Drama, engagement and creativity - CiteSeerX

Drama, Engagement and Creativity Susan Davis Abstract: In an era where what we make with our minds is of growing importance economically, the way that we generate new and creative ideas is the focus of educational and economic think tanks across the globe. It’s important therefore for educators to be able to articulate what it is that we do that supports creativity in a digital age. In the past, many Arts Educators have been concerned with the notion of ‘aesthetic’ engagement, however this kind of engagement does not necessarily have a ‘generative’ component to it. The notion of ‘creative engagement’ is perhaps now more appropriate, with the focus on the participant as a creative agent For my work in education, I have adapted Czikszentmihalyi’s creativity model and focused on terms and aspects of creativity that are useful for exploring young people’s creativity in a digital age. In my current work I am exploring how pedagogy and practices drawn from drama education support the development of young people’s creative engagement and creative practice. Key Words: Creativity, Drama, Process Drama, Aesthetics, Engagement, Digital Age 1.

Introduction I’m planning a unit of work for a group of lower primary school students. I want to introduce them to the concept of space and the planets. I want them to have some idea of the conditions necessary for life on earth and why it would be difficult for humans to live on other planets. I’d like to know at the end that students have gained some knowledge about earth and other planets and have developed some skills in selected written genres, including report writing and letter writing. How could I do this in a way that engages students? How could I do this so that students also had opportunities to be creative? This is the context I worked with in 2006; consider what you might have done before reading about the process I used towards the end of this paper. 2.

Creativity and the arts? In recent years we have seen a growing interest in the concept of creativity in education and especially as it relates to preparing students for their participation in and contribution to knowledge and creative economies. Major studies, reports and initiatives across a range of countries have advocated for the increased focus on teaching for creativity and the role of the arts as having a particular role in this process 1 . This is not always evident at a program or operational level however. As critics such as Ken Robinson point out, while there is a recognition that the new economies require creativity and 'talent', education still often focuses on a narrow, conventional agenda more suited to an earlier era . 2 Within the literature on creativity in education there is also some critique of any position whereby creativity is seen as being an arts-specific attribute with Jeffrey and Craft claiming that “Creativity as only an arts-based

18.01.07 Draft paper for “Creative Engagements: Thinking with Children” 3rd Global Conference” February 2007

2

Drama, Engagement and Creativity

phenomenon is rejected as unnecessarily narrow by many … who argue that creativity crosses all subjects and domains.” 3 However, while it is possible to teach creativity across different subjects and domains, it would still seem reasonable to argue that the kinds of learning experiences, the pedagogy and processes that many students receive in arts classrooms are more likely to foster creativity than those that they may experience in some other curriculum areas (as they are currently taught). A significant study documented in a major US report Champions for Change examined the impact of arts learning experiences on students in grades 4-8. They used a range of measures for exploring the impact on learners including: the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking, questionnaires, teacher perception scale judgments and other data gathering methods. What they found was that students who had engaged in ‘rich’ in-schools arts programs (in a number of arts areas across a number of years): … performed better than those in “low-arts” groups on measures of creativity, fluency, originality, elaboration and resistance to closure – capacities central to arts learning. Pupils in arts-intensive settings were also strong in their abilities to express thoughts and ideas, exercise their imaginations and take risks in learning. In addition, they were described by their teachers as more cooperative and willing to display their learning publicly. 4 Arts experiences are often those where students are provided with spaces and opportunities to solve problems without there necessarily being one solution, for them to develop skills in using different symbol systems and to explore possibilities using their imaginations. The notion of imagination is one that I think is crucial to the creative experience and to assist with understanding that I have found the work of Vygotsky particularly helpful. “Everything that requires artistic transformation of reality, everything that is connected with interpretation and construction of something new, requires the indispensable participation of imagination.” 5 Vygotsky also sheds light on the way that imagination is not just about coming up with weird and wonderful ideas from nowhere, but imagination involves using existing knowledges, skills, ideas and images, then using more abstract thinking to combine those and make them into something new: … imagination is a transforming, creative activity directed from the concrete toward a new concrete. The movement itself from a given concrete toward a created concrete, the feasibility of creative construction is possible only with the help of abstraction. Thus, the abstract enters as a requisite constituent into the activity of imagination, but is not the center of this activity. The movement from the concrete through the abstract to the construction of a new concrete


Susan Davis

3

image is the path that imagination describes ... We think that not novelty in itself, but novelty of the concrete image of the idea produced distinguishes this activity. 6 This to me also indicates the importance of providing students with grounding in various ‘concrete’ skills and knowledge - the creative journey is not a content free journey of experimentation and discovery. Creative engagement therefore is an interesting concept to explore in the context of the learning process. To be able to be engaged enough to the point of being able to create requires the development of underlying skills and knowledge, creative engagement then needs to build on and link to other kinds of engagement. 3.

