And...

Five years for pete's sake!!

Sorry, but the same old, same old...

No point looking backwards, if there is no tomorrow.

I've waited...five years and you know what...nothing.

Don't give me China.

Don't give me poorly attended conferences.

MoE means squat to practically every education professional 

I now meet.


Me.

I meet former students.

MoE...long forgotten.

They tell me they are tired, frustrated, voiceless, 

cheesed off...

The system is out to get them.

I don't envy their next thirty years.

I really don't.


Five years since Dorothy passed away.

Five years...

Bless her.

Just heard about Dorothy's passing.
My condolences to everyone close to her.

No second chances to make a good first impression

More of this in future posts.
The agenda for MoE has moved forward.

Not only do I have an idea but I have a plan...

Averages...don't get me started.
MoE has always had a reputation for obscure...wordism.
Innovation is one thing but vague word use is another.
Andy Kempe, it seems to me, has always had his suspicions!!

A good idea here does not work there.

The most frequent comment, always, relates not to content, not to delivery, but always to attitude towards learning [ AtL - behaviour].
Get your policies wrong on this...

A visit today to a well meaning but ultimately badly positioned centre of learning, showed me that jumbled thinking continues to blight the futures of many of our young people.
You work with what you have got.
Miracles are exactly that!

C21st. thinking to solve C19th. problems!!
Possibly...however; future thinking is being blighted by narrow thinking towards the creativity of.. well Dorothy for example.
So, it seems to me, no matter how hard Luke, Ken, Maria et.al. try to promote MoE my students will [unfortunately for...education?] reject this approach to valued learning for all as a mere postscript on their educational route.
Please tell me I am wrong.
For all the promotion. For all the meetings. I still haven't heard MoE mentioned since my last assessment with my students.
They are planning their learning in line with progressive thinking.
I just haven't the heart, at the moment, to assist them with an understanding of the reality of...who knows?

Depression's not a million laughs and suicide's too dangerous.

I discovered recently that one colleague has been taking up to 4 hours to prepare for each 1 hour session of teaching they do.
So, at present a total of 15 sessions [per week] x 4 = 60 hours + 15 hours teaching + meetings + marking + tutorials+ research = one very tired colleague who should not presume they will be teaching the same modules next academic year.
I admire their...constitution.
Somebody should have a word. Their line manager perhaps? I suspect they have, but such is the pressure today of observation and judgement, and the fact that money owing from previous studies needs to be paid back...

The wheel is round for a reason.

Last week I was asked to complete a session for a colleague. No problem. Glad to help out. The 'mountain' of paperwork given to students to complete the task was extremely impressive, including tables, pictures, references and so forth.
Basically it gave them the answers.
It did not require much from the student.
Is this a problem?
The marks will probably be absurdly high for each student. They will receive a high grade for their completed essays.
Is this fair to the students? Probably not. Is this fair to other colleagues? Well...
I want my students to think for themselves, I encourage them to do exactly that. We learn from our mistakes, don't we?
I still want to get better at what I do.
So do my students.
However, I wonder if some departments feel they cannot afford to continue to do this for much longer.
Results, and good results at that, will be expected in a consumer driven agenda from next year.
How many then I wonder will be forced down the same route as my burnt out colleague?

Why do some people think Sudoku is good for them?

I digress.
The plodding, methodical, predictability of some of my colleagues, beggars belief.
We create a maze of methodology and then criticise the masters of spin.
I have previously asked if anyone was interested in creating a Dorothy translation. I had several interesting responses. Some of which I intend to use in my retirement speech!
I am rarely, no that is not true, I am always, astounded by some of the the utterances that are made in meetings. I assume that my colleagues are not trying to make me feel inadequate on purpose. Ha, ha.
In fact, they have entered into a field of competition I find difficult to recognise from my earlier years in education.
Undermined and undervalued are common views I now hear from younger colleagues who would willingly change their career route if there were alternatives available. Unfortunately in our current recession these do not exist.
Lessons are being learnt and not all of them are positive.
Current MoE work with students has been focused on issues way beyond my experience of, oh lets say, 20 years ago. Kuwait, Bosnia and now...well let's be honest it's a pretty long list.
I do my best to keep up.
Nowadays it seems that is all I can do.
My students are brilliant.

