Implementing innovation in schools requires careful orchestration of a host of dimensions and stakeholders. Stakeholders fundamental to change are teachers. This article explores the potential of an in-school professional development program at empowering teachers and consequently transforming their perceptions, attitudes, and classroom practice. This program formed part of a 3-year-3-cycle research longitudinal project aimed primarily at promoting Drama within a school situated in a low socioeconomic status area. The discussion centers on the teachers’ initial beliefs, perceptions, knowledge, and practice of Drama and examines the change as a result of the professional development intervention. The research gradually involved all the teacher population (14) in the particular primary state school. At the end of the 3-year project, teachers reported a change in perceptions and enhanced knowledge of Drama conventions and thus felt more confidence to teach the subject. Moreover, they reported that a year after the project had finished, they were still using the Drama strategies learnt in their classrooms.
Apple, M.W., & Jungck, S. ( 1991). You don’t have to be a teacher to teach in this unit: teaching, technology and control in the classroom. In A. Hargreaves & M. Fullan (Eds.), Understanding Teacher Development. London: Cassell.
2.
Attard, C. ( 2007). Creative expression and the Midweek Project in Gozitan Primary state schools. Unpublished BEd (Hons.) Dissertation, University of Malta.
3.
Begoray, D.L., & Morin, F. ( 2002). Multiple literacies in language arts: Sustainable teacher change through a summer institute. Reading Online, 64. Accessed December 5, 2003, from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.aspHREF=begoray/index.html
4.
Bezzina, C. ( 1999). Opening Doors to School Improvement: an introductory handbook. Malta: MUT Publications .
5.
Bolton, G. ( 1984). Drama as Education. Essex: Longman.
6.
Borg, C., & Mayo, P. ( 2001). ‘From ‘Adjuncts’ to ‘Subjects’: parental involvement in a working class community’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22, 245-266.
7.
Brown, J. L. Ed. (1995). Professional development and observing dimensions of learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum and Instruction.
8.
Carless, D.R. ( 1997). Managing systemic curriculum change: A critical analysis of Hong Kong’s target-oriented curriculum initiative. International Review of Education, 43, 349-366.
9.
Cohen, D.K., & Hill, H.C. ( 1998). Instructional policy and classroom performance: the mathematics reform in California. Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) Research Report Series RR.
10.
Cohen, D.K., & Hill, H.G. ( 2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102, 294-343.
11.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. ( 2000). Research Methods in Education (5th ed). London: Routledge Falmer .
12.
Cook, C. ( 1917). The play way. London: Heinemann.
13.
Dilworth, M.E., & Imig, D.G. ( 1995). Reconceptualizing professional teacher development. The ERIC Review, 3, 5-11.
14.
Fullan, M. ( 1982). The meaning of educational change. Toronto: OISE.
15.
Fullan, M. ( 1999). Change Forces: The sequel. London : Falmer Press.
16.
Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1996). What is worth fighting for in your school?New York: Teachers College Press.
17.
Gatt, I. ( 2006). Challenging policy, changing practice: Introducing drama as a curriculum innovation. Unpublished PhD, University of Exeter.
18.
Giordmaina, J. (Ed.). (2000). National curriculum on its way: Proceedings. A Conference on the Implementation of the National Curriculum, Ministry of Education, Education Division, Faculty of Education, Gutenberg Press, Malta.
19.
Green, L., Chedzoy, S.M., Harris, W., Mitchell, R., Naughton, C., Rolfe, L., & Stanton, W. ( 1998). A study of student teachers’ perceptions of teaching the arts in primary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 24, 95-107.
20.
Guskey, T. ( 2002). Professional Development and Teacher Change. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 83, 381-392.
21.
Guskey, T.R., & Sparks, D. ( 1996). Exploring the relationship between staff development and improvements in student learning. Journal of Staff Development , 17, 34-38.
22.
Harootunian, B., & Yargar, G.P. ( 1980). Teachers’ conceptions of their own success. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, April.
23.
Kennedy, M. ( 1998). Form and substance in teacher inservice education. Research Monograph No.13Madison, WI, National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin Madison.
24.
Leonhard, C. ( 1999). Grand masters series: A challenge for change in music education. Music Educators Journal, 863, 40-43.
25.
Mezirow, J. ( 1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ministry for Education and National Culture ( 1998) Kurrikulu Nazzjonali gdid għall-Edukazzjoni f’Malta Bejn l-Eta ta’ 3 u 16-il Sena [A New National Curriculum for Education in Malta 3 -16]. Malta: Ministry for Education and National Culture.
28.
Ministry of Education and National Culture. ( 1999). Creating the Future Together: National Minimum Curriculum . Malta: Ministry of Education.
29.
Ministry of Education. (2001). National Curriculum on Its Way: strategic plan. Malta: Ministry of Education.
30.
O’Neill, C. ( 1995). Drama worlds: A framework for process drama. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
31.
Stanton, W. ( 1997). Teacher education or on-the-job training?The Position of Drama. NADIE Journal, Brisbane Australia (61-73).
32.
Wang, Y.L., Frechling, J.A., & Sanders, W.L. ( 1999). Exploring linkages between professional development and student learning: A pilot study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, April.
33.
Ward, W. ( 1930). Creative dramatics. New York: D. Appleton-Century.
34.
Woodson, S.E. ( 1999). ReConceiving ‘creative drama’: An exploration and expansion of American metaphorical paradigms. Research in Drama Education, 42, 201-214.