The arts and forms of engagement In arts education writings, the concept of creativity or creative engagement has not been as well theorized as that of the aesthetic. The notion of the aesthetic was quite a powerful one, especially in the 1980s and 1990s as (in drama education for example) people like Philip Taylor 7 , Brad Haseman 8 and Judith McLean 9 brought the word into the lexicon of the average drama teacher drawing on the work of theorists such as Abbs, Langer, Kant and Eisner. The introduction of the term aesthetics was quite powerful because it gave us a way of understanding what it might be that was common to the different arts disciplines. It also helped us see that the arts were about far more than self-expression and self-esteem building. The aesthetic was about engaging students in significant learning that engaged both their minds and their senses; it was about the cognitive domain as well as the social, emotional and kinaesthetic. It was also about providing students with a grounding in the forms, structures and elements that they might draw on, utilise and manipulate in their own work. As Taylor said in 1993 “What is required is a sensitive balance between discipline and experience.” 10 The time is perhaps ripe now for a focus on creativity – on generative acts – on acts of making. In an era where what we make with our minds is of growing importance economically, the ways that we generate new and creative ideas is the focus of educational and economic think tanks across the globe. It’s important therefore for us to be able to articulate what it is that we do that supports creativity and (the seemingly less contentious word) innovation in a digital age if we aren’t to be consigned to the ‘nice but not necessary’ category in the educational hierarchy. To do this I’ve found it useful to explore the possible connections between some key terms that are used in different educational contexts. In education people regularly talk about the importance of engagement as being a key factor in working with students (I note that this term is often not defined though has been in previous “Creative Engagement” conference proceedings 11 ). Many Arts Educators have in recent times been concerned with the notion of ‘aesthetic engagement’ and experiences (Bundy, Haseman, Jackson, Taylor) and now I’m proposing we need more of a focus on ‘creative engagement’ and practice. Are these states similar or different and how do we


4


go about achieving them? At this stage my explorations are quite tentative, but I have found the following table helpful to start to explore what the characteristics of these states might be. The key here is that the focus is on the participant, the producer the student as creative agent, it is not on the way they perceive and evaluate objects or a contemplative state alone (thought these are still important), but it is about how to hook young people into a focused experience (or series of experiences) that leads to them producing creative works. Engagement . Connection with the task, content, skill . Bracketing out distraction . Building components of knowledge and practice

Aesthetic Engagement . Grappling with ideas and feelings . Experiences of ‘pleasure’ . Accessing the symbolic order

Creative Engagement . Generative acts (making) . Going beyond previous practice and ideas (personal/group – little ‘c’ creativity domain/culture – big ‘C’ Creativity)

Figure 1: Different kinds of engagement 4.

Exploring notions of creativity There is a considerable body of research related to the concept of creativity. For the purposes of my work I am focusing on aspects which are helpful in terms of supporting the creativity of young people in a democratic way – with a belief that creativity is something that all people are capable of. Whilst Czikszentmihalyi and Gardner’s work focuses on creativity as demonstrated by the lives of ‘domain changers’, I have key components of their findings still relevant to working with children in schools. Czikszentmihalyi and Gardner talk about two different kinds of creativity – little ‘c’ creativity which is when we might do something novel and different ourselves within our everyday life. 12 This kind of creativity does not tend to have a lot of significance beyond that person or their specific context (e.g. teacher in the classroom, partner appreciating your cooking a different meal). Big ‘C’ creativity on the other hand is that which is recognised within a domain or culture as being original and innovative – it actually leads to changes in practice and thinking in a certain domain. The kind of creativity most often encountered in the classroom is likely to be of the little ‘c’ kind. Czikszentmihalyi proposed a system of three components within which creativity occurs. This has been adopted by Gardner and others as useful for their analysis of the work of creative people. This system is comprised of: the individual, the domain in which they work and the field which recognises their work. In considering the relevance of this model for my work in education (and in drama education in particular) I have been


