ContentsPage

Foreword 3John Airs

Voices of Resistance: The Context 6Edward Bond and David Davis

Editorial 9

Chair’s Report 17Liam Harris

Acts of Resistance 24David Davis

Just Do It? 30Matthew Milburn

How to use the Continuum of Engagement 39Tim Taylor

Blind Children Explore Two Sides of Darkness 49Hind Al-Tamimi with Mutasim Atrash

A note for the last NATD journal 60Cao Xi

Swimming against the tide 64Chris Cooper

Irresistible fiction 74Dr Adam Bethlenfalvy

Carrying the fire, and passing it on: from Mostar to Novi Sad 81Hristina Mouratidou & Armin Joha Hadžimusić

25 Glasses of Wine 94Dijana Milosevic

Why bother with theatre? 102Brian Woolland

Biographies 110

Forewordby John Airs

It was in 1985, after eighteen years of teaching English and Drama, that I realised involvement in two separate activities, politics and drama, could be, should be, one. It was in 1985 that I discovered NATD.

Later I spent some time on the committee of NATD and then for a longer period on the Editorial Committee of the Journal (previously known as Broadsheet). Nothing has shaped my work as a teacher, advisory teacher and university teacher, more than NATD and the Journal.

I very much doubt there are other gatherings of teachers (or other professionals for that matter) where you can enjoy such a creative, rewarding, challenging time together. And a shared political awareness has been an essential element of these engagements.

At one conference I remember Edward Bond saying something along the lines of ‘When the Greeks invented drama they were saying ‘There is something in our lives we don’t understand. Bring it here and make it explain itself’’. The neatest encapsulation of the art form I know. Working together to explore ways of doing this and taking what we’ve discovered back to school made teaching a joy for me and, I know, for many others.

In the previous issue of the Journal (Volume 33 Issue 1) the Editorial highlights a passage from Bond’s article, Fabricating Society:

Drama is the only way we can create our humanness and that means inevitably that drama’s subject is justice. If we can’t do this we will lose our human responsibility and become instruments of the state. Don’t think it couldn’t happen; the market is already working at it. [My emphasis]

Bond argues specifically that:

[T]he market has replaced democracy and they [the young people] are not citizens but consumers.

Later in the issue, the editors, Maggie Hulson and Guy Williams, in their article Keep Noticing – Witnesses to Injustice, quote David Davis from his book Imagining the Real, calling for:

A form of drama able to challenge the cultural mindset where everything appears ‘normal’ but is really insane.

It is observations like these that to my mind make the Journal so invaluable.

There is a nice irony in the fact that this year’s winner of the annual Global Teacher prize, the London teacher Andria Zafirakou, is, as the Guardian put it, (24 March 2018): ‘exactly the kind of teacher this government actively discourages’. She describes the arts, increasingly neglected in cash strapped schools and driven off the agenda by the STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering and maths), as helping:

[T]o really challenge [children] and take them out of their comfort zones, because they’ve got to solve problems with these subjects. So the social skills you build up with them, being able to talk about your work confidently, being able to evaluate a piece of work, being able to talk about a role-play and completely break down a role-play – they are the life skills. They are absolutely life skills that every child needs.

She concludes her interview with Decca Aitkenhead by saying:

I think sometimes the most beautiful thing about being a teacher is when you ask the child to teach you.

There is a truth absolutely at the very heart of drama in education. Has she been attending NATD conferences?

And it isn’t just teachers who realise current education policy is so unapt. Michael Rosen in his regular witty column ‘Letter from a curious parent’ (Guardian 4th April 2018) entitled So now employers don’t want rote learning? Excuse the bitter laugh, quotes a recent speech by the president of the CBI, no less, calling on policy makers:

To make education in England about more than results and rote learning and prioritise teaching that encourages thoughts, questions, creativity and teamworking.

He needs to get to an NATD conference! Or visit the online community? And read the Journal.

Either out of ignorance or malice, or both, government policy since Thatcher, driven by the philistine National Curriculum and by the ending of a local authority’s ability to fund teachers’ attendance at drama conferences or to support Theatre-in-Education companies, has finally driven NATD to the verge of extinction. That it has survived this long is to the tremendous credit of all those who refused to give in and fought on against all the odds. It is with relief that we learn that:

The Association has taken significant measures to ensure its survival

and is entering into a hibernation period to ensure the financial and pedagogical future of its work. (Chair’s Report – Summer 2017 Making Sense in Chaos by Liam Harris.)

It is precious. It is precious.

Having retired and withdrawn from the scene some time ago I’d like to take this opportunity to record my deepest respect and gratitude for those who are sustaining the Association and the Journal, the two remaining editorial members who have produced the last three volumes on their own. No mean feat. Thank you.

