Data set one: the workshop evaluation questionnaires

Chapter 2: Literature review

4.3 Data set one: the workshop evaluation questionnaires

The evaluation questionnaires were completed following the training workshop to gauge views on its suitability as a training vehicle, and initial impressions regarding lecturer effectiveness and the use of drama-based techniques. The data analysis yielded a final list of 77 codes. These were consolidated into four main themes and eight sub-themes. The findings and interpretative analysis are presented for each theme and sub-theme.

4.3.1 Theme one: lecturers’ response to workshop: positive

This theme focuses on the co-researchers’ positive perceptions of the workshop experience. Sub- theme one briefly highlights general perceptions and sub-theme two features specific benefits recognised from the experience.

4.3.2 Sub-theme one: general reception

The following quotations relate to the co-researchers’ overall perceptions of the workshop:

I enjoyed myself to the point that I wished I could be as good as Rob, because if I was Rob’s student I would be looking forward to my next lecture/tutorial, which I think is what we should all aspire to as teachers

It totally convinced me of the utility of these techniques because I realised that as a participant/observer at that moment I was very engaged and enjoying myself a lot

It was an active learning event suitable for adult educators

it was very good to see a professional in action, to see how well these techniques can be used if they come naturally

These comments appear to be generally positive. In the workshop, the lecturers were in a sense ‘students’. So, the comments regarding enjoyment and engagement could be a positive indicator that in the classroom setting, drama-based techniques may be well-received by students if they have the power to sustain engagement. It was notable that as the demonstrator of the techniques, I was perceived by at least one lecturer, as a ‘professional’. On the surface, this appears to be a positive reaction, highlighting the effectiveness of the techniques. However, in my opinion it could also possibly reveal a concern on the part of the lecturer about his/her ability to perform to the same ‘standard’. This is a salient point for inclusion in the revised training strategy (RTS): how to build the confidence to perform.

81 4.3.3 Sub-theme two: recognition of benefits

This sub-theme foregrounds the possible benefits of the workshop with greater specificity as shown in the following quotations:

It helped me in understanding the possible benefits of using drama techniques in teaching, and it showed how these can be used

Inspiring and empowering

The workshop was extremely helpful to come up with some ideas for the lectures and tutorials. Without it, the exercise would have been almost impossible. The workshop clearly described the 3 techniques we would use in our lecture/tutorial

The event was also highly effective in providing demonstrations of soliloquy, story and sketch

The three techniques were well explained and demonstrated

This was the most effective and useful part of the workshop. Each technique was put into context and explained firstly by definition and using theory then one or two examples were demonstrated to the audience

The examples provide were strong and showed how the use of breathing techniques, body language, and demeanour effect audience responses

I found the performing art skills (i.e. breathing techniques and voice projection) to be very effective

A common theme appears to emerge from the above quotations: the value of explaining and then

demonstrating the techniques as a key component of the training. It also seems that the

application/demonstration of the performing arts skills was perceived by some as effective. For the RTS, the explanation/demonstration of the techniques should remain a key element and it may be beneficial to foreground the performing arts skills more explicitly, perhaps by discussing each one in turn as a primer, and then critically analysing, through interactive discussion, the ones applied in each of the demonstrations. It is not clear whether the co-researchers perceived themselves as better equipped to design and execute the techniques following the demonstrations, but words such as ‘useful’, ‘effective’ and ‘empowering’ may represent positive indicators in this regard. The following set of quotations relate to the workshop’s role in presenting issues of lecturer effectiveness and student engagement:

I think it was very effective. We did spend a considerable amount of time discussing these, and I think that a quite comprehensive list of issues emerged from the two posters. Many of the things listed are also listed in the handbook provided, which reflects that there is a common understanding – at least in theory - of what makes an effective lecturer and on what enhances students’ engagement

The event strongly engaged tutors to discuss lecturer effectiveness and student engagement

Yes the workshop covered this material well presenting the literature on these areas and also encouraging tutors to share their opinions about these areas

Very effective. The presenter gave some examples and showed us which direction to go into. The slides were very useful

It was effective, as we saw various techniques in action we could hypothesise to what extent effectiveness and engagement might be achieved. However, I am always a bit cautious, as the discussion about these criteria is not the same as actually seeing it in action, having it applied and thus being able to measure it. It was a good start, though

It appears from the comments that the interactive session on lecturer effectiveness and student engagement worked fairly well in enabling discussion, for the purpose of establishing an agreed set of criteria. In the final extract, the co-researcher seems to have evaluated these in light of the workshop demonstrations. The mention of cautiousness could simply reflect the need to witness the effects in the live teaching environment or could, perhaps, reveal a slight apprehension about being able to achieve the desired result. For the RTS it would seem reasonable to retain this activity but to address the latter point in the confidence-building session.