Susan Davis

5

reflecting on what the key features of this model might look like in educational settings in a digital age. The three terms I’m therefore using are ‘creative engagement’, ‘creative practice’ and ‘communities of practice’. ‘Creative engagement’ I’m seeing as that kind of engagement whereby individuals are actually moving beyond the routine and informational aspects of learning and into making and innovating. ‘Creative practice’ I see as the skills and knowledge domains that we practice and study (including those that students may ‘practice’ which may not neatly fit school curriculum subjects). ‘Communities of creative practice’ are those social networks and communities which include learning communities (within educational institutions and out), both live and virtual that support and provide recognition for specific creative work. I am also interested in defining some significant aspects of the digital era which are impacting on the ways people engage and create though these are not included in this version of the model.

Creative Engagement – the kind of engagement that underpins creative work – including intense focus on the task the intent to create, the ability to take risks and try out different possibilities Communities of Creative Practice – collaborators, audiences, those who support, refine and critique the work

Creativity in a digital age Context and features of the digital age …

Creative Practice – the focus of the learning and action, including skills and knowledges in different domains, working within ‘flexible constraints’

Figure 2: A Model of Creativity for the Digital Age Learning in a digital age 13 Within the sphere of education there has been an explosion of research and work focusing on the impact of technologies within education and the ways technology can be used in education. While the focus is often on access to hardware and how to teach students using Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) I believe that preparing students for participation in the digital age requires much more than that. I am interested for example in the ways that growing up in the digital age is impacting on young people (or ‘digital natives’ 14 ) as learners, on their expectations, their interactions and their ways of working. The following points are ones that I’ve drawn from engaging with a range of relevant readings. I have begun to organise some of key points around the three main headings of my creativity model: Creative engagement in a digital age 5.



6

Identity is “the main, and sometimes the only source of meaning” 15 and this is increasingly so – it is important to look at the ways identity is constructed (which Vygotsky believed was the major creative project adolescents engaged in 16 ) and expressed in a digital age Students have to see themselves as capable and able to learn in a certain domain before they are able to engage and create. 17 If they have a damaged identity as a learner, repair work needs to occur before critical learning can occur. Students need to have positive experiences, to create an identity of someone who is able to achieve meaningful success. Various recording technologies provide many more means for people to see representations and versions of themselves mirrored back to them 18 . This can impact on young people’s sense of themselves and their existence in significant ways. It seems that for some young people the use of technology can provide a ‘frame’ 19 for existence whereby engagement is increased. This can be important in increasing engagement in the classroom. Communities of creative practice in a digital age The advent of sites such as youtube and myspace and a range of other online communities has meant that young people are able to access wider audiences for their work and sources of critical feedback and advice Many people learn within collaborative learning communities whether these be face to face, or accessed through the Internet . 20 Creative practice in a digital age Recent developments in computer software, memory capacity and broadband access have meant that it’s possible for young people to be digital creative content producers much more easily. 21 In their content creation work young people utilise their existing knowledge of popular genres and forms gleaned from their experiences of media and the Internet 22 It can’t be assumed that all young people are creating digital content however and teaching themselves – skills levels vary enormously and it is important to acknowledge informal and formal learning , to audit skills and still teach them to those who need them. 23 Digital natives are more likely to want to learn in action or ‘link, lurk and try’ exploring and trying things out rather than patiently reading manuals and learning things in a step by step process 24 Digital natives expect more immediate return for effort expended and have greater expectations about variety and entertainment value, reward systems and interaction potential. 25

6.

