Dance-ability: A Mixed Methods Study of Dance and Development in Preschool Students with Disabilities and Adaptations for Sustainable Dance Programming
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
Eleanor Louise Pierman, M.A.
Graduate Program in Arts Administration, Education and Policy
The Ohio State University
2020
Dissertation Committee:
Shari Savage, Ph.D., Advisor
Joni Boyd Acuff, Ph.D.
Margaret Wyszomirski, Ph.D.
Laurie Katz, Ph.D.
Copyrighted by
Eleanor Louise Pierman
2020
Abstract
The increasing constituency of children with autism and the need for accessible early intervention strategies has sparked my interest in dance as not only a teaching tool, but as a means for inclusive education. Though we have made headway with modifications and differentiated instruction for students with disabilities, most practices still take place within traditional education structures. Instead, I argue that teachers should expand their pedagogies to include less traditional methods of instruction that may be accessible to and foster growth in all students, not just the “average” student that many curricula are tailored to. Dance education is one avenue that has not been greatly explored but has the potential to enhance inclusive education practices.
The primary research question in this mixed-methods study asks whether or not a ballet company’s pre-kindergarten creative movement program influences development for students in inclusion classrooms, and to determine if dance correlates with socio- emotional development and/or executive functioning. For the purposes of this study, I conceptualized socio-emotional development in terms of five categories: emotion expression, identifying emotions about oneself, emotion understanding, emotion regulation, and social relationships. Executive function was broken down into categories of inhibition, shifting, working memory, and planning and organizing. Each of those
! ii categories also had a number of sub-themes operationalizing specific behaviors that exemplified the main category. Additional emergent themes included attention and engagement, comprehension and creativity, independence, and following along.
Data collection involved pre- and post-surveys assessing elements of socio- emotional development and executive function, my own participant observation of the dance program in three inclusion residencies, and interviews with the ballet company’s teaching artists as well as the classroom teachers. Following holistic analysis of all data sources, I determined that over the course of the program, all students experienced growth in each of the aforementioned categories of socio-emotional development and executive function. Those results were particularly robust for the students with autism, suggesting a potential gap-bridging effect of dance in preschool for students with disabilities.
Furthermore, I was able to identify several necessary infrastructures and adaptations to make the program accessible to students with disabilities and their same- age peers. Much of the original program structure and all adaptations align with established learning theories and disability pedagogies, which ensures that the dance program is meaningfully inclusive. Using those adaptations, it is possible not only to effectively use dance as an experiential learning opportunity for students with autism, but to adapt other existing programs to become more accessible to all populations.
! iii
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to John Gilbert, who has always supported me in every way
possible, never fails to tell me that he is proud of me, and is always the first to wish me
happy National Ice Cream for Breakfast Day or let me know that Harry Potter is playing
on TV. Describing the extent of my appreciation and love for you would take take
significantly more space than I have here, so I’ll keep it simple – I wouldn’t be where I
am today without you, Grandaddy.
! iv
Acknowledgments
There are many people that have guided and supported my growth as a scholar and an educator throughout the years. I would first like to thank my advisor, Dr. Shari Savage, for all of her support and for always making me feel better than I did before I talked to her (and for putting up with my quantitative leanings!). I would also like to thank my committee, Dr. Joni Acuff, Dr. Margaret Wyszomirski, and Dr. Laurie Katz, for lending their expertise and for making my research so much stronger than it would have been without them. Special thanks to my mentor Ambre Emory-Maier for her unending support of my research and my professional experiences. She constantly helps me to grow as a researcher, an educator, a professional, and a person, and my work would not be possible without her. Extra special thanks to my mom, who consistently reminded me that I was more than capable of completing this work, even when it seemed impossible.
Finally, thank you to all of the administrators, teachers, students, and parents that were in any way involved with the creation of this dissertation, without whom I would not be where I am today.
! v
Vita
2008…………………………………………Upper Arlington High School, Honors
Diploma
2012…………………………………………B.S. summa cum laude, Psychology,
Communication, The Ohio State University
2012 to present………………………………Teaching Artist, BalletMet Columbus
2012 to present………………………………Administrative Assistant, OhioDance
2014…………………………………………University Fellowship, The Ohio State
University
2015 to present………………………………Graduate Teaching Associate, Department
of Arts Administration, Education, and
Policy, The Ohio State University
2016…………………………………………M.A. Arts Policy and Administration, The
Ohio State University
2016-2017…………………………………..Graduate Teaching Fellow, The Ohio State
University
2016-2018…………………………………..Managing Editor, Journal of Cultural
Research in Arts Education
! vi 2018…………………………………………Recipient: Department of Arts
Administration, Education and Policy’s
Outstanding Graduate Teaching Associate
Award, The Ohio State University
2018…………………………………………Recipient: Graduate Associate Teaching
Award, The Ohio State University
Publications
Emory-Maier, A., & Pierman, E. (2016). The Wiggle Jig: A comprehensive outreach
program developed by BalletMet. Dance Education in Practice, 2(1), 6–11.
doi:10.1080/23734833.2016.1133971
Fields of Study
Major Field: Arts Administration, Education and Policy
! vii
Table of Contents
Abstract ...... ii!
Dedication ...... iv!
Acknowledgments ...... v!
Vita ...... vi!
List of Tables ...... xv!
List of Figures ...... xvi!
Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1!
Background to the Study ...... 1!
Rationale for Research ...... 5!
Research Questions ...... 7!
Definition of Terms ...... 8!
Significance of Study ...... 9!
Assumptions and Limitations ...... 10!
Assumptions as an Insider ...... 10!
Assumptions as an Outsider ...... 13!
Limitations of the Study ...... 14!
! viii Blueprint for Dissertation ...... 15!
Chapter 2: Literature Review ...... 17!
Introduction ...... 17!
Theoretical Framework: Disability ...... 18!
Autism: Current Understandings and Controversies ...... 20!
Socio-political Controversies and Divisions within the Autism Community ...... 34!
Relevance to the Current Study ...... 45!
Theoretical Framework: Child Development ...... 46!
My Conceptualization of “Development” ...... 46!
Distinct but Related Areas of Development ...... 50!
Theoretical Frameworks: Education ...... 55!
Dewey’s Philosophy and Experiential Learning ...... 55!
Embodied Cognition ...... 57!
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence Theory ...... 60!
Special Education ...... 62!
Dance Education in Early Childhood ...... 66!
Intersections: Dance, Development, and Disability ...... 70!
Dance and Development ...... 70!
Dance and Disability ...... 73!
Summary ...... 77!
Chapter 3: Methodology ...... 79!
! ix Introduction ...... 79!
Restatement of Research Questions ...... 79!
Overview of Study ...... 80!
Dance to Learn Program Overview ...... 81!
A Brief History of Dance to Learn ...... 82!
Essential Resources, Support Systems, and Potential Challenges ...... 84!
Pedagogies and Program Delivery ...... 87!
Why Dance to Learn “Works” ...... 91!
Theoretical Research Foundations ...... 93!
Mixed Methods Research ...... 95!
Comparative Case Study and Quantitative Research ...... 96!
Ethnography ...... 98!
Methods...... 102!
Participants ...... 102!
Design ...... 103!
Ethics and Privacy ...... 111!
Chapter 4: Analytical Framework ...... 113!
Introduction ...... 113!
Methodological Framework ...... 113!
The Social Model and My Research Methodology ...... 114!
Step 1: Identifying the Problem/Rationale for Study ...... 117! ! x Autism ...... 117!
Special Education ...... 119!
Dance and Autism ...... 120!
Step 2: Project Design ...... 120!
Educational Philosophies and Theories of Cognition/Learning ...... 121!
Dance in Education and as Intervention ...... 133!
Step 3: Outcome Measurement ...... 135!
Socio-Emotional Development Outcome Measures ...... 136!
Executive Functioning Outcome Measures ...... 141!
Step 4: Analysis and Interpretation ...... 144!
Socio-Emotional Development ...... 144!
Executive Functioning ...... 145!
Multiple Intelligences and Embodied Cognition ...... 146!
Analysis of Dance to Learn Pedagogies and Delivery ...... 148!
Step 5: Program Impact ...... 148!
Chapter 5: Data Presentation and Analysis – Program Infrastructure and Pedagogies .. 150!
Overview and Analysis Procedures ...... 150!
Program Infrastructures and Support ...... 153!
Funding ...... 153!
Partnership with the Inclusion Center ...... 155!
Co-Teaching ...... 158!
! xi Summary of Infrastructures ...... 161!
Program Design ...... 162!
Part One: Welcome ...... 163!
Part Two: Locomotor ...... 168!
Part Three: Brain Dance Warm-Up ...... 174!
Part Four: Creative Story ...... 180!
Part Five: Solo ...... 186!
Part Six: Goodbyes ...... 190!
Summary of Program Design ...... 191!
Pedagogical Strategies for Inclusion ...... 193!
Mindset: “Assume that they can, help if they can’t” ...... 194!
Planning ...... 198!
Class Structure and Transitions ...... 203!
Pacing ...... 205!
Building Trust ...... 208!
In-the-Moment Teaching Techniques ...... 211!
Daily Evaluation ...... 223!
Potential and Perceived Challenges ...... 224!
Program Strengths ...... 228!
Socio-Emotional Supports ...... 228!
Executive Function Supports ...... 229!
Strengths of Teaching and Program Structure ...... 230! ! xii Other Strengths ...... 231!
Answering Research Question 2 ...... 233!
Chapter 6: Data Presentation and Analysis – Students ...... 236!
Overview ...... 236!
Student Demographics ...... 236!
Analysis Overview and Limitations ...... 239!
Quantitative Analysis ...... 239!
Qualitative Analysis ...... 243!
Socio-Emotional Development: Results and Discussion ...... 247!
Quantitative Analysis ...... 247!
Qualitative Analysis: Socio-Emotional Development ...... 256!
Holistic Analysis: Answering Subquestions 1a & 1c ...... 301!
Executive Functioning: Results and Discussion ...... 307!
Quantitative Analysis ...... 307!
Qualitative Analysis: Executive Functioning ...... 335!
Holistic Analysis: Answering Subquestions 1b & 1c ...... 373!
Answering Research Question 1 ...... 379!
Chapter 7: Discussion and Conclusion ...... 380!
Overview ...... 380!
Research Question 1: Dance and Development ...... 381!
Socio-Emotional Development ...... 381! ! xiii Executive Function ...... 387!
Summary: Research Question 1 ...... 391!
Research Question 2: Implications for the Dance to Learn Program ...... 391!
Continued ...... 392!
Research Question 3: Classroom Teachers ...... 397!
Limitations ...... 399!
Future Research Directions ...... 402!
Impact of the Current Study ...... 404!
References ...... 406!
Appendix A: Recruitment Flyers ...... 422!
Appendix B: Consent Forms ...... 426!
Appendix C: IRB Approval ...... 439!
Appendix D: Indicators Cheat Sheet ...... 441!
! xiv
List of Tables
Table 1. Gardner’s (2011) Multiple Intelligences ...... 61!
Table 2. Student Demographics ...... 238!
Table 3. T-Test Executive Function Data Summary ...... 331!
Table 4. Attention/Engagement ...... 364!
Table 5. Blueprint for Inclusive Program Adaptation ...... 392!
Table 6. Getting Started ...... 396!
!
! xv
List of Figures
Figure 1. Literature Review Mind Map ...... 18!
Figure 2. Dance to Learn Logic Model ...... 93!
Figure 3. Methodological/Analytical Framework ...... 115!
Figure 4. Overarching Qualitative Trends ...... 246!
Figure 5. Socio-Emotional Development Index ...... 248!
Figure 6. Socio-Emotional Development: Peer Models ...... 249!
Figure 7. Socio-Emotional Development: Students with Disabilities ...... 250!
Figure 8. Socio-Emotional Development Index: ANOVA Results ...... 251!
Figure 9. ’17-’18 Socio-Emotional Development Index ...... 254!
Figure 10. Socio-Emotional Observations ...... 258!
Figure 11. Positive Affect ...... 260!
Figure 12. Expression of Pride/Self-Confidence ...... 271!
Figure 13. Greetings/Goodbyes ...... 282!
Figure 14. Imitation ...... 284!
Figure 15. Eye Contact in Students with Disabilities ...... 285!
! xvi Figure 16. Positive Adult Interactions ...... 295!
Figure 17. Executive Functioning Index ...... 309!
Figure 18. Executive Functioning Index: ANOVA Results ...... 309!
Figure 19. EF: Parent Survey ANOVA Results ...... 312!
Figure 20. ’17-’18 Executive Function Index ...... 313!
Figure 21. Inhibition: Peer Models ...... 315!
Figure 22. Inhibition: Students with Disabilities ...... 316!
Figure 23. Inhibition Index: ANOVA Results ...... 317!
Figure 24. ’17-’18 Inhibition Index ...... 318!
Figure 25. Shift Index ...... 319!
Figure 26. Shift ANOVA Results ...... 321!
Figure 27. ’17-’18 Shift Index ...... 322!
Figure 28. Working Memory Index ...... 324!
Figure 29. Working Memory: ANOVA Results ...... 325!
Figure 30. ’17-’18 Working Memory Index: ANOVA Results ...... 327!
Figure 31. Plan/Organize Index ...... 328!
Figure 32. Plan/Organize: ANOVA Results ...... 329!
Figure 33. Executive Function Observations ...... 337!
Figure 34. Withholding Response: Whole Class ...... 339! ! xvii Figure 35. Wandering ...... 343!
Figure 36. Turn Taking ...... 345!
Figure 37. Self-Correction ...... 350!
Figure 38. Following Along ...... 367!
Figure 39. Independence ...... 370!
! xviii
Chapter 1: Introduction
Background to the Study
I walked into the gym, wondering what the day’s creative movement class would bring. An observer, I sat down to watch the teachers begin their lesson, tailored for the preschool students – some were nondisabled, and some had a disability. One student stood out, slightly smaller than the rest, with his signature black and white bandana tied around his neck. He had very little language, and though he was able to walk into the room independently, he wasn’t always able to jump or skip or hop like the other kids. An aide was usually right with him to help him with complex movements, and though he generally seemed content within the dance class, I often wondered if he felt discouraged because he needed such significant support.
That day, the teaching artists were continuing the story of The Mitten. Students had already marched and slid through imaginary snow, and it was time to introduce the first animal in the story: the mole. Students enthusiastically agreed that moles were small, so the teaching artists prompted the students to find the floor on their bellies and scoot like the mole through the snow. Seeing the students laughing and smoothly gliding across the floor made me smile, but what I saw next nearly brought tears of joy to my eyes. The child who previously needed help to complete most of the movement activities turned out to be an expert mole crawler, and he absolutely knew it. He was more excited than I had ever seen him – a beaming smile lit up his face, mouth wide and eyes glinting – and I simply couldn’t help but to smile and laugh with him. As he moved independently, almost effortlessly, around the floor without any help, I could see that he was so proud of himself, and he was having so much fun that it didn’t even matter that he struggled with other locomotor movements. Suddenly, all of the students were on equal footing, fully participating in class regardless of any disability. That, to me, is the power of dance. Given the opportunity, anyone can be a dancer.
! 1 Though I identify myself as many things, one of the most influential aspects of my identity is “dancer.” I have always had a passion for dance, whether I am watching, practicing, or teaching it. Dance is the one thing in my life that I have consistently found my way back to, despite pursuing my undergraduate degree and considering career paths in psychology and communication. My role as a dance teaching artist has given me ample experience teaching creative movement at the preschool level, and I have seen firsthand the real impact of dance in the classroom. I have witnessed the growth that takes place in the students during a dance residency, and just as importantly, how much fun they have when they are in dance class. The joy, inspiration, and empowerment that dance can bring to all of its students is the driving force behind my passion and my research interest. It is my hope to expand those benefits to populations of students who are often underserved, such as students with autism. I have taught movement programs specifically for students with autism, and aside from being able to see the students progress in terms of movement and social development, they have been the most fun residencies I have ever had the pleasure of teaching. I want to understand on a deeper level how development is affected by dance, and how I can better my own teaching practices to share the joys of dancing with children who might not otherwise have the opportunity to experience them. Additionally, this dissertation is a continuation of my Master’s thesis, and I hope to further the work that I started at the beginning of my graduate school career.
Through my own experience as a teaching artist, I have also developed an interest in education and especially the role of the arts in both mainstream education as well as inclusion or special needs settings. Research about different learning methods (Gardner,
! 2 1998, 2011; Hartmann, 2015) suggests that the “traditional” lecture-based model of education is not accessible or effective for all students. A phenomenon that has an increasing impact on public education is the rising number of diagnoses of disabilities such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD). ASD, a group of complex neurological disorders, is currently the fastest growing developmental disability; by 2018, an estimated one in 59 children were diagnosed (cdc.gov). The rising constituency of students with
ASD and other developmental delays suggests a number of implications for public school teachers. Challenges common to disorders like ASD include social interaction and communication (Morgan, 1986; Moseley et al., 2015; Mundy, Sigman, Ungerer, &
Sherman, 1986), both of which can impede student success in the traditional lecture- based model of education.
