Action Research Project
© Chris Port, Central School of Speech and Drama, 2000
Title: In what ways might a Behaviourist model of learning be ‘fit for the purposes’ of teaching a Drama curriculum at Key Stage 3?
Author: Christopher James Port
University: The Central School of Speech and Drama
Course: Post Graduate Certificate of Education Drama (Secondary: 11+ years)
Date: 16th June 2000
1.3 Aims and research question
- An exposition of the Behaviourist model
- A critique of the Behaviourist model
- Beneficial aspects of the Behaviourist model
- Problematic aspects of the Behaviourist model
- An exposition of the Constructivist model
- A critique of the Constructivist model
- Beneficial aspects of the Constructivist model
- Problematic aspects of the Constructivist model
2.3 Social Constructivism
- An exposition of the Social Constructivist model
- A critique of the Social Constructivist model
- Beneficial aspects of the Social Constructivist model
- Problematic aspects of the Social Constructivist model
2.4 A Comparison of Behaviourist, Constructivist and Social Constructivist Models of Learning
- Some features of Behaviourist, Constructivist and Social Constructivist models of learning applied to secondary schools.
- Adaptation of methodology for study of teaching-learning models (cf. Pollard and Triggs 1997).
- Pro forma Observation Model
3.2 Action Research Cycle
1. Before discussing appropriate models of learning, what sort of Drama curriculum do you think is appropriate for Key Stage 3?
2. What learning models seem ‘fit for the purposes’ of teaching the above Drama Curriculum at Key Stage 3?
- Behaviourism: B.F. Skinner (1953)
- Constructivism: Piaget (1950)
- Social Constructivism: Vygotsky (1962)
3. Although there may be overlaps and no ‘neat fits’, which model of learning do you think best characterizes your teaching style? What problems have you found and how have you dealt with them?
4. What comparisons can (or should) we make between teaching Drama at Key Stage 3 and teaching other subjects at Key Stage 3?
5. What assumptions are we making about learners’ intelligence?
6. How do you assess Drama at Key Stage 3?
- My assessment criteria for Key Stage 3
4.4a Quantitative Analysis of Question 1 ‘Drama is usually taught to you in the same way as other subjects’.
4.4b Qualitative Analysis of Question 1 ‘Drama is usually taught to you in the same way as other subjects’.
4.7a Quantitative Analysis of Question 4 ‘In other subjects, you find it easier to understand things by:’
4.7b Qualitative Analysis of Question 4 ‘In other subjects, you find it easier to understand things by:’
* * * * * * * * * *
- The following documentation constitutes a modest Action Research Project completed over a 7 week period (2nd May to 16th June 2000).
- The research site was a single site 11-18 Catholic mixed comprehensive school with Technology college status.
- Research was conducted solely by myself while completing the final phase of my training in situ with the Drama Department for Qualified Teacher Status as a Teacher of Drama at secondary level (11+ years).
- The main area of research was an observation and evaluation of three different learning models in practice with a focus on Drama: Behaviourism, Constructivism and Social Constructivism.
- The Mentor was kept fully informed during the research period of the nature and area of the research and the means of data collection.
- The Mentor was consulted and interviewed extensively. All other participants (e.g. pupils and other teachers) were briefly informed of the nature of the research project when their active co-operation or consent was required (e.g. questionnaires or observations of teaching).
- A guarantee of anonymity was made to all participants with the exception of an audio-taped interview between the Mentor and I when it was agreed beforehand that location and identity would be disclosed for the record. Access to this audio-tape is restricted to authorized course tutors at the Central School of Speech and Drama for verification purposes.
- In this Action Research document, anonymity has been preserved for all participants at all times. No participation has been obtained under false pretenses and no confidences have been breached.
I understand the University’s definition of plagiarism and declare that all sources drawn on have been fully acknowledged.
Chris Port16th June 2000