Changes in Sociometric Status Following Drama Education: A Longitudinal Study in Czech Republic

1
Changes in Sociometric Status Following Drama
Education A Longitudinal Study in Czech Republic

• Širucek, J. (sirucek_at_fss.muni.cz)
• Masaryk University, Faculty of Social Studies,
  Brno, Czech republic

2
Special thanks...

• To professor
• Peter K. Smith
• (University of London, Department of psychology)
• For patient help with an abstract of this paper

3
Drama education in Czech schools

• 10 years of experience with drama education in CZ
• Drama education is not a common part of
  curriculum
• Implemented as consequence of changes in general
  school education plans, pronouncing core
  competencies
• Communication skills
• Social and personal skills
• Learning skills
• Problem solving skills
• Civic skills
• Work skills
• ... In addition to conservative focus on frontal
  teaching and knowledge, typical for Czech school
  system

4
Ways and methods of drama education

• Game play, dramatic etudes and theatre
  performances support growth of core competencies
  by
• Experience with wording own opinions listening
  and appraising to others opinions (communication
  skills)
• Role-taking in game play makes new emotional
  experience accessible (social and personal
  skills)
• Information seeking processing enhance learning
  skills
• Analysis of social conflicts in drama etudes
  affects problem solving skills
• Moral aspects of drama education scenarios open
  theatre performances for broader school
  community supports civic skills
• Preparation of stage decorations, costumes etc.
  encourage work skills
• As result, global positive changes in social
  relations in classes are expected
• And dramatic etudes could be used in constructive
  solving of specific conflicts or difficult social
  situations happening in everyday life in classroom

5
Research aim design

• Evaluate possible changes in peer relations
  related to drama education implementation
• With special respect to problematic social
  relations in classes
• Two-wave longitudinal study with control group

6
Two-wave longitudinal study

• 4 intervention classes 4 control classes
• Matched by grade
• 2 fifth-grade classes (N21 N28)
• 4 sixth-grade classes (N47 N43)
• 2 seventh-grade classes (N23 N29)
• Control classes were from same school as
  experimental
• Selection of intervention classes
• Based on school headmasters reference
• Classes with suspect onset of bullying or with
  difficult social relations within pupils
• Without any previous experience drama education
• Without any previous or currently running
  preventive program focused on social relations or
  bullying
• Headmasters reference based on reports of class
  teachers educational counselors (school
  psychologist not present)
• Selection of control classes
• Classes considered as healthy in terms of
  social relations
• Again based on school headmasters reference
• 1st wave of date collection in September 2008,
  2nd at the end of June 2009

7
Drama education implementation

• Instructors
• Four PhD students of special pedagogy
• 3-4 years of experience with drama education
• All of them active teachers on another schools
  than those in sample
• Provided with regular supervision (monthly
  meetings with their leader)
• Participated voluntarily on project, with only a
  symbolic reward
• Drama education in intervention classes
• Two hours each two weeks
• Drop-outs of hours occurred in all classes, about
  10 of time

8
Method - Nomination technique (NT)

• Set of 18 items, based on tool traditionally used
  by Czech school psychologist in assessment of
  peer relations
• Enriched by more items to ensure better
  reliability and wider interpretation
• 2 cumulative scales
• Prosocial behavior (K 8 alpha 0,91)
• Items as who is helpful? or who is
  trustworthy?
• Conflict behavior (K 8 alpha 0,93)
• Items as who starts quarrels or hassles? or
  who is hostile toward others?
• 2 single questions
• Influence who has influence on others?
• Dismissal who is only for himself?
• Dimensional structure
• Prosocial conflicts scales linearly independent
  (r 0,12)
• Prosocial influence in mediocre correlation (r
  0,30)
• Conflicts dismissal highly correlated (r
  0,8!)
• Lack of valid scale of social isolation
• Strengths and difficulties questionnaire
  (Goodman), completed by class teacher
• Perceived peer relations questionnaire state
  anxiety scale included as self-report
• Data still not available for analysis

9
Results group comparison

• Control group
• Influence (p 0,008 Cohens D 0,36)
• Intervention group
• Prosocial behavior (p 0,018 Cohens D 0,16)
• Conflict behavior (p 0,009 Cohens D 0,22)
• Influence (p 0,018 Cohens D 0,32)

10
Prosocial behavior class comparison

• Control group
• 3 significant effects, 2 increases 1 decrease
  in class means
• Intervention group
• 2 significant effects, both slightly increasing
• 2 stability lines
• Greater variability of changes in control group

11
Conflict behavior class comparison

• Control group
• 3 significant effects, 2 increases 1 decrease
  in class means again
• Intervention group
• 3 significant effects, all increasing
• Greater variability of changes in control group
  again
• 1 stability line in both groups

12
Influence class comparison

• Control group
• 2 significant effects, 1 extreme increase
  (Cohens D 2,45!) 1 slight increase
• 2 stability lines
• Intervention group
• 3 significant effects, all with mediocre
  increasing
• Greater variability of changes in control group
  again

13
Discussion of results

• In intervention vs. control group comparison,
• Medium increasing effects were found in prosocial
  behavior, conflict behavior and influence in
  experimental group
• Surprisingly, also negative effect of
  increased rate of conflict behavior
• In control group, influence increased only
• First interpretation
• Drama education positively affects childrens
  social skills
• Increase in prosocial behavior reflects drama
  educations focus on expressing own emotions and
  understanding others
• These growing capacities results in more
  prosocial behavior in peer group
• Increase in conflict behavior is interpreted as
  growing self-confidence and ability to openly
  name problematic or unwanted behavior in group of
  peers
• Pupils are more willing to indicate problem
  behavior in nomination technique
• ... And possibly to face it in active way, which
  leads to more conflicts in class

14
Discussion of results

• But... What about those inconsistencies between
  specific classes?
• Higher variability of spontaneous changes in
  control group
• 2 increasing 1 decreasing trend in both
  prosocial and conflict scale
• Group comparison results are consequence of
  higher variance of scores in control group, wave
  3
• Exactly, results are caused by strong decrease in
  only one class
• Based on this (small) sample, no strong support
  for drama education effect is evident
• Maybe NT is not the right tool?
• NT measures outcomes only, social processes
  leading to outcomes are hidden in black box
• More intensive research is needed
• Focused on more on social process, and not only
  outcomes of drama education
• Qualitative research based on observation

15

• THANK YOU FOR ATTENTION
• Jan Sirucek
• Sirucek_at_fss.muni.cz