John Airs

Voices of Resistance: The Contextby Edward Bond and David Davis

Guy, thanks for sending me copies of the latest Journal. It’s a very good issue.

The Feds Don’t Like Us is disturbing and encouraging because it’s so informative about what is happening on the front line.

But I want to comment particularly on Seeing the World Through the Eyes of a 4-year old. As you say, it’s a jewel. But it had a particular revelatory effect on me  because I read it just after answering questions for a French production of A Window (one of my Big Brum plays). In the last section of the play there is a one word speech. It is starkly simple and there is no indication of how it should be said. It occurs in the middle of pages of abrupt chaotic broken speeches marked by dashes and exclamation marks. I’d forgotten writing it. It’s spoken by a teenager. When I read it I was astounded. It radically changes the scene, slotting in a new horizon. One syllable. What was it doing, what did it mean? How was it to be used and understood? Its sparseness was an important part of its power. I’ve analysed many ways of describing drama and acting. It is such a complicated, seemingly contradictory thing that adults should play at ‘pretending’ in this way. And in A Window it seemed almost impertinent to throw in this one syllable. But I read how the four year old (in the Journal article) thought and created – and then I understood. I write quite elaborate parts for adult actors, but how could they relate to working on drama with young children in a schoolroom? I realised that (apart from incidentals) the worlds of my plays and the 4-year old were the same. The means and process of creativity were exactly the same. It was uncanny. The four year old confirmed what I write about the new born child and how later it grows and enters into the world, then into society, and in this way creates itself and its human reality: they are one and the same. It made sense of phrases like ‘the logic of imagination’ – which the child uses to enter reality and at the same time to create itself. This is what makes us the drama species A Window is about a father and son. There were the only two Big Brum actors available when the play was written. But it could be about any child and parent relationship – or any human relationship. I will try to spell this out. Call the four year old Boy 1 (B1).   The Journal article describes how B1 plays with objects and situations and assembles, relates, them into meaning. B1 is a single child (with carers). Section three in A Window has two actors. Instead of the actors themselves writing the text, they interpret an already existing text. Call the whole text Boy 2 (B2), because it comes from one creative imagination (the playwright’s). B2 sets up situations for actors to perform. Call the two actors jointly B3.  The actors can impose false Interpretations on the situations from outside - they are ideological or superficial and seek to capture and repress creativity.  In the Journal article, for instance, this is how B1 is told that at dawn night goes away into heaven - but B1’s carers rotate a globe to show B1 the real relation between night and day, the real situation, so that reality can function. So how should

B3 interpret the play’s situations?  There are two characters in the play: father and son – call the two characters jointly B4. The actors (B3 as B4) can inhabit the situations falsely – animating them with mystery or (as in contemporary ‘culture’) false gimmicks and theatrical effects.  This would be as if, in real life, B1’s creative search was corrupted. Entertainment then becomes a drug substitute for reality and conformity becomes the repression of knowledge. But B3 have an alternative – they can use B4 and the situations to rediscover, recover, their own B1 selves. A drama’s situations are intended to not just make this possible but step by step in the drama’s development to make this necessary. Through the play each of the two actors as B3 create their own individual B1 self – they recreate the creativity of the four year old. But the members of the audience are also B3 and so when the play’s B3 use B4 to recreate, re-enter, the reality of B1, the audience must recreate, re-enter their own B1, their own human creativity. (It is the triple brain of drama). This is not mystical or idealism - it uses the ordinary processes of daily life to disentangle the paradoxes and chaos of ordinary life that, to it, seem beyond control or understanding and are used to impose ideological behaviour. ‘Enacting’ uses the creative reality of the four year old, B1. Obviously learning and emotion have an effect on the self’s ambience - but when ordinary reality is reproduced on the stage or in the schoolroom, and B3 and B4 create, find, B1, it is as if the texture of performance changes so that what formally is artificial (as play-acting is) becomes reality-without-distractions. Or to put it another way, becomes the meaning of humanness. Remember that in creative play the four year old (B1) is also creating his or her self. It couldn’t be otherwise. This is also the audience’s situation – the audience (or any spectator) of drama creates themselves in situations in our ever-changing situation, in situations that conceal us from ourselves by wrapping us in the past. To put it journalistically, in drama (not theatre) the self meets the self. This is why collectively we have created public drama. The structure of drama is B1, B2, B3, B4 – and B1. Of course B1 is present through all stages of the drama, but the drama’s purpose is to clarify B1 in contentious social and human situations, to clarify humanness. To avoid being mere style, the acting of B4 must throughout relate to the ambiguities in the situations – it can’t be left to the climaxes. Here I can’t explain acting any further. But in A Window the monosyllabic line in section three confronts the characters’ (B4) with the alternative choices in the situation and the actors (B3) must convey this throughout their performance.   I’ve spelt this out in detail to describe the creativity of a real-life four year old. The creativity of the four year old endures in the one syllable speech in A Window. More than that, the four year old’s creativity is alive in the huge public panorama of all civilization’s drama. It’s the difference between learning and creativity. There may be learning in some creativity but some learning may be rote learning. There is no rote creativity. I think if we lost it and its connection with drama, it could not be recovered. It is in danger of being destroyed.          

