J 6mpeccable

Total marks 7=J8 2, =,

What is to 8e assessed

Le(el of personal

engagement:

CvB Barely engaged to Committing B Committed

4xpression of feeling: 0 0 way with words B )eal concern

Work as process: *roduct!oriented B

%aintaining role: C!0! 1rom the superficial to the

real# e(en when we arc notwatching

B Likes to feel safe

4nergy appliedappropriately:

C When it suits him 0

4xpressing in another

mediium:

C Thin 'oes not see this as a

way of being jseen,#

B Thoughtful but dull

Figure ; Teacher)s thinking about her evaluation@assessment of Aance and Bartyn;5

sufficiently energetically8 and attempts# once again# to grapple with drama!

in!cducationAs longstanding preoccupation with the expression of ?true feel!

ingsA. owe(er# while the authors are anxious to grade the genuineness of

the feelings expressed# it is ne(er made clear how this can be reliably

ascertained# particularly if a pupilAs high score in ?%aintaining roleA suggest

more than fair competence in the skills of deception.

The problem is# and it is a most serious one# that gi(en the progrcssi(isl

'orothy# 5a(in and the $ew %uggletonians

2


28/83

legacy of drama!in!education together with its recent transmutation into

pedagogy# it is difficult to see how the /umble of associated but too often

contradictory teleological explanations can e(er produce schemes with

much more coherence than this. 0s was uickly disco(ered by the old C&4

Boards# in allocating marks to childrenAs drama# you can grade the le(el of a

childAs co!operation with the creati(e enterprise# and you can grade theircreati(e ability and their acting skills. Beyond that you are in the realm of

metaphysical speculation. ow Bolton e(aluates ?containingA# for example#

is difficult to imagine.

$one of this should be mistaken as an argument for a set of practices

prescribed by the exigencies of formal assessment. 6 ha(e simply applied

)own treeAs proposal about finding the truth of an educational system

through its appraisal structures# and concluded that in its efforts to formulate

e(aluati(e schemes of one kind or another# drama!in!education has nowhere

more completely exposed the serious weaknesses in its own conceptual

apparatus. 6t would not be an o(er!simplification# for example# to say thatthe child who is ?good at dramaA in the scheme uoted here# would be one

who toes the line and appears to be sincere. e or she# in other words# who

cansuccessfully ta1e us in+ *aradoxically# we ha(e a prgrammc which has

abandoned the culti(ation of )ousseauAs natural nobility in fa(our of the

encouragement of the street!wise cut!and!thrust of effecti(eness and

appearance.

The t!o !itnesses

+nlike earlier manifestations of drama!in!education# the

new orthodoxy cast in eathcoteAs $ewcastle workshopswas absorbed into the thinking and practice of school

drama with an especial (igour. cathcotc and Bolton

between them seemed able to inspire an astonishingly

uncritical loyalty which in(ested in them a uniue#

apparently indisputable# authority. )ather like the se(enteenth!century %uggletonians# who put their sal(ation in the hands of "ohn )ee(e

and Lodowick %uggleton# belie(ing them to be the ?two witnessesA of The(e)elation, substantial numbers of drama teachers in the ,-s seemed

happy to forsake the discourse of the wider educational community infa(our of the witness of ?'orothy and 5a(inA.

The concluding passage of WagnerAs account of eathcoteAs teaching well

illustrates that strange mixture of awe and whimsy which came to

surround her performances:

Learning to loach from 'orothy cathcotc is like dancing with a whirlwind#

The symphony she hefcfl sweeps you along with a sense of 666 rhythm; %illyou liu(tO (ery ide understanding of the steps your

2



29/83

feet must take when her leadership is gone and you are left to dance alone.

%y hope is that this book will spell out some of the steps so that you can

start the dance; but the music you hear must be in your own soul.=

1reuent use of this kind of semi!magical imagery reinforced the e(angelic!

al thrust of the new orthodoxy# wrapping eathcoteAs already powerful

physical presence in a cloak of spirituality around which an increasingly

beleaguered discipline could rally. 0s Christopher ill writes of the disillu!

sionment which followed the collapse of the radical programmes of the

4nglish )e(olution:

6f anything was to be sal(aged from the wreckage of radical hopes# some

legitimating force was reuired. The %ugglctonians had the indisputable

authority of the Two Witnesses. What could not be won by political means

might be secured by di(ine assistance.=,

+ndoubtedly# eathcotc and Bolton succeeded in pro(iding far more than a

new methodology for the teaching of drama. Like )ee(e and %uggleton#

they offered a wisdom that claimed its origins in a deep spiritual truth and a

unifying (ision of humanity which absol(ed their followers from further

moral or ideological speculation.

