Limitations

I acknowledge the limitations that are often ascribed to action research, particularly when it derives from the critical theory tradition and, therefore, entails transformative or emancipatory aspirations. Cohen et al. identify a range of criticisms that concern action research practice (2007, p.304). These include: unrealistic aspirations with regards to social transformation; ignorance or neglect of social complexities owing to an academic sense of critique; or imposed agendas for empowerment and emancipation. In a similar line of reasoning, although Patty Lather supports the critical dimensions of research practices, she expresses several concerns with regards to the ways in which emancipation or empowerment is ‘imposed’ (1991, p.3).

My study aspires to be critical and transformative, but not necessarily empowering and emancipating, in the traditional sense. The ensemble-based learning might develop the potential for participants to acquire further initiatives, to practise their agency or to be empowered, but this does not mean that participants are pre-considered as oppressed. Students and their context will inform my practice and the level of transformation that needs to be targeted. In this sense, the principal way for addressing these issues lies in the incorporation of case study methodology in my own research design. In this way, students’ reality will define both the direction of the transformative endeavour, and the ensemble-based learning. In the analysis of the data, the reader will

125 have the possibility to observe the ways in which the research project changed in order to address the particular issues that each context generated.

In the same line of reasoning, in order to address the risk of making an exclusively theoretical critique to the curriculum and the pedagogy of the subject of theatre and of the teaching of Sophocles’ Antigone, I will also re-consider my critique according to the particularities of the social context. Curricular critique, apart from being an academic preoccupation of critical pedagogy, derives from the specific consequences that specific curricula bring to the learning environment. In this context, the case study perspective will enable me to re-formulate my critical perspective according to the specific constraints that are observed in each educational context.

3.2.2 Case Study

The function of the project was explored in two different classrooms of separate schools, in the context of different curricular subjects.19 The factors that differentiated each case did not only consist in formal educational factors that determined each school’s organisation, but were also related to the singularity of each social group of students. Both the official structures of each educational institution, and the particularity of the educational modus vivendi of each social group, generated the need to focus on the uniqueness of each case, and to explore the ensemble process of learning in the terms that each context indicated (Simons, 2009).

Case study constitutes a popular methodology in educational research and is a very wide methodological category. The definitions vary, but there is agreement about the singularity that characterises the case study research (Stake, 2000; Yin, 2003; Patton,

19

The first school accommodated this project in the module of Theatre Elements (See section 3.10), while the second school accommodated the project in the context of Ancient Greek Learning: Ancient Greek Grammatology: Sophocles’ Antigone (See section 3.11).

126 2002). Stake underlines the multiplicity through which we might approach a case, but he also insists on the essentiality of maintaining the focus on its particularity:

We could study it analytically or holistically, entirely by repeated measures or hermeneutically, organically or culturally, and by mixed methods – but we concentrate, at least for the time being, on the case”. (2000, p.435 cited in Patton, 2002, p.447).

Simons, while emphasising the depth and the multiperspectivity that should characterise the case study, notes the openness of what can be defined as a case. In this context, she defines case study as

an in-depth exploration from multiple perspectives of the complexity and uniqueness of a particular project, policy, institution, programme or system in a ‘real life’ context”. (2009, p.21)

From this perspective, it is argued that one of the methodological advantages of case study lies in the fact that it orients the researcher’s interest in the specific contextualised instances (Winston, 1998, p.79). In order for the exploration of the ensemble-based theatre learning to be meaningful – and, further, capable of contributing in order to inform theory and subsequent practice, – its evolution is inextricably integrated in the ways in which students experienced the process.

Taking into account the situated character of education (Bruner, 1974), and of educational research (Winston, 1998), I decided to explore the function of the ensemble- based model of learning in a real school-life context. I did so under similar “constraints of curriculum, time and space as faced the class teachers” in their professional lives (Winston, 1998, p.80). Otherwise, there was the risk of idealising the project’s impact, or, of having the positivistic illusion of ‘testing’ it, in objective terms, or, I would argue, in a social vacuum (Cohen et al., 2007, p.11-12).

127 In this line of reasoning, I avoided researching the schools as representative or stereotypical examples, and I attempted to interpret the meanings of each social group in its own terms. Therefore, I did not classify the fieldwork in the categories of “critical cases, extreme cases, typical cases, and heterogeneous cases” (Patton, 2002, p.452). Rather, the emphasis was given on comprehending and interpreting the educational patterns and the social relations that constructed the reality of each classroom. In this manner, I intended to explore the ways in which the overall project interacted with the specific social groups. The first target was both to understand “how” the project functioned for each social group, as well as to interpret “why” the project was oriented or developed in this or the other way (Yin, 2003, p.1). Subsequently, each case was intended to inform both the theory and the practice of the ensemble-based theatre learning. In this sense it is characterised as instrumental. Stake uses this definition

where a case is chosen to explore an issue or research question determined on some other ground, that is, the case is chosen to gain insight or understanding into something else. (Stake, 1995, pp.3-4 cited in Simons, 2009, p.21)

Nevertheless, this classification does not exclude intrinsic interest (ibid.) because, in order for the function of the ensemble to be understood, the particularities of each social context must be acknowledged and interpreted. The following points articulate some intrinsic and some instrumental sub-questions of the research:

Intrinsic interest:

 Which is the participants’ relation to theatre (previous experiences and perceptions)?