Best wishes

Edward Hello Guy

I just wanted to congratulate you, Maggie, Liam and Rupert on still being there and fighting on. I think this copy of the Journal one of the most important I have read. From the Editorial, the Chair's Report, Bond's writings, your article, your and Maggie's article through to the end, all speak to the urgent responsibilities we face and which you all are spending time and energy on. It is extraordinary that you are still there and working so strongly for a human future. It is as though your voices and actions in bringing out the Journal are sharpened, razor-like, by the crisis rather than dulled by its weight. Within the pages I found a real and rare understanding of the crisis created by neo-liberal ideology and practice, and encouraged even in finding the word used as you do in our article. It is urgent as you argue in the Journal to get others involved, in writing, in raising money and membership, and, not wanting to sound trite, spreading the resistance. I'll try to do something.

I'm working on a book proposal about Plymouth School of Creative Arts which I think is quite a remarkable phenomenon in this day and age. I'm visiting again next Thursday and taking down Cao Xi from Drama Rainbow in Beijing. I don't know if you are going to be able to bring out another volume but if you are going to be able to what about a volume dedicated to Voices of Resistance. I feel sure you could commission articles from Cao Xi and Chris Cooper about the wide range of work in China, Kostas in Greece, Adam in Hungary, Wasim in Palestine, surely someone from CAGDAS in Turkey although I'm not in touch with many now. But my book has been translated into Chinese, Turkish and Arabic so there is something going on internationally as well. I strongly recommend a thorough reading of all the material on Plymouth School of Creative Arts on their website: very interesting reading. http://plymouthschoolofcreativearts.co.uk/

Well done again to you and your team

Love

David

Preface to the Editorial

In the previous issue, the editors of The Journal flagged up that it may well have been the last. This brought about a warm and encouraging response. We would like to thank, David Davis, Edward Bond and John Airs for their support and motivating influence. Thus inspired we approached practitioners and were overwhelmed by the response. What we introduce below is probably the biggest Journal we have produced. Who knows if it will be the last?

Editorial

Three moments:1. May 2018. We are gripped, leaning in towards a screen. A man in Paris can be seen

climbing up, with apparent ease, the outside of an apartment block. He is on his way to rescue a small child dangling from a balcony several floors up. The focus is on the climbing man, not the child hanging on with two hands. Before he took that climb the man was an immigrant without legal documents. He had been sleeping on the floor of a residence for migrants. After that climb, and the subsequent media coverage, he was interviewed by the President, his immigration papers were fast-tracked and he now has a job with the Paris fire brigade.

NeverthelessIn northern Paris alone, more than 2,000 migrants and refugees are sleeping rough under motorway bridges and along canals, in what doctors have said are ‘catastrophic sanitary conditions’.1

And neverthelessThe boy’s father, who said he was out getting groceries during the incident, will be sentenced in September for abandoning his parental responsibilities.2

We know what has become of the adults. Who knows what has become of the boy? We don’t hear of him.

2. June 2018. In America Republican politicians are hurriedly trying to address the growing outcry over the American government policy of the systematic separation of children from their families as they try to migrate across the US-Mexico border.

NeverthelessThe US has pulled out of the United Nations Human Rights Council, calling it a ‘cesspool of political bias’.3

And neverthelessThe administration is not making any special efforts to immediately reunite the 2,300 children who have already been separated from their parents under

1 The Guardian 29th May 20182 2 Juky 2018 www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/3 www.bbc.co.uk 20 June 2018

his ‘zero tolerance’ policy.4

Who knows what has become of all those children? We don’t hear of them.

3. July 2018. Philip Pulman’s voice echoes many as he criticises the government’s ex-ams policy:

They seem to be doing their best to ruin children’s lives. We hear of the desperate straits that some children get into now, older children who are facing GCSEs and A-levels and so on. It’s entirely unnecessary …to make them a complete fetish and to make the very existence of the school depend on their success in the league tables is just monstrous … It’s absolutely monstrous. It’s the Government. It’s those in charge of education. There are individual teachers in individual schools who are doing wonderful things, who understand the true purpose of education, which is to help us find instruction and delight and interest in everything that exists.5

NeverthelessA 26-year-old English teacher says he has watched his year 11s go through anguish. Like most of his colleagues, he has laid on countless revision sessions during lunchtimes and holidays to try to get his students through. ‘In one week recently, there were two suicide attempts by students. This is in a high-achieving school in a middle-class area, so I am sure problems must be heightened for already disadvantaged students, too.’6

And nevertheless…increases in depression, suicide attempts and suicide appeared among teens from every background – more privileged and less privileged, across all races and ethnicities and in every region of the country. All told, our analysis found that the generation of teens I call ‘iGen‘ – those born after 1995 – is much more likely to experience mental health issues than their millennial predecessors.7

How is it that we live in a world where people kill themselves rather than live in the world?