This is not a Love Song

Mantle of the Expert. MoE
Drama for Learning. DfL
Learning through Drama. LtD

This is beginning to remind me of the false creation of battles in the 90's which proved so divisive, in my opinion, for Drama in Education. You had to be seen to be taking sides. Were you a supporter of Hornbrook or not? And so forth.
Forward to 2010 -National Conferences attended by 75 people for goodness sake.
The profile of Drama in Education is dimming again it seems to me.
I mention the far away look of colleagues as I promote MoE at meetings and I receive considerable acknowledgment from around the world that this is not uncommon.
As leaders in the field in the UK we promote outwards, always a good thing in my opinion, however, we work on the basis of only 25.
[ The current figure given by Luke ].

Many of my students are grounded in a reality that is defining an extremely narrow range of options for them at present. They are bold in their intent but very few of us seem to be listening to them. We hear them of course, but, so they tell me, we don't really think about what they are trying to tell us.
They don't believe me when I tell them 75 people are, and they don't find it credible when I tell them of the support they can get from 25 other people.
The figure is derisory, or so it seems to them.
Frankly who can disagree?

MoE Diversity

In the last 2 years this blog has generated considerable dialogue with interested parties from around the world.
Including many from the UK, ongoing correspondence with colleagues from the U.S., New Zealand, Netherlands, Canada, Ireland and Singapore has created a valued source, and resource for ongoing learning in MoE.
I work with an increasingly diverse group of colleagues and students from around the world who all draw on a rich diversity of education experiences, from private tuition to open air classrooms with few trained teachers.
I guess each student will take something from MoE and shape it into the valuable learning they want to create in future.
Further,this blog has generated contact with colleagues from around the world that has shaped my thinking, and in turn opened potential further avenues of learning for my students.
However, with huge changes about to be thrust upon all of us in education, I just hope the impetus for new learning will not become submerged in a narrow agenda of curriculum scaling down.
I sense the change already in meetings and in the far away looks I sometimes receive when it is my turn to summarise the learning my students achieve through using MoE.
I get such terrific and supportive comments from correspondents to this blog.
At present I can, and do, respond in a similar vein.
But for how much longer?

More than an itch.

Students of mine have created recent experts, of volcanoes tsunamis, earthquakes, refugee camps and, well the list is quite extensive. All linked to curriculum requirements and demands, the drive with which they undertake their teaching and learning role can be quite breathtaking.
The use of film and sound technology, creating both visual and aural collages and demonstrating clear understanding of the various topics and issues, is all the more impressive given the short space of time in which all this has been achieved.
Students have responded to MoE as a forward thinking / progressive teaching and learning tool because they are aware of it from their days at High School.
So there you have it.
MoE across the curriculum all the way through to University.
Who would have thought!!
But what's next?
Pardon?
What do you do next after MoE?
What's wrong with some more MoE?
Transferring the skills, knowledge and so forth into examination results reflecting deep learning perhaps?
I don't believe the learning I have seen lacks academic vigour as it has been both challenging and enjoyable.
It is however, at this precise point, that colleague concern kicks in.
The debate will rage back and forth and as with all teaching and learning debates nowadays there will be positive and negative outcomes.
Winners and losers if you want.
It happens every academic year and has done for a long time in my own experience.
As I gaze and flick through examination, curriculum and department materials from a variety of sources, I find myself quite often amazed at the detail within.
Unfortunately, I am often left wondering who is listening to who?
If no one is listening to my students they might just turn around and ask what is the point of MoE?
What can I tell them?

Leading The Way?

I attended last week an excellent student led session focused, almost entirely, on teaching and learning.
As an example of the positives highlighted, I was again reminded that learning is at its best when confident ownership of the content is in the hands of the learner not the teacher.
To some of my colleagues this seems to be a risk too far. Why?
I suspect it is the genuine concern of inspection.
An unwillingness to tip the balance towards facilitation of learning. This was not always the case. Equally I share my colleagues concerns.
MoE is a clear example of this tipping of the balance and perhaps it is why several of my colleagues remain suspicious of its worth.
They will reluctantly agree with me that it has a place in the teaching and learning armoury, but that its prominence is perhaps overrated in the curriculum.
Who can argue with that?