 What students think of politics (political consciousness and habitus)?

128

 How could this project respond or be adapted to their previous experiences?

Instrumental interest:

 How students respond to the process?

 Which are the reasons for their responses?

 Are they influenced by the process?

 If and how the process influences their participation in theatre?

 If and how the process influences their social interaction?

 If and how the process influences their political thinking and habitus?

The story-element:

Apart from the emphasis in the comprehension of each classroom’s context, the second reason for which case study methodology was implemented in my research lies in the story-telling potential that case study provides. Winston emphasises the story element in the context of a case study and argues that “case studies are stories – contextualized” (1998, p.80). The ways in which the project is conducted in each case, the practices that structured it and the responses that it elicited, all constitute the story “of the evolution, development and experience of the particular case” (Simons, 2009, p.147). The strength of this framework consists of its potential to bear the holistic nature of the meaning which “is indeed more than the sum of its parts” (ibid., p.124). Therefore, the report of the function of the ensemble is constructed as an interpretive narrative that will analyse the story of each case.

3.3 Issues of Validity

The theoretical, epistemological and methodological frameworks of this study indicate the rejection of the notion of a universal truth/knowledge, and accept the

129 possibility of a situated form of truth/knowledge with a focus on daily life and narrative within the context (Kvale, 1995, p.21). Therefore, the validation of this research project is moved from a final test on the objective results, and focuses instead on the ways in which “the research process re-orients, focuses and energizes participants towards knowing reality in order to transform it” (Lather, 1991, p.68). Lather refers to this kind of validity as “catalytic” (ibid.). The same kind of validity can be also described through the combination of Kvale’s communicative and pragmatic validity.

According to Kvale’s postmodern approach to social research validity, the communicative and the pragmatic validity are distinguished. This means that communicative validity is achieved through a speech act, a linguistic articulation of the matter at stake, while pragmatic validity is exclusively manifested in action. More specifically,

Communicative validity involves testing the validity of knowledge claims in a dialogue. Valid knowledge is not merely obtained by approximations to a given social reality; it involves a conversation about the social reality: What is a valid observation is decided through the argumentation of the participants in a discourse. (1995, p.30)

In the context of pragmatic validity,

Knowledge is action rather than observation; the effectiveness of our knowledge beliefs is demonstrated by the effectiveness of our action. By pragmatic validation of a knowledge claim, justification is superseded by application. (ibid., p.32)

Nevertheless, it is argued that the combination of both categories of validation is more suitable to the framework. The theoretical syllogisms of this democratic-oriented research project view communicative and pragmatic validity as interdependent practices

130 that succeed and complement each other.20 In this respect, communication facilitates and organises action, while action re-informs communication. Taking into account the aforesaid conceptions for validity, it is argued that the validity of this project consists of three axes. The first axis lies in participants’ claims with regards to recognition or non- recognition “of the reality-altering impact of the research process” (Lather, 1991, p.68). The second validation axis depends on “whether a knowledge statement is accompanied by action, or whether it instigates changes of action” (Kvale, 1995, p.34). Finally, the third axis refers to participants’ gaining of “self-understanding and, ultimately, self- determination through research participation” (Lather, 1991, p.68).

In order for these axes to be deeply explored -– not only, yet predominantly, the particular methods of gathering data -– the overall design of the project was accordingly designed in order to address the complexity of these types of validity. In the first place, methodological triangulation was adapted in order to respond to the different needs of the project. The interventionist and the cyclically reflective quality of action research was combined with the context-orientation of case study, in order to create a dialogic narrative that described the ways in which the project functioned for the specific educational situation. Second, different methods for gathering data – that will be further analysed – were used in order for different meanings and understandings to be recorded and interpreted from multiple perspectives (Simons, 2009, p.131). Finally, transparency which reveals the problematic areas of the process will also be included in the narrative of each case. Before analytically presenting the methods that were triangulated for the gathering of data, it is essential to refer to the reason for which different methods have been combined, as well as other types of triangulation that were adapted.

20

For more details on the ways in which speech and action inter-complement and ‘inter-validate’ each other in the public space and in the democratic practices, see section 2.1.

131

3.4 Triangulation

Throughout the bibliography of social inquiry and educational research, triangulation can be claimed to constitute an intertwined method of the concept of validity (Seale, 1999; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983). However, it is noted that in the context of this project, triangulation was used neither just as a check nor as a method which “assumes a single fixed reality that can be known objectively through the use of multiple methods” (Seale, 1999, p.53). Rather, it is employed as an amalgam of Silverman’s approach and Ciroucel’s conception, according to which triangulation addresses the situated work of accounts without undercutting the one over the other. It additionally suggests that every reading of data provides a new interpretation that will deepen the others (Seale, 1999, pp.58-60). From this perspective, triangulation denies certainty and stability and seeks a deepened understanding in the open and complex space of the fieldwork. The first level of triangulation constitutes data triangulation.

Data-source triangulation involves the comparison of data relating to the same phenomenon but deriving from different phases of the fieldwork, different points in the temporal cycles occurring in the setting, or the accounts of different participants [...] differentially located in the setting. (Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007, p.183)

Consequently, specific thematic unities that derive from the research questions – such as students’ attitude toward ensemble ability or self-instituting ability21 – will be examined, both in terms of the real level of the drama process, and in relation to the fictional level of the theatre.

Apart from methodological and data triangulation, the final level of triangulation concerns the methods that are utilised to gather data. In this context, different methods

132 will function inter-complementarily in order to provide comprehending and interpretive depth to the meaning making of the events. Units of data that are gathered from observations will be further examined through the reviewing of video-recordings and, mainly, through participants’ responses, understandings and perspectives as formulated in interviews (Wilkinson and Birmingham, 2003, p.121). In this way, units of data that refer to the same thematic categories will be synthesised or contrasted in order to inform the overall interpretation of the process.

133

3.5 Methods

3.5.1 Research Journal

The research diary was one method which was used from the planning phase to the final levels of data analysis. Qualitative researchers in a variety of disciplines – medicine, law, education, the social sciences and the humanities – have since found writing as a method of inquiry to be a viable way in which to learn about themselves and their research topic. (Richardson and Pierre, 2005, p.959). Whether they are referred to as fieldnotes, research journals, diaries, log books, or lab books, all these written methods are important companions to the research process. First, fieldnotes function as an “external memory for researchers to note from concrete actions to deep feelings and thoughts” (Altricher, 2005, p.24). Second, they acquire a reflective quality which is often ascribed to the act of writing about oneself, one’s actions and one’s experience. Progoff argues that there is a reflective and revealing potential in the act of writing, because it is the ultimate way of

getting feedback from ourselves, and in so doing, it enables us to experience in a full and open-ended way, the movement of our lives as a whole and the meaning that follows from reflecting on that movement. (Progoff, 1992 cited in Janestick, 1999, p.507)

Apart from the ethnographic modes of inquiry, both educational action research and case study have a rich tradition of drawing upon the diary (Altricher et al., 2000, p.12).

One of the significant advantages of a research journal as a method for gathering data lies in the accessibility and the familiarity of the methodical instrument. The research diary is easy to use at any time during the research period. “Writing a diary is simpler and more familiar that any other research methods, such as interviewing”, because it is always in the researcher’s disposition to use it (Altricher et al., 2000, p.10).

134 The accessibility of the research journal provided me with an organised space and point of reference in which information could be recorded, and could function as an aide- memoire and feedback during the different phases of the fieldwork (ibid., p.19). The

second advantage of the research journal as an instrument for qualitative inquiry lies in the multiplicity of ‘research material’ which is recorded in it. Holly argues that “keeping a diary is both an aid to memory and a process of generating new perspectives and making connections” (2005, p.28), while Altricher et al. distinguish between two general categories for diary notes:

On the one hand diaries can contain data which are obtained by participatory observation and by conversations and interviews in the field, sometimes enriched by explanatory comments and photographs; on the other hand, they can contain written reflections on research methods and you own role as researcher […]. In addition ideas and insights are noted, which can lead to the development of the theoretical constructs which, in turn can be used to interpret the data. (Altricher et al., 2000, p.12)

In this context, my research diary includes various categories of data, from chronological reports to impressionistic material and pictures. In particular, it contains: structured and unstructured notes obtained by observations; interviews and informal conversations; additional ‘found items’ such as photographs, letters, other formal and informal papers and so on; contextual information about the ways in which data are collected; and reflections both on the educational and the research process, as well as ideas for possible plans or subsequent actions. In other words, it includes “items of different type and quality, both ‘data’ and pieces of reflection, interpretation, and analysis and short memos or occasional observations” linked with interpretive ideas and reflection about research items (Altricher, 2005, p.24).

135 Acknowledging the importance of making clear distinctions between descriptive and interpretive notes (Bogdan and Biklen 1982 in Althricher et al., 2000, p.20), as well as the essentiality of interpreting from the ground instead of imposing assumptions on the content of data, the organisation of the diary attempted to keep this interaction alive while making clear distinctions between descriptive and interpretive notes. As such, the diary was organised chronologically, and each entry consisted of a descriptive account that was accompanied by an interpretive consideration of the described event.

Descriptive Accounts (DA)

All the descriptive entries were written chronologically as soon as possible after the events, conversations, or other significant moments of the fieldwork. Each entry was accompanied by the date of the event, by contextual information such as time, location, participants, specific foci, etc. Furthermore, paragraphs, headings, subheadings and underlinings facilitated the overall structure of the text (Altricher et al., 2000, p.14). Where an extended description is not possible (such as just after the event) key words or phrases that later functioned as aides-memoire were quickly recorded, during the course of the activity (ibid., p.19). Immediately after each lesson, I spent some time writing a more detailed description, in order to make the entries as complete as possible, and anything that I remembered after this was also added (ibid.).

Reflective Accounts (RA)

After the end of each session, and before the planning of the following lesson, all the notes were read and reread in order to provide me with new insights, perspectives