owe(er# the dangers of the self!appro(ing system which drama!in!

education engendered for itself during the ,-s# and of which eathcote

and Bolton were the unchallenged ambassadors are# 6 hope# ob(ious. The in!

tense personalisation of practice# combined with a mistrust of disinterested

analysis# meant that it became almost impossible to challenge the premises

upon which the practice was built. %eanwhile# without the checks and

reassessments that genuine debate brings with it# the elders became more

self!assured and less in touch with reality# gathering their disciples aroundthem as a shield against an increasingly unsympathetic educational world.

Like the disappointed %ugglctonians# and 1ifth %onarchists# and )anters

and 'iggers of the se(enteenth!century# ?when the kingdom of Christ failed

to arri(e# the faithful could retreat into their own communities and en/oy

there much of the euality# comradeship and fraternity that the outside world

denied themA.=2&adly# as the ,-s came to an end the promised kingdom of

drama!in!education must ha(e seemed as far off as e(er# paradise

indefinitely postponed. The ,- 4ducation )eform 0ct heralded a (ery

different educational en(ironment from that marked by its predecessor in

,-EE. 0fter a decade of dramatic hagiocracy too many ordinary drama

teachers were to find themsel(es dangerously ill!prepared for the demands it

would make upon them.

C

The +etting: ($ents on the Pu0lic +tage

The !"#s settlement

The single!minded pursuit of classroom strategies# the

struggle for a methodology of drama teaching# which

marks the past ten or fifteen years of de(elopments in


30/83

educational drama# was based upon the belief that if

?drama as a learning medium)4 could be shown to bepedagogically effec ti(e# then drama!in!education recast

in this way would be able to /ustify a place for itself 7and

its practitioners8 at the (ery core of the school curricu !

lum.QQQQQQQQQ 6 shall suggest here# and in the following chapter# that the

exclusive attention conseuently #aid to theories ofexclusive attention conseuently #aid to theories ofdramatic learning had in fact uite the reverse effect"dramatic learning had in fact uite the reverse effect"#laying a significant #art in drama)s relegation in the#laying a significant #art in drama)s relegation in thenational curriculum of thenational curriculum of the 4545 ?ducation %eform?ducation %eform.ct.ct.2QQQQQQQQQQQQQ

The wider origins of this paradox lie in the shifting of the post!war

ideological balance of political life in 4ngland# well under way by the mid!

,-s# but largely ignored by those in positions of influence in the drama!in!

education mo(ement. The latter# with their heads down amongst their

methodologies# rarely looked up to consider the serious implications of these

changes for a sub/ect discipline still with only a tenuous hold on thetimetable.

0s far as education is concerned# the ,->s can be recognised with hindsight

as years marked by consensus politics. The Centre for Contemporary

Cultural &tudies has called this general agreement o(er educational aims

?the li%"3s settlementA# seeing it as ?the product of a distincti(e alliance 3f

three groups of forces: leading sections of the Labour *arty# the orga!uiQrdteaching profession# and certain key intellectuals in the new

lduonlion@rclfttcd academic disciplinesA.Ill ftl>t" ihii ?pr3)lT&i(cA alliance spread more widely still# resting not


only on the pragmatic socialism of 0nthony Crosland# but also on the non!

conformity of his Tory opposite number. 4dward Boyle.EBoth men presided

o(er a period of educational expansion fuelled by popular demand. 'uring

the ,->s education grew at a greater rate than any national enterprise

except gas and electricity. 4ach year successi(ely greater numbers ofchildren gained 5C4 \ and 0 le(els. By ,->= The )obbins )eport was

warning of ?an educational emergencyA in higher education because of the

effects of the post!war ?baby boomA.4ducation spending as a proportion of

gross national product rose from =.2 per cent in ,-JJ to > per cent in ,->- 7a

period co(ered by both Conser(ati(e and Labour go(ernments8# partly

because of public demand and partly through a con(iction that Britain had to

modernise its social and economic infrastructure in order to compete

successfully in world markets.

5reater access to education at all le(els of society was a key element in this

strategy. There was an expansion of further and higher education and a new

commitment to the comprehensi(e school. Ways were sought to reducebarriers to opportunity for working!class children# traditionally inhibited by


31/83

the elitism of the uni(ersities and contained within the low expectations of

the secondary!modem school. There was a perception by go(ernment#

endorsed by $ewsom and other reports from within the education estab!

lishment# that the young of the nation represented a key resource in a new!

technological age# and that BritainAs economic future depended to a large

extent upon that growing populationAs ability to li(e within and manage thatnew age. This ability could only be achie(ed# and later sustained# it was

thought# by opening up educational opportunities right across the social

spectrum.