In 1989 NATD called a conference entitled The Fight for Drama the Fight for Education. At that conference Edward Bond told us that:

Barbarism seeps out, it comes dropping from the sky, it comes flooding. It will find the way that it can least be noticed until it wants to be noticed.8

4 www.theguardian.com 21 Jun 20185 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-5923537/Government-s-exams-fetish-ruining-children-s-lives--Philip-Pullman.html6 The Guardian Thursday 17 May 20187 www.theguardian.com 24 April 20188 pp 16-17

Over the ensuing thirty years NATD has raised its voice in the struggle for a humanising curriculum, trying to avert such faces of barbarism as those outlined in the moments above.

To this end, the Association, and its publication, The Journal for Drama in Education, has nurtured the following three main child-centred strands:

The development of educational drama, working alongside such influential pedagogues as, Gavin Bolton, and most particularly, Dorothy Heathcote;

The development of the art form of drama and theatre, in the interests of hu-manness, in particular the work with our sister organisation SCYPT, and the profound influences of Geoff Gilham, and Edward Bond;

The development of an internationalist perspective, forging links around and across the globe.

As we write this editorial for this issue of The Journal, we are encouraged by the voices of resistance yet raised, and the practice that they set forth. We can see how the strands hold strong in the DNA chain links, and although the Journal and NATD may be coming to an end, the legacy is alive and thriving.

The first four articles concern the humanising craft, values and aims of educating the young, in and out of school. We can see that each of these practitioners knows where the children are, knows what needs to be done for them, and will tell the world about them.David Davis is one of the great teacher educators. His courses in Birmingham were the most rigorous, demanding and inspiring experience for all of his students and he cre-ated a generation of teachers who held the needs of young people developing their rela-tionship with their world at the heart of their practice. In championing, interpreting and developing the work of Dorothy Heathcote he recognised the lifeblood that she brought to young people when many around him dismissed her. In more recent times he has be-come increasingly convinced of the need to apply Edward Bond’s principles to classroom practice. In this article, as ever searching for concrete ways in which what we do reflects what we believe, he draws our attention to the Plymouth School of Cre-ative Arts. He is once again guiding us to witness acts of resistance.In Just Do It Matthew Milburn shows us what can be done. A long-standing member of NATD Milburn places the creativity of the young first and last. He articulates the bigger picture of the curriculum as he drives at four key links in the chain of reality faced by schools, outlines the direction of travel and clearly offers us actions to be taken, insisting:

I am NOT being idealistic; I am being clear on what would make things better. We need to stop rushing to action but instead slow down and engage in a national debate about the kind of curriculum, assessment and pedagogy would really be relevant for young people growing up in the 21st Century.

Mathew’s resistance was born in the practice of Dorothy Heathcote and David Davis. He has chosen to continue the fight as a Headteacher – placing himself at the helm in the school enables him to take significant actions that affect thousands of children. It also gives him a perspective that enables classroom teachers to see that ‘it doesn’t have to be this way.’Tim Taylor, in another of his important contributions to The Journal, continues to show us how

…the wonder of Mantle of the Expert, Dorothy Heathcote’s great in-vention, once it gets going it heads in the direction of the children’s own energy and commitment: not against them, but with them.

With the incisiveness and insight that is the Heathcote legacy, Taylor’s ‘Levels of Engagement’ takes us deeper into the particulars of the teacher’s craft. Taylor analyses elements of the child’s engagement, and demonstrates, lucidly and accessibly, the development of a classroom practice as he provides us with a step by step method. Taylor, like other members of NATD, is a tutor on the Abdel-Mohsen Qattan Founda-tion’s Drama in Education Summer School. Both here and elsewhere he teaches suc-cessive generations of teachers the value of Mantle of the Expert. When designing and developing the curriculum for this teacher education programme, Wasim Al-Kurdi, Director of the ERRD9, also worked alongside such long standing and influential mem-bers of NATD as David Davis and Luke Abbot. And it is clear to see the continuation of Heathcote’s work in Hind Al-Tamimi’s article.In ‘Imagination, Sensations, Drama, and a Teacher in Her First Trials’ Tamimi gives an account of how she has begun to reach out for what Mantle of the Expert has to offer to the classroom practitioner. Tamimi is working in Hebron, a Palestinian city in the West Bank. She is supported and guided in her work by Mutasim Atrash, a tutor from the summer school and Researcher on the ERRD. In his stark report of the context he draws rich connections for us, and he tells us

As a teacher, Hind seeks to find a real role to protect humans and train them to depend on themselves and use their brains to achieve justice.