4.3.4 Theme two: lecturers’ response to workshop: improvements

This theme examines the suggested improvements to the workshop provision. Sub-theme one briefly addresses issues of workshop organisation including duration and venue considerations. Sub-theme two focuses on areas of possible workshop re-design.

4.3.5 Sub-theme one: workshop organisation

This sub-theme highlights logistical issues as shown in the following quotations. Although many of the comments support the approach taken, they have been included under the ‘improvements’ theme to keep the discussion cohesive and to provide context.

The workshop venue was good. It was quiet and there was enough space

The arrangement of the furniture in the venue helped to facilitate dialogue among attendees and made for a comfortable learning environment

Good – spacious and convenient

the room was good and had a lot of space to work in

The training venue was a large training room with a big screen and ample space to configure the seating arrangement as desired. It appears that the majority of co-researchers appreciated the spacious environment for undertaking the active learning activities. The preference for a lecture theatre venue may possibly reflect a desire to see the techniques performed in one of the actual teaching settings. In my opinion and experience, this could work well for practicing the techniques (post-design) but not for the actual workshop training. This setting may not be the best for helping ‘to facilitate dialogue’. The following quotations relate to duration and timing:

The duration of the event seemed perfectly fine to me The duration of the event was fine at 3 hours

good duration, it didn’t feel long

Good – enough time for explanations, demonstrations and group discussions The duration was ok, the time when it started was a bit too late for me

The comments seem to reflect general satisfaction with the duration of the event. The event commenced in the early evening, so the comment regarding start time may reflect personal preference or be motivated by that co-researcher’s personal experiences during the working day preceding it. The start time is flexible and for cycle two can be determined through group discussion and consensus. The following quotations relate to class size:

I think that the number of people was appropriate. It was enough to make interaction and group work interesting and fun, but it wasn’t too much so that every person could have a chance to express herself

Good - numbers allowed for interesting discussions and friendly atmosphere

a good number and selection of people invited. The workshop wouldn’t be as effective if there were more people

The size of the group provided a good interaction. I would have liked to have had a few more individuals for interaction purposes

There appears to be similarity in perceptions regarding the class size, although subtle differences in preference are highlighted when comparing the final two extracts. The nature of the training allows for a larger class size but in my experience, a balanced approach is necessary. Too few may possibly restrict the degree of interaction, but too many could possibly restrict the quality of interaction if points cannot be rigorously debated or some are reluctant to participate in a large group.

84 4.3.6 Sub-theme two: workshop design

This sub-theme relates to specific suggestions for improving the workshop design. As with the previous sub-theme, some supportive comments, together with the suggestions for improvement, have been included to provide context. The following quotations relate to the need for additional demonstrations and practice opportunities:

I feel that there were adequate uses of storytelling and sketches. I would have preferred a little more soliloquy. It appears that the soliloquy is probably the most difficult technique to adopt

I felt that the number of demonstrations was adequate, although more would have been better. What’s even more important, I believe that the simple demonstration is not enough at least for someone like me for whom something like this is totally unfamiliar and quite scary

there was more than one example per technique which was helpful to put into context – i.e. one would be funny and the other would be serious

More examples of all three techniques in various circumstances would have been good Yes, it needs to include practice sessions for the participants including immediate feedback by the workshop leader. To be honest, I felt a bit left to my own devices until we did the 1:1 workshop

I think that some practical sessions (and ideally more than one) where participants have to use these techniques under guided supervision would have been useful … Lecturers who would like to use these should be trained in a very practical way and over a few weeks so that there is time for reflection, exercise and improvement. I also think that this is the only way in which the effectiveness of these techniques can be really measured. This is because if the learning of the techniques is only based on a demonstration, the effectiveness of the techniques will depend to a large extent to the lecturer’s pre-existing ability and talent

I think that this workshop should have been followed by a few practical sessions, ideally one for each technique, where each of these techniques was examined in depth and where we are given the possibility to practice each technique and get constructive feedback Practice before the actual delivery. A dress rehearsal, if you will

Although, the analysis in theme one suggested positive perceptions of the workshop overall with recognition of specific benefits, the above comments reveal a more complex picture regarding the thoroughness of the action planning process, of which the workshop is a key element. The value of the demonstrations was highlighted when analysing theme one but these first few extracts suggest a desire for even more examples. The comment about the soliloquy is interesting. The perception of difficulty here could be driven by unfamiliarity with the technique - a fear of the unknown - or perhaps the idea of ‘speaking to oneself’ felt a little ‘uncomfortable’.