Drama and engagement Within education, drama has been established as both a specific arts subject to be studied, and as a teaching methodology. In both cases, what is often valued is the way that participants are able to take on roles in fictional


Susan Davis

7

contexts, and interact in relatively safe environment to explore possibilities, actions and consequences. Key aspects include the notion of role-taking, storytelling and the sharing of drama with an audience (formally or informally) 26 . The interactive nature of drama and the potential for heightened levels of engagement is enhanced through students participating in a structured but open form of text creation. While there may be an end product to such a process, the focus is on the experience of participants as they help build fictional worlds, taking on various roles within specific frames or scenes. The concept of narrative is generally driven by the introduction of dramatic tension, often requiring the participants to investigate and problem solve – a kind of active engagement which helps strengthen and build commitment to their roles and the fiction. The main action in a process drama is improvised with the role of teacher or “leader” being a key one in this process, in helping create the fictional world, often introducing a stimulus or pre-text. 27 The leader then initiates participants into the drama and works actively throughout the process, both inrole (as a character) and out-of role (as the teacher reflecting and narrating dramatic episodes). 28 These kinds of processes are open works and rely on the active participation of the process leader and other participants to be realised. Drama processes can provide opportunities for engagement and creative engagement which capitalise on many features of learning in a digital age. Through engaging in roles which draw on aspects of their own identity, students can contribute to a developing drama being motivated to build knowledge and skills in meaningful ways. They are able to contribute to creative processes early on, without having to wait until they have completed basic learning before moving to this stage. The following case study will tease out how this can occur. 7.

Case study example Most of my current research is with secondary school students who are engaged in studies and activities related to Drama and Film and Television. However in 2006 I worked with a class of year 2 students in a voluntary capacity introducing them and their teacher to process drama. I visited the class once a week for about one hour and devised drama and other activities that related to the units they were studying. The two units we worked on were a Space unit and a Transport unit (see Appendix for an overview of the Spacetroopers unit). What I was able to do was to create narrative structures that helped engage students in the unit. They were able to take on roles that they could relate to and from which they could engage in problem solving and various forms of creative expression (drama presentation, visual arts collages, story and letter writing etc). The following are some points I noted over time that were features of their engagement and work. I have organised these observations under the three aspects of my creativity model, noting that the interaction between these different aspects is where ‘creativity’ and ‘creative engagement’ can occur. Creative Engagement



8

At the beginning of the process I worked in role as the commander of the Spacetroopers and explained that we were all ‘spacetroopers’ an elite group of astronauts who undertake special missions in space to help our planet. Students were invited to build their role through creating their own identification badge and motto. Students were told that others wanted to join ‘spacetroopers’ and that we as existing members had to work out what we would look for in new applicants. This involved students working from a position of ‘expert’. This setting up fictional roles drew on aspects of students’ own experience and allowed for them to operate from a position of confidence early on. I shared an account of one of our last adventures (which we acted out together with a teacher narrative) after which students could contribute their own recollections of past adventures. This meant that students could contribute to the drama, help build and shape the story and events. Students were motivated to the point where they wanted to create/make for themselves – with them voluntarily offering suggestions of past adventures, suggesting what might happen in future lessons, wanting to draw pictures of their spacecraft and spacesuits etc. Students were presented with a ‘real’ problem to be solved within the drama – a reason to remain engaged. I presented them with a mission briefing about how earth had run out of resources and how they had to work out what planet to go to for a specific resource (one group had to find water, one to find minerals, and one to find gas – methane in particular). They had to engage in research processes, work out what planet to go to and what would be the main problems in getting to that planet. I noticed that the girls were the most excited about building their roles, contributing to the narrative and problem solving. I started to build in other physical games, challenges and quizzes (e.g. scavenger hunts building up points for various journey requirements, completing a quiz on the planets, working out what messages said by using a code) which the boys seemed to respond to more enthusiastically than some parts of the drama. Students were very excited about using technology to record key moments and share them e.g. taking photos of their teams before they left on their mission, creating newspaper stories about their experiences Students were quick to enact media genres that they knew (e.g. roleplaying on-screen ‘current affairs’ style interviews before they left on their missions). Communities of creative practice