Tamimi’s account is detailed and we can see how she is careful to both protect and challenge her students. She tells us of her own feelings and concerns as she and her class determine the direction of the work and try to find their own compass.One of the most interesting developments within the history of NATD has been the mingling of the influences of Heathcote and Bond. We might deduce it, for example, from the quote from Atrash above. Although this intermixture may not have been in-tentional, and there are proponents of each who may wish to oppose it, there does seem to be a folding in of both. This is evident in Cao Xi’s A Note for the Last NATD Journal.Cao Xi tells us of the work of drama practitioners in mainland China as they created a new Drama practice, much influenced by David Davis. His account of the development of Drama Rainbow, outside of the state school system, is illuminated by that of the growth of his own practice, and by his description of the profound impact of Chris Cooper’s work. He depicts the contextual effects of ‘rampant consumerism’ and shows

9 Educational Research & Development Programme

us that, nevertheless:

There are no school inspectors and we can draw on any materials that we think are useful for children. This allows us to develop a radical and progressive way of approaching early years teaching. The Centre combines the great tradition, although long forgotten by peers in other areas of Asia10, of Heathcote and Bolton, but also of systems like Reggio Emilia from Italy, and the dramaturgy of the great British dramatist Edward Bond, as well as the great tradition of theatre in education from the SCYPT movement.

By adopting and honing the methodology, towards a humanising curriculum they have found that:

Drama is a crucial vehicle for doing this, a holistic approach to the child that contextualises and grounds learning both socially and historically, but it is also a great way of thinking about our organisation strategically.

His closing paragraphs address the need to face the contradictions and the effects of the crisis, exampling a clear stance on resistance and evolution.In Chris Cooper’s magnificent sweeping piece, a companion to Cao Xi’s, he provides a fantastic description of the context both in the UK and in China and takes the reader through the rich complexity of the work that he is creating and in which he is collabor-ating. He refers to our shared experience in the UK over the past three decades:

The history of TIE and Big Brum, like that of NATD, has been one of resistance: resistance to cuts, educational ‘reform’ and the relentless attack on progressive education and the teaching profession, direct and indirect censorship, and the proactive defence of the rights of the artist, the social, political and cultural rights of children and young people, and support for all social provision in the face of political coercion and rampant privatisation.

He goes on to describe the work of his colleagues that is currently developing in China as:

…less as voices of resistance and more as pioneers making history.From an internationalist perspective, he is swimming against the tide, but he concludes that

There is much that can be done.

10 Hong Kong used to be the hub for the tradition of DiE (influenced by UK of course). And I mean that even though they’ve translated most of what’s out there in the publication, the form is still very much dominated by conventions, you can barely see elements of LTD or Bolton’s ‘being in role’ in most of their practice.

Dr Adam Bethlenfalvy provides a lucid and very powerful analysis of the crisis as he is experiencing it in Hungary and resistance to it. It has great clarity, breadth and depth. He offers us:

…a short summary of the current state of Drama and Theatre-in-Education in Hungary, followed by a subjective analysis of the current socio-political context we work in and the specific challenges this creates for practitioners working in Hungary. It will go on to present one direction that might offer possibilities for practitioners.

Adam is a long-standing friend of NATD and has had a profound influence on the development of Drama-in-Education and Theatre-in-Education in Hungary. He describes its growth against the backdrop of the current manifestation of the crisis – the landslide victory of Viktor Orbán, via a state-funded anti-migration campaign. He goes on to describe his development of the work of Edward Bond and suggests:

Perhaps this direction offers possibilities in facing the problems raised by developments present in our socio-political culture globally.

It is a very powerful and significant contribution to this issue. It points to a way for -ward that we desperately need.NATD has given a platform and support to theatre workers who saw their art as both resistant and therapeutic in the context of war – the connections were to do with values as much as anything, not least the protecting and challenging of children through the art form of theatre. Hristina Mouratidoua and Armin Joha Hadžimusić describe themselves as cultural refugees. In their inspirational article, they provide an objective record of their struggle in the resistance. The two voices combine so that we can feel both their pain and their joy. The war in Bosnia required huge strength and the hideous treatment of The Mostar Youth Theatre (MTM) by the authorities after the war called upon another. Ultimately they chose to continue the fight by emigrating to Serbia. The article concludes with their optimism and joy:

Finding meaning. Sharing that meaning. Passing on the fire to younger colleagues. It is one of the best jobs in the world.