This# then# was the tide upon which drama!in!education found a secure

anchorage. Concerned more with the processes of deli(ery than with the

politics of pro(ision# the non!politicians in the settlement alliance 7the

teachers and their allies in the uni(ersities8 saw the child!centred# de(elop!

mental premises of the progressi(e mo(ement# of which school drama stood

as such a prominent representati(e# as ideally placed to ser(e the new

egalitarianism. 0mong the state agencies# too# there was percei(ed to be aneed for children of different social classes to understand each other better#

or# as a &chools Council document argued in ,-># a reuirement that

education should aim ?to help students find within themsel(es the resources

that alone can help them li(e at ease in the changing worldA.A The disman!

tling of these cultural barriers would come# it was assumed# not as a result of

political re(olution and reconstruction# but through the increase of

awareness and understanding brought about by the exercise of the socio!

psychological principles of progressi(e teaching methods. Child!centred

models of classroom practice# it was thought# would help this process ofad/ustment# particularly for that large group of pupils whom $ewsom had

3&i4(ents on the *ublic &tage=,

identified as ha(ing abilities ?artificially depressed by en(ironmental and

linguistic handicapsA.Brian Way is thus perfectly in tune with his time

when# in the first chapter ofDe)elo3ment through Drama, he declares that#

&o far as is humanly possible# this book is concerned with the de(elopment

of people# not with the de(elopment of drama ... 4ducation is concerned

with indi(iduals; drama is concerned with the indi(iduality of indi(iduals#

with the uniueness of each human essence .. . drama encourages originality

and helps towards some fulfilment of personal aspiration.

This emphasis on autonomous fulfilment was gi(en added impetus in the

secondary sector because of the undoubtedly beneficial effect the new child!

centred methods had on the daily guerilla warfare of the school. By allowing

particularly ?difficultA pupils informal space to express opinions and debate

their concerns# teachers often found the task of pedagogic inter(ention

considerably eased.,The exceedingly flimsy content boundaries of the

drama lesson made drama!in!education a particularly suitable (ehicle for

this kind of approach. 'rama teachers found themsel(es increasingly called

to ser(ice courses directed towards the lower end of the ability range# with

repertoires of trust exercises# group therapeutics and games.U


32/83

While for many teachers who can look back on this time it was indeed a

kind ofAgolden ageA# the ,->s settlement and the progressi(ist ideas which

flourished under its protection were the result more of a series of fortunate

economic and political coincidences than of a sustainable ideological

momentum. 0 period rich with curriculum initiati(es and methodological

ad(ances# it was also one marked by political compromise and educationalpragmatism. 3pportunities to alter radically the structure of the education

system# by remo(ing the anomaly of a parallel pri(ate ser(ice# for example#

or e(en by simply legislating away the lingering tri!partite system of gram!

mar# technical and secondary!modern schools set up by the ,-EE 0ct# were

either not taken by the ,->E! Labour 5o(ernment 7which after ,->> had a

ninety!se(en seat ma/ority8# or only tardily embarked upon. The Labour

*arty in power asked for no report on comprehensi(e education# for exam!

ple# and seemed content to lea(e the problems of the new schools to the

experts.

&imilar caution characterised the introduction of the new Certificate of&econdary 4ducation 7C&48 in ,->J. While the new syllabuses ga(e

teachers control o(er public examinations for the first time# and introduced

Continuous assessment 3n R wide basis# the examination system itself# with

9C4 78 6c(i!6h remaining for the more able# reinforced the old grammarQ ?#i I

7.ndaiy niileiii ili(iiimii mill ini(r them an anomalous structural home


within the comprehensi(e system. %any curriculum initiati(es 7such as

4uropean &tudies# for example8 perished as they tried to make headway

within the tangle of historical compromises and (ested interests which for so

long had plagued 4nglish education# and which no real efforts were made todisplace.

%eanwhile# the tendency of the teaching profession itself to o(erlook the

material ambitions of parents for their children# and go(ernmental reluct!

ance to become in(ol(ed with what 'a(id 4ccles once called ?the secret

garden of the curriculumA# ser(ed to distance and e(en alienate the general

public from educational affairs. The alienation was soon to be recognised

and exploited# as a loose alliance of the political right sought to fill fhc

policy (acuum and mobilise public concern.