Expect The Unexpected

Tomorrow we will be discussing MoE and its continuing place of prominence in our learning agenda.
There will be almost complete agreement, as far as I am aware, that students will continue to use MoE as a prime driver in their learning and teaching.
There will, however, be some disagreement about how long into courses students will be happy to do so.
I'm not a great fan of this kind of meeting.
Why?
Well to be frank I'd like to hear more from the students themselves. Not all my colleagues think this is a good idea. And so on.
MoE, if it does nothing else, breaks down barriers between teachers and learners. It empowers independence and creativity, always an important resource for progression in learning.
So we will have our discussion.
Decisions will be made.
Action will be taken.
Students will then be told about the meeting.
By me.
They will then want to have a meeting to discuss the decisions.
Why?
Well each year my students are clearly recognising their increasing ownership of their own learning agenda.
This has left me me wondering; how long will it be before the students will be notifying me, and my colleagues, of decisions made at their meetings?
It will happen, won't it?

Thanks to Moodle

My students are way past copying and pasting. So they tell me.
Definitely yesterdays thing. So Sixth Form!
Note taking on mobile phones, whatever next?
Listening to their MP 3's during lectures, has this become the norm behaviour?
Yesterday, a senior lecturer told me they had been reassured of the value of the degree courses on offer because, somewhat implausibly it seemed to me, they [the students] had presented evidence that student debt alongside entry level jobs, was still the best option!
For all the innovation in teaching and learning. For all the brooding over content and delivery.
Despite student created by, developed by, models of MoE, we still end up with the basic fact:
Since October I have only had full attendance for my classes twice. Once at the beginning and once last week.
As my lecturer colleague pointed out, we have empowered our students to be independent learners, what do you expect?
Their use of powerpoints is exceptional. Presentation skills are just out of the window compared to 5/6 years ago. Their dominance is only challenged by the inability of some examining bodies to keep up.
My students are inspiring.
Even when they're not there.
Or listening.

See, hear, do.

Lots of decisions are made through informal discussions with colleagues.
Not at minuted meetings, conferences and so on, but in corridors, the canteen, down the pub.
Colleagues are then left to interpret meaning and if possible, act upon them.
In the course of one morning this week I had three colleagues tell me how they were using MoE to advance the learning of their students.
If they had heard each others approach to their MoE learning they might have been left wondering if they had missed something in their own MoE INSET to their departments.
Experience tells me that each colleague will deliver learning of value to their students and that their students, in turn, will become better equipped to recognise progress in their approach.
Some of the MoE documentation still baffles them, and probably most of us at some point, we shape as we see fit seems to be the approach that is working for many at present.

Sources

Several years ago I used a Drama studio at The University of Warwick.
Each week I would follow on from a session usually taken by Jonothan Neelands. Each week I would find handouts and notes, presumably from the session, left lying around by his students.
These, along with very informative wall displays, proved to be quite a valued resource in preparing my own sessions with my students.
I hadn't thought about this for some time until this week I found myself taking notes from student's displays. The quality it must be said was superb. Their understanding of MoE quite clearly indicated.
I then found handouts and flyers on tables in the staff room which inevitably led to the photocopier and into my preparation for sessions later this term.
How long have I been working like this? I've not really given it a great deal of thought before.
Teach with your ears and write with your eyes.

Creative Learning

The student wasn't being difficult, he was just having difficulties.
So I told him to him to imagine he was me, and to tell me what I needed to do to solve the problem.
In my notes I recorded this as MoE.
Luke would strongly disagree I suspect, but Andy would tell us all that this is probably about the level most Drama practitioners use MoE.
I have written extensively about creative teaching and learning and the importance for creative teachers to be willing to take chances. Go ahead blur the boundaries, interpret the definitions as you see fit.
DIE and particularly MoE within DIE, is surely about interpreting the guidance to meet the needs of the learner.
Yet again this week, I see students of mine quite happily demonstrating a good understanding of MoE. But they also seem to want right from the outset, to stamp their own imprint on it. It is important to them that they own the learning they create.
I think this is a good thing. To say otherwise would just be churlish.
MoE feels like it is becoming part of a long production line creating yet another educational tool to advance the learning of young people, just another module on ITT courses.
MoE is beginning to feel like just another product that must be packaged, marketed and be able to work.
Surely we must allow the customer / teacher / lecturer / student to use as they see fit.
My student solved his problem, thanks to MoE. Trust me.

