Drama in education : deconstructing the role of movement in text

The purpose of this study was to conduct a comparative textual analysis on the role of movement in 3 texts in Drama in Education in Canada. As the subject is holistic and encourages creative, active participation, movement was expected to appear, even inadvertently, in both theory and practice. It was hoped that guidelines for the use of movement within Drama in Education would emerge from the texts and that these guidelines would serve as models for others to use. A total of 26 Drama in Education experts in Canada were each asked to list the 10 most important texts in the field. Those who answered were assigned numbers and charted according to age, gender, and geography. An objective colleague helped narrow the group to 16 participants. A frequency count was used, assigning 10 points to the first text on each list, and descending to 1 point for the tenth text listed. Based on the highest number of points calculated, the 5 most frequently used texts were identified. These were compared to ascertain the widest representation ofthe authors' geographic location and gender, as well as differences in theory and practice. The final selection included 3 texts that represented differing approaches in their presentation and discussion of Drama in Education theories and practices. Analysis involved applying 5 levels of commitment to determine if,how, why, when, and with what results movement was explicitly or implicitly addressed in the 3 texts. Analysis resulted in several unexpected surprises around each of the 3 texts. The study also provided suggestions for extending and clarifying the role of movement in teaching and learning in general, as well as for Drama in Education in particular.

Private versus public : how one gay professor negotiates the boundaries between his personal and professional lives /

This study examined how one university professor negotiated the boundaries between his personal life as a gay man and his professional life as a teacher. Using his sexual orientation as a focal point, the study explored the circumstances and underlying assumptions that influenced this professor's decisions to disclose information of a personal nature. Data collection was solicited from a number of sources: (a) In-depth interviews with the participant, his colleagues, students, and friends; (b) Field observation of the participant teaching over a 3 -day period; and (c) A document review of lesson plans, course outlines, student feedback forms, and the participant's teaching portfolio. The researcher maintained both observation journals and reflective journals during this process. Data analysis using the constant comparative method elicited several themes. The participant engaged in a variety of strategies in disclosing his sexual orientation that included: (a) no disclosure at all, (b) assuming people knew, (c) casually mentioning it in conversation, and (d) deliberately planning to tell someone. The participant also engaged in an ongoing assessment of his environment that included evaluating the level of risk in disclosing his sexual orientation and assessing the listener's ability to receive the information. The participant cited numerous reasons for disclosing his sexual orientation. Further inquiry revealed a number of belief systems that underlined these reasons. These belief systems included beliefs around privacy, authenticity, teaching, manners, professionalism, and homosexuality. The conclusions suggested that the participant utilized a consistent process in both his personal and professional lives to determine what information was kept private and what information was made public. While the process used to determine the degree of disclosure was consistent, the actual disclosures themselves varied widely in nature.