Dijana Milosevic is a colleague who works in Belgrade, Serbia. We met her through MTM after the war in the former Yugoslavia in the late 1990s. She shared her work with us at our Conferences and we sent delegations of NATD members to work with her in Belgrade. She writes of war and violence:

In 1991 a tragic and bloody civil war started in our country. We, who grew up believing that we lived in ‘the best country in the world’, were never taught to recognise the signs of the approaching apocalypse.

There is a constant sense of optimism is everything that Dijana says, does and writes. Of Crossing the Line she says:

By performing this play, I grasped theatre’s direct power to heal by returning dignity to those who have experienced violence and to create the space for making the stories important to people other than those who experienced them.

Brian Woolland is a long-standing member of NATD, a Drama educator, a teacher and an artist. It is fitting that this issue concludes with his article as he continues on his journey of resistance, focusing on the humanising power of the art form. Whether in workshop or in performance he makes a it clear where the influence of NATD lies as he works with other agencies who seek to help the marginalised and the dispossessed. In contextualising one of the pieces of work, he outlines the sheer horror of the numbers:

There are more than 3 million refugees in Turkey (probably more than 4 million if all the ‘illegal entrants’ are taken into account). Approximately 9% of these are housed in camps. The city of Adana has a population of 3 million. It is presently host to 300,000 refugees, i.e. 10% of the population of the city. 100,000 of these are not registered and therefore not eligible for any kind of education or support. On a personal level, I found myself overwhelmed and distressed by the sheer numbers involved.

But as always, he is searching for the way. The way to understand. The way to enable. The way to make a difference. And the way to join forces with those who share the journey:

In Amsterdam there is a bookshop called PAGES, which functions as a cultural and arts centre as well as a bookshop, and is run by a Syrian who arrived in the city in the early stages of the Syrian civil war, Samer al-Kadri. Al-Kadri wrote this, which resonates strongly with The Promised Land project, and is a reminder to us all that resistance and solidarity can take many forms…

We need builders to build houses, we need farmers, we need medicine, we need food. We need many things, but we also need art and culture. Without culture, we don’t have anything…

The Last Word?Chair’s Report Summer 2018

by Liam Harris

I feel a great sense of responsibility in writing this Chair’s Report. As you will have gathered from the Editorial in the pages previous, this could well be the last Chair’s Report ever published in a Journal - at least in the format that we know it.

In April 2018, NATD held its AGM in London. For the third year in a row, the Association considered a motion to close. After lengthy conversation and debate, the Association voted against the motion but made the following commitments for the 2018-19 term of office:

To commit to a Conference in 2019, at which an AGM will be held to determ-ine the future of the Association;

To produce one edition of The Journal for Drama in Education; To nurture an understanding of how the Association can be developed to in-

crease engagement; To investigate outsourcing the Association’s general administration and find-

ing funds to pay for this service.

It was mooted at AGM 2018 that unless the evolutions of the year ahead rejuvenate the Association, that it will be time for the Association to close.

I am therefore in a difficult position in writing this report. On the one hand, I have to recognise in my musings that this could well be the last formal publication of the Association. On the other hand, my position in the Association requires me to be the eternal optimist. We must consider that this is not simply an end, but an opportunity to reimagine what NATD, and particularly the Journal, could be.

I think, then, it is useful to break down my report into 3 questions:

1. What has the Journal (and its predecessor, The Drama Broadsheet) been since its inception in the 1970’s?

2. What has the Journal become in recent times?3. What might the Journal be in times to come?

I do not intend to capture a complete and accurate history of the Journal (that is not only an enormous task, but a somewhat naïve approach to what has been a pivotal aspect of the Association’s work over nearly 40 years). Instead, I hope that you might garner a flavour of what the Journal will be leaving as its legacy.

What has the Journal been?

As an undergraduate student at the Royal Central School of Speech and Drama (RCCSD), I found myself in the school’s library preparing for my dissertation. I had already been a member of the Association for a number of years and was therefore quite familiar with the Journal as a publication. As I sifted through RCCSD’s collection, I was surprised to find another publication with the Association’s name on - Issue 1 of Drama Broadsheet from 1979. A typewritten document stapled in one corner with a hand-drawn image on the front cover, it was full of information about local, regional and national events, opinion pieces and official reports. It is a fascinating read and a digital copy can be found in the Member’s Only Archive on the natd.eu website. It is from these humble beginnings that the Journal as we know it today has grown and flourished.

It is only by looking at the Journal’s origins that we can truly begin to understand the impact NATD’s primary publication has had on Drama Education not only nationally, but internationally. Even in this very first publication, we get a sense of its importance in championing the overall aims of the Association. It developed a dual purpose of informing its membership about the local happenings across the country (and how this fitted within the national picture) while simultaneously advancing the pedagogy and practice of Drama in Education. It has continued to do so for nearly 40 years.

