A Vygotskian Argument for Teaching Drama in Secondary Schools

  • Harry DanielsEmail author
  • Emma Downes
Part of the Creativity Theory and Action in Education book series (CTAE, volume 2)


In this chapter we will argue that drama provides young people with opportunities for exploring possibilities of ways of being in the world. Our suggestion is that these opportunities of ‘being other,’ of reflecting on one’s identity in the social world, are facilitated by experiences of being in role in the safety of settings that are an important part of drama in education. It is in drama lessons the techniques and practices of being in role are acquired. These techniques and practices constitute tools that enable young people to work on their ‘selves.’ They mediate social relations in such a way that enables new forms of exploration and understanding of the self and possibilities for ‘being other.’ The acquisition of these tools requires teaching. This argument becomes all the more important when we consider the fact that drama has been marginalized in the English secondary school thus denying young people access to what can be some of the most formative experiences of their educational careers.


Vygotsky Drama Role Mediation Creativity Imagination 


  1. Bakhurst, D., & Sypnowich, C. (1995). Introduction. In D. Bakhurst & C. Sypnowich (Eds.), The social self. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Billett, S., & Somerville, M. (2004). Transformations at work: Identity and learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruner, J. (1997). Celebrating divergence: Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 40, 63–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Courtney, R. (1990). Drama and intelligence: A cognitive theory. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Courtney, R. (1995). Drama and feeling: An aesthetic theory. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Daniels, H., & Downes, E. (2014). Identity and creativity: The transformative potential of drama lessons. Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 3(2), 41–71.Google Scholar
  7. Derry, J. (2013). Vygotsky: Philosophy and education. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elliott, V., & Dingwall, N. (2017). Roles as a route to being ‘other’: Drama-based interventions with at-risk students. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 22(1), 66–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analysing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 377–406). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1–18). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fleer, M., & Hammer, M. (2013). Emotions in imaginative situations: The valued place of fairytales for supporting emotion regulation. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 20(3), 240–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glăveanu, V. P. (2010). Creativity as cultural participation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(1), 48–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glassman, M. (1996). Understanding Vygotsky’s motive and goal: An exploration of the work of A. N. Leontiev. Human Development, 39, 309–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and social change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  15. Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1984). Current activity for the future: The zo-ped. In B. Rogoff & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), Children’s learning in the zone of proximal development: New directions for child development (pp. 45–63). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  16. Hughes, J., & Wilson, K. (2004). Playing a part: The impact of youth theatre on young people’s personal and social development. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 9(1), 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Luria, A. R. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lynch, A. D., Lerner, R. M., & Leventhal, T. (2013). Adolescent academic achievement and school engagement: An examination of the role of school-wide peer culture. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(1), 6–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Moran, S., & John-Steiner, V. (2003). Creativity in the making: Vygotsky’s contemporary contribution to the dialectic of development and creativity. In M. Marschark (Ed.), Creativity and development (pp. 61–90). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moran, S., & John-Steiner, V. (2004). How collaboration in creative work impacts identity and motivation. In K. Littleton & D. Miell (Eds.), Collaborative creativity: Contemporary perspectives (pp. 11–25). London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  22. Prior, P. (1997). Literate activity and disciplinarity: The heterogeneous (re)production of American studies around a graduate seminar. Mind, Culture and Activity, 4(4), 275–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smagorinsky, P. (2011). Vygotsky’s stage theory: The psychology of art and the actor under the direction of perezhivanie. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 18(4), 319–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sobkin, V. S. (2016). L. S. Vygotsky and the theater. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 53(3), 1–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tawell, A., Thompson, I., Daniels, H., Elliott, V., & Dingwall, N. (2015). Being other: The effectiveness of arts based approaches in engaging with disaffected young people. Oxford: University of Oxford. Retrieved from
  26. Thompson, I., & Tawell, A. (2017). Becoming other: Social and emotional development through the creative arts for young people with behavioural difficulties. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 22(1), 18–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Vygotsky, L.S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 42(1), 7–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wallace-DiGarbo, A., & Hill, D. C. (2006). Art as agency: Exploring empowerment of at-risk youth. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 23(3), 119–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Wertsch, J., & Tulviste, P. (1992). L. S. Vygotsky and developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 28, 548–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wright, P., & Rasmussen, B. (2001). Children and drama: Knowing differently. In M. Robertson & R. Gerber (Eds.), Children’s ways of knowing: Learning through experience (pp. 218–232). Camberwell: ACER Press.Google Scholar
  33. Yaroshevsky, M. (1989). Lev Vygotsky. Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  34. Yaroshevsky, M. (1993). L. S. Vygodsky: In search for the new psychology. Saint-Petersburg: Publishing House of International Foundation for History of Science.Google Scholar
  35. Zinchenko, V. P. (1985). Vygotsky’s ideas about units of analysis for the analysis of mind. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 94–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Curriculum Co-ordinator for Drama. Bartley Green SchoolBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations