Encuadre pedagógico

This chapter illustrates the methodology I used to investigate the impact of this theatre production on Hong Kong tertiary students’ English ability. It describes my research approach, my criteria for selecting case study participants, the sources of evidence, and methods used to analyse the data. The chapter concludes with ethical issues related to my research and a description of the limitations of the methodology of this thesis.

Research Approach

Vygotsky and Wertsch (1981) argued that an investigation of cognitive development requires one to take a methodological approach that studied the learner “in the process of change” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 65). This methodology has been called the experimental- development method or the cultural-historical method. Through this research approach, researchers can observe how artifacts (e.g., language) are fundamentally used in the internalisation of social behaviour and development of higher psychological functions (Wells, 1999). This methodology requires not only a study of the individuals’ behaviour or action after the intervention (as is traditionally done), but also requires one to investigate the context and processes involved before, during, and after the interaction.

Learner development can be investigated through the analysis of the following: historical (phylogenesis), environmental (sociocultural history), individual experience (ontogenesis), and development of specific processes during ontogenesis (microgenesis) (Wertsch, 1985). These domains are interdependent and, although researchers investigate just one domain, they must remember that development in one domain impacts on all. In addition, this methodological approach implies that participants must be studied over a period of time,

which thus requires longitudinal research (e.g., over 10 years) or short-term longitudinal research (e.g., six months).

Consistent with L2 studies viewed from an SCT perspective (e.g., McCafferty, 2002; Ohta, 2001; Poehner, 2005; Poehner & van Compernolle, 2011), a microgenetic approach was used to investigate L2 development in this study. I observed L2 learning processes in a culturally-specific situated activity (i.e., the theatre production) and, in the process of development (i.e., interactions with others and/or artifacts in context). In addition, I investigated cognitive development through the use of word meaning and perezhivanie as units of analysis because they both represent cognition and emotional experience of a learner (Vadeboncouer, 2013). I extended this methodology by breaking down these units of analysis into smaller units using Poehner’s (2008b) DA model.

I used elements of Poehner’s (2008b) DA model as the units of analysis for this study to allow for a systematic investigation of ZPD activity within the learning environment. As mentioned in the previous chapter, DA is an alternative form of assessment that views assessment of L2 current ability as instructional opportunities to promote learner

development. The activity or interaction not only provides information about a learner’s current ability, but, through collaborative dialogue, aims to also determine a learner’s potential ability by having a mediator assist a learner complete a task.

Thus, any activity in the production process that involved a learner and a director or peer in interaction or collaborative dialogue to promote learner development is a ZPD activity (see Figure 10). The ZPD activities were classified as either other-regulated ZPD or self-regulated (self-mediation) ZPD. Within each ZPD activity, I explored the following micro-units of analysis:

 task (what are learners asked to do; what is the level of complexity of task as compared to the previous task/s);

 participants of the interaction (mediators);

 mediation provided (activity and/or artifacts);

 the object of mediation; and

 learner reciprocity (how learners respond).

Figure 10. Elements of ZPD activity (Poehner, 2008b)

If an other-regulated ZPD activity functions as an assessment and instructional

activity, it was considered a DA activity. Following Poehner’s (2008b) model, tracing learner development within these DA activities over a period of time allowed me to systematically monitor and determine the process of L2 development throughout the production process.

Participants

A case study method was used to select the participants of the study because it allowed for the investigation of “complex and dynamic interactions of events, human

relationships, and other factors in a unique instance” (Stake, 2000; Yin, 2009). It also allowed for thick description of specific events, individuals, and groups in a systematic manner. Thick description is a descriptive account of what the researcher observes. It also includes the perspectives of both the participants studied and that of the researcher making the narration simultaneously an interpretive account (Geertz, 1973).

Figure 11. Embedded case study design (adapted from Yin, 2009, p. 46)

This research involved a single case study with embedded subunits of analysis (Yin, 2009) (see Figure 11). This is an appropriate case study design for this study because of the nature of the context under study. Each theatre production is unique; the director, actors, script, and so on are different making each production a unique research site. Embedded subunits were used for analysis to focus the case study inquiry as it is beyond the scope of this research to investigate all the participants of the case (Yin, 2003). This study also aimed to investigate learners’ perezhivanie in the process of creating a theatre production over a period of time. Thus, this case study design is suitable for this study because it allowed for an extensive analysis of the emotional experiences of the participants as they go through the production process.

There were a total of 17 students who were part of the production. There were originally 20 students but three students withdrew after the second month due to other commitments. As with previous theatre projects at HKIEd, a mix of nationalities brought about a combination of English and non-English speaking people. Of the 17 students, eight were Hong Kong locals whose native language was Cantonese, six were from Mainland

China and spoke Mandarin, and three were bilinguals from other countries (Malaysia, Canada, and India). One student was in the Chinese programme, another from the Physical Education programme, and the rest were all in the English teaching programme. Fourteen of these students were actors and three signed up to be part of the technical team. There were two directors, myself, a Filipino teaching English at HKIEd’s language centre, and Dr. Matthew DeCoursey, a Canadian professor of English literature. An artistic director, a HK- born Filipino, led the technical team.

Below is a summary of the profile of the participants in the project (see Table 1). All participants were fully informed of the research and they voluntarily consented to participate in the project. Because names mentioned in the video recordings could not be edited out and could potentially confuse readers of this thesis, the researcher also obtained participant consent to use their real names for the purposes of this thesis. Any subsequent publication will use pseudonyms to ensure non-disclosure of their identity and confidentiality of the collected data.

Table 1. Profile of Students and Staff Involved in the Production

Profile of Students and Staff Involved in the Production

Participants Background Role in production Programme

Annie HK local Actor English

Bo HK local Actor English

Georgina HK local Actor English

Hunter HK local Actor Chinese

Ivy HK local Actor English

Joyce HK local Technical English

Kenneth HK local Actor P.E.

Samson HK local Actor English

Erin Mainland Actor English

Merry Mainland Actor English

Sherry Mainland Actor English

Stacy Mainland Technical English

Zoe Mainland Technical English

Bonnie Other Actor English

Henna Other Actor English

Sneha Other Actor English

Michelle Other Director Teacher

Matthew Other Director Teacher

Ritzy Other Artistic director Teacher

Embedded Cases

To get a comprehensive perspective of L2 learning in this learning environment, stratified purposeful sampling method was used to identify subcases (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The following factors were considered in selecting the subunits:

1. Ethnicity: Used to determine if students of different sociocultural backgrounds approached the theatre process in a distinct way. The participants were divided into three groups: Hong Kong local, Mainland Chinese, or other (from other countries). The researcher limited the choice of participants to Hong Kong locals and/or mainland Chinese participants.

2. English theatre experience: Used to determine the impact of previous exposure to theatre influenced their participation in this production. Participants with no prior theatre experience in English were selected as a subunit to eliminate the

possibility of students having been exposed to this method of English learning. 3. Oral proficiency level: Used to determine if and how learners of different

categorised students (participants) into three broad proficiency levels (high, medium, or low) based on the category voice of their assessment criteria in the pre-production task (see Assessment Criteria on page 84). The selected cases were limited to medium and low proficiency levels as these are the proficiency levels that dominated this sociocultural context.

4. Role in the production: Used to determine how role in a theatre production has had an impact on their learning experience. The participants were grouped according to key areas of responsibility in the production: lead actor, supporting actor, or technical crew. Participants in the technical team were not considered for this research because limited resources did not allow for their interactions to be recorded during rehearsals as they worked in a different location from the actors.

Figure 12 is an attribute-by-attribute tree map of the participants of the study divided by their ethnicity (HK local, Mainland, other), their English theatre experience (yes or none), their English oral proficiency level (high, medium, low), and their role in the production (lead actor, supporting, or technical). Out of the 17 participants, four participants were

selected to fit the embedded case study design. To decide which participants were going to be the subcases for this study, groups that did not fit the criteria above were disqualified.

The map displays 17 possible groups with eight groups having had no English drama experience. Eliminating the “other” ethnicity group, seven groups remained and were further classified as either Mainland Chinese or HK local. Then, they were subdivided according to their oral proficiency level (medium or low) and then according to the roles they played in the production (lead actor, supporting or technical).

Out of the five groups left, two pairs of subunits (two HK locals and two from Mainland China) were chosen as sub-cases for this study. Within each pair, one had a

medium oral proficiency level and one had a low English oral proficiency to explore the experience of participants with varying proficiency levels. In addition, sub-cases were chosen such that each pair had a lead actor and a supporting actor to explore the experience of

participants playing a different role in the production. The shaded spaces in the tree map indicate the subcases chosen for this study. Table 2 displays a summary of the selected cases within the subunits identified in the tree map.

Table 2.Selected Cases Embedded within this Single Case Study

Selected Cases Embedded within this Single Case Study

Data were collected for all students as part of the theatrical learning experience but only detailed analysis of the four case studies is included in the thesis. The rational for script choice will be discussed in the results section of this thesis.

Ethnicity SPK Prof Role Case

Hong Kong Local High X

Medium Lead actor Ivy

Low Supporting actor Hunter

Mainland High X

Medium Lead actor Erin

Low Supporting actor Jenny

Other High X

Medium X

Figure 12. Attribute-by-attribute tree map of the participants arranged by ethnicity, English theatre experience, English oral proficiency and role in the production

Sources of Evidence

To ensure validity and reliability of results, data were collected from multiple sources and results were triangulated across these sources (Yin, 2009). The following data were collected: video recordings of rehearsals, researcher’s field notes, pre-production diagnostic task, pre- and post-production in-depth interviews, director and participant journals, and focus group discussions.

Video recordings of rehearsals.

Video recordings of rehearsals. To capture interactions between participants and directors within the learning environment, all rehearsals were video-recorded. This enabled the researcher to obtain the fullest data possible during data collection, as it is difficult to only maintain an observation purely by manual writing (DuFon, 2002). In addition, video

recordings also provided extra information on extra-linguistic elements (i.e., gestures, facial expressions, etc.) of communication which speakers use as they negotiated meaning. As theatre directly addresses linguistic, paralinguistic and extra-linguistic means of

communication, video recordings allowed me to see the interplay of these communication methods as students engaged in the process of creating this theatre production.

A professional cameraman and his assistant were employed to handle the video camera, following the guidelines stated in DuFon (2002). The cameramen have professional experience in recording live events such as parties, weddings, and research data. The camera used in the data collection was a Sony Handycam HDR-XR160 Camcorder with hard disk memory, wide-lens and a gun microphone.

As the current study was concerned with interactions occurring within a learning environment, the researcher instructed the cameramen not to focus on case study participants but to capture all interactions among all the participants involved in the project. Thus, they were then almost always located at the back of the room to remain unobtrusive and to be able

to obtain wide-angle shots of whole-group activities. If the activity required small group work, they would circulate among groups to capture these interactions. If there were performances, they were instructed to take wide-angle and/or close-up shots as the scene required. Again, only interactions within the theatre rehearsals could be recorded and interactions of the technical team could not be recorded due to limited resources.

Pre-production diagnostic task.

Pre-production diagnostic task. Students were asked to complete a pre-task that served as both a diagnosis of their acting skills and their English ability in acting prior to the production process. They were given two texts to read aloud, a monologue and a dialogue. These two tasks were chosen because they are also required for the performance of the main script. Students were informed of the task beforehand and were given the texts before they came to the pre-task session.

The dialogue, A Possibility, was taken from a book of short dialogues for teens (Allen, 1996) (see Appendix A). This script was chosen because the text allowed for flexibility in interpretation and both men and women could play the characters in the text. The dialogue is a conversation between two friends, Jeannie and Robin, about a letter that Jeannie received from a potential love interest. Jeannie hesitates to open the envelope

because she is busy thinking about the possibilities of the contents of the letter. Robin finally convinces Jeannie to open the envelope and, although the response is not favourable to Jeannie, Jeannie remains optimistic that her dream may come true.

To perform this dialogue, students were allowed to choose their own partners from amongst the group of students that showed up for recruitment. They were given 15 minutes to prepare for a two-part task. They were asked to (a) perform the dialogue as they understood and interpreted it and (b) perform the dialogue with character personalities given by the directors. Part one enabled the directors to assess students’ current acting ability and oral

proficiency level. On the other hand, part two enabled the directors to determine students’ potential dramatic ability. In part two, students were asked to perform the same text but with character variations which was deliberately the extreme opposite of their interpretation. For example, if the students had said that they performed the text as two best friends, the variation would be two sisters who do not like each other very much.

Students were also asked to explain how they interpreted the text and characters in the dialogue after each performance. This verbalisation provided insight into their conceptual knowledge of the text, acting, and performance.

After the dialogue performances, students were asked to perform a monologue. The monologue was used to evaluate students’ potential to communicate a narrative to an

audience. The monologue was taken from Raisin in the Sun (Hansberry, 1958) (see Appendix B). The speech is from the point of view of a young woman, talking to a young man. It begins with the context that the young man had just asked the main character a question about herself. The character responds first by saying “nothing”, but then tells a story from her childhood. She was one of several children, dangerously sledding down the ice-covered front steps of a house. A boy had an accident and his head split open. The boy survived and this seemed miraculous to the speaker. She goes on to say that she had been, as a result, ambitious to be a healer herself, but that something changed, and it does not matter to her any more. This monologue was chosen for the pre-task for three reasons:

1. It contained a narration where students could use their voices to make sense of the logic in a text. Furthermore, the text did not present logical difficulties and the narration was the most intuitive way of linking chunks of text together;

2. The narration gave emotional significance in that the scene of a child being injured was easy to picture and easy to identify with intuitively. Students were

challenged as to how far they could show such emotion in their way of speaking; and

3. The speech gave clues as to the learners’ ability to create and understand a character not explicitly defined by the script.

Similar to the dialogue, each student was asked to explain his or her interpretation of the text after each performance. Again, these verbalisations of intentions were required to evaluate students’ level of understanding of the texts and ability to interpret a text.

Assessment criteria.

Assessment criteria. The directors assessed the students holistically on the day of the performance and then met the next day to extend these evaluations using a drama

performance assessment rubric that they use in their drama courses. The rubric was created by the directors based on the elements of Stanislavsky’s acting method (for full description of this acting method, see page 141). The rubric assesses students on six categories on a six- point scale ranging from 1 (poor) to 6 (excellent). Below are the categories and their

operational definitions. The detailed rubric can be found in Appendix C. As some categories do not apply to some performances, the directors only used categories that were applicable to a task.

 Text interpretation: the ability of the student to understand the script to be performed. This includes understanding the dramatic structure of each scene and the whole play, and understanding the relationship of events of the scene to communicate the theme of the play.

 Character creation and development: the ability of the student to conceptualise a realistic character for performance. This includes understanding the roles and relationships of the character to the story (i.e., backstory), and understanding