What is evident within these early editions throughout the 1980s is a sense of struggle around Drama’s place within the curriculum. In Issue 3 from 1980, Chair Sandra Williams summarised the happenings of an Oxford Conference using the soundbites from conference delegates and speakers (Williams, 1980: 2-4). She particularly focusses on the comments of Ken Robinson - now Sir Ken Robinson of TED Talk fame – who addressed the delegation at the event. In it, he outlined what he thought NATD should be doing to support the growth of Drama in schools:

Encourage debate Keep a register of speakers, reading material, contacts, Circulate information, evaluate what is going on Liaise with NADA, NCTYP etc.

In many ways, this is what the Journal has continued to do throughout its existence.

Drama continues to struggle for its place in schools and the Journal has continued to champion its place in a child-centred, humanising curriculum, encouraging debate, circulating material and ensuring that networks of like-minded individuals have continued to grow.

Throughout the 1980s, Drama Broadsheet became a prominent voice in the fight against the reductionist and heavily marketised Thatcherite view of education. The Association spent much time fighting for the repeal of the 1988 Education Reform Act, which introduced a standardised National Curriculum for the first time. With a regular section entitled ‘Cuts, Cuts, Cuts’ and continual criticism of the effects league tables would have on the place of schools within the community, it is quite remarkable how accurate the publication’s foresight was in predicting the current crisis schools across the UK find themselves in as a result of a marketised school system.

The 1990s saw a shift in focus for Drama Broadsheet. As Tony Blair began his 12 year stint as Prime Minister of a Labour Government, education came to the ministerial foreground three times over. Drama Broadsheet went about solidifying the practice and pedagogy of Drama in Education, publishing a number of seminal articles from prominent writers such as Dr Dorothy Heathcote, Gavin Bolton, David Davis, Edward Bond, Tony Grady and Geoff Gillham. These articles remain cornerstones of our understanding of Drama-in-Education practice and have provided the springboard for future research and development of the thinking behind Drama in the classroom and beyond. The scale and wealth of material produced throughout the 1990s is exceptional and represents a significant contribution to the cannon of writing about Drama in Education that underpins much of the current research into our practice.

The late 1990’s saw the end of Drama Broadsheet as a publication and the early 2000s saw the beginnings of the Journal for Drama in Education as we know it today. The rebranding was in recognition of the considerable pedagogical and educational influence the publication was having both nationally and internationally. The change in name allowed for the publication to move from magazine to academic journal, now with a weighty list of academic referees that enabled much of the work to be ratified against rigorous academic standards. The list of referees is quite phenomenal and has included:

Lina Attel Director of the Performing Arts Centre, Noor Al Hussein Foundation, Jordan

Gavin Bolton Reader Emeritus, University of DurhamProfessor David Davis

Professor of Drama in Education, University of CentralEngland

Dr Brian Edmiston

Associate Professor, Ohio State University, USA

Dorothy Heathcote

Senior Lecturer in School of Education, Universities of Durham and Newcastle 1950-1986

Wasim Kurdi Researcher, Qattan Centre for Educational Research

Development, Rammallah, PalestineProfessor David McKellar

Deputy Dean and Head of Department, Rhodes University, South Africa

Carmel O’Sullivan Lecturer in Education, Trinity College DublinAllan Owens Senior Lecturer in Drama, Chester College Of Higher

EducationJaroslav Provaznik

Principle Lecturer in Drama in Education, Prague, Czech Republic

Bill Roper Senior Lecturer in Psychology, University of Central England

Dr. Urvashi Sahni President of the Studyhall Educational Foundation, IndiaJohn Somers Senior Lecturer in School of Drama and Music, University

of ExeterErik Szauder Assistant Professor, Eotvos University, Budapest, HungaryDr Paddy Walsh Senior Lecturer, London University Institute

Of EducationBrian Woolland Lecturer in Drama and Theatre Studies, University of

Reading

Throughout its time, the Journal has extended its reach considerably across the globe. It can be found in libraries and in schools in Canada, Eire, South Africa, Greece, Palestine, Norway, Belgium, Holland, Australia, the Netherlands and, of course, the UK.

I think one of the Journal’s greatest achievements has been its publication of several special Issues over the last 10 years. These have included the Dorothy Heathcote Special Edition (Volume 28, Issue 3) in 2012 to mark the extraordinary work of our late President who had just passed away; The History of NATD (Volume 28, Issue 4) in 2012 which captured the development of the Association from the 1970s to 2011 with contributions from many of the chairpersons throughout the period; and the TIE Special (Volume 29, Issue 3) published in 2013 that captured some of the most important writings on Theatre in Education since the 1980s. These special editions have introduced a new generation of drama educators to the very foundations of our practice.