Public Law 94-142 (1975) requires educators to provide a “free and appropriate education” in the “least restrictive environment” for all students with disabilities. One such educational paradigm is inclusion, in which students with special needs are placed in classes with same age peers with support services provided in the general education setting (Gerber & Kellman, 2010). Baglieri and Shapiro (2017) state that inclusion or mainstreaming is often equated to the least restrictive environment. Though inclusion is considered one of the best practices for special education, it “challenges schools to find teaching approaches that best meet the needs of both typical and students with special needs within the same classroom” (Gerber & Kellman, 2010, p. 16). Though not specifically in the context of education (but easily applicable to it), Mitchell and Snyder
(2015) also explain one of the social barriers for inclusion: “Inclusionism requires that disability be tolerated as long as it does not demand an excessive degree of change from
! 3 relatively inflexible institutions, environments, and norms of belonging” (p. 14), which to me highlights a systemic issue in the institution of education. Furthermore, schooling tends to focus heavily on academic and cognitive outcomes rather than on social development, which places students already struggling in social areas at a greater disadvantage.
In response to current educational scrutiny, researchers (Catterall, 2009; Catterall,
Dumais, & Hamden-Thompson, 2012; Nevanen, Juvonen, & Ruismäki, 2014; Phillips,
Gorton, Pinciotti, & Sachdev, 2010; Robinson, 2013; Winner & Cooper, 2000; Yorke-
Viney, 2007) have investigated arts education or arts integration as a possible method of instruction to promote all students’ success in the classroom. Though the current federal legislation includes the arts in its definition of a well-rounded education (Every Student
Succeeds Act, 2015), “access to arts education in [American] schools is eroding”
(Blakeslee, 2013, p.1). Thus, proponents of arts education have increased research efforts exploring potential benefits of the arts in education. In general, studies have shown positive impacts of arts education on learning. For example, in a study by the National
Assembly for State Arts Agencies (2014), the arts were shown to motivate students, creating a positive school environment and decreasing the likelihood of student drop-out.
Additionally, students were more likely to become engaged in the classroom and develop social skills. In a longitudinal study, Catterall (2009) found that students involved in arts education were more likely to find gainful employment, volunteer, and earn a college degree than students without arts education.
However, despite the recorded positive impact of arts education, the emphasis in public school curricula has shifted to focus on STEM subjects (science, technology,
! 4 engineering, and mathematics) as well as English/Language Arts (ELA). Thus, when schools experience budget cuts, programs like art education are often cut in favor of
STEM and ELA. As of 2013, 7% of Ohio public schools had no access to any kind of arts instruction (Ohio Alliance for Arts Education, Ohio Arts Council, & Ohio Department of
Education, 2013). In particular, dance education, especially within inclusive environments, is underrepresented in both literature and in practice.
Rationale for Research
Though we have made headway with modifications and differentiated instruction for students with disabilities, most practices still take place within traditional education structures. Instead, I argue that teachers should expand their pedagogies to include less traditional methods of instruction that may be accessible to and foster growth in all students, not just the “average” student that many curricula are tailored to (Hartmann,
2015). Dance education is one avenue that has not been greatly explored but has the potential to enhance inclusive education practices.
According to a report by the National Center for Education Statistics, in the 1999-
2000 academic year, 20% of public elementary schools offered dance-specific instruction. Ten years later, dance-specific instruction decreased to only 3% (Parsad &
Spiegelman, 2012). Literature shows a connection between dance in school and social development, including: dance stimulates emotions, which can affect both learning
(Paulson, 2002) and self-concept (Stinson, 2005); mirroring exercises stimulate mirror neurons and can promote empathy (Berrol, 2006); dance can improve communication in pre-verbal students (Mason, Thormann, & Steedly, 2004); dance may influence pro- social behaviors of students in special needs classrooms (DeCaigny et al., 2008); and
! 5 Dance/Movement Therapy (DMT) as an intervention for children with disabilities such as autism can promote social development (Koch, Mehl, Sobanski, Sieber, & Fuchs, 2014;
Martin, 2014; Scharoun, Reinders, Bryden, & Fletcher, 2014; Thom, 2010). Yet despite the potentially positive influences of dance in education, it remains rare.
The availability of dance education mirrors the trends in dance education research. Despite some evidence for the benefits of dance instruction, there is not a lot of strong empirical research in the literature. According to the National Dance Education
Organization, there is especially a dearth in dance education and early childhood
(Bonbright, Bradley, & Dooling, 2013), and particularly for children with disabilities such as autism. Furthermore, the research that does exist regarding dance and students with disabilities is not particularly rigorous. Due to the nature of dance interventions like
DMT, it is difficult to employ empirically rigorous methodologies that allow for generalization or strong confidence in internal and measurement validity (Scharoun et al.,
2015). Therefore, there is a gap in the literature within the realm of dance and its impact on development in the population of preschool students with disabilities, and it is important to address that to see if dance is an effective and sustainable way to provide children with disabilities an equal opportunity to be successful in education.
In general, dance as an intervention for developmental disorders such as autism has primarily been studied from either the perspective of a therapist providing
Dance/Movement Therapy or from a classroom teacher implementing a “dance program” within the classroom. However, studies have not addressed other methods of program delivery, such as a professional ballet company bringing a program to a particular classroom. The aforementioned gap in the literature is what this study will focus upon.
! 6 Research Questions
In order to address gaps in the field of dance education and disability, this study will focus on a specific program delivered by a ballet company in a large midwestern city, Dance to Learn. The Dance to Learn program is a 10-week residency for preschool and pre-K classrooms that incorporates weekly 30-minute dance lessons with teaching artists to promote motor, cognitive, and social-emotional development. Lesson plans are aligned with State Department of Education content standards as well as dance standards for preschool. Using a mixed methods approach incorporating elements of quantitative and qualitative analysis, the following study will seek to investigate the relationship between this kind of dance integration program and child development for preschool students with disabilities.
The ultimate scholarly aims of this research study include: to observe whether or not Dance to Learn influences students in inclusion classrooms, and to determine if
Dance to Learn correlates with improvements in socio-emotional development or executive functioning. In order to understand if dance can address some of the challenges in special education, this study will ask:
(1)!How does dance influence development in students in a preschool inclusion
classroom?
a.! How does dance influence socio-emotional development?
b.! How does dance influence executive functioning?
c.! How does the process work differently for different students (peer
models vs. students with disabilities)?
! 7 (2)!How does the dance integration process work when a professional ballet
company enters a classroom to deliver a dance program?
a.! What adaptations are necessary for a program to be successful in an
inclusion setting as opposed to a general education classroom?
(3)!How are classroom teachers impacted by such a program?
Definition of Terms
The terms “ballet company” and “inclusion” have specific definitions in their respective fields. In this study, I use the terms slightly differently than they may usually be intended, and thus I would like to provide my own definition and justification for the terms as they are used throughout the rest of this document.
Due to confidentiality, I will not name the organization that was responsible for developing and delivering Dance to Learn (also a pseudonym). The organization includes a professional ballet company that trains in its studio and presents professional performances as well as an academy and a dance education department. Dance to Learn is delivered by faculty in the dance education department, which is distinct from the professional dancers in the company. Because the organization’s name applies to all aforementioned departments – production, academy, and education – I have simplified the expression of “teaching faculty from the ballet organization” to “the ballet company.”
Note that all references to the ballet company in this document refer to the education program and the faculty delivering it rather than the professional dancers who perform in the company.
I use the term “inclusion” to describe the center in which this study took place largely because that is how the center defines itself. Part of their mission is to serve
! 8 preschool-aged children with developmental delays, and in the classroom, that happens alongside same-age peers. Thus, because students with disabilities are learning alongside students without disabilities, I refer to “the inclusion center” throughout my study.
Significance of Study
In 2017, I attended a professional development workshop about teaching dance for children with autism. Initially, I was asked to lead the workshop myself, but due to a conflict of interest with a current employer, I instead attended as a participant. The person they invited to give the workshop, “Alan,” has a studio in California and runs and teaches a program for children with autism; he spoke a lot about his program and did class demonstrations with two different groups of students. The workshop took place at a school in which I had previously taught dance classes, and I recognized some of the students that took part in the class demonstrations. One child in the first class was vocally stimming – it sounded kind of like he was singing, making high-pitched noises as he occasionally wandered around the gym. I recognized him as one of my former students and remembered that he had done well and seemed to enjoy the residency that I taught.
After the class was over and during our debriefing session, Alan said that that particular child was the most distracting for him, and that if it were an ongoing program and the child continued making vocalizations, Alan would ask him not to come back for future classes. I was shocked – essentially Alan was willing to exclude a child from participating in a dance class for kids with autism because he had autism. To Alan, the child was, in essence, “too disabled” to participate in a program specifically for kids with disabilities.
The above reflection demonstrates some of the still-common barriers to inclusive education faced by many students with disabilities today. My study attempts to investigate a dance program that includes all children, even those with disabilities that may be mild, moderate, or severe. In the short term, my research provides practical insight into a ballet company’s preschool creative movement program. By gaining a deeper understanding of how the program works in different settings and how different groups of children are influenced by the program, teaching artists will be able to adopt
! 9 different teaching techniques or modify the delivery of the program to better meet the needs of all students. In that case, situations where children would otherwise be asked not to participate will be minimized and hopefully eliminated altogether.
Furthermore, many of the studies that currently exist regarding dance, education, and disability do not necessarily take into account theoretical perspectives of disability, special education, or learning. My dissertation will allow me to build an understanding of the intersections of different bodies of literature, such as theories of disability, theories of development, and theories of education, all within the context of dance education. Based on my findings, I hope to provide a framework or blueprint for adapting programming for specific populations like children with autism.
Assumptions and Limitations
In order to understand some of the limitations and potential biases of the study, it is important to understand where I come from as a researcher. As a white, nondisabled female, my worldview is situated within that lens, and my interpretations of data likely reflect that as well. Based on my unique position as both an insider (in my role as a teaching artist) and an outsider (coming into a preschool classroom to which I otherwise do not belong and working with a population with whom I do not personally identify), there were several assumptions that I needed to be aware of as I conducted research. The following section will detail some of the potential issues due to my positionality and history with the program.
Assumptions as an Insider
Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) caution that when “researching settings that are more familiar, it can be much more difficult to suspend one’s preconceptions, whether ! 10 they derive from social science or everyday knowledge” (p. 103). While my insider status as a teaching artist gives me easier access to Dance to Learn, I am coming in with an understanding of how the program is “supposed to work,” which means that I have some expectations of what should happen during the dance classes I am observing. My familiarity with the setting might also make it difficult to notice some of the interesting things that happen, because I am more likely to take them for granted as an insider.
Hammersly and Atkinson (1995) mention that people who live inside a culture
“are often not conscious of the fundamental presuppositions that shape their vision” (p.
9). Thus, it was incredibly important for me to be reflexive in my research and attempt to identify some of the presuppositions that I may otherwise take for granted. My experience as a researcher was heavily influenced by my previous experience working in the program as well as my personal values. For example, I have a stake in the program as a teaching artist, and therefore I see the program itself as valuable and likely to have a positive influence on the participants. I expected to see growth in the children – whether that be in socio-emotional, cognitive, or motor development – because I have witnessed it in previous classes. As an insider, I may also be prone to presenting the program in an
“unrealistically favorable light” (Hammersly & Atkinson, 1995, p. 109). I hope that since
I am aware of that potential bias, I was able to emotionally distance myself and be more objective in my observations. Regardless, I need to be aware that my assumptions may have led me to interpret my observations in a positive light, or that I may have focused on observations that are more positive and fail to notice some of the less positive things that may be happening.
! 11 However, in contrast to allowing my values and expectations to influence overly positive interpretations of the program, my preconceived notions may have caused me to overcompensate and report mostly “negative” observations. I realized that particular bias as I was analyzing the data for my Master’s thesis; in my fieldnotes, I tended to over- report when students were not behaving as expected or when students were struggling rather than specifically when students were successful. I also tended to categorize behaviors in a binary way – as either “successful” or “unsuccessful” – which limited my analysis significantly. I tried to be aware of those tendencies or underlying assumptions as I conducted my dissertation research to avoid those biases.
Additionally, as an insider, I faced the potential issue of over-rapport with the ballet company’s teaching artists. As a teaching artist myself (though I did not actively teach the classes in my study), I may succumb to “the danger of identifying with such members’ perspectives, and hence [fail] to treat these as problematic” (Hammersley &
Atkinson, 1995, p. 111). I did not want to privilege the perspectives of the teaching artists, or default to using only the lens of a teaching artist as I analyzed and interpreted my data. I also did not want my previous relationships with the teaching artists to limit my ability to gain rapport with the other groups in my study, such as the classroom teachers and the children themselves. With those dangers in mind, I attempted to find an effective strategy to emotionally distance myself from my identity as a teaching artist in order to understand multiple perspectives and embrace my role as an outsider in the setting.
! 12 Assumptions as an Outsider
Though my position as a teaching artist makes me an insider of Dance to Learn, I was also an outsider in the classrooms that hosted the program. Originally, I assumed I would be able to take a role as a passive observer – I would sit quietly in the corner and observe the class taking place while I jotted notes and did not interact with anyone. I thought that would allow me to take more detailed notes and make more accurate observations. However, after reading Hammersley and Atkinson’s (1995) description of the danger of taking the role of the complete observer, I determined that it was important to actively participate in the classes to try to take on the perspectives of the classroom teachers and the children in the class. In order to embody the experience of a participant in the classroom, I wanted to become a “student” in the class myself.
Related to my role as a participant observer (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995), I also initially had an assumption that I wouldn’t greatly influence the research itself. Since my presence in the classroom as a researcher accompanied a novel situation (i.e., Dance to Learn) for the classroom teachers and students, I found myself believing that my presence in the room wouldn’t make that much of a difference for the program and its participants. However, I need to be aware of the potential issue of reactivity
(Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995), or that the teaching artists’ and classroom teachers’ knowledge of my research may itself influence behaviors.
I also think one of the challenges of being an outsider is that I initially entered the classroom setting without knowing the children in the class. That may have led me to make assumptions about their experiences or intentions, at least at the beginning. For example, there are often cases where children decide they do not want to participate –
! 13 they have a breakdown or go sit down in the corner and refuse to dance with the rest of the class. As a teaching artist, when that happens, I sometimes find myself making assumptions about why the child stops participating – were they having a bad day, or is that characteristic of the child? The conclusions I draw as a teaching artist allow me to alter my approach to teaching to hopefully encourage the child to reengage with the class, so in that sense it can be helpful. However, I tried to step away from that as a researcher and avoid making assumptions about the children’s motivations, especially before I got to know them.
Limitations of the Study
Though this study will be perhaps more rigorous than other existing studies regarding dance and preschool students with disabilities, it will still be narrow in focus in that it will only consider a single dance program. Other programs of varying formats and content may provide different results, and my study will not investigate those.
Additionally, my study will not be longitudinal in nature – it will only look at a single academic year’s worth of data for each child, and thus it will not investigate whether the effects (if any) last beyond preschool.
Furthermore, my study takes place in a general inclusion classroom, so there were students with disabilities other than autism in the class. However, my primary focus is on autism; while the quantitative survey data includes information for everyone in the class, the qualitative observations focused specifically on the children I knew to have an autism diagnosis.
Regarding the quantitative analyses, the sample size was relatively small, which limits the statistical power of the quantitative data. Because of the small sample, it was
! 14 difficult to ensure that the groups had equal variances, which could potentially skew the statistical results. Additionally, because of the study design and potential confounding variables related to additional interventions for individual children, parent involvement and family lifestyle, socio-economic status, etc., the most I can conclude is a correlation between dance and development; it would be irresponsible to claim that the dance program caused the results.
Finally, individual differences in the program’s classrooms contribute to the limitations of the study. For example, in the fall, the programs happened mostly in consecutive weeks with few breaks in between weekly classes. Due to inclement weather in the winter, the first several weeks of the winter session took place every other week, which may lead to differences in development as well as teaching strategies and classroom teacher experience. The curriculum was also slightly different for the fall versus the winter session; the winter session explicitly integrated emotion knowledge within the chosen story, while the fall classes focused on animal movements that did not directly relate to emotions. Those discrepancies may lead to differences in the amount of socio-emotional learning for each of the classes. I did not directly analyze the curricula within my research; rather, I looked more broadly at teaching strategies as well as socio- emotional and executive functioning outcomes.
Blueprint for Dissertation
In this document, I first provide a review of the literature relevant to my transdisciplinary study and explain why those areas of literature are important to understand within the context of my research. I then explain my methodology, including the theoretical bases of my methods as well as specific procedures for data collection and
! 15 analysis. Following my methodology, I provide a more specific analytical framework that directly applies the areas of literature addressed in my review to my methodology and explains how I used that information to collect and interpret my data.
Chapter five begins with my overview and analysis of the program itself, including an analysis of modifications and teaching techniques employed by the teaching artists. Chapter six will focus on the student data, both quantitative and qualitative, to assess changes in socio-emotional development and executive function in the program.
Chapter seven provides the discussion and conclusion, summarizing the major trends in the study and applying them to aspects of the literature. It will also present a blueprint for adaptation – a set of important considerations for anyone who wishes to make a program more accessible – based on my study results. Finally, I will describe study limitations and potential areas of future research.
! 16
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Introduction
Due to the transdisciplinary nature of my research, it is important to examine related literature spanning several academic genres including child development, education, disability, autism, and the intersections of dance, development, and disability.