Susan Davis

9

Students were very responsive to my working in role along with them – they often greeted me when they saw me outside of the drama lessons as ‘Commander Sue’ and shared our secret salute Students worked collaboratively in the whole class group – could see each other’s work and help each other. Working in smaller groups required much more scaffolding and support. We had discussions about things like ‘how do you make difficult decisions’, ‘how do you make group decisions’ with student reflecting on their experiences in the playground as well as in the drama. Creative practice Students built their drama knowledge through teacher modeling and their experiences of working in and out of role. Student learning was engaged through ‘doing’ and experiencing, supported by explanation and direct teaching where needed, and clarified through the use of reflection and evaluation. Engagement through drama lead into knowledge building and demonstration in other curriculum areas e.g. Science, Maths, English and Art. At the end of the unit I asked the students if they could give me some feedback about what they had learnt and whether using drama as a link throughout the unit was worthwhile. Student responses to the question “What did you learn through our work with drama?” included the following: “You can have fun and learn” Dylan “It’s good to use your imagination, and you use your body too” Kirra “We learnt about what it might be like in the future” Kayla “I learnt about going on stage and I’m not so embarrassed” Max “You can watch and learn as well as doing it yourself” Josh “You use your brain” Sasha “You learn more – you can always sort problems out” Abby 8.

Conclusion For meaningful learning to occur, students need to be engaged in the learning process – to be hooked into the journey, to have reasons and motivations to build their knowledge and skills. This kind of engagement may then become a form of ‘creative engagement’ from which students are able to problem solve, experiment and create. This is one component of a creativity model for the digital age. Students also need to develop their knowledge and skills in specific domains of ‘creative practice’. They need to interact with others and receive feedback on and acknowledgement of their work as they interact within ‘communities of creative practice’. The use of drama processes in education offers up powerful opportunities for this kind of creative engagement and experience. These kinds of learning experiences can also lead to the development of capacities that young people need to be not only participants, but active agents, in a digital age. Other art forms offer us new worlds, worlds in which we can feel but not act, worlds for contemplation. In process drama


10


we go beyond that. We create the world and live, however briefly, by its laws… If we cannot imagine things differently, we will not be able to bring about any alteration in our circumstances. 29 Notes

1

P Roberts, "Nurturing Creativity in Young People," (London: Department of Culture Media and Sport (UK), 2006), C Sharp and J Le Metais, "The Arts, Creativity and Cultural Education: An International Perspective," (London: NFER & QCA, 2000). 2 K Robinson, "Balancing the Books," in Creative Industries, ed. John Hartley (Malden MA, Oxford UK, Carlton Vic: Blackwell Publishing, 2005). 3 A Craft, B Jeffrey, and M Leibling, eds., Creativity in Education (London & New York: Continuum, 2001). p.8 4 J Burton, R Horowitz, and H Abeles, "Learning in and through the Arts: Curriculum Implications," in Champions of Change: The Impact of the Arts on Learning, ed. Edward B. Fiske (Washington DC: The Arts Education Partnership &The President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities, 1999). P 3 5 L S Vygotsky, The Collected Works of L.S. Vygotsky - Volume 5 Child Psychology, trans. Marie J. Hall, Cognition and Language (New York & London: Plenum Press, 1998). p. 153 6 ibid p. 163 7 P Taylor, "Conceptualizing an Aesthetic in Arts Education," The NADIE Journal 17, no. No 2 (1993). 8 B Haseman, "Keynote Address for Teachers in the 1-10 Arts Syllabus Trial," QADIE Says 22, no. No 1 (1999). 9 J McLean, "Performance for Young People: An Aesthetic Education Model," NJ (Drama Australia Journal) 23, no. No 2, 1999 (1999). 10 Taylor, op.cit p. 19 11 D Shepherd, ed., Creative Engagements: Thinking with Children, vol. 31, At the Interface: Cutting-Edge Research (Oxford, UK: Inter-Disciplinary Press, 2005). 12 M Csikszentmihalyi, Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention (New York: HarperPerennial, 1996), H Gardner, Creating Minds: An Anatomy of Creativity (New York: Basic Books, 1993). 13 I am using the term ‘digital age’ I acknowledge others characterize the era as the ‘information age’ or the ‘network society’. While all these terms are pertinent I believe that the most profound impact on our work in education currently stems from the charges flowing from the shift to using digital technologies. 14 M Prensky, Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants (2001 [cited 5 October 2005); available from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf.


