A dramatic collage: becoming pedagogical through collaborative playbuilding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore a case study of a group of preservice teachers that took part in a playbuilding process as part of a drama education course at a Canadian University. The paper focusses on ten preservice teachers’ creation in original theatrical production,The Teacher Diaries: a collage of stories based on the preservice teachers’ lived experiences as teacher candidates. Through a discussion of the playbuilding process, the techniques used, and an analysis of three scenes, this paper addresses the question: How can playbuilding and performance help preservice teachers “become pedagogical”? Design/methodology/approach The paper focusses on ten preservice teachers’ creation in original theatrical production,The Teacher Diaries: a collage of stories based on the preservice teachers’ lived experiences as teacher candidates. Through a discussion of the playbuilding process, the techniques used, and an analysis of three scenes, this paper addresses the question: How can playbuilding and performance help preservice teachers “become pedagogical”? Findings The primary understanding that emerged from this research was how playbuilding can be used as a holistic participatory research method in which participants conduct research, analyse, thematise, implement and disseminate data throughout the creative process. Research limitations/implications As researchers of this playbuilding process, the authors have come to realise that when using playbuilding as a method for research and arts creation there is an overlapping of understanding and analysis of the research findings that is a continual part of the research process. Rather than simply collecting data, analysing it and drawing conclusions from the previously identified data, the whole process becomes a research experience. As seen above, participants were continually coming up with insights throughout the process that informed the creation, growth and change of their scenes so that they could create a final product. Practical implications Drawing on a case study of ten preservice teachers, and their original performance pieceThe Teacher Diaries, this paper set out to determine how the playbuilding process can be used to help preservice teachers develop pedagogically. Several scholars have already noted that creating collaborative theatre is a reflective, inquiry-based process (Belliveau, 2006; Cahill, 2006; Carteret al., 2011; Conrad, 2004; Goldstein, 2008), and that the creation and performance of live theatre allows participants to interact with audiences in ways that written material cannot (Norris, 2000, 2008). Social implications Throughout the playbuilding process, the preservice teachers engaged in storytelling, improvisation, reflection and dialogue. Working collaboratively, the preservice teachers were able to identify similarities in their experiences and develop a supportive community where they could share stories and resources (see Mreiwedet al., 2017 for more discussion of community development through drama). Originality/value Because of this, the members of Team Awesome were inspired to create a pamphlet (including tips and links to government and other online resources) to share with their peers following the performance. While this was simply one case study, the results of this study indicate that the playbuilding process has great potential for use in helping educators “become pedagogical” through collaboration, reflection, articulation of needs, community-building and the sharing of resources in preservice teacher education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".