The following literature review overviews the theoretical underpinnings of my study as well as specific studies that relate to my work with dance, development, and autism. A more nuanced analytical framework that applies the theories more directly to my research and addresses additional studies will be introduced in Chapter 4.
Figure 1 displays my literature review mind map and shows some of the connections between different areas of literature relevant to my research. Ultimately, there were three overarching areas of literature and theory related to my study: child development, education, and disability (denoted by the dark blue rectangles). Each broad area has more specific areas of focus as well. Light blue rectangles denote subsections of broader areas; purple circles represent more specific themes with the red diamonds signifying offshoots or specific applications of those themes; finally, pink trapezoids represent areas of research where specific studies were used to inform my own.
! 17
Figure 1. Literature Review Mind Map
Theoretical Framework: Disability
The social model of disability is an overarching theoretical framework that works its way into each aspect of my study’s methodology and analysis. The social model is a way of conceptualizing disability that is often directly contrasted with the medical model or “deficit” model of disability. Within the medical model, disabilities are largely classified as personal problems that should be “fixed” by a medical professional. That line of thinking historically resulted in a negative and often condescending view of people with disabilities; research involving “the disabled” was unethical and
! 18 dehumanizing (Mertens, Sullivan, & Stace, 2011). Though my research does relate to the medical model in some sense because dance is being used as an intervention that could benefit children with autism, I want to move away from the negative and dehumanizing classification of disability that often accompanies “deficit” thinking.
The social model, by contrast, provides an alternative view of disability that frames it more positively. Within the social model, impairments are distinguished from disability; people have impairments, but disability is classified as society’s negative response to those impairments. Thus, the social model provides a way of thinking that removes the blame from the person with the disability and instead places it on society’s intolerance (Mertens, Sullivan, & Stace, 2011). In other words, rather than considering disability to be a defect, we should consider disability a cultural and minority identity, and thus those with disabilities can be constituted as an oppressed minority deserving of equal rights.
I will be conceptualizing my study in terms of the strengths-based social model of disability. Shakespeare (2006) mentions three ways in which strengths of the social model have manifested: it helps people politically by giving them the power to build social movements, it helps instrumentally by identifying barriers to be removed, and it helps psychologically by removing blame from the individual and placing the onus on society to change. With regard to the psychological effect, I think it can also help people without disabilities better understand and confront their own thinking and assumptions about disability. Critics of the social model claim it is perhaps too simple to encompass and accurately describe the actual lived experience of people with disabilities because it discounts the fact that impairment might be a significant part of life regardless of how
! 19 society views disability (Shakespeare, 2006; Siebers, 2008). However, despite the weaknesses of the social model of disability, I consider it to be the most effective way for me to frame my study in order to ensure that my research is not focused solely on deficits.
Autism: Current Understandings and Controversies
Because my study focuses on preschoolers with autism and how dance can influence development, it is important to understand what autism is, how prevalent it is, how it is treated (i.e., early intervention), and the kinds of issues affecting families in the autism community. The following sections will examine these issues in detail and explain their relevance to my study.
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a lifelong developmental disorder that can affect several areas of functioning, including social interaction and communication. It is thought to affect one in 59 children, a 15% increase from the 2012 data (cdc.gov), which makes it one of the most common developmental disorders. Demographically, boys are more frequently diagnosed than girls, with the ratio of males to females approximately
4:1 (Johnson & Myers, 2007). Additionally, a study by the CDC found a higher incidence of developmental disabilities like autism in lower-income families (Bitsko et al., 2016), which suggests implications regarding access to services.
Due to the complex nature of ASD, it is not fully understood. Researchers are still trying to delineate specific causes of autism as well as find evidence for effective intervention practices. The very definition and criteria of autism were updated as recently as 2013, suggesting that while we have come to understand autism more accurately than in the past, there are still questions to be answered.
! 20 According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.;
DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013), a person qualifies for an autism diagnosis if he/she shows (1) “Persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction across multiple contexts” including socio-emotional reciprocity, nonverbal communication, and relationships, as well as (2) “Restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities” including at least two of the following: stereotyped or repetitive movements, use of objects, or speech; inflexibility and insistence on sameness; highly restricted interests or fixations; or sensory hyper- or hyporeactivity (APA, 2013).
This definition represents a shift in thinking about autism, which previously segmented the autism spectrum into four different diagnoses: autistic disorder, Asperger’s syndrome, childhood disintegrative disorder, or pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS). However, due to differences in diagnoses and treatments, researchers opted to revise the criteria for the DSM-V to be “more accurate, and medically and scientifically useful” (APA, 2013). In addition to meeting the aforementioned criteria, in order to be diagnosed with autism, symptoms must be present in early childhood (even if the person is not diagnosed until later in life), and the symptoms must limit and impair everyday functioning (APA, 2013). Though treatment plans can help with adaptive behaviors, symptoms of autism persist throughout the lifespan.
Because autism is considered a spectrum of disorders, it is important to note that each case is unique. The DSM-5 (APA, 2013) has separated autism into three different levels of severity based on how much support a child needs: Level 1 – Requiring support;
Level 2 – Requiring substantial support; and Level 3 – Requiring very substantial
! 21 support. However, two children that need the same level of support may have very different symptoms; thus, it is difficult to make broad characterizations of every child with autism.
Common symptoms. Though there is no one specific phenotype for autism, there are several commonalities or “core features” associated with social skills and communication. For example, regarding social skills, delayed or lack of joint attention
(i.e., shared enjoyment or paying attention to what others are paying attention to) “seem to be one of the most distinguishing characteristics of very young children with ASDs”
(Johnson & Myers, 2007, p. 1191). Children with autism frequently have difficulty orienting to social stimuli, such as hearing one’s own name, and are also less likely to engage in social referencing (looking toward his/her mother to make sure a novel situation is safe). Additionally, children with autism may struggle to understand others’ perspectives, or lack Theory of Mind (ToM) skills (Johnson & Myers, 2007). ToM skills involve not only perspective-taking, but also metacognition and the ability to infer mental states based on external behaviors; ToM is thought to influence the development of executive functioning as well (Carey, Zaitchik, & Bascandziev, 2015). Social skills related to pretend play may also lag in children with autism (Johnson & Myers, 2007).
In terms of communication, common challenges associated with autism include
“lack of speech, scripted speech, parroting without communicative intent…lack of appropriate gaze…[and] lack of the alternating to-and-fro pattern of vocalizations”
(Johnson & Myers, 2007, p. 1192). Additionally, sudden or gradual regression of verbal and nonverbal communication skills and/or social skills, though not necessarily indicative of autism, can also be a red flag (Johnson & Myers, 2007). In addition to speech patterns
! 22 like echolalia and abnormal prosody (rhythm or flow of language), people with autism may take language very literally and thus need to learn more flexible uses of language like humor or metaphors. However, despite language or communication delays or abnormal preverbal development, 70% of people with autism develop functional language with intervention (P. Rabidoux, personal communication, February 20, 2017).
Regarding the development of social communication, Wu and Chiang (2013) found that there is a different developmental trajectory associated with autism; they concluded that in early childhood, initiating communication tends to be challenging, especially initiating joint attention through indicating gestures.
While social skills and communication are considered “core features” of autism, there are several other coexisting conditions that are not considered to be “core features” because they do not necessarily distinguish children with autism from children with other developmental disabilities. For example, cognitive ability may vary greatly in children with autism. A 2012 study by the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring
(ADDM) Network reported that 31.6% of reported cases of autism also had a comorbid intellectual disability (defined as having an IQ<70), while 43.9% of cases of autism were associated with above average intelligence (Christensen et al., 2016). Johnson and Myers
(2007) also state that with autism, “Abilities may be significantly delayed in some areas of development yet ‘advanced’ in others, often because of exceptional focusing, memory, calculation, music, or art abilities” (p. 1194). In rare cases, a person with autism may even have what is considered a savant skill, where despite an intellectual disability, he/she has exceptionally high ability in something like music, art, or calculation (Bennett
& Heaton, 2012). However, because of the vast differences across individual cases and
! 23 the inability to distinguish it from other developmental disorders, cognitive ability is not considered a defining factor of autism.
Sensory symptoms are also prevalent across people with autism. According to
McCormick, Hepburn, Young, and Rogers (2016), estimates of the prevalence of sensory symptoms with autism range from 69-93%. The most common sensory issues seen in children with autism are related to sensory modulation, or regulating responses to sensory input. Miller and colleagues (2007) describe three subtypes of sensory modulation disorder: sensory overresponsivity (SOR), sensory underresponsivity (SUR), and sensory seeking/craving (SS). People with SOR find typical sensory input to be aversive, and thus may not tolerate certain stimuli like loud noises. Their behavior is characterized by hyperreactivity to sensory input and may be limited to a single sensory system or involve multiple sensory systems. People with SUR tend to be hyporeactive; they disregard or are inattentive to certain stimuli, particularly sounds. Those who are SS crave an unusual amount of sensation and will often engage in behaviors to generate the sensations they want (Miller et al., 2007). In autism, these behaviors can manifest as stereotypies like spinning or hand flapping and are often referred to as “stimming.”
Motor ability is another area of development that can be affected in children with autism, though it is not considered a core feature. Gross motor delay has been found in some, but not all, children with autism. Lane, Harpster, and Heathcock (2012) found that young children (ages 2-3 years) with autism had a gross motor delay of six months and a fine motor delay of eight months. Using the Test of Gross Motor Development as an assessment, Berkeley, Zittel, Pitney, and Nichols (2001) found that children ages 6-8 that had been diagnosed with autism demonstrated delays in both object control and
! 24 locomotor skills. Jansiewicz et al. (2015) used the Physical and Neurological Exam for
Subtle Signs to assess subtle neuromotor skills in boys with autism ages 6-17 as compared to similar controls. They found that boys with ASD struggled with balance and gait, were slower in speed, and showed more dysrhythmia in timed movements with hands and feet. Additionally, autism also correlates with dyspraxia, or poor motor planning due to abnormal development. Studies have shown that praxis difficulties can manifest in difficulties with gesture and imitation (Mostofsky, Dubey, Jerath, &
Jansiewicz, 2006) as well as motor, social, and communication challenges (Dzuick et al.,
2007). Therefore, screening or assessment of motor skills is warranted with a diagnosis of autism due to the possibility of motor delay or dyspraxia.
Suspected causes. Due to the complexity of autism, researchers still do not fully understand its causes. There are several theories about what might contribute to the development of autism, but researchers have largely found that the causes are multifactorial (Schaefer & Mendelsohn, 2013), which makes it difficult to identify the specific underlying origins. There is research to suggest that there is a genetic component to autism; the prevalence among siblings of people with autism ranges from 2-14%
(Newschaffer et al., 2007) which indicates some level of heritability. However, the model of inheritance is not well understood. Thus far, no single autism gene has been found;
“over 100 candidate genes have been studied for association with ASDs” (Newschaffer et al., 2007, p. 241), but each alone is not enough to cause autism.
In addition to genetics, there are brain anomalies associated with autism that may suggest a neural basis for the disorder. For example, 20-30% of cases of ASD are accompanied by macrocephaly, or head circumference more than two standard deviations
! 25 above the mean (Johnson & Myers, 2007). Other neuropathologic studies of the brain show decreased Purkinje cells (cells that inhibit nerve impulses, the lack of which may relate to sensory overresponsiveness) in the cerebellum, abnormal maturation of the forebrain, abnormalities in the brainstem, and even differences in the volume of gray and white matter in the brain (Johnson & Myers, 2007). Additionally, McPartland, Coffman, and Pelphrey (2011) found altered patterns of connectivity in the brain, which leads to differences in social information processing. However, social processing occurs throughout the brain, so it is difficult to isolate what exactly is “causing” autism. Finally, because there are several different brain anomalies that are associated with autism, none of which are conclusive, it is impossible to use neuroimaging (like an MRI) to confirm an autism diagnosis.
Though there is not a lot of data about environmental factors and autism, there is a
“possibility that gene-environment interactions may underlie some of the complexity of autism inheritance” (Newschaffer et al., 2007, p. 245). Environmental triggers for gene mutations like copy-number variants (CNVs) are largely unknown, so it is difficult to pinpoint which environmental factors play a role and the magnitude of their effects.
Newschaffer and colleagues (2007) state that there are three prescription drugs that are potential autism risk factors: thalidomide, used to treat anxiety and morning sickness during pregnancy; valproic acid, an antiepileptic also used as a mood stabilizer; and misoprostol, used in labor-induced abortions. Additionally, there are other potential risk factors related to pregnancy, such as increased maternal and paternal age, bleeding during pregnancy, feeding difficulties, and others that may be related to autism (K. Ratliff-
Schaub, personal communication, January 23, 2017). However, the lack of research
! 26 regarding environmental factors and autism means that there is still not a clear understanding of how different triggers are related to autism. Essentially, the most agreed-upon information about the cause of autism is that it is partially genetic, and it is certainly multifactorial.
Diagnosis and prevalence. Since autism is a complex disorder, diagnosis can be complicated and is most effective with an interdisciplinary diagnostic team. It is important to use a developmental perspective, recognizing that autism might look very different for a preschooler versus a teenager, and take information from multiple sources to make an accurate diagnosis (Ozonoff, Goodlin-Jones, & Solomon, 2005).
Theoretically, the process should begin with surveillance (recognizing children who may be at risk for a developmental disorder) and screening (the use of standardized instruments at specific time periods in development to refine the risk), usually by a child’s primary care physician (Johnson & Myers, 2007). If a child has an abnormal screen, then they should be referred for a more comprehensive evaluation.
According to Gail M. Whitelaw (personal communication, February 13, 2017), whenever a child is suspected of having an issue that involves communication (such as autism), the first step is to evaluate the child’s hearing to rule out auditory processing disorder. Following an auditory evaluation, clinicians need to perform a clinical interview with the parents to better understand the child’s social/behavioral development and communication skills. The Autism Diagnostic Interview – Revised (ADI-R) is a standardized tool often used to collect information from parents (Lord, Rutter, &
LeCouteur, 1996). The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) is another observation-based tool that clinicians often use to aid in diagnosis; alone, it is not
! 27 sufficient to confirm autism, but when combined with the ADI-R it can provide an accurate diagnosis (Risi et al., 2007). Following the ADOS and ADI-R, it can also be beneficial to perform an intelligence test to assess possible intellectual disability
(Fombonne, 2005). Finally, it is important to assess adaptive behavior, social/emotional or mental health, neuropsychological issues like executive functioning, and fine and gross motor skills (A. Witwer, personal communication, January 30, 2017).
Early intervention. The main goals of intervention for autism include mitigating the core features of ASD while also developing strengths to maximize independence and quality of life (Myers & Johnson, 2007). Because of the complexity and variability of autism, there are many different kinds of interventions to treat it. These interventions vary in type and amount of evidence to support their efficacy. However, one trend found consistently across research is that early intervention is key for providing the most efficacious treatment (Myers & Johnson, 2007; Rogers, 1996). This review will briefly touch on the most common forms of early intervention as well as describe
Dance/Movement Therapy (DMT) and its role as an intervention for children with autism.
In 2009, the National Autism Center (NAC) undertook the National Standards
Project to evaluate the existing evidence supporting different educational and behavioral treatments for autism. Based on their findings, they created a list of treatments classified by the strength of supporting evidence: established treatments have sufficient evidence to support their benefits in the treatment of autism; emerging treatments have one or more studies that show the intervention has benefits, but need additional rigorous studies to provide evidence about their efficacy; unestablished treatments have little or no evidence
! 28 to support their effectiveness for persons with ASD; and ineffective or harmful treatments were classified as having no or negative effects (although there were no treatments that fell into this category) (NAC, 2009).
Structured behavioral interventions. One of the most rigorously researched forms of early intervention is classified as structured behavioral intervention, such as
Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) therapy and Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention
(EIBI) therapy. The NAC (2009) classifies behavioral therapies as established. ABA therapy is based on the principles of operant conditioning; it begins with a stimulus to elicit a desired behavior, and when the recipient demonstrates a correct response, the interventionist provides a verbal or tangible reinforcement to encourage that response
(Fannin & Watson, 2014). Both ABA and EIBI rely on discrete trial training (DTT), which can help teach foundational learning skills like attention and compliance. Evidence shows that “Children who receive early intensive behavioral treatment have been shown to make substantial, sustained gains in IQ, language, academic performance, and adaptive behavior as well as some measures of social behavior” (Myers & Johnson, 2007, p.
1164). A recent meta-analysis also showed that children who received EIBI experienced all of the above gains, as well as improvements in expressive and receptive language, daily communication skills, and social skills (Reichow, Barton, Boyd, & Hume, 2014).
Despite the wealth of reported benefits for structured behavioral interventions, there are some concerns regarding behavioral therapies. The recommended intensity is
40+ hours per week, which can be inaccessible for many families due to both time and cost. There is also a concern regarding the generalizability of skills across situations outside of therapy. Finally, the therapist does not really model effective social skills for
! 29 the child, so evidence of social pragmatism is also lacking (Fannin & Watson, 2014). Due to those drawbacks as well as the fact that the model is not universally successful for every child (Reichow et al., 2014), other forms of early intervention should be considered to treat symptoms of autism.