Susan Davis

11

15

M Castells, The Rise of the Network Society, 2nd Edition ed. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2000). p. 3 16 S Moran and V John-Steiner, "Creativity in the Making: Vygotsky's Contemporary Contribution to the Dialectic of Creativity and Development," Creativity and Development Counterpoint Series (Oxford University Press, 2002). 17 J P Gee, What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). p. 59 18 This relates to an updating of Lacan’s work on the importance of the ‘mirror stage’ in identity formation 19 E Goffman, "Frame Analysis," in The Goffman Reader, ed. Charles Lemert and Ann Branaman (Malden, Mass & Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Inc, 1997, Essay first published 1974). 20 S O'Hear and J Sefton-Green, "Creative 'Communities': How Technology Mediates Social Worlds," in Collaborative Creativity: Contemporary Perspectives, ed. Dorothy Miell and Karen Littleton (London: Free Association Books, 2004). 21 H Jenkins, "Digital Cinema, Media Convergence, and Participatory Culture," in Rethinking Media Change: The Aesthetics of Transition, ed. David Thorburn and Henry Jenkins (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003). 22 M Pearson, "Splitting Clips and Telling Tales: Students Interactions with Digital Video," Education and Information Technologies 10, no. 3 (2005). 23 J Burgess, "Hearing Ordinary Voices: Cultural Studies, Vernacular Creativity and Digital Storytelling," Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 20, no. 2 (2006). 24 J S Brown, "Growing up Digital: How the Web Changes Work, Education and the Ways People Learn," Change March/April 2000 (2000). 25 M Prensky, Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part Ii: Do They Really Think Differently? (NCB University Press, 2001 [cited 10 September 2005]); available from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part2.pdf, M Prensky, Twitch Speed: Reaching Younger Workers Who Think Differently (The Conference Board's Magazine, 1998 [cited 10 September 2005]); available from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Twitch%20Speed.html. 26 B Haseman, "Improvisation, Process Drama and Dramatic Art," London Drama 1991, no. July (1991), J O'Toole, The Process of Drama: Negotiating Art and Meaning (London & New York: Routledge, 1992), P Taylor, Pre-Text and Storydrama: The Artistry of Cecily O'neill and David Booth (Nadie Research Monograph 1) (Brisbane: NADIE, 1995). 27 B Haseman, "The 'Leaderly' Process Drama and the Artistry of 'Rip, Mix and Burn'" (paper presented at the Playing Betwixt and Between: The IDEA Dialogues, Bergen: Norway, 2001), C O'Neill, Drama Worlds: A Framework for Process Drama (Portsmouth: Heinemann, 1995), J Simons, "Following the Leader: An Observation of the Work of Brad Haseman on 'Leaderly' Process


12


Drama" (paper presented at the Playing Betwixt and Between: The IDEA Dialogues, Bergen, Norway, 2001). 28 N Morgan and J Saxton, Teaching Drama: A World of Many Wonders (Portsmouth: Heinemann, 1987). 29 O'Neill, Drama Worlds: A Framework for Process Drama. p. 152 References

Abbs, P, ed. The Symbolic Order: A Contemporary Reader on the Arts Debate. London: Falmer Press, 1989. Brown, J S. "Growing up Digital: How the Web Changes Work, Education and the Ways People Learn." Change March/April 2000 (2000): 1020. Bundy, P. "Aesthetic Engagement in the Drama Process." Research in Drama Education 8, no. 2 (2003): 171-81. Burgess, J. "Hearing Ordinary Voices: Cultural Studies, Vernacular Creativity and Digital Storytelling." Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 20, no. 2 (2006): 201-14. Burton, J, R Horowitz, and H Abeles. "Learning in and through the Arts: Curriculum Implications." In Champions of Change: The Impact of the Arts on Learning, edited by E B Fiske. Washington DC: The Arts Education Partnership &The President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities, 1999. Castells, M. The Rise of the Network Society. 2nd Edition ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2000. Craft, A, B Jeffrey, and M Leibling, eds. Creativity in Education. London & New York: Continuum, 2001. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: HarperPerennial, 1996. Gardner, H. Creating Minds: An Anatomy of Creativity. New York: Basic Books, 1993. Gee, J P. What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. Goffman, E. "Frame Analysis." In The Goffman Reader, edited by C Lemert and A Branaman. Malden, Mass & Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Inc, 1997, Essay first published 1974. Haseman, B. "Creative Practices." In Creative Industries, edited by J Hartley. Malden MA, Oxford UK, Carlton, Vic: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. ———. "Improvisation, Process Drama and Dramatic Art." London Drama 1991, no. July (1991): 19-21. ———. "Keynote Address for Teachers in the 1-10 Arts Syllabus Trial." QADIE Says 22, no. No 1 (1999): 3-6.