Hornbrook

Over the last few years I have been guided to a variety of excellent Drama sites by my students.
The sheer range and quality of the undertaking by individuals, theatre companies and universities, for example, is really impressive.
I have found much to inform my practice and to aid the undertakings of my students.
Recently however, I have been astounded by the narrowing of requirements from Drama teachers I meet. This has certainly been been happening for the last 3/4 years or so.
It would seem that the need for appropriate texts for monologues and duologues, schemes for exploring texts, Drama ideas for new Drama teachers and so forth has become a major priority. Pearson Publishing [Edxcel?], must be preparing their warehouses for a surge come next term!
I never really agreed with much of the thrust behind Hornbrook's ideas for Drama in Schools.
I always tell my students to make up their own minds about content once they know their students, parents and schools expectations. Normally in that order as well!
Not being part of the National Curriculum means they could truly be creative as teachers.
So how come the narrowing? What is happening in the training process guys? Has Hornbrook realised a dream?
Drama in schools, it seems to me, is currently rudderless. We appear to be drifting aimlessly. Just look at the range of Drama work at Key Stage 3 today compared to say 10 years ago.
MoE is fine if given enough time. Great for KS2 and early KS3 and then?
Drama in Education will not develop in the 21c. if it continues this narrow view. I am not persuaded by the current practice of many of my colleagues, in Higher and Further Education, that this is not the case. I only have to look at the work of my own colleagues and students to see this.

Bellamy, Starkey, Heathcote

You spend your life in academia. You write papers and books, attend conferences, give keynote speeches, become a reader, maybe even a professor.
Having gained a reputation for your subject knowledge, your university, yourself, you are then told to retire.
What do you do?
Well?
You get an 'agent', maybe somebody who has studied in your department or even a friend.
They then help you create a new career after university.
It could be Environmental Ecology, English History or Mantle of The Expert.
You need to update a little sure; a new idea possibly, even introduce new 'enterprises' to your 'clients', just remember to stay one step ahead of any competition, because your future depends on it.

Oh... and just hope that your new audience has no, in depth, understanding of your previous academic life.

You must then try to remain relevant, so that your ideas will then dominate current thinking in your subject area. This should then render all other attempts to move ideas forward redundant.
Years later like, for example, Slade, Way, Byron, Bolton, O'Neill, Neelands, Kempe you will be placed, eventually [ nowadays metaphorically ], on the university library shelf. Useful references for Drama in Education modules on English, Media Studies or Theatre courses.

Useful concepts in Education remain useful. Trust me.
Dorothy made a shrewd selection from a broad range of ideas worked over 30+ years in academia.
Like my students tell me, they always work better and feel sharper when being observed. Not when alone with a class.
MoE is a first class performance idea for all concerned but not the only one.

Let me explain!

My students have really enjoyed trying to to tell colleagues at their school about MoE.
First they start with the theory and then they are usually asked to give a practical demonstration.
They have to prove themselves?
Show MoE can actually work?
Who knows?

I can remember when students were encouraged to not experiment on teaching practice, but to "...save that for the real job!."
Ermm...
There are a lot of positives around the developing world of MoE, but it is becoming clear to me at least, that there is an awful long way to go.
After how long? 30/40 years?
How much longer can this be sustained?

Handy Hints

Information, advice and guidance.
The jargon issue pursues us all in education, doesn't it?
Andy Kempe has discussed this, at length, and he is absolutely right.
If you get caught in the 'jargon' trap you will end up having to constantly defend your stance, point of view and so on.
This, it seems to me, is the 'trap' Dorothy has created for all of us who use MoE.
Our attempts to convince colleagues of MoEs value and worth will always be thwarted by her 'meta-language'.

I dare you to create, with me if you wish, a Dorothy Heathcote Glossary.
Then take it to your colleagues for their assessment.
I, for one, would really appreciate their thoughts and observations!

Getting it.