Developmental models. In contrast to behavioral models of intervention are developmental models, which are based on developmental theory and social-pragmatic language acquisition. In a developmental treatment, ASD is considered within the context of typical developmental trajectories and is largely child-led and play- or relationship- based (Myers & Johnson, 2007). Because these strategies are largely focused on social skills, they are likely to be more effective in increasing language and communication skills than structured behavioral interventions. For example, with the Developmental,
Individual-difference, Relationship-based (DIR) model, outcomes show increased ability to affectively relate to others and participate in spontaneous verbal communication
(Fannin & Watson, 2014). The DIR model emphasizes “floor time” play sessions and other methods that encourage social reciprocity and relationships, which can be beneficial in ameliorating some of the core features of autism (Myers & Johnson, 2007). However,
NAC’s National Standards Report only places developmental interventions at an
“emerging” level of treatment (National Autism Center [NAC], 2009), so more research is needed to understand its effectiveness.
Naturalistic interventions. Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Interventions
(NDBI) combine elements of both structured behavioral and developmental intervention techniques. Though NDBIs are highly structured like ABA therapy because they use “(1) intervention protocols that are composed of operant teaching techniques; (2) intervention
! 30 goals that are socially significant; and (3) intervention results are analyzed objectively by assessing a child’s progress before, during and after the intervention” (Schreibman et al.,
2015, p. 2414), reinforcers are naturally occurring rather than arbitrary rewards, which allows for better generalization across settings. One such model is the Denver Early Start
Model, which has been shown to remediate “key deficits in imitation, emotion sharing, theory of mind, and social perception by using play, interpersonal relationships, and activities to foster symbolic thought and teach the power of communication” (Myers &
Johnson, 2007, p. 1165). Pivotal Response Treatment (PRT) is another common NDBI that focuses on “pivotal” areas of development such as motivation, self-regulation, and social initiation (Stock, Mirenda, & Smith, 2013). Based on empirical evidence, PRT and naturalistic interventions are considered to be established treatments (NAC, 2009).
Social skills. There are also social skills therapies for autism that specifically target social interactions and communication. The goals of social skills therapies usually include “responding to the social overtures of other children and adults, initiating social behavior, minimizing stereotyped perseverative behavior while using a flexible and varied repertoire of responses, and self-managing new and established skills” (Myers &
Johnson, 2007, p. 1166). Though the National Autism Center classifies most social skills treatments as merely emerging, joint attention (JA) interventions (a subgroup of social skills) are considered established (NAC, 2009). Fannin and Watson (2014) state that joint attention is integral to language development, and usually consists of indicating gestures used to engage in shared awareness of an object or event with a social partner, such as showing a toy. Research has shown that JA interventions improve JA gestures as well as expressive and receptive communication and eye contact (Fannin & Watson, 2007). JA
! 31 therapy may be especially helpful for young, preverbal children since it predicts social language development (Myers & Johnson, 2007).
Occupational therapy. Occupational therapy (OT) is another common form of intervention for children with ASD. OT addresses different functional “occupations,” such as self-care (eating/feeding, dressing, toileting) as well as other areas like play, social interactions, and rest/sleep (Myers & Johnson, 2007). Occupational therapists are also usually the ones who perform sensory therapies to address potential sensory symptoms. The two common forms of sensory therapy are Sensory-Integration Therapy
(SIT) and Sensory-Based Intervention (SBI). SIT is an established therapy that has a number of fidelity measures to ensure its proper delivery. Using a constructivist perspective, it is a play-based intervention that provides a “just right” sensory-motor challenge to promote adaptive responses in the child (Case-Smith, Weaver, & Fristad,
2014). Studies have shown that SIT can result in meaningful positive effects based on the child’s individual goals (Case-Smith, Weaver, & Fristad, 2014). SBI, however, is classified as an unestablished treatment (NAC, 2009). SBIs target a single sense for a child with a modulation disorder, and they are made to fit into a child’s daily routine.
Weighted vests and noise reducing headphones are two commonly used SBI interventions. However, despite frequent use in schools, Case-Smith and colleagues
(2014) found insufficient evidence of SBI benefits.
Dance/movement therapy. One intervention that does not appear on the NAC’s list is Dance/Movement Therapy (DMT). Compared to other interventions, DMT has not received much attention in relation to ASD, and so there are not many studies that address its effectiveness; most of the existing literature is anecdotal and not empirically
! 32 rigorous. However, most accounts of DMT as an intervention for autism have shown potential benefits for recipients.
The American Dance Therapy Association (ADTA) classifies dance/movement therapy as “the psychotherapeutic use of movement to promote emotional, social, cognitive and physical integration of the individual” (ADTA, 2016). Devereaux (2012) describes DMT as “an especially useful therapeutic approach with individuals with autism that can provide both a direct link to feelings and build connection or relationship with others” (p. 335). Since it is based in movement rather than verbal communication and language, it can be especially useful for children who are nonverbal or have limited language, which occurs frequently in children with autism. However, access is limited; according to an online survey, only 2.4% of children with ASD are involved in DMT as an intervention (Scharoun, Reinders, Bryden, & Fletcher, 2014).
DMT is typically structured as a one-on-one intervention between therapist and child, which allows it to be child-centered and focused on the individual needs of the recipient. Devereaux (2012) outlines the theoretical foundations of DMT, the first of which includes mirroring and attunement. Mirroring exercises are used to promote synchrony between therapist and child and help develop imitation skills as well. The second foundation of DMT is self- and mutual-regulation, or an interactive cycle between individuals. Mutual regulation is effected through synchronous movement between the therapist and child, which enhances the bond and trust between them. Thus, both expressive communication and relationships can be developed through DMT. Finally,
DMT aims to expand the “window of tolerance,” or regulation of the nervous system from extreme over- and under-arousal. Devereaux (2012) states that “restrictive,
! 33 repetitive, or self-stimulatory movements act like a barrier for [children with autism] from engaging with others within the external environment” (p. 341); DMT instead interprets stereotypical movements as forms of expressive communication that may indicate arousal level.
Martin (2014) offers a theoretical treatment framework for a DMT intervention for autism that consists of four phases. She describes that the first phase is primarily about establishing trust and safety between therapist and child, and also making an initial assessment of the child’s functioning. Once safety is established, phase two is about building a connection between the therapist and child and encouraging engagement.
Mirroring can be particularly useful in this phase of DMT. Phase three becomes more complex, emphasizing body awareness and motor coordination; attunement also comes into play here. In this phase, “greeting” body parts can be helpful in allowing the child to understand his/her own body and its capabilities. The final phase incorporates rhythm and timing. Embodied rhythmic interventions that involve some sort of turn taking may also help to encourage the back-and-forth pattern of communication. Thus, as Martin (2014) and others (Devereaux, 2012; Scharoun et al., 2014) suggest, the integrated experience of
DMT that fosters both motor and social development could be particularly relevant for children on the autism spectrum.
Socio-political Controversies and Divisions within the Autism Community
There are currently several divisions within the autism community, partly due to a lack of complete understanding about ASD, and also partly because of the history of how autism was “discovered.” Some of the current controversies that are important to discuss include: the recent Autism Wars, which involve the classification of autism as an
! 34 epidemic as well as the vaccine issue; different factions within the autism community, such as those who want to find a cure (including those who believe in alternative medicine as a treatment for autism) versus those who consider autism as a form of diversity to be celebrated; and also some implicit assumptions and issues around language and terminology. This section will address some of the biggest controversies that still affect public perceptions of autism today.
Historical influences on current controversies in autism. In his best-selling book NeuroTribes, Steve Silberman (2015) details the medical history of the discovery of autism through a combination of humanizing anecdotes and meticulous accounts of the men and women who “discovered” the disorder. His comparison between Hans Asperger and Leo Kanner reveals the beginnings of some of the misconceptions that exist about autism, and also explains some of the stigmas that remain. Based on Silberman’s descriptions, it is clear that many of the current controversies that surround autism stemmed from the initial dissemination of information about it.
Hans Asperger is usually credited with discovering “Asperger’s Syndrome,” which is no longer classified as distinct from autism. He is most well-known for publishing a paper on four “high-functioning” children, and thus is commonly misunderstood to have only worked with highly intelligent but socially inept children – his “little professors.” In truth, Asperger worked with many different children on the autism spectrum, including those with severe symptoms that needed very significant support. Rather than considering autism a childhood disorder that children would grow out of, Asperger realized it was a polygenic, pervasive, lifelong disorder that could be diagnosed as early as two years old, which is more or less how we understand it now. In
! 35 terms of education and pedagogy, Asperger focused on teaching children “how to put their autistic intelligence to work” (Silberman, 2015, p. 105). He didn’t see them as patients to treat, but rather as collaborators in developing pedagogical techniques that would work for them. Unfortunately, much of Asperger’s research was destroyed in the second world war, and thus his knowledge was not widely disseminated until more recently (Silberman, 2015).
In contrast to Asperger, Leo Kanner is the one who is usually credited with
“discovering” autism, although he and Asperger made their “discoveries” around the same time. Kanner was able to move to America and disseminate his research widely, which is where much of the early understanding about autism came from. Unfortunately,
Kanner had a number of misconceptions about autism that were largely accepted as fact until recently; these misconceptions serve as the foundation for some of the current stigmas and controversies that exist today. Kanner’s original conception of autism was a very rare, monolithic diagnosis that was only applicable to children; autistic traits would be outgrown in adulthood, according to him (Silberman, 2015). Today, we understand that autism is not at all rare and is a lifelong disorder, but the widespread belief that it only affected children prevented many adolescents and adults from being accurately diagnosed during Kanner’s time.
Additionally, the stigma of “toxic parenting” as a cause for autism largely comes from Kanner’s descriptions of it. Silberman (2015) states that Kanner saw parents that were often well-off but were somehow either “obsessive” or “not emotional enough” with their children. Kanner discussed (rather disdainfully) an example of “obsessive” parenting, where a mother meticulously documented her son’s behaviors and tried to
! 36 prescribe meaning to them; the “obsessiveness” was considered a causal factor in the child’s behaviors. In general, Kanner found that the parents often exhibited traits similar to those of their children. Rather than the obvious thought that autism and associated traits might be somehow genetic and not outgrown in adulthood, scientists simply blamed the mother for literally causing her child to have autism. As a result, many parents were shamed for having children on the spectrum, which led to barriers for diagnosis and treatment.
As a child psychologist, Kanner essentially tailored his definition of autism to benefit the field of child psychology. Silberman (2015) makes the point that “a condition that was inborn could not be prevented – it could only be ameliorated” (p. 192) thus making the “child guidance” job of a psychologist obsolete. Therefore, if parents were the cause, then it placed the psychologists in the center of the child’s life, even discrediting the parents themselves. As Silberman (2015) said, “The fact that his patients’ parents would unjustly pay a heavy price if his theory about them turned out to be wrong didn’t factor into his calculations” (p. 192). Though we now understand that autism is certainly not a product of “toxic parenting,” that conception still contributes to stigmas associated with ASD.
The Autism Wars. In 1985, the prevalence of autism was estimated to be around two in 10,000 (Newschaffer et al., 2007). By 2003, prevalence had increased to five in
1,000, before jumping up to one in 88 in 2012. According to the Center for Disease
Control, the current estimated prevalence of autism is one in 59 children (cdc.gov). Due to the increase in both diagnoses and public awareness about autism, some have questioned if there is an “autism epidemic” (Johnson & Myers, 2007), which is
! 37 problematic in terms of perceptions about autism. “Epidemic” usually refers to widespread infectious diseases – things that are contagious and passed from person to person somehow, but also that have the hope of a cure with some kind of antibiotic or treatment. Because autism is neither contagious/infectious nor curable, the term
“epidemic” presents a skewed picture of what autism actually is, and thus leads to a very negative perception of the disorder.
Because diagnoses of autism appeared to be drastically increasing, researchers went in search of a reason for the sudden upswing in cases. In 1998, Andrew Wakefield, a London gastroenterologist, put forth the notion that vaccines, specifically the Measles
Mumps Rubella (MMR) vaccine and vaccines containing thimerosal (which is 50% ethyl mercury), were causing autism. He published a study “proving” the link between MMR and autism, which was quickly accepted in the mainstream and led to many parents choosing not to vaccinate their children out of fear that they would become autistic.
However, Wakefield’s study was investigated, discredited, and ultimately retracted in
2004 after watchdogs “uncovered numerous problems with its methodology, ethics, and reporting” (Silberman, 2015, p. 420). Wakefield was stripped of his medical license in
2010. Since Wakefield, numerous studies have come out that show no association between vaccines and autism, including a systematic meta-analysis of twelve studies that ultimately recommended the continued use of the MMR vaccine (Wilson et al., 2003).
Despite scientific evidence and the CDC’s confirmation that “vaccines are not associated with ASD” (cdc.gov, emphasis in original), there are still many “anti-vaxxers” that reject immunizations because of the conception that MMR is responsible for autism and vaccines are simply a Big Pharma conspiracy. Silberman (2015) explains that
! 38 “Beleaguered parents dubbed these endlessly looping arguments the Autism Wars” (p.
79).
Rather than blaming vaccines or toxic environments, research suggests that the increase in diagnoses is not necessarily related to an increase in the number of cases of autism that exist, but rather should be attributed to the more specific criteria that clinicians now use to diagnose autism. Because we have a much better understanding of how to define autism, it has become easier to accurately diagnose. The criteria have been broadened since the original “discovery” of autism, which means that naturally, the number of diagnoses will increase (Silberman, 2015). Additionally, there is the possibility of diagnostic substitution (Shattuck, 2006). While there is an increase in autism diagnoses, there is also a decrease in other diagnoses like intellectual disability, which suggests that autism is being diagnosed in place of something else. Therefore, there is little evidence to support the notion of an autism epidemic. However, the Autism
Wars have left a division in the autism community that still exists today.
Factions within autism communities. In addition to the Autism Wars, which primarily refer to the vaccine controversy, there are also different camps of thought within the autism community itself. One is heavily focused on finding a cure for autism.
Once again, I think this partially stems from Kanner’s initial description of autism as a purely pathological issue. In medical terms, autism is seen, especially by frightened parents, as something that will prevent independence and success in a child’s life, and thus is something that should be treated and ideally cured. The creation of different organizations such as Defeat Autism Now! (DAN!) and Cure Autism Now (CAN) perpetuated the notion that autism was curable and that a cure was what parents should
! 39 ultimately seek for their children (Silberman, 2015). Even the names of the organizations suggested that autism itself is an inherently bad thing that should be fixed. The following section will discuss some of the competing beliefs among these factions of the autism community.
Alternative medicine. The general idea of “defeating” or curing autism also comes with different thoughts about the kinds of treatments that might be effective or even curative. For instance, many parents have tried a gluten free casein free (GFCF) diet in hopes that changes in nutrition will mitigate symptoms of autism. Gluten and casein are two proteins commonly found in wheat and dairy, and some researchers like Bernard
Rimland – founder of DAN! – believed that children with autism were unable to digest the proteins, leading to “leaky gut syndrome.” Rimland thought that the undigested proteins leaked into the bloodstream and were carried to the brain, which resulted in abnormal development (Silberman, 2015). However, there is little evidence to show that the GFCF diet is effective as a treatment for autism; the NAC (2009) classifies it as an unestablished treatment, and states that there could be potentially harmful medical effects associated with it.
DAN! also promoted other kinds of alternative medicine to “cure” autism in addition to the GFCF diet. They suggested using techniques like megavitamins and dietary supplements, conveniently sold by DAN! at a high cost (Silberman, 2015).
Chelation was another method of treatment that was meant to leech heavy metals out of the body through the use of chelating agents. However, the process can be extremely dangerous, resulting in the lowering of essential nutrients (Silberman, 2015), and potentially death (Myers & Johnson, 2007). Despite the lack of evidence supporting
! 40 alternative biomedical treatments for autism, some still believe it is worth it for the small
(perhaps inaccurate) hope of a cure for ASD.
The Autism Speaks controversy. Cure Autism Now (CAN) was one of several parent groups that formed in the 1990s, and it primarily focused on biomedical interventions to cure autism rather than on providing services to families (Silberman,
2015). In 2007, CAN merged with Autism Speaks, the largest fundraising organization for autism in the world. Autism Speaks is a private non-profit organization that is
“committed to an endless search for potential causes and risk factors” (Silberman, 2015, p. 423). Although Autism Speaks dropped the word “cure” from their mission statement in 2016, it is still met with skepticism from other organizations that are not solely focused on researching the causes and treatments of autism.
In contrast to Autism Speaks, the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network (ASAN) was co-founded by Ari Ne’eman, a young man diagnosed with Asperger’s at age twelve
(Silberman, 2015). Since its foundation, ASAN works to “empower autistic people across the world to take control of our own lives and the future of our common community, and seek to organize the autistic community to ensure our voices are heard in the national conversation about us” (Autistic Self Advocacy Network [ASAN], 2018). ASAN has several issues with Autism Speaks, which have contributed to the controversies between the factions of autism communities. First, ASAN declares “Nothing about us, without us”
(ASAN, 2018), and notes that Autism Speaks does not have much representation from the autistic community itself. “Furthermore, very little of the money raised by advocacy organizations like Autism Speaks addresses the day-to-day needs of autistic people and their families” (Silberman, 2015, p. 15). Because of the emphasis on finding the causes
! 41 and treatments for autism, Autism Speaks tends to use fear tactics that rely on stereotypes to raise money. Wallis (2009) describes a controversial ad created by Autism Speaks that
ASAN’s Ne’eman spoke out against, saying: “We don't want to be portrayed as burdens or objects of fear and pity” (as quoted in Wallis, 2009, para. 4). Because of the starkly opposing viewpoints, it is important to be aware of the tensions between different organizations like ASAN and Autism Speaks when working with populations of people with autism.
Neurodiversity. In the spirit of Asperger, the concept of neurodiversity recognizes that developmental differences like autism represent natural human variation, and should not be solely considered pathological or as “deficits” (Masataka, 2017). According to
Silberman (2015),
Neurodiversity advocates propose that instead of viewing this gift [autism] as an
error of nature – a puzzle to be solved and eliminated with techniques like
prenatal testing and selective abortion – society should regard it as a valuable part
of humanity’s genetic legacy while ameliorating the aspects of autism that can be
profoundly disabling without adequate forms of support. (p. 470)
This represents a shift away from the deficit-based model of thinking; the ideas of neurodiversity arose to counter the voices that suggested the best course of action was to find a cure. Judy Singer, an anthropology and sociology student from Australia, first coined the term “neurodiversity” and hoped that it would be a liberatory and activist term
“to do for neurologically different people what feminism and gay rights had done for their constituencies” (as quoted in Silberman, 2015, p. 453). Neurodiversity relates directly to the social model of disability, discussed previously.
! 42 Language and terminology. Due to the differing camps of thought, it is important to be aware of appropriate terms and language when speaking to families and members of the autism community. Terminology has changed from when the DSM first listed autism as a diagnosis. For example, people with different levels of severity used to be referred to as “high-functioning” or “low-functioning.” There are a number of issues with those terms, such as the fact that they are too simplistic to describe the nature of autism (Silberman, 2015). Additionally, being classified as “low-functioning” often masks talents and strengths that would otherwise go unnoticed and could be emphasized by providing an appropriate environment or alternate means of communication
(Silberman, 2015). Rather than classifying symptom severity in terms of level of functioning, the DSM-V (APA, 2013) now describes severity in terms of levels of support needed. Instead of saying a person is “low-functioning,” one would describe that person as needing a high level of support in a specific area(s).
Additionally, while defining terms, I think it is important to distinguish between the concepts of “speech” and “communication.” Silberman (2015) discusses a study conducted by psychiatrist Leon Eisenberg – Eisenberg located 63 teenagers with autism and recorded their outcomes as “good,” “fair,” or “poor.” More than half were in institutions, and most of the teenagers received a “poor” outcome. Eisenberg suggested that the biggest outcome indicator was the presence of “useful speech” (p. 280). Later on in the chapter, Silberman talks about Amy Lettick, a parent of a child with autism who opened a school for children with autism. Silberman (2015) states that “Lettick realized that too much emphasis was being placed on teaching autistic children to speak, when what was truly essential was enabling them to communicate” (p. 298, emphasis in
! 43 original). It is important to understand that distinction when working with a community that is likely to have nonverbal members and to be open minded about the medium of communication.
Finally, though not specific to autism, it is important to consider how to refer to groups of people with disabilities, especially as I consider myself an “outsider” (i.e., neurotypical or not autistic). Baglieri and Shapiro (2017) discuss the influence of labels on social stigma, stating that the label essentially “takes the place of the person’s individuality” (p. 27). They also describe the problematic nature of disability euphemisms. Euphemisms like “differently abled” or “physically challenged” may appear to be “nicer” than just saying “disabled,” but in reality, euphemisms downplay the actual experience of people with disabilities and may ultimately reinforce negative perceptions.
Baglieri and Shapiro (2017) go on to describe People-First Language, which is what is commonly accepted as appropriate. People-First Language is used to reduce the stigma of labels by placing the person before the characteristic – “a person with autism” rather than “an autistic person.” It also emphasizes the difference between the verbs
“have” and “be” – a person has a disability rather than is the disability. However,
Baglieri and Shapiro (2017) also note that People-First Language was created and normalized by nondisabled people, and so some find it to be offensive. They contrast
People-First Language with Identity First Language (“disabled people” instead of “people with disabilities”), which locates disability in a social context rather than as an individual attribute. Personally, as a nondisabled person, I am more comfortable with the reasons behind person-first language because I would be afraid to assume I should identify someone by their disability rather than by their personhood first. Therefore, in my own
! 44 writing, I opt more for the person-first approach (a child with autism, people with sensory disorders, etc.). I think that does a better job of highlighting strengths and individuality rather than weaknesses or stereotypes.
Relevance to the Current Study
What has been discussed in this section only scratches the surface of what we know about autism and what kinds of controversies still exist today. Because my study will be situated primarily within the framework of the social model of disability, I believe it is important to address and be aware of some of the lingering issues and barriers that people with autism may face. Additionally, in order to foster development and growth, it is clear that early intervention is important (Myers & Johnson, 2007; Rogers, 1996). That is in large part why I chose to focus on preschool students for my study.
Furthermore, of the many existing treatments available, one of the ones with the least amount of research but a significant amount of potential is dance-based intervention or DMT. Because the symptoms of ASD include social or communication challenges, dance provides a unique way to bypass verbal communication and instead communicate using movement. Performing sequences of movement can help to stimulate motor planning skills; as previously discussed, planning and organizing falls into the realm of executive function, and thus dance can theoretically provide an avenue to develop those skills as well. Ideally, my study will contribute to the field by providing an in-depth, empirically rigorous investigation of one way to employ dance-based interventions in a preschool classroom.
! 45 Theoretical Framework: Child Development
Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) state that “Sometimes the starting point for research is a well-developed theory from which a set of hypotheses can be derived” (p.
25). In addition to the social model of disability, my theoretical framework will involve child development – specifically socio-emotional development and executive functioning
– as well as ideas about how dance relates to those areas of development. Rather than employing a single theory and testing hypotheses based on it, I draw on ideas from several different theorists to inform my research.
My Conceptualization of “Development”
Due to the multifaceted nature of human development, scholars have proposed several different theories to address it. Among the most well-known are Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and Vygotsky’s theory of social development, and I use ideas from both of them for my own theoretical framework.
Jean Piaget is known for his stage theory of cognitive development. Though controversial, the stage theory asserts that there are four main hierarchical stages of cognitive growth, such that one must progress through them in a linear fashion, with a child’s age serving as a major criteria of the stage (Lourenco, 2016). Thus, the first two stages are most relevant to preschool education. In the sensorimotor stage (0-2 years), the child primarily learns through sensation and accommodates information and schemas to experiences in the world. During the preoperational stage (2-6 years), the child becomes a more reflective, symbolic thinker and begins to internalize actions, allowing him to embrace different perspectives of the world (Kolb, 1984). Piaget emphasizes that the development of new forms of knowing are constructed by the individual; the child has an
! 46 active role in learning (Lourenco, 2016). Criticisms of Piaget claim that stage theory does not adequately account for individual differences in child development and fails to address why progression from one stage to another occurs.
Lev Vygotsky also places importance on the active participation of the child during development, but focuses on the social nature of learning and the existence of human subjectivity. Vygotsky asserts that knowledge is actively constructed between the teacher and the student within the learning environment (Liu & Matthews, 2005).
Development only occurs through social interaction mediated by tools (i.e., pencil, abacus) and signs (i.e., language, pretend play), both of which are also of a social nature
(Lourenco, 2012). Because development is highly social, Vygotsky (1978) states that
“every function in the child’s development appears twice: first on the social level, and later on the individual level” (p. 57). As such, Vygotsky emphasizes the roles of culture, history, and language in development, with the internalization of language occurring gradually over time (Corsaro, 2015). Because Vygotsky considers learning to be largely situation-specific and context bound, he attributes the goal of education to be the development of intellect and rationality beyond specific situations. Thus, education should be about the process rather than the outcome, utilizing learner-centered and discovery-oriented methods (Liu & Matthews, 2005).
In my own conceptualization of development, I think identifying certain stages can be valuable as a heuristic for charting development (Lourenco, 2015), and also for providing a framework to compare developmental growth in different populations.
However, I do not necessarily believe that development must occur linearly through a set of pre-defined stages, especially because development might look different for different
! 47 populations. For example, Morgan (1986) reviewed studies of autism from a Piagetian lens and focused on the two-factor theory of figurative versus operative functioning. He found that children with autism struggled with operative functions while progressing in figurative functions, which suggests a different developmental track than Piaget originally proposed. Additionally, Wu and Chiang’s (2014) study about social communication in children with and without autism found a different developmental trajectory regarding joint attention abilities in children with autism. Thus, development does not always look like a progression through a linear hierarchy of stages, especially if a child has a disability such as autism.
Despite my drift from Piaget in terms of adherence to strict stages in development, there are similarities between Vygotsky’s and Piaget’s theories of development (Lourenco, 2012) that I tend to agree with. First, both employ a developmental perspective, which looks at the origins, or genesis, of knowledge; how do children learn? I also used a developmental perspective in looking at the role of dance in how children learn. Secondly, both involve a “dialectical approach, in that psychological development involves a continuous interaction among distinct, but interdependent, functions of processes” (Lourenco, 2012, p. 283, emphasis in original). Later I will briefly discuss the interactions between socio-emotional development and executive functioning, which are distinct but related areas of development. Thus, I also assume a dialectical approach in my research. Third, Piaget and Vygotsky emphasize the role of action in learning: children are active agents in their own learning, and thus action precedes learning (Lourenco, 2012). Dance is largely based in actions and embodiment, so therefore I also examined how action relates to development. In my observations, I
! 48 recorded behaviors and actions, which means that actions are how I documented development as well. Fourth, Piaget and Vygotsky “stress the primacy of processes of development, not its external outcomes or exterior manifestations” (Lourenco, 2012, p.
283, emphasis in original). The nature of the Dance to Learn program shares a similar emphasis on process over product – it is more about exploration through movement rather than preparing a final performance or ending up with a finished product at the end of the residency. Therefore, while I did in some sense look at exterior manifestations of development (since that is how I can record it as a researcher), I was more interested in the process and the change in development over time. Finally, both Vygotsky and Piaget are interested in transformational changes (qualitative – how) rather than variational changes (quantitative – how much) (Lourenco, 2012). I also looked at transformational changes over time throughout the residencies (although I also took note of variational changes as well). For example, consider that a child is initially able to identify that another child is sad, but does nothing about it. If over time the child is able to identify that another child is sad and then responds appropriately to that emotion by going over to comfort that child, then I consider that a transformational change related to understanding emotions.
Despite the aforementioned similarities, Lourenco (2012) describes one major difference between Vygotsky and Piaget. He discusses that Piaget’s conception of development is highly autonomous – based in the individual child – while Vygotsky’s is heteronomous, or heavily dependent on the existing social structures and interactions with more knowledgeable adults. Because my research is based in education and dance instruction specifically, I tend to fall more in line with Vygotsky’s thinking. I want to
! 49 understand how this dance program, delivered by more knowledgeable others (the ballet company’s teaching artists) influences development in the children. Additionally, for children with autism, social learning will likely be mediated by others or prompted by adults. Therefore, like Vygotsky, I adopt a more heteronomous view of development.
However, it is important to understand both Vygotsky and Piaget because Dance to Learn itself is based on elements of Piagetian development (A. Emory-Maier, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
Distinct but Related Areas of Development
As previously mentioned, my study will attempt to understand the relationship between dance and socio-emotional development/executive functioning. In order to operationalize those abstract concepts, it is important to have some kind of theoretical framework that defines what I am looking for in terms of socio-emotional development and executive functioning. The following sections will briefly describe those, and then will discuss their potential relationship to one another.
Socio-emotional development. In a broad sense, socio-emotional development involves a child’s ability to understand and regulate his or her own emotions and to have positive relationships with others. Scholars have argued that socio-emotional assessments in preschool should focus on individuals’ success in meeting societal standards rather than focusing on deficits (Raver & Zigler, 1997). I also tried to take that approach in my observations – I preferred to focus on identifying strengths and improvements rather than only pointing out deficits.
Because of the broad nature of socio-emotional development, it is important to present a narrow enough theoretical framework to be able to identify behaviors
! 50 specifically related to it. Denham (2006) considers the foundations of socio-emotional development to include “sustained positive engagement with peers” and “regulating emotional experiences and expressiveness” (p. 60). Common constructs also stem from emotional and social competence theory, such as emotional expression and knowledge, emotion regulation, social problem solving, and positive and negative social behaviors
(Denham, 2006). Other researchers also include social cognition (including how children feel about themselves) and communicative behaviors within the realm of social- emotional development (Raver & Zigler, 1997).
For the purposes of my study, I categorized my ethnographic observations based on the constructs that are measured in my quantitative survey, which stem from some of the concepts described above. The first theme relates to emotional expressiveness, and particularly positive affect, which “is important in the initiation and regulation of social exchanges” (Denham, 2006, p. 63). Another aspect of social cognition that Raver and
Zigler (1997) discuss is identifying feelings about oneself, especially in a social context.
Though related, this is different from emotional expression because it requires a deeper sense of self.
Also related to emotional expressiveness is the understanding of emotion, or emotion knowledge. In that case, children can look at others and understand how those others are feeling based on emotional expressions (Raver & Zigler, 1997). Emotion knowledge also “allows a preschooler to react appropriately to others, and bolsters social relationships” (Denham, 2006, p. 66). Somewhat related to the concept of emotional knowledge is empathy – understanding how another is feeling and thus responding appropriately to others’ emotional responses (Squires et al., 2009).
! 51 Emotion regulation is another construct that I will use to understand socio- emotional development. Denham (2006) describes that preschoolers “have to regulate emotion while sharing materials, taking tums, [and] getting in line” (p. 70), and that doing so involves “managing, modulating, inhibiting, and enhancing emotion” (p. 70).
Finally, social relationships are an important construct in socio-emotional development. Raver and Zigler (1997) discuss prosocial behaviors within interactions with peers as an indicator for social skills. Denham (2006) cites social relationship skills as including “(a) sharing, (b) listening (c) taking turns, (d) cooperating in play or to complete a task, and (e) using polite words” (p. 77). Essentially, the social relationship skills will manifest based on the understanding of others’ emotions. By looking for each of the aforementioned constructs, I believe I was able to gain an accurate understanding of the students’ socio-emotional development over time. A more detailed explanation of specific operationalizations of socio-emotional development appears in Chapter 4 when I discuss my analytical framework.
Executive functioning. The domain of executive functioning (EF) is defined as a set of “top-down processes involved in any cognitive work that demands novel thinking, thinking ‘out of the box’, operating in a non-automatic way. They underlie planning, cognitive control, self-control, and sustained attention” (Carey, Zaitchik, & Bascandziev,
2015, p. 41). The literature describes several different theoretical conceptualizations of
EF; some consider it to be a unitary construct made up of sub-processes, while others classify it as a set of dissociable processes (Garon, Bryson, & Smith, 2008). Regardless of the form, most researchers agree that EF develops rapidly in childhood, and that it is not necessarily a linear progression (Anderson, 2002). Some researchers posit that EF
! 52 may be the impetus for the progression through Piaget’s stages (Barrouillet, 2015). For the purposes of this research, I am basing my theoretical understandings of EF on four of the five subscales articulated by Gioia, Espy, and Isquith (2003): inhibit, shift, working memory, and plan/organize. Gioia and colleagues (2003) also include emotional control among their subscales for EF; however, they frame it in terms of struggles to regulate emotional responses. That is slightly different from the framework I described for socio- emotional development, which puts more emphasis on successful interactions with peers.
Because I prefer the more strengths-based orientation, and because emotional control can be considered to overlap with my theoretical framework for socio-emotional development
(i.e., emotion regulation), I chose not to include it separately as a construct within EF.
Some researchers also argue that EF is moderated by attention (Anderson, 2002; Garon,
Bryson, & Smith, 2008), so instances where students paid attention and followed along also fall under the realm of EF.
For the purposes of my research, I am defining inhibition as “withholding or restraint of a motor response” (Garon, Bryson, & Smith, 2008, p. 40). Anderson (2002) also considers inhibition to be a subset of attentional control – by selectively attending to certain stimuli and focusing attention for prolonged periods of time, children must inhibit other responses. Shifting, sometimes equated with cognitive flexibility, “refers to the ability to shift between response sets, learn from mistakes, [and] devise alternative strategies” (Anderson, 2002, p. 74).
Working memory has been interpreted by many authors as the ability to update and monitor information (Garon, Bryson, & Smith, 2008). Keeping directions in mind while following them is an example of working memory. Attention can also play a role in
! 53 working memory – being able to concentrate on a task (performing a certain movement sequence) even when there is a distraction (another child is making a lot of noise) requires working memory skills.
Planning/organizing, sometimes also referred to as goal setting, is the final construct of EF that I used in my study. Within the context of EF, planning refers to
“managing current and future oriented task demands” (Nilsen, Huyder, McAuley, &
Liebermann, 2017, p. 54). Typically, planning and organizing develop greatly between 7-
11 years of age (Anderson, 2002), but examples can be seen as early as preschool.
Because I am studying a dance/movement program, I am also conceptualizing motor planning as a form of EF that is perhaps more obvious within the setting of my research.
EF, socio-emotional development, and autism. As discussed above, there is some crossover between elements of socio-emotional development and executive functioning based on my definitions. Additionally, some researchers have linked EF skills and social skills in children with autism. Freeman, Locke, Rotheram-Fuller, and
Mandell (2017) performed a study that found a relationship between EF and adaptive behaviors in children with autism: “metacognitive impairments, specifically in initiation and working memory, play a role in the adaptive social deficits” (p. 1891). Kimhi and colleagues (2014) performed a study that found a relationship between EF skills and theory of mind (ToM), or the ability to infer others’ mental states. Specifically, the authors found links “especially between preschoolers’ planning abilities and their capacity to predict and explain false beliefs, and also between their cognitive shifting and prediction abilities” (Kimhi et al., 2014, p. 2350). In other words, difficulties with planning (EF) might lead to difficulties in either producing or understanding action plans
! 54 (ToM), and difficulties in cognitive shifting (EF) may lead to difficulties in predicting or understanding others’ models of reality. Therefore, though socio-emotional development and executive functioning are distinct areas of development, it is important to understand how they may influence one another.
Theoretical Frameworks: Education
Due to the complex and intangible nature of learning and cognition, many educational paradigms and theories of learning exist. Those relevant to this study include
Dewey’s philosophy of education and experiential learning theory, theories of embodied cognition, and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence Theory. Additionally, I will briefly mention dance education literature and relevant pedagogies.
Dewey’s Philosophy and Experiential Learning
John Dewey stresses the importance of direct experience within learning situations. He deems the act of thinking in itself to be a form of experience, and argues that the “mind is not a thing (substance or possession), but rather a catch-all label for the many active ways in which we observe, forecast, and respond to circumstances”
(Hildebrand, 2016, p. 75). In particular, Dewey focuses on the nature of inquiry, or thinking’s response to problematic situations, and the many facets that are included in inquiry, such as communication, facts, logic, emotion, and imagination, among others.
Like Vygotsky, he also acknowledges the social nature of inquiry, and further describes it as a normative, or value-laden, process (Hildebrand, 2016).
Regarding education, Dewey considers the purpose of schools to be a place
“where students and teachers experience situations that invite, even demand, thinking minds to inquire” (Hildebrand, 2016, p. 76, emphasis in original). In response to ! 55 conventional education practices that were largely based on the premise of the teacher transferring knowledge to passive students, Dewey argued that education was neglecting students’ needs to have meaningful experiences (note that the same argument could be made about current special education practices as well). Specifically, students learn best when they have direct experiences, or experiences that are had rather than known or simply thought about. Dewey also made note of the social consequences of direct experiences, which reflect the development of empathy: “direct experience is integral because that enables us to assimilate and sympathize with another’s experience. This happens by communicating and by stretching imagination to grasp meanings as seen from another’s perspective” (Hildebrand, 2016, p. 81). Consequently, the nature of Dewey’s paradigm for education may also lead to social as well as cognitive (i.e., learning or knowledge) outcomes.
Furthermore, Dewey holds art and aesthetic experiences in high regard for education. In terms of meaningful experiences, art is especially important because it incorporates thinking, feeling, and making, which leads to a positive (and meaningful) experience for a student. In Art as Experience, he explains that rather than the art object being the focus of the activity, it is the process of making the art that is important
(Dewey, 1980). Thus, like both Piaget and Vygotsky, there is an emphasis on the process over the product. For educators, Dewey “proposes that if teaching could become more artistic — by adopting artists’ flexibility and creative initiative — educators might avoid the anesthetic extremes of teaching by ready-made recipes or by quixotic, personal caprice” (Hildebrand, 2016, p. 80). Thus, according to Dewey’s paradigm, dance
! 56 education could be a useful tool in the classroom to promote meaningful experiences and encourage both social and cognitive outcomes.
Dewey’s educational philosophy, in conjunction with Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, has inspired other similar paradigms for learning, such as Kolb’s
Experiential Learning Theory. One of the main tenets of Kolb’s theory is that ideas are constantly formed and re-formed through experience – they are never fixed entities of thought. Kolb (1984) names four abilities that learners must have in order to be successful. First, they must be able to become fully involved in new concrete experiences without bias. Secondly, they must engage in reflective observation of their experiences from different perspectives. Thirdly, they need to formulate concepts that synthesize observations into logical theories through abstract conceptualization. Finally, learners must use those theories to make decisions and solve problems via active experimentation.
It is not unreasonable to apply those concepts to art and dance education. For example,
Zeitner, Rowe, and Jackson (2015) found that dance as experiential learning was an effective method within leadership education; similar principles could also be applied in a preschool setting to effect positive socio-emotional and academic outcomes.
Embodied Cognition
Previous theories of learning and thinking suggest the importance of the body.
Piaget, for example, argues that the sensorimotor stage is the “foundation on which all cognitive architecture is erected” (Barrouillet, 2015, p. 9). Both Dewey (Hildebrand,
2016) and Kolb (1984) stress the holistic experience of the individual in terms of not only thinking, but also feeling and perceiving within situations. More recently, the field of embodied cognition has emerged, spanning several disciplines such as psychology,
! 57 cognitive neuroscience, philosophy, linguistics, and artificial intelligence (Borghi &
Cimatti, 2010). Though there are several nuanced versions of the theory of embodied cognition, the major premise of all of them is that the body has a central role in shaping the mind; “the body functions as a constituent of the mind rather than a passive perceiver and actor serving the mind” (Leitan & Chaffey, 2014, p. 3, emphasis in original).
Some scholars equate embodied cognition with situated cognition, which defines cognition as taking place within context- and task-relevant inputs and outputs (Wilson,
2002). Thus, dancing is situated because motor actions take place toward the goal of carrying out the dance sequence, and presumably one is thinking about dancing while performing the dance. Spatial cognition is often situated as well (Wilson, 2002), which is important in navigating a stage or a room full of other dancers. However, cognition that occurs “off-line” (i.e., planning, remembering, day-dreaming) is not situated, so proponents of embodied cognition expand the idea beyond that of situated cognition to include simulation, or the “off-line recruitment of the same neural networks involved in perception and action” (Borghi & Cimatti, 2010, p. 763). Situated cognition also emphasizes the role of history or background information, while embodied cognition only concerns the body’s direct interaction with the environment (Fenici, 2012).
Borghi & Cimatti (2010) discuss the development of the “sense of the body”
(p.767), or the idea that rather than simply having a body, one is the body performing the actions. Bodily self-perception is developed incrementally through body awareness and action, and is not a cognitive or “thought of” state, but rather a state of being. Scholars argue that cultural means and language are important aspects of developing bodily
! 58 awareness; therefore, embodied cognition encompasses a social aspect as well (Borghi &
Cimatti, 2010).
Embodied social cognition. In order for social cognition to be embodied, one’s own movements and bodily postures must influence thought processes; though many social behaviors involve perceptions of bodily states, that does not necessarily mean they can be considered embodied. However, scholars claim that emotional contagion, empathy, mindreading (understanding another’s thoughts via words, emotions, and body language), and language understanding may all have embodied foundations. For example, when emotional contagion occurs through the mimicry of facial expressions, the facial
(bodily) expressions influence thoughts and feelings and thus constitute an embodied experience (Goldman & de Vignemont, 2009). Scholars have found that by simulating actions of others, we are better able to understand others’ body movements (Grafton,
2009). However, some argue that social cognition is minimally embodied in adulthood; there are many other factors involved in social cognition that do not have a bodily foundation (Goldman & de Vignemont, 2009). Despite the controversy, researchers
(Fenici, 2010; Leitan & Chaffey, 2014) state that early cognitive processes in infants and young children are largely embodied, thus making embodied social cognition a particularly relevant framework for preschool-aged children.
The discovery of the mirror neuron system (MNS) has led to claims that the basis of some social cognition begins with motor planning (Goldman & de Vignemont, 2009).
Mirror neurons in the brain fire both when one performs an action and when one sees an action being performed by others. Mirror neurons “play an important role in ‘low- level’ mindreading and support the attribution of mental states to others” (Fenici, 2012, p. 281).
! 59 Several researchers have also connected activation of the MNS to the development of empathy (Behrends, Müller, & Dziobek, 2012; Berrol, 2006; McGarry & Russo, 2011).
As mirroring is often a technique used in dance classes, the research suggests that dance interventions in a preschool classroom are linked to social cognition. This study will thus utilize the frameworks of embodied cognition and embodied social cognition to inform the design and results.
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence Theory
Howard Gardner (1998, 2011) presents a learning theory based on the idea that humans have at least eight distinct intelligences. Gardner (1998) states that some of the intelligences, such as the linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences, are the traditionally regarded concepts of IQ; these are often the focus of the typical classroom environment. Others, however, are slightly more unconventional and “do not always reveal themselves in paper-and-pencil tests” (p. 18). Gardner claims that each intelligence can be foundational for more effective educational practices; they are a tool that can be used to achieve educational goals. The major premises of Multiple Intelligence Theory
(MIT) are that every person possesses each of the intelligences, but strengths and weaknesses manifest differently for every individual (Gardner, 1998). Thus far, the eight intelligences Gardner (2011) identifies are naturalist, linguistic, musical, logical- mathematical, spatial, bodily- kinesthetic, and the personal intelligences (interpersonal and intrapersonal) (see Table 1).
! 60
! Comprehensive!understanding!and!mastery!of!the! Linguistic! core!operations!of!language!and!its!functions;!poets,' writers! ! Confrontation!with!the!world!of!objects,!the!actions! Logical8Mathematical! one!can!perform!on!them,!and!their!relationships! with!other!objects;!mathematicians,'scientists! ! Competence!in!composing,!performing,!listening,!and! Musical! discerning!elements!of!pitch,!rhythm,!and!timbre;! composers,'musicians! ! Abilities!to!accurately!perceive!the!visual!world,! Spatial! modify!or!transform!perceptions,!and!recreate!visual! aspects!of!experience;!artists,'sculptors! ! Using!one’s!body!in!differentiated!and!skilled!ways,! Bodily8Kinesthetic! for!expression!and!other!goal8directed!purposes,! including!fine!and!gross!motor!skills;!dancers,'mimes' ! Internal!ability!to!feel,!identify,!understand,!and! Intrapersonal! discriminate!between!one’s!own!emotions!and!guide! subsequent!behaviors;'novelists,'therapy'patients' ! Ability!to!notice,!identify,!and!distinguish!between! Interpersonal! the!moods,!temperaments,!and!emotions!of!others;! politicians,'therapists' Naturalist! Ability!to!recognize!and!categorize!natural!objects;! biologists,'naturalists'
Table 1. Gardner’s (2011) Multiple Intelligences
Gardner’s (2011) description of bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is the one most closely related to dance. He states that bodily-kinesthetic intelligence involves “the ability to use one’s body in highly differentiated and skilled ways, for expressive as well as goal-directed purposes” (Gardner, 2011, p. 218). These body movements include both fine and gross motor skills. Gardner also discusses the emotional component associated with dance. For example, dance historically conveyed extreme emotions such as joy or grief, but in modern pieces can also express more complex emotions such as guilt or
! 61 remorse. Therefore, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is not only inherent in the movements of all humans, but it also relates to the personal or emotional intelligences and thus has a socio-emotional developmental component. Movement can help students that struggle with emotional interpretation or communication by giving them a different means of communication and expression, and therefore, in addition to experiential learning and embodied cognition, this study will incorporate the framework of multiple intelligences.
Special Education
Historically, special education in the United States “has been marked mainly by segregation and exclusion” (Dudley-Marling & Burns, 2014, p. 15). Within the framework of the medical model, children with disabilities were often considered ineducable, and thus were kept out of public schools. If students with disabilities were considered educable, they were usually separated within schools and placed in isolated classrooms, both because they were considered to have specific needs or interventions that could only be provided by professionals and so as not to disrupt the learning of the
“normal” children (Dudley-Marling & Burns, 2014).
In 1975, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) (P.L. 94-142) was adopted; this act declared that children with disabilities had the right to a free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. Today, the least restrictive environment “is widely understood to indicate a preference for inclusion” (Baglieri &
Shapiro, 2017, p. 4). Inclusion, sometimes called mainstreaming, refers to the practice of integrating students with and without disabilities in a general education classroom.
Baglieri and Shapiro (2017) articulate five tenets of inclusive education: 1)
“Opportunities to engage in meaningful learning through diverse experiences” (p.12); 2)
! 62 “Value and respect of diverse ways of knowing” (p. 13); 3) “Embracing difference in self and others” (p. 14); 4) “Intellectual pursuit” (p. 15); and 5) “Education as agency” (p.
15). While inclusion is often preferred as the least restrictive environment, “pull-out” instruction is also common for students with disabilities. In that case, specialists (i.e., speech-language pathologists, occupational therapists, audiologists, etc.) take a student with a disability out of the classroom during the school day to work individually with that student (Baglieri & Shapiro, 2017).
Because inclusive education in practice can take many forms, there are additional paradigms for special education that may guide inclusive curricula. Two that I consider to be best related to dance education and Dance to Learn are Vygotsky’s paradigm for special education and Universal Design for Learning. In the following sections, I provide a brief overview of these theories; each is discussed in more detail in my analytical framework in Chapter 4.
Vygotsky’s paradigm for special education. In addition to his theories of social development, Vygotsky suggests a paradigm for special education. In his study of defectology, or “research and practice relevant to contemporary special education and school/educational psychology” (Gindis, 1995, p.77), he states that disabilities are not seen as abnormal until they are brought into a social context. As reflected in the social model of disability, problems do not stem from specific impairments, but rather from the resulting social implications of the impairments (Gindis, 1995).
Vygotsky is also known for his theory of disontogenesis, or distorted development, which suggests specific learning implications for people with disabilities.
He argued that disabilities could be compensated for through the development of higher
! 63 psychological functions such as abstract reasoning, logical memory, and voluntary attention (Gindis, 1995), or what we now consider executive functioning (Carey,
Zaitchik, & Bascandziev, 2015). Rehabilitation occurs through education, by “creating alternative, but equivalent, roads for cultural development” (Gindis, 1995, p.79).
Vygotsky argued students need a differentiated learning environment to fully develop higher psychological functions and even personality. Within a unique and specialized curriculum, it is important to provide students with the skills to compensate for their particular disability (i.e., individualize education for the student), and to allow them more time to learn. Finally, in accordance with the social model of disability, Vygotsky notes the importance of defining children by strengths instead of weaknesses (Gindis, 1995).
Universal Design for Learning. Yet another paradigm for inclusive education is the Universal Design for Learning (UDL). The central premise of UDL is the concept of learner variability; every student has different abilities, needs, and preferences with regard to learning style that can be traced to the neurological level (Hartmann, 2014).
Glass, Meyer, and Rose (2013) state that learner variability is pervasive, normal, can only be recognized and understood in context, and is usually systematic and predictable.
Therefore, it is possible to construct classroom lessons to account for learner variability.
However, most general education curricula tend to be tailored to the “average” learner, which leads to a “narrow and inflexible curriculum” (Hartmann, 2015, p. 57). UDL frames the inflexible curriculum as what should be fixed, rather than the remediation of the student.
UDL instruction is based around three neural networks that have been linked to learning processes: affective, recognition, and strategic (Glass, Meyer, & Rose, 2013).
! 64 One of the driving assumptions behind UDL is that all students are capable of becoming
“expert learners” (Hartmann, 2015). Expert learners are defined by three overarching traits that are related to the three major principles of UDL. First, expert learners are resourceful and knowledgeable, so educators should provide multiple means of representation of concepts (related to the recognition network). Expert learners are also considered to be strategic and goal-directed. As such, it is important to provide students with multiple means of action and expression to show what they have learned (related to the strategic network). Finally, expert learners are purposeful and motivated, so educators should provide multiple means of engagement for their students (related to the affective network) (CAST, 2014).
UDL and arts education. Arts education, and thus dance, can easily be integrated into each principle of the UDL paradigm. Glass, Meyer, and Rose (2013) state that “arts can play an increasing role in providing the rich, meaningful, and engaging types of learning options that UDL demands” (p. 99). The arts themselves are inherently another means of representation that require interpretation of both meaning and emotion. Glass,
Meyer, and Rose (2013) argue that “Investment in the arts may be important for developing cognitive flexibility” (p. 109, emphasis in original), which is also an important component of executive function. By encouraging learners to engage with material through different perspectives and representations, they can develop the ability to select relevant strategies for interpreting and understanding information. Thus, using movement to represent concepts not only aligns with UDL, but can also support EF in students.
Regarding multiple means of action and expression, the arts provide the opportunity for expression through different forms of media (Glass, Meyer, & Rose,
! 65 2013). In dance, that opportunity arises through gesture and nonverbal communication.
Within a preschool inclusion classroom where children may be nonverbal, allowing students the ability to express answers or show that they remember content through movement is an important way to measure learning and comprehension. Therefore, dance can be particularly helpful to support learners.