$ew ideologues

Before the decade was o(er# the first of a series of polemical literary essays#the notorious Black *apers on education# had been published.,2iewed by

many teachers at the time as little more than an aberrant outburst from the

extreme right# the writers who contributed to these documents ne(ertheless

set out to challenge the premises upon which the educationalists of the

,->s had founded their strategies for egalitarian reform.

By attempting to appeal# o(er the heads of the educational establishment and

the political consensus which supported it# to the ?common senseAU of the

man or woman in the street# contributors found that they could exploit

widespread popular uncertainties. 6t was in the o(ert populism of this pro/ect

7and the model it was later to pro(ide for the 3ou/adiste ascendancy of the,-s8# rather than in the presentation of a coherent alternati(e programme#


33/83

that its success lay. 0lso# it has to be said that the association in the minds of

the press and the public of key elements of the ,->s settlement# such as the

comprehensi(e school# mixed!ability classes# and progressi(e teaching

methods# with an intellectual ?liberalA elite out of touch with the aspirations

of ordinary people# was by no means an entirely mistaken one.,=

The Black *aper writers mustered discontent around three distinct themes#

namely standards# parents# and teaching methods. Cyril Burt# for example#

claimed that ?attainment in the basic sub/ectsA had actually declined since

the 1irst World War# and that /udged by ?tests applied and standardied in

,-,=!,E# the a(erage attainments in reading# spelling# mechanical and

problem arithmetic are now appreciably lower than they were JJ years

agoA.,EBurtAs later 7subseuently discredited8 findings# relating to inherited

intelligence# pro(ed another popular theme among Blok *aper

contributors# many of whom were con(inced 7hat working!class

4(ents on the *ublic &tage ==

children were# on a(erage# innately less intelligent than their middle!classpeers. By this account# de(ices such as comprehensi(e schools and mixed!

ability teaching were an egalitarian illusion# doomed from the start in the

face of genetic reality. 0t the root of this proposition lay a form of social

'arwinism similar to the competiti(e sur(i(alism fa(oured by right!wing

economists. 0ccording to this (iew# it was natural# indeed desirable# that the

intellectually able should climb on the backs of the weak. This (igorous#

healthy process# it was argued# was being blocked by the cranky permissi(e!

ness of ?progressi(eA teaching.

*arents were central to the Black *aper pro/ect# and were to be enlisted in

support of it once the amorphous sense of concern already identified had

been amplified sufficiently into ?the crisis of educationA. The ?common

senseA of the ?ordinary parentA was contrasted fa(ourably with the ?woolly!

thinking progressi(ismA of the intellectual left. ere is )hodes Boyson 7then

head of ighbury 5ro(e &chool8 arguing that parents wanted nothing more

from the secondary!modern school than that it should emulate the grammar

school with ?an attracti(e uniform# some cxclusi(eness of intake# and the

creation of traditionA:

... parents see schools largely as places which train their sons and daughters

for better /obs .. . secondary modern schools with progressi(e methods# rural

science# much art and music and freedom of de(elopment endeared

themsel(es to no!one other than the (aguely!idealistic# unworldly andle(itating types so well represented and influential amongst education

officials and ad(isors.,=

*ublic reser(ations about the unfamiliar teaching methods of progressi(ism

were easy to exploit. Concrete e(idence played only a small part in this

attack# which instead leant hea(ily on fears about discipline and control. The

comprehensi(e school was deemed to ha(e made a significant contribution

to the ?pop and drugA youth culture of the ,->s and ,-s# while attempts

on the part of teachers in the same schools to de(ise new strategies for the

deli(ery of education were ridiculed as absurd and irresponsible.

... 6 know that the best comprehensi(e school heads ... will ha(e no truckwith libertarian absurdities 7?child centredA education# free acti(ity# no rules#


34/83

no streaming# no examinations# no teaching and therefore no learning8 but

there is enough e(idence to show that the Comprehensi(e outlook only too

often in(ol(es ?progressi(eA concomi!tiinl# "nsi as the Labour *arty find

the trades union mo(ement ha(e .ilwiiy$ s settlement was already a matter for the history books. 6n fact# the

speech marked the end of a long post!war period of educational expansion#

and began a process of go(ernmental reassessment and economic contrac!

tion# in which the teaching profession# and those academics most associated

with it# were to become increasingly marginal to the creation and imple!

mentation of education policy. 6n his speech# Callaghan laid down the

parameters of the debate in a series of uestions relating to the ?real worldA

to which he was in no doubt the nationAs education ser(ice must perforce

adapt: !