"How will this help me in the future?"
The classroom cynic can bite through all the prep. work, all the learning, all the ...
What has happened to the current generation?
I have sensed in recent years, in classroom observations, a loss of joy from Y.4 upwards.
Even recent graduates I talk with seem to have lost a spark.
I can only generalise of course, but I am concerned.
In the Arts we seek creativity and imagination in learning, only to be sidelined by assessments and ordering of understanding.
Surely MoE can avoid this unhealthy trap of mere game playing?
And yet MoE still remains a mystery to many. But for how long?
Some of my colleagues, particularly in Higher Education, still say Drama when they mean MoE and then continue to make the same mistake every time thinking it doesn't matter. It should matter.

Reflection without penalty.

As a tool for learning that is evolving all the time I found myself telling a colleague this week that the version of MoE I currently use has been pretty much bastardised to meet my current approach to teaching.
I was still asked, with others, to deliver training. I wonder how much at odds it will be to recently trained colleagues?
With new approaches to timetabling [KS3/4] now enabling teaching to take place over longer periods, perhaps MoE can now take its place in the broader curriculum?
The current training schedules, at least the ones I have seen, seem unnecessarily complicated, dare I say, tedious?
Sir Jim Rose' report has centred Drama for learning in KS2, well almost! And beyond?
I sense change and look forward to seeing where this will lead to in the next 18 months.

But you can't come in.

I've always enjoyed the potential of MoE.
The creative learning buzz it can create still amazes me. I also relish the fact that it enables me to do TIR work. For a Drama teacher I believe this to be the 'hub' for successful lessons.
Will KS3 catch up with KS2 in recognising this? I believe it will.
Yet again I think it works really well when the 'MoE rules' are adapted rather than followed too closely.
I totally agree with Andy Kempe here. Too much irrelevancies have been placed in the MoE agenda. Adaptability is the key.
To some degree the creativity of the teacher using MoE is stifled if the 'rules' are followed too strictly.
So how best to show / demonstrate MoE to non specialists?
Is the current approach the right one?

Lecturing, Teaching, Performing. Learning?

Back in the early 90's I was watching Luke Abbot deliver some Drama work with young students.
There were about 20 or so observers.
Returning from the break early, I mentioned to a colleague [we were the only two adults present] that we had caught the youngsters playing together and not performing. When Luke returned with the other observers, the children settled to restart their performance.
Luke was trying to demonstrate an approach to teaching.
Because of the adult audience presence the youngsters were always performing/ aware of the audience.
In the classroom, alone with the teacher [their only audience] this doesn't happen.
Dorothy, bless her, has had children performing to audiences[ teachers, students] most of her career. The evidence is clear.
Children will behave differently, learn differently, in front of observers/audience. The situation is different to a classroom situation. They are not comparable.
In addition to which they are being filmed!
This doesn't exactly create false outcomes that cannot be replicated in the classroom...or does it?

Four steps back - one step forward

With some reluctance you sometimes have to move away from the idea to move forward with the idea.

This can occur for many reasons, often outside the control of the teacher.
Again the adaptability of colleagues in recognising the signs is really important if MoE is to have the intended impact on student learning.
Personalisation and independence of student learning is surely at the heart of current educational thinking? The boundaries of teacher expectations is bound to be challenged.

Stepping Stones

Team teaching today.
A difference of opinion between colleagues[ almost in role ] 3 students kicked out of group, in role as cameramen.
Advice...go on strike, demand a meeting to conclude differences!
A super learning lesson, students in negotiation at end of period.
You really test the comfort levels of colleagues particularly when colleague is less experienced with MoE.

Have you experienced something similar?

By Association...

Andy Kempe has stated that in his experience, he sees many variations of the MoE approach.
In essence, isn't this inevitable?
I have watched Dorothy be pretty flexible in her approach over the years.
Luke Abbot perhaps lacks this flexibility?
In any art form surely to stay static is to hold back both learning and creativity?
It is this element of experimentation that informs my current practice.

I'm pretty sure most practitioners of MoE will agree?

Sometimes 2+2 will do.

You probably know the names.
The supporters and detractors of Mantle of the Expert.
Luke Abbot for, Andy Kempe against.
I want to continue the developing dialogue on this blog.
I believe with the recent growth in the use of MoE in classrooms, a very close analysis of what can, what shouldn't and what will be achieved by using MoE could radically change education for young people.

I have used this approach as a Drama teacher for 17 years, and always used it to teach PSHEE and Citizenship.

Can MoE really drive a whole curriculum?