Finally, the arts align closely with the third tenet of UDL – multiple means of engagement – by providing avenues for engagement outside of a traditional lecture-based classroom. Glass, Meyer, and Rose (2013) argue that
the mere presence of the arts—and its wider opportunities—provides more
options to recruit interest, sustain engagement, and develop self-regulation, at
least for many students. And the arts, where students learn to respond to and make
sense of the emotions and affective meanings in artistic works, provide an ideal
environment for learning how to recognize, express, and regulate their own
emotions. (p. 113)
Therefore, in addition to providing an avenue for multiple means of engagement, including the arts (and thus dance) in education can also foster socio-emotional skills like emotion understanding, expression, and regulation. Given the ability of arts instruction to address each aspect of UDL, the Dance to Learn program can be interpreted in accordance with the UDL paradigm.
Dance Education in Early Childhood
As mentioned in the previous chapter, it is comparatively rarer to see dance education in schools compared to other arts forms. Despite “efforts to place dance as a fundamental aspect of the public school curriculum, it is still considered extracurricular
! 66 and expendable” (Koff, 2000, p. 27). For many educators living in a standards- and testing-based educational climate, dance is often seen as something purely for entertainment or performance, and thus not an essential part of the curriculum. However, it is possible to provide dance education without “complex mastery as its goal. Rather, it enables every child, regardless of physical capabilities, to be expressive in a nonverbal manner to explore and incorporate the physical self as a functioning part of the whole social being” (Koff, 2000, p. 27).!
Part of the discrepancy may have to do with a misunderstanding about the definition of dance education as opposed to dance training. When one receives dance training, one learns specific movements and techniques with the intent of mastery and performance. Dance education, however, is not performance-based. Rather, “dance education seeks the development of self-expression and interpretation through motion, with self-knowledge as its aim” (Koff, 2000, p. 28). Oftentimes, somatic inquiry is classified within the field of health care (Eddy, 2002) rather than education. However, exploring how the body can move using elements of space, time, and energy provides an avenue not only for self-expression and motor development, but also to engage with other areas of curriculum that can be more deeply explored by adding dance and movement
(Koff, 2000).
Dance and creative movement are particularly well suited for early childhood education because movement precedes language. Children initially explore the world through movement rather than words, and once language is developed, the desire for physical exploration continues throughout childhood (Koff, 2000). In the classroom, there is often a struggle to balance movement and the sedentary behavior considered
! 67 appropriate for a school learning environment. Thus, dance can tap into a child’s desire to move and make it easier to engage in that sedentary behavior at other times during the school day (Koff, 2000). When performed as a systematic program of instruction, dance education can foster physical development, and when integrated into a preschool curriculum, movement “increases the depth of resultant learning and understanding”
(Koff, 2000, p. 30). Thus, there is justification for including dance and movement as a fundamental aspect of education.
There are several approaches to teaching dance and integrating movement into education and everyday life. One such approach is Body-Mind Centering® (BMC℠), developed by Bonnie Bainbrige Cohen (2012). BMC identifies several systems in the body to serve as an integrated and embodied approach to movement and consciousness; it can be applied in areas of dance and movement as well as child development and education. According to Cohen (2012), “Development is not a linear process but occurs in overlapping waves with each stage containing elements of all the others.” That conceptualization of development aligns with my own, thus making the developmental approach of BMC applicable to pedagogies in Dance to Learn.
Laban Movement Analysis (LMA) is another approach to dance pedagogy and assessment. LMA “is a method and language for describing, visualizing, interpreting and documenting all varieties of human movement” (Laban/Bartenieff Institute of Movement
Studies, 2020). It identifies four main elements of movement: body, effort, space, and shape. Using those elements, it is possible for children of all ages to creatively explore movement. “Rather than being given preset dance sequences, teachers are provided with movement principles and materials, and then encouraged to find uses which are most
! 68 appropriate for their students and for each particular teaching situation” (Davis, 1995, p.
32). Though some of the specific concepts of the elements of dance may not be explicitly taught in a preschool setting, Dance to Learn implicitly uses them when designing and delivering curricula.
Anne Green Gilbert (1992) also provides a framework to teach creative dance that emphasizes teaching dance concepts rather than dance steps. She states:
There might be a misconception that creative dance means turning on music and letting the students dance the way the music makes them feel. This is like giving an American student a book written in Chinese and expecting them to read it. (Gilbert, 1992, p. 4)
Gilbert (1992) states that most people are not familiar enough with dance concepts to effectively improvise dance movement, so she provides a detailed description of and justification for teaching various creative dance concepts. She asserts that engaging in creative dance can provide cognitive, affective, physical, and social outcomes, and can certainly take place in a classroom setting. Dance to Learn uses many of her dance concepts and even some specific activities within its lessons.
In sum, there are several different pedagogical approaches to dance education, many of which are relevant to Dance to Learn. However, there are still some misconceptions about dance education as a field; often, educators consider it as extracurricular or as a way to let out excess energy rather than to teach dance for dance’s sake or to help attain other developmental goals. Instead, “an instructional program should give shape to this energy” (Koff, 2000, p. 30). Effective dance education can foster several areas of development including cognitive, social, and motor outcomes.
Thus, it is important to consider dance and movement as a fundamental aspect of
! 69 education, particularly in early childhood. Classroom teachers can be successful in implementing movement in the classroom, but often do not have the dance training or movement background to provide effective dance education (Gilbert, 1992). Since many classroom teachers do not have a dance background, a potential solution would be to bring in movement professionals to teach dance concepts in alignment with pre- established classroom curricula. Thus, Dance to Learn could serve as an example of a successful framework for dance education in early childhood.
Intersections: Dance, Development, and Disability
After conceptualizing theoretical frameworks related to disability, development, and education, it is important to understand how dance relates to each of them. The following sections will address the potential role of dance in development, as well as specific studies about dance and disability. In particular, I focus on the outcomes that I measured in my own study: socio-emotional development and cognitive skills/executive functioning.
Dance and Development
Much of the existing literature on dance in education is not focused on disability or autism, specifically. However, it is necessary to understand how dance can influence
“typically” developing students as well in order to make a justification for using dance as an inclusive education practice. The following is an overview of dance and movement as they relate to both socio-emotional and cognitive outcomes in nondisabled children.
Dance and socio-emotional outcomes. Though somewhat limited, there is research that seeks to investigate how dance may influence social and emotional development, especially with young children. For example, several studies show that ! 70 children as young as four are able to interpret emotions expressed through dance (Boone
& Cunningham, 1998; Lagerlof & Djerf, 2009; van Meel, Verburgh, & Meijer, 1993).
Boone & Cunningham (2001) also found that young children were able to encode and display emotion through movement. All of the aforementioned studies suggest that dance can be a medium through which children can explore emotion and expression, which could potentially be useful in a preschool classroom setting.
Several studies further suggest a relationship between dance and improved social functioning in young children. Lobo and Winsler (2006) used the Social Competence
Behavior Evaluation: Preschool Edition to measure social skills and found that as compared to peer controls, Head Start students involved in a creative movement dance program showed significant gains in social competence as well as significant decreases in problem behaviors. Von Rossberg-Gempton, Dickinson, and Poole (1999) also found that a creative dance program for preschoolers correlated with an increase in social skills such as cooperation, communication, sense of belonging, and awareness of others. Finally, several studies have suggested that dance can be a tool for improving synchrony, or socialization through matching movements with other people (Kirschner & Tomasello,
2009; von Rossberg-Gempton et al., 1999).
Additionally, several researchers believe that there is a potential relationship between mirror neurons in the brain and the development of empathy (Behrends, Müller,
& Dziobek, 2012; Berrol, 2006; McGarry & Russo, 2011). However, much of the literature is theoretical and does not present experimental evidence to fully support the claim that mirror neurons are linked to empathy, and that dance can be a mechanism through which to develop empathy. Further research about empathy and mirroring is
! 71 necessary to better understand the relationship. Though more research is needed in many areas related to dance and social outcomes, the general trends suggest that dance can be beneficial for children of all ages, especially young children.
Dance/movement and cognitive outcomes. Though not specific to dance,
Fedewa and Ahn (2011) performed a meta-analysis examining the relationship between physical activity and academic achievement. They found that physical activity as measured by overall fitness, development, strength, cardio, and flexibility has “a significantly positive impact on children’s cognitive outcomes and academic achievement” (p. 530) as indicated by variables such as math or reading achievement and
IQ. Elementary aged children, especially those with disabilities, were seen to improve even more than typically developing children. Several studies have also used measures of flexibility (Aldemir et al., 2011), strength (Aldemir et al., 2011; Cosma et al., 2016), cardio, and overall fitness (Huang et al., 2012) as motor outcomes for dance research.
Therefore, it is not unreasonable to conclude that dance as physical activity may also lead to positive cognitive outcomes and academic achievement. Furthermore, for students with disabilities, Fedewa and Ahn’s (2011) work suggests that dance education may result in a gap-closing effect.
Other studies have also found links between dance and cognitive outcomes. For example, Bläsing and colleagues (2011) describe a relationship between dance and recall of structured movement sequences, suggesting that dance may help foster recall abilities.
Zach, Inglis, Fox, Berger, and Stahl (2015) found that in kindergarteners, those involved in a dance program improved in executive functions such as spatial perception and attention, whereas peers in a control group showed no improvement. Bläsing and
! 72 colleagues (2011) also describe the link between professional dancers and increased ability to maintain attention, which suggests that dance programming may also improve attention. Therefore, the aforementioned relationships between dance and executive functioning suggest that dance can be a way to encourage positive cognitive outcomes.
Giguere (2011) also performed a phenomethnography identifying 27 different cognitive strategies that children use to create dance, which also supports the research regarding the link between dance and cognition. Based on the previously discussed studies, it is possible that dance can support cognitive development and executive functioning in young children, but more experimental research is needed to further understand the relationship.
Dance and Disability
Based on the literature regarding dance and both social and cognitive outcomes, studies show that movement interventions for children with autism may help to mitigate some of the core features associated with autism by promoting social skills and nonverbal communication. The following is a brief discussion of the existing research on dance and autism.
Outcomes of dance/movement therapy as an intervention for autism. As previously discussed, Dance/Movement Therapy (DMT) is “the psychotherapeutic use of movement to promote emotional, social, cognitive and physical integration of the individual” (ADTA, 2016). Despite the potential for DMT to benefit children with autism, “few empirically based studies address the treatment of DMT within the broader context of evidence-based practice” (Devereaux, 2012, p. 335). Because therapies are most often conducted one-on-one and are very specific to the child, it can be difficult to
! 73 find a standardized assessment to make it an evidence-based practice. However, anecdotal accounts of DMT for autism date back to the 1970s.
In one of the first published descriptions of DMT for autism, Boettinger (1978) describes her experience working with Amy, a 4-year-old with autism. 30-minute sessions occurred three times a week over eight weeks, and Boettinger describes the importance of building trust throughout those sessions. After eight weeks of DMT, Amy was more tolerant to touch, showed increased synchrony (matching movements) with the therapist, exhibited fewer “autistic gestures” (i.e., stereotypies) and improved her expressive communication ability (i.e., overt gestures and eye contact).
After a year of sessions once per week, Devereaux (2012) found that DMT led to increased tolerance for physical contact, as well as empathy, creativity, and expression.
Furthermore, children enhanced their cognitive and academic skills by exploring and understanding abstract concepts such as “in/out” through movement. In a literature review, Scharoun and colleagues (2014) also describe single-case studies of DMT for autism that show benefits such as increased acceptance of physical contact, the development of physical, auditory, and social skills, and even increased responsiveness to social cues.
DMT group therapy. While much DMT research has been conducted in one-on- one interventions, some research has addressed DMT therapy in group sessions. Mateos-
Moreno and Atencia-Dona (2013) found that when combined with music therapy, dance therapy can reduce autistic behaviors, especially interaction disorders and regulation/behavioral variability, in young adults with severe autism. Koch, Mehl,
Sobanski, Sieber, and Fuchs (2015) also performed a feasibility study of DMT for young
! 74 adults with ASD and found that mirroring-based DMT related to improvements in body awareness, self-other awareness, social skills, and psychological well-being. Finally,
Torrance (2003) studied a group of adolescent males with ASD that demonstrated aggressive behaviors, and found that after DMT therapy, there was increased group cohesion and respect for each other, better turn-taking, and less aggression. Therefore, these studies suggest that DMT as a group therapy can be sustainable and beneficial for some populations of people with ASD.
DMT has also been implemented in a group setting for young children (ages 3-9) with potentially successful results. Similar to Torrance (2003), some researchers have found that in children around age 4-5, DMT that emphasizes verbal and nonverbal communication can result in a decline in aggressive behaviors (Scharoun et al., 2014;
Siegel, 1973). Siegel (1973) describes using DMT group therapy with four children with autism ages 4-6. The intervention used both verbal and nonverbal activities involving mirroring, dance, and music to promote body image. Siegel (1973) observed “positive responses at varying times” (p. 148), suggesting the potential efficacy of DMT as a group intervention for autism.
Other studies have also shown that children with ASD who are involved in group
DMT see an increase in synchronous movement and communicative behavior as well as a decrease in tuning out behaviors and aversion to touch (Boettinger, 1978; Scharoun et al.,
2014). In a more empirically rigorous study, Hartshorn and colleagues (2001) observed
38 children with autism ages 5-7 who participated in a biweekly 30-minute movement therapy class in groups of 3-8. Behaviors were coded during the first and last classes and compared to a similar group that did not have a movement intervention. Researchers
! 75 found that the children in movement therapy showed an increase in attentive behaviors and passive on-task behaviors (paying attention and being engaged even if they were not actively performing the movement), and a decrease in stress behaviors like stereotypies, wandering, and resisting the teacher. DMT has also been shown to increase group cohesion in young children (Erfer & Ziv, 2006). Based on all of the aforementioned studies of group DMT in young children with ASD as well as other populations, it is not unreasonable to conclude that similar principles could be applied to a classroom setting with similar results.
Dance and disabilities in the classroom. Though much of the research regarding dance as an intervention for ASD and other disabilities is within the field of
Dance/Movement Therapy, this study will seek to understand more about how dance can work in an inclusion or special needs classroom setting. Research about creative movement and dance programs for children with special needs, although limited, suggests that there are benefits to having such programs in schools. For example, a study with hypoactive children ages 7-10 showed that creative movement increased creativity, body image, and speech and communication (Caf, Kroflic, & Tancig, 1997). Using
Torrance’s Thinking Creatively in Movement and Action assessment, Jay (1991) found that there was significant overall improvement for students with special needs who took part in a dance program as compared to similar peers in an adapted physical education class, especially for imagination. These studies suggest that utilizing dance in schools may help creative thinking for students with disabilities.
Though less common in schools, DMT has also been successfully implemented within school systems for children with developmental disabilities like autism and Down
! 76 syndrome (Vincent et al., 2007). Though not formally evaluated, those who implemented the program found that by “Experiencing movement as a vehicle for self-expression, healing and growth, children with special needs have already gained new aspects of themselves, showing increased self-esteem and communication skills” (Vincent et al.,
2007, p. 56). Thus, there is a mechanism for establishing DMT principles in classroom settings, but in general, more research is needed to fully understand the effectiveness of such a program. Yet based on the available evidence, it is not unreasonable to conclude that DMT can be helpful for children with autism, both one-on-one and in group settings.
Some researchers have attempted to use movement programs other than DMT to foster children with ASD in the classroom. Rosenblatt et al. (2011) studied the effects of yoga on behavioral and cognitive symptoms for children with ASD, as measured by the
Behavioral Assessment System for Children. Results suggest that after the yoga program, scores on the Behavioral Symptom Index showed improvement, especially for children ages 5-12. These studies suggest that movement interventions can potentially be beneficial for children with ASD in behavioral and cognitive domains.
Summary
With an estimated prevalence rate of one in 59 children (cdc.gov), autism is currently one of the most prominent developmental disabilities. As such, the rising constituency of students with autism suggests a number of implications for classroom teachers. Traditional classroom pedagogies assuming that the teacher represents a wealth of knowledge to be transferred to students likely will not be effective for students with disabilities, including those with autism. However, more child-centered pedagogies like experiential learning (Dewey, 1980; Hildebrand, 2016) or instruction for multiple
! 77 intelligences (Gardner, 2011) may be more effective in stimulating learning and development for students with disabilities and nondisabled students alike. Several paradigms related to inclusive education stress the importance of differentiated instruction and focus on student strengths rather than perceived deficits (Gindis, 1995;
Hartmann, 2015). Arguably, dance and movement is one potentially effective way to provide that differentiated instruction.
Dance has also been used as an intervention for autism through dance/movement therapy (ADTA, 2016). While there are several anecdotal accounts of the success of
DMT, there is a dearth of research about how dance can influence children with autism, especially in a school setting. Frameworks for group DMT or other dance programs in schools exist, but few have been empirically examined, especially looking at specific areas of development like socio-emotional development and executive functioning.
Attempting to address this gap in the literature, this study uses the social model of disability to apply dance education within an inclusion classroom to see the influences of dance on development in students with autism. Guided by theories of experiential learning, embodied cognition, multiple intelligences, inclusive education, socio- emotional development, and executive functioning, this study will examine a specific program and address methods of program adaptation for students with disabilities as well as assess how dance can impact development.
! 78
Chapter 3: Methodology
Introduction
*Note: to ensure confidentiality and protect participant privacy, I have not reported names of the school, classroom teachers, teaching artists, ballet company, program, or children in my final report. All names written here are pseudonyms.*
The previous chapter examined relevant literature across multiple disciplines that informs this study. This chapter will discuss the study’s methodological foundations, both qualitative and quantitative, as well as specific procedures for data collection and analysis. Additionally, I provide a brief overview and history of the Dance to Learn program to provide context about its infrastructure and goals as they relate to my study.