The analysis of the video diaries (data set three) may reveal more in this regard. Although only one co-researcher uses the term ‘scary’ it suggests that at least some people may be daunted by the challenge. This appears to be supported by the other comments asking for the inclusion of practice sessions. It appears that one co-researcher felt ‘isolated’ during the period between the workshop and the one-to-one session. Because, as facilitator, my values were evident in the workshop, including my passion for and experience of the techniques, I feel I may have underestimated the difficulty of the challenge for some; I should have been more sensitive to the subjective realities of each member of the group in this regard. For the RTS, a number of points emerge: for cycle two, the need to provide additional demonstrations in the workshop itself, to build-in personalised coaching for each co-researcher and to provide practice opportunities, perhaps through a second workshop.

The following quotations relate to possible revisions of the workshop model:

I would make this the first workshop of four. The other three would be specifically focused on each of the three techniques. The other workshops should be of 2 hrs each. Participants should prepare their own story, sketch or soliloquy, and perform it in front of the others, they would get feedback and guidance on how to do so more effectively and on what was missing (confidence? Preparation? Self-awareness of what the body is doing? Etc.). The first half an hour of the following session should be used to repeat the technique for which feedback was given the previous time and see whether there was an improvement. These would be very practical sessions, but there would be a lot of reflection and discussion on feelings and own experience

Rather than change the model for the workshop, my recommendation would be to use psychometric tests with regard to memorization and to explore whether those with better memorization skills might be more successful in acquiring the techniques taught at this workshop. If so, I suspect the workshop itself should be targeted towards people with high level memorization skills to ensure the best outcome. Or, alternatively, memorization techniques could be added to the workshop or a precursor workshop to assist people before they engage with drama techniques. Without the ability to rapidly memorize the templates offered during the workshop, I suspect the techniques would become tricky to fully employ

Relinquishing the second workshop was not that good, as we could have practiced in front of the workshop audience

The above extracts appear to support the idea of an additional practice workshop. Originally, it was intended to develop a second practice-oriented workshop, but this was excluded from the final plan. It appears that this should now be re-instated. The four-workshop model is an interesting idea but for logistical reasons I would recommend running cycle two with just the one additional workshop but adopting the principles underpinning the four-workshop model; that is: performing in front of the group, receiving critique and developing personal action plans for

improvement. In my opinion, targeting those with high memorisation skills would work against inclusivity. However, for the RTS, a brief session on these skills could be incorporated into the first workshop.

The following quotations relate to the effectiveness of the guidance notes:

They were very useful and they helped me a lot in preparing my sessions

I read and reflected upon the notes and referred back to my memories of the demonstrations presented in the classroom. I must say, however, that it appears to me that memorization is somewhat the key to success. The ability to observe Rob performing the demonstrations was more useful to me. This is because I quickly memorized each of the techniques used and started to reflect on how to adapt them within my courses

They were useful but perhaps a bit long

I found them very short, and unless one went to get the literature referenced (who has the time?), it did not help that much. When I scripted my three techniques I did not use the guidance notes at all; they were not hands-on enough

They should contain actual scripted examples

The only thing I would add in the handout materials would be scripts of the examples that Rob used in his demonstrations. The first stage of learning is copying

The varied perceptions of the usefulness of the guidance notes, possibly reveals variations in the design approach. It is possible that the co-researcher who relied on memorisation did not utilise the notes in a direct way and may not have fully scripted the created scenarios. Others appear to have found the notes useful to varying degrees. It appears that the co-researcher, who did not find them useful, scripted the performances, perhaps suggesting that the inclusion of scripted examples would have made the notes more relevant. On balance, in the RTS for cycle two, the notes should remain the same but in view of the last two comments, should be adapted to include several scripted examples.

4.3.7 Theme three: application of learning

This theme focuses on the learning points that co-researchers have identified from the workshop experience. Sub-theme one relates to personal application of learning and some additional learning points are highlighted in sub-theme two.

4.3.8 Sub-theme one: learning to be applied

The first two extracts focus on the learning gleaned from observing the demonstrations by the facilitator:

There is a creative leap from seeing the demonstrations and coming up with different exercises. The easiest first step is to use some of Rob’s material, which is what I did as a first step and it went down very well!

The first extract was featured under the theme one discussion on overall perceptions of the workshop. It is featured again here from the perspective of learning from the presenter. It perhaps illustrates the importance of selecting a presenter who can demonstrate the techniques in an effective way. This is a salient point for any who wish to adapt the process followed in this project for their own purposes. However, as noted when discussing theme one, there is a danger that a lecturer could feel unable to perform in the same way, thus leading to de-motivation. The comment: ‘I wished I could be as good as…’ is fine if it inspires and empowers, but not if it creates a feeling of inferiority. In the RTS the facilitator should perhaps emphasise the value of

In document The use of drama-based techniques in higher education teaching (Page 94-136)