Susan Davis

13

———. "The 'Leaderly' Process Drama and the Artistry of 'Rip, Mix and Burn'." Paper presented at the Playing Betwixt and Between: The IDEA Dialogues, Bergen: Norway 2001. ———. "Old and New Arguments for Placing Drama at the Centre of a New Curriculum." QADIE SAYS 24, no. 1 (2001): 4-13. ———. "With Sublime Lips: Shaping 'the Divine Kiss'." NJ (Drama Australia Journal) 23, no. 2 (1999): 19-26. Jackson, A. "The Centrality of the Aesthetic in Educational Theatre." NJ (Drama Australia Journal) 23, no. 2 (1999): 51-63. Jenkins, H. "Digital Cinema, Media Convergence, and Participatory Culture." In Rethinking Media Change: The Aesthetics of Transition, edited by D Thorburn and H Jenkins. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003. Lacan, J. Ecrits: A Selection. London: Tavistock/Routledge, 1977. Langer, S. Feeling and Form. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1953. McLean, J. "Performance for Young People: An Aesthetic Education Model." NJ (Drama Australia Journal) 23, no. No 2, 1999 (1999): 33-38. Moran, S, and V John-Steiner. "Creativity in the Making: Vygotsky's Contemporary Contribution to the Dialectic of Creativity and Development." Oxford University Press, 2002. Morgan, N, and J Saxton. Teaching Drama: A World of Many Wonders. Portsmouth: Heinemann, 1987. O'Hear, S, and J Sefton-Green. "Creative 'Communities': How Technology Mediates Social Worlds." In Collaborative Creativity: Contemporary Perspectives, edited by D Miell and K Littleton, 113-25. London: Free Association Books, 2004. O'Neill, C. Drama Worlds: A Framework for Process Drama. Portsmouth: Heinemann, 1995. O'Toole, J. "Playing on the Beach: Consensus among Drama Teachers - Some Patterns in the Sand." NJ (Drama Australia Journal) 22, no. Number 2, 1998 (1998): 5-20. ———. The Process of Drama: Negotiating Art and Meaning. London & New York: Routledge, 1992. Pearson, M. "Splitting Clips and Telling Tales: Students Interactions with Digital Video." Education and Information Technologies 10, no. 3 (2005): 189-205. Prensky, M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants 2001 [cited 5 October 2005. Available from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20%20Part1.pdf. ———. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Part Ii: Do They Really Think Differently? NCB University Press, 2001 [cited 10 September 2005]. Available from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20%20Part2.pdf. ———. Twitch Speed: Reaching Younger Workers Who Think Differently The Conference Board's Magazine, 1998 [cited 10 September 2005].


14


Available from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Twitch%20Speed.html. Roberts, P. "Nurturing Creativity in Young People." London: Department of Culture Media and Sport (UK), 2006. Robinson, K. "Balancing the Books." In Creative Industries, edited by J Hartley. Malden MA, Oxford UK, Carlton Vic: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. Sharp, C, and J Le Metais. "The Arts, Creativity and Cultural Education: An International Perspective." London: NFER & QCA, 2000. Shepherd, D, ed. Creative Engagements: Thinking with Children. Vol. 31, At the Interface: Cutting-Edge Research. Oxford, UK: Inter-Disciplinary Press, 2005. Simons, J. "Following the Leader: An Observation of the Work of Brad Haseman on 'Leaderly' Process Drama." Paper presented at the Playing Betwixt and Between: The IDEA Dialogues, Bergen, Norway 2001. Taylor, P. "Conceptualizing an Aesthetic in Arts Education." The NADIE Journal 17, no. No 2 (1993): 18-22. ———. Pre-Text and Storydrama: The Artistry of Cecily O'neill and David Booth (Nadie Research Monograph 1). Brisbane: NADIE, 1995. Vygotsky, L S. The Collected Works of L.S. Vygotsky - Volume 5 Child Psychology. Translated by M J Hall, Cognition and Language. New York & London: Plenum Press, 1998.

Susan (Sue) Davis is a lecturer at Central Queensland University (Noosa Hub) and is a PhD candidate at Queensland University of Technology in the Creative Industries Faculty.
