Investigation of Learning in Creative Drama-based Classrooms through Community of Practice

Year 2016, Volume: 5 Issue: 2, 557 - 576, 18.06.2016

Pınar Güner Tuğba Uygun

https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.v5i2.5000184628

Cited By: 1

Abstract

In creative drama-based classrooms, the learners attain opportunities of working collaboratively in performing drama and determining their roles in their learning process through their performance. Also, there exist the opportunities of communication, learning various views, thinking creativity, thinking independently and forming mutual outcomes with the help of their previous knowledge and experience. The purpose of the current study was to examine the processes and the ways of formation of communities of practice in creative drama-based classrooms for preservice teachers enrolled in the departments of early childhood and elementary mathematics education through their learning process. Moreover, the roles of instructors and participants in different drama classrooms and programs in these different communities were investigated. The participants of the present study were composed of 55 sophomore preservice teachers at a university in northern part of Turkey. Data collection process lasted four weeks and included video recordings of the classes and audio-recordings of the interviews made with some of the participants. The qualitative data were analyzed by using community of  practice framework. These communities were examined based on three dimensions of communities of practice (CoP), joint enterprise, mutual engagement and shared repertoire by focusing on their learning of these different communities. The findings showed that Wenger’s CoP dimensions manifested themselves in the classrooms. Also, this framework utilized the understanding of similarities and differences among these different communities for their learning processes.

Keywords

Uygulama toplulukları, yaratıcı drama, öğretmen adayı, matematik eğitimi, okulöncesi eğitim

References

• Adıgüzel, Ö. 2007. “Dramada Amaç ve Özellikler.” In İlköğretimde Drama, Öztürk, A. (Ed.), 19-32. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Aguilar, O.M., & Krasny, M.E. 2011. “Using the community of practice framework to examine an after-school environmental education program for Hispanic Youth.” Environmental Education Research, 17(2), 217-233.
• Akyol, A. K. 2003. “Drama ve Dramanın Önemi.” Türk Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(2), 179-192.
• Brickhouse, N.W., P. Lowery, and K. Schultz. 2000. “What kind of a girl does science? The construction of school science identities.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441-58.
• Creswell, J. W. 2012. Educational Research Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Pearson Publications.
• Dewey, J. (1958). Experience and Education.New York: Macmillan.
• Grossman, P. L. 1991. “Overcoming the apprenticeship of observation in teacher education coursework.” Teaching & Teacher Education, 7(4), 345–357.
• Kirshner, D., & Whitson, J.A. 1998. “Obstacles to understanding cognition as situated.” Educational Researcher, 27 (8), 22–8.
• Lattuca, L. R. 2005. “Faculty work as learning: insights from theories of cognition.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 102 (Summer), 13-21.
• Lave, J. and Wenger, E. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, New York.
• Lemke, J.L. 2001. “Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education.”
• Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38 (3), 296–316.
• Merriam, S. B. 1998. Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Nutku, Ö. 1983. Gösterim Sanatları Terimleri Sözlüğü. Ankara: Sevinç Matbaası.
• Reveles, J.M., R. Cordova, and G.J. Kelly. 2004. “Science literacy and academic identity formulation.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (10), 1111–44.
• Sağlam, T. 2004. “Dramatik eğitim: Amaç mı? Araç mı?” Tiyatro Araştırmaları Dergisi, 17, 4–22.
• San, İ. 1989. “Eğitimde Yaratıcı Drama.” Ö. In Yaratıcı drama içinde Adıgüzel, (Ed.), (57-68). Ankara: Naturel Yayıncılık.
• San, İ. 1991. “Yaratıcı Drama Eğitsel Boyutları.” Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi İzmir Eğitim Kongresi, 25-27 Kasım.
• San, İ. 1998. “ Türkiye’de Yaratıcı Drama Çalışmalarının Dünü ve Bugünü”. II. Ulusal Çocuk Kültürü Kongresi. Ankara. ATAUM.
• Senemoğlu, N. 1997. Gelişim Öğrenme ve Öğretim Kuramdan Uygulamaya. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Stein, M. K., Silver, E. A., & Smith, M. S. 1998. “Mathematics reform and teacher development a community of practice perspective.” In Thinking practices in mathematicsand science learning (pp. 17–52). J. Greeno & Goldman, S. (Eds.), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
• Tuluk, N. 2004. Yaratıcı Drama-PivolkaSayı3, Ankara.
• Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge:
• Cambridge University Press.
• Wenger, E. 2000. Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization. 7, 225-246.
• Wenger, E. and Snyder, W. 2000. “Communities of practice: Theorganizational frontier.” Harvard Business Review, 139-145.
• Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. 1998. “A critical analysis of the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry.” Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 130–178.
• Yang, S.-H. 2009. “Using Blogs to Enhance Critical Reflection and Community of Practice.” Educational Technology & Society, 12 (2), 11–21.
• Yeğen, G. 2003. “Yaratıcı drama.” İlköğretim Online, Öğretim Uygulamaları, 2(2).
• Yin, R. K. 2003. Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.