Let me repeat some of the fields that need study because they cause concern.There are the methods and aims of informal instruction; the strong case for

the so!called core curriculum of basic knowledge; next# what is the proper

way of monitoring the use of resources in order to maintain a proper

national standard of performance; then there is the role of the inspectorate in

relation to national standards; and there is a need to impro(e relations

between industry and education.,

1rom the mid!,-s onwards# ad(ocates of progressi(e education were to

find themsel(es increasingly on the defensi(e in educational policy!making

at all le(els. 6n this respect# it should be remembered that de(elopments in

drama!in!education after this time 7and that includes all the ma/or writings


35/83

of eathcote and Bolton8 must be set against a background of a broken

consensus# and within a political and economic climate fast changing to

4(ents on the *ublic &tage

=J

meet the concerns which had been so effecti(ely articulated by Cox and

'yson and their fellow Black *aper contributors in ,->-.

zo longer can it be accepted that progressi(ism and comprehensi(e schemes

are necessarily right# or that the future necessarily lies with them. The Black

*aper has encouraged parents# teachers# %.*.s to speak out on the present

day abuses in education. There are many signs that the trend is now back to

more balanced and tried (iews

,-

Anything you can do

These ?balanced and tried (iewsA were much in e(idence in the Labour5o(ernmentAs 5reen *aper#Educaiion in @chools,published in "uly ,-. 6t

contained# for example# the suggestion that there should be national agree!

ment on curriculum content# with a core of essential sub/ects:

... it is clear that the time has come to try to establish generally accepted

principles for the composition of the secondary curriculum for all pupils . ..

there is a need to in(estigate the part which might be played by a ?protectedA

or ?coreA element of the curriculum common to all schools.

Education in @chools also urged the 'epartment of 4ducation and &cience

to be less reticent about inter(ening in matters traditionally left to the

?professionalsA:6t would not be compatible with the duties of the &ecretaries of &tate ... or

with their accountability to *arliament# to abdicate from leadership on

educational issues which ha(e become a matter of li(ely public concern.

There was to be a greater in(ol(ement of the commercial sector in policy

committees; a core curriculum should be able to ?offer reassurances to

employersA as well as to teachers and parents. 0bo(e all# schools were to be.

di(erted from the egalitarian pursuit of that legacy of )enaissance human!

G++" the well!rounded citien# to ?education for in(estment# education forefficiencyA#22or in other words# to the preparation of pupils for an effecti(e

place in the ser(ice of the economy.

0midst all this concern for economic rele(ance# it should be remembered

int thd relationship between a( nationAs economic performance and its

7duration ynlein remains unpin(cn; sunnO economists ha(e e(en argued

=>


that education policy has no appreciable effect whate(er on the operation of

the economy.2=$e(ertheless# from the mid!,-s# it was against predictions

of economic demand that education policy was increasingly measured. This

necessarily entailed attacks on the institutions within the ser(ice most

identified with the old progressi(e ideal. 6n ,-# for example# the &choolsCouncil was forced to change its constitution to reduce the representation of


36/83

teachers. 4(en the 'epartment of 4ducation and &cience itself was not

considered sufficiently free from the taint of the ,->s settlement. 1rom its

creation in ,-E# the %anpower &er(ices Commission 7%&C8 7directly

answerable to the &ecretary of &tate for 4mployment8 became an agency of

growing importance in the deli(ery of education policy. The implications of

the new utilitarianism for sub/ects like drama which had floated into thecurriculum on a tide of progressi(e ideas were potentially (ery gra(e.

By the early ,-s there is e(idence of attempts from within the field to

reach an accommodation with the changing political climate. 6ndeed# it is

possible that the growing ad(ocacy of eathcoteAs theories of dramatic

pedagogy could be interpreted as a generalised# almost subliminal# acknow!

ledgement of the changing political context. The reinstatement of the teacher

as the key moti(ating figure in the lesson# for example# which was being

widely ad(ertised as the model for good practice by the ,-s# could be

interpreted as an attempt to disassociate educational drama from what Cox

and 'yson had called the ?excesses of laisse-fairepermissi(ismA withwhich it had for long been identified. The coloured lights and noisy disorder

of the ,->s drama lesson must surely ha(e embodied all that the new

idealogues most mistrusted and sought to eradicate.

*aradoxically# it was the influence of the %&C and its associated enterprises

which was to offer educational drama a role wi

Hornbrook Education Dramatic Art

Documents