At the heart of the Journal and the Broadsheet are its contributors, without whom the Association and, more importantly the practice, would not have grown and flourished over the past 40 years. These people are an extraordinary collection of practitioners and educationalists. To give you a flavour of the quality of regular writers and contributors to the Journal, I have named a few of the most notable over the last 50 years: Dr Dorothy Heathcote MBE, Gavin Bolton, Sir Ken Robinson, Tony Grady, Geoff Gillham, Jonothan Neelands, David Davis, Edward Bond, Wasim Kurdi, Luke Abbott, Deborah Kidd, Ian Yeoman, Tag McEntegart, Gillian Adamson, Chris Cooper, Adam

Bethlenfalvy, Hywel Roberts and Brian Woolland. It is extraordinary to think that these great minds have come together over the span of 40 years under the common cause of developing a humanising, child-centred practice with drama at its heart.

Often un-thanked, but never underestimated, have been the professionals who have served on the various manifestations of the Editorial Committee. Most, if not all, have served as editors while also holding down full-time professional commitments. I think this is perhaps what is most remarkable about the Journal – a publication of such quality and importance has been regularly curated by part-time volunteers. In this sense it has truly been the mouthpiece of the Association: made by its members for its members with no material gain beyond the betterment of teaching and learning in the classroom. The editors to whom we all owe so much have included: Tony Grady, Sandy Frost, David Davis, Roger Wooster, Kate Katafiasz, Kate Page, John Airs, Guy Williams, Jenny Daniels, Tag McEntegart, Annette O'Reilly, Jo Gould, Theo Bryer, Mitch Holder-Mansfield, Al Muir, Wendy Rouse, Christine Vassilopulou. Particular recognition should go to Maggie Hulson who has served a remarkable 26 years on the Editorial Committee of the Broadsheet and Journal.

At the NATD Conference in 2013, upon being appointed President of the Association, Luke Abbott commented on how we were all standing upon the shoulders of giants. I think that this has never been more apparent than when looking at the list of names above who, in some way, have contributed to the legacy that is the Journal for Drama in Education.

What has the Journal become in recent times?It is no secret that all aspects of the Association have struggled over the last 10 years. The climate in UK schools has changed and the world is moving into uncharted territory with rapid advances in technology changing the way in which we know, understand and most importantly, interact with the world around us. With a dwindling and ageing membership, the output of the Association has come under significant strain. The old ways that kept people together for so long have been worn away by the marketised climate that continues to prevail in the education sector.

Despite this, the Journal has remained a guiding light for us all in what might be seen as some as extremely dark times. Against all the odds, it has continued to produce high quality and important reflections on the Drama-in-Education methodology that continue to inform our classroom practice. However, this has not been without significant challenges.

Unlike in times of old, the depleted membership numbers have resulted in a reduced pool of individuals to draw from to fill committee positions, both on the National Executive Committee and the Journal Committee. For the past 2 years, the Association has relied on two individuals to continue to oversee the editing of the publication. We all owe an awful lot to Maggie Hulson and Guy Williams for their tireless efforts. Our

thanks should also go to Roger Wooster who has continued to proof read the Journal despite attempting to enjoy a well-earned retirement!

In addition, the depleted membership has resulted in a lack of activity from which the Journal can draw quality material. Without a wide pool of members, from where can we draw the next generation of seminal article writers? Unless the Association can draw in the next generation of Drama educators quickly, there will be no practice from which the Association can draw.

Despite dwindling membership, it is a testament to the Editorial Committee that the number of subscriptions for the Journal, both national and international, continues to grow. Academic institutions from Palestine to Greece, from China to the USA continue to stock the Journal in their libraries. Unfortunately, our reach has not extended to individuals who, historically, have been the lifeblood of the Association. Unless we can find a way to engage the individual once more, the Journal and the Association will cease to exist.

What might the Journal be in times to come?

It is our hope that over the coming year we will be able to instigate a significant evolution of the Association. We are currently in conversation as an NEC about collaborating with academic institutions to establish a significant re-launch event at which we can engage a new generation of teachers and educators with the pedagogy of NATD. Alongside this, we are continuing to explore ways in which we can reach the individual by digital means in order to gather together in the flesh for the meaningful sharing of practice – a principle to which we remain committed.

But where does this leave the Journal?

As Chair, I believe we have two key responsibilities. The first is to protect the legacy of the pedagogical wisdom within the back catalogue of Drama Broadsheet and The Journal for Drama in Education, ensuring that this remains accessible to future generations of Drama educators. Secondly, we must endeavour to provide an accessible and inclusive space for the next generation of reflective pedagogical writing. What might this look like? We welcome your thoughts on the matter and I invite you to contact me directly to do so.

For now, we have committed to publishing this edition of The Journal for Drama-in-Education. Beyond this, the future remains uncertain.

What is certain is that unless the Association begins to engage once more with the individual and the readership and membership step forward to reimagine its fundamental structures, this will be the last word.

We stand on the shoulders of giants – but we cannot stand still anymore.