Restatement of Research Questions
The primary research question in this mixed-methods study asks whether or not a ballet company’s pre-kindergarten creative movement program, Dance to Learn, influences development for students in inclusion classrooms, and to determine if the
Dance to Learn program correlates with socio-emotional development and/or executive functioning. In order to understand if dance can address some of the challenges in special education, this study focuses on three populations: students, teaching artists, and classroom teachers. Specifically, this study asks:
! 79 (1)!How does dance influence development in students in a preschool inclusion
classroom?
a.! How does dance influence socio-emotional development?
b.! How does dance influence executive functioning?
c.! How does the process work differently for different students (peer
models vs. students with disabilities)?
(2)!How does the dance integration process work when a professional ballet
company enters a classroom to deliver a dance program?
a.! What adaptations are necessary for a program to be successful in an
inclusion setting as opposed to a general education classroom?
(3)!How are classroom teachers impacted by such a program?
Overview of Study
This mixed-methods study aimed to investigate a ballet company’s preschool dance program, Dance to Learn, and its influence on the socio-emotional development and executive functioning of students with autism as well as the impact on teaching artists and classroom teachers in an inclusion setting. Three classrooms – two in the fall of 2018 and one in the winter of 2019 – participated in the study. Over the course of each
10-week session, I collected data through various means. I used surveys to collect data from teachers and parents, I observed and videotaped each class session and wrote detailed field notes, and I conducted and transcribed multiple interviews with the lead classroom teachers and teaching artists. I also accessed and analyzed survey data collected by the ballet company from the previous year’s program in the same center.
Additionally, my own personal reflections and revelations, documented in my in-process
! 80 memo, are considered relevant data. The surveys were analyzed using quantitative, statistical analysis, while the field observations, field notes, interviews, and personal reflections underwent qualitative analysis. Individual analysis was followed by triangulation of data sources and holistic analysis.
Dance to Learn Program Overview
Dance to Learn is a preschool creative dance program delivered by a professional ballet company in a large Midwestern city. During the 10-week residency, two teaching artists and one accompanist from the ballet company travel to preschool classrooms throughout the greater metropolitan area once a week to provide 30-minute dance classes.
The creative movement program aims to enhance motor, cognitive, and social-emotional development. Though yearly program evaluations of Dance to Learn show trends toward increased development in all measured areas, this study attempts to better identify the nature of the relationship between the program and development in socio-emotional behaviors and executive functioning specifically within an inclusion setting. By using valid and reliable measurement instruments to measure socio-emotional development and executive functioning, as well as observations and interviews with classroom teachers and teaching artists, this study is a more empirically rigorous design than the ballet company’s yearly evaluations. Additionally, it addresses pedagogical and program implications when working with children with developmental disabilities as well as the potential impact on classroom teachers.
To provide sufficient context for the study, I will begin by giving an overview of the inception of Dance to Learn to elaborate on some of the important components and infrastructures of the program. I will then discuss some of the important resources and
! 81 partnerships that help the program continue, followed by a description of the program delivery itself and relevant pedagogies. I will end with a discussion about why the program “works.”
It is important to note that I will discuss the Dance to Learn program as a whole rather than just the classes that have been adapted for children with disabilities. I do so because though classroom practices may vary based on the setting and group of students, the overall structure and infrastructure of the program remain the same.
A Brief History of Dance to Learn
Dance to Learn is the brainchild of the ballet company’s current Education
Director (hereafter referred to as Avery), who took the position in 2006. Upon her arrival, she inherited a long-range plan which included an early childhood component. However, she felt that at the time, the department did not have enough resources – teachers, funding, and infrastructure – to support an early childhood program. Thus, initially, she waited until an opportunity arose to construct one. In 2009, a preschool center contacted the ballet company about providing a dance class for their Head Start program, a free and comprehensive federal preschool program for low-income families. The mission and vision of the ballet company emphasize dance accessibility to all communities, and thus working with a population considered “at-risk” was directly aligned with the ballet company’s goals. Avery decided to set up a pilot program for a nominal fee (paid for by the Head Start centers), and thus began what is now the Dance to Learn program (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
At the end of the 2009-2010 academic year, another opportunity arose for the ballet company’s early childhood program. A bank contacted the ballet company about a
! 82 new funding source for children considered at-risk early in childhood and invited Avery to apply. With the fledgling early childhood program in the works, it was perfect timing.
The ballet company wrote and was awarded a three-year grant that included bringing in a professional to consult and help design the program. Avery did research ahead of time and decided that she wanted to approach the program from a brain-based neuromotor developmental perspective because that was more accessible to children than ballet. She took inspiration from Anne Green Gilbert’s (2006) work, which ultimately led to a partnership with the founder of a prominent kinesthetic learning center in New York to help train teachers and create the movement assessment (Avery, personal communication,
February 27, 2018).
After the initial design of the program, Avery also needed to hire an external evaluation company to analyze and provide evidence for the impact of the program, so she reached out to several companies and had them bid for the position. Avery began working with an evaluator; they worked together to make choices about curriculum for the program (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
In addition to providing a brain-based dance program, Avery also wanted to create a children’s book that educated children about dance and the ballet company in particular, so she began a three-year partnership with a local writer and actor to create the companion book for Dance to Learn. Though having a children’s book may not seem like an integral component of an early childhood dance program, it has become part of the ballet company’s brand, and something that makes the Dance to Learn program unique.
In order to increase access to and awareness of the program, the ballet company periodically does readings of the book at local libraries and other locations. Additionally,
! 83 the book provides an important literacy component – each child receives a copy to take home at the end of the residency (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
Thus, it helps the program align with literacy elements of the Every Student Succeeds
Act (2015). Districts have the opportunity to apply for federal funding to support the development or improvement of a comprehensive literacy plan, which can include arts instruction (Education Commission of the States & Arts Education Partnership, 2018), so having the book can also potentially increase opportunities for funding the program
(although that is an avenue the ballet company has not explored yet).
After finding an evaluator and commissioning the children’s book, Avery created a budget for the program that included building curriculum, designing assessments, arranging professional development trainings for the teaching artists and classroom teachers, arranging for the professional development trainings to count for state credit to provide incentive for the classroom teachers to attend, hiring accompanists and acquiring keyboards for them to take on location, and developing community partnerships with institutions that would receive the program (Avery, personal communication, February
27, 2018). In short, all of those were necessary components that were required to help the program take off and be successful.
Essential Resources, Support Systems, and Potential Challenges
It is important to note that the ballet company would not be able to sustain Dance to Learn without numerous resources and support systems, both within and outside of the ballet company. Funding is a constant challenge for nonprofit arts organizations, and the cost of Dance to Learn can be prohibitive for some centers. Additionally, when funding sources become unavailable, it can limit the dissemination of the program. Dance to
! 84 Learn would not have been possible without the seed funding from the bank and their continued support each year. Private donors and other foundations help fund the program, and sometimes the organizations that receive the program also contribute to the cost based on their ability to pay and the specific grant requirements (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
Aside from funding, it is imperative to have strong partnerships with external community institutions because they are the ones hosting the program; without the cooperation and support of the schools and community centers in which Dance to Learn takes place, there would not be a program at all. Thus, partners like Head Start centers and the local city school district are essential for the success of the program (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
In addition to external funding resources and support, it is also important to have support for the program within the ballet company. Avery stated that the education department is usually third on the list when it comes to funding distributions within the ballet company (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018), so it is essential to garner the support of those who approve the budget and allocate funds.
While it is important to understand what kinds of resources are necessary for the success of a program like Dance to Learn, it is also helpful to be aware of potential challenges that may arise. In the interest of disseminating the program, the ballet company licensed Dance to Learn to another organization in 2014. Avery described the complex processes involved in licensing the program, including curriculum transfer, teacher training, assessment – there were specific tools that the organization was required to use and specific information they needed to give the ballet company about each
! 85 residency – and coming to an agreement about what was adaptable for their populations’ needs while still maintaining the integrity of the program. It was an involved process that was ultimately not very lucrative for the ballet company, and so the partnership ended after three years (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018). Avery also tried to license the program to other organizations, but due to the lack of infrastructure, celebrity, and financial support, it never really came to anything. Avery stated: “I don’t foresee the ballet company trying to license this program per se. I don’t think we have a lot of infrastructure to market the licensing of that program, to kind of flood the market”
(Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
In addition to challenges with licensing the program, the ballet company also had to deal with issues regarding the evaluators. The initial evaluation partner moved out of state, so the ballet company switched to a second company for evaluation consultations.
Avery worked with the second company to expand some of the materials she had developed with the first evaluation company, and for a while, the partnership worked well. However, ultimately, the ballet company was not getting what they needed from the evaluations. Avery stated:
I think the problem that we found with [the second evaluation company] was they
really weren’t telling our story in the way that we needed the story told. And as
we were expanding the program and there were more and more stakeholders
involved – school systems that want to see the data, corporations that want to see
the impact, private donors – they all want to see the evaluation. Yeah, it’s really
cute and fun when you see little kids running around, dancing and having fun, and
no one’s smacking anybody else in the face, but what’s the true impact? How do
! 86 we measure that? That’s when we decided last year that it was time to find a
different evaluator that could help with that. (Avery, personal communication,
February 27, 2018)
Thus, it is important to be aware of potential challenges in terms of getting the necessary information about the program and cultivate partnerships that garner the necessary support for the program, even from the perspective of program evaluation. The ballet company is currently in its third year working with a new organization as an evaluator, and so far the collaboration has been positive.
Pedagogies and Program Delivery
As mentioned previously, Dance to Learn originated as an outreach program distinct from the ballet company’s academy or a dance-in-school setting. It is designed based on neuromotor development, creativity, and brain-based research. To make it more accessible to diverse populations, Avery decided not to make it about ballet specifically, so while the elements of dance are emphasized and it does celebrate dance for dance’s sake, it is not specifically a ballet program (Avery, personal communication, February 27,
2018). That distinction is important when considering the program delivery strategies and pedagogies, and is one of the driving forces behind the program as a whole.
Considerations for program delivery. Community partnerships are essential in determining what classrooms will receive the program. In most cases, the ballet company contacts the administrator of the institution or school to discuss the program, show them a video and evaluation report, and negotiate cost or discuss the availability of underwriting.
The administrator then determines the locations and classrooms in which the program will take place. Classroom teachers within schools may also serve as catalysts for
! 87 delivering the program in specific locations, but the classroom teachers do not have authority to ultimately make those decisions. Thus, it is imperative to have administrator support when finalizing program delivery. At this point, many of those decisions occur within current ongoing partnerships. When it comes to making new partnerships, Avery considers what is strategic for the ballet company to be involved in from an organizational standpoint: which organizations have funding, serve at-risk populations, and have a number of classrooms to work with; what will increase recognition and visibility for the ballet company and allow them to break down barriers, etc. From there it becomes a negotiation with the organization’s administrators to solidify where Dance to
Learn will be delivered (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018).
In addition to understanding how the locations of the program are selected, it is also important to know how a typical class session is structured. The program lasts for ten weeks, with two teaching artists and one accompanist going into schools once per week for 30-minute classes. During each class, the teaching artists usually begin with a locomotor exercise like “Follow the Leader” incorporating different kinds of movement – marching, tip-toeing, jumping, hopping, galloping, etc. – through the space. Then they move into a seated stretch based on the “Brain Dance” as articulated by Anne Green
Gilbert (2006). The Brain Dance engages eight different movement patterns correlated with the stages of neuromotor development: breath, tactile, core-distal, head-tail, upper- lower, body side, cross-lateral, and vestibular. The seated warm-up in Dance to Learn, though slightly different each time, uses similar movement patterns to promote brain- based motor development. Following the warm-up is the “creative curriculum” part of the class, determined in collaboration with the classroom teacher(s). Finally, the class ends
! 88 with a solo, where each child takes a turn to go across the floor demonstrating one of the movement concepts explored during that class.
Though those four elements – locomotor activity, Brain Dance warm-up, creative exploration, and solo – are usually included in each class, the order may change from day to day. Teaching artists often make that decision based on the atmosphere and energy of the class. For example, if students have a lot of energy, they may choose to begin with the seated stretch instead of locomotion to help focus and calm students down. With that said, when teaching in inclusion classes, it is helpful to adhere to the same schedule each week and have clear transitions from one activity to the next (Pierman, 2016).
In addition to providing classes for different centers and schools, Dance to Learn also offers the opportunity for each class to visit the ballet company for an hour-long tour and dance class. Not all classrooms opt to do the tour, usually due to difficulties acquiring transportation (which must be provided by the school; the ballet company does not provide transportation for the tours). However, if a center does schedule a tour, they arrive at the ballet company’s downtown location and go straight into one of the dance studios for a 30-minute movement session led by the teaching artists. They then break out into smaller groups, where they get to see and touch different shoes and costumes, do a literacy-themed craft developed by a local literary center who partners with the ballet company, walk around the studios and see the costume shop, and if the company is in, sit in and watch some of the company class.
Specific pedagogical tools and values. Avery has mentioned that she does not subscribe to one specific education theory or a single pedagogical framework, but rather has several beliefs and values that influence particular pedagogies within Dance to Learn
! 89 (Avery, personal communication, February 27, 2018). One of the basic tenets of the program has to do with the integration of dance with literature and other concepts the students are exposed to in class. Regarding specific curricula, the ballet company has several different lesson plans for children’s books and even STEM modules that can be used as curricula in Dance to Learn. Because one of the aims of Dance to Learn is to supplement learning that takes place in the classroom, the classroom teachers are integral in determining the specific themes and lessons that the teaching artists use. If the classroom teachers request a book or lesson that the ballet company does not already have, the teaching artists may write a new lesson plan. The flexibility within the lessons is one of the hallmarks of the program.
On a related note, Dance to Learn is a heavily collaborative program. That is not only evident in the work with the classroom teachers to determine the content of the program for each class, but also in the structure of the program itself. Each residency is taught by two teaching artists with the help of an accompanist, so all of them must work together to make the program successful (Avery, personal communication, February 27,
2018). Using a multi-teacher structure is helpful because there is support embedded within the program – the teaching artists support each other, and the accompanist supports the teaching artists. It also helps in terms of classroom management; if one teaching artist is leading the lesson, the other teaching artist can encourage or assist individual children to ensure that all participants are getting the most out of the program.
Avery mentioned the pedagogical value of modeling behaviors, but also allowing a range of expressions and explorations through movement. Young children often learn by what is being modeled for them, so some of the teacher-led activities like locomotion
! 90 and warm-up are largely based on imitation and mirroring practices. However, interpretation and personal expression are highly valued as well, so some of the activities are influenced or adapted based on student interests and requests. In that sense, the program takes an inquiry-based approach – teaching artists may pose a question, and the students’ answers guide the rest of the class activities (Avery, personal communication,
February 27, 2018). Thus, the program does embody characteristics of the Reggio Emilia approach (McNally & Slutsky, 2017).
Because of the emphasis on supporting executive functioning, there is also some adherence to Piagetian constructs of development (Avery, personal communication,
February 27, 2018). Furthermore, Avery states that some values of Dance to Learn relate specifically to communication. She believes in clarity of language, reading and responding to nonverbal communication, and having compassion for the students with whom teaching artists are working. These underlying beliefs greatly shape the goals of the program as well as the methods of delivery.
Why Dance to Learn “Works”
As mentioned previously, part of the reason Dance to Learn is successful is due to
Avery’s opportunity-spotting (Chang & Wyszomirski, 2015) and acting on the chances that arose. She mentioned that over the past ten years, there has been a heavily-focused movement on early childhood education and how to improve school readiness. She feels that more recently, that emphasis has expanded to encourage all children to become lifelong learners and successful members of society. Additionally, she noted that there is a push to identify children who are “at risk” in terms of behavior, special needs, physical health, and emotional/mental health, and to then intervene using evidence-based
! 91 practices. Thus, a new early childhood dance program for children “at risk” based on neuromotor development was relevant to the increasing interest in society, and with that increased interest came money and support (Avery, personal communication, February
27, 2018).
Additionally, Avery noted the importance of aligning the program with the mission and vision of the ballet company. The dance academy has always been a big proponent of dance education for young children, so an early childhood education program also fits into the mission of the organization as a whole. She states that until around age ten, children are
really open to lots of different things. So if we can embed some of that
information in their brains and in their bodies – and hopefully they have other
opportunities to continue to practice those skills – it maybe will change
somebody’s way they approach life as they grow up and age. (Avery, personal
communication, February 27, 2018)
Thus, part of the reason the program “works” is because the impact is potentially lifelong.
Furthermore, the program is a way to increase audiences and visibility for the ballet company as well as break down barriers for children who want to dance. All the while,
Dance to Learn is preserving the ballet company’s identity and supporting the ideals that the company was founded upon.
Finally, one of the biggest reasons the program has continued to be successful has to do with the fact that it is based on research, and it has built up an infrastructure to sustain it. Figure 2 is a logic model that shows some of the necessary resources as well as some of the observed outcomes also supported by arts education literature. Essentially,
! 92 the fact that all of the necessary elements were able to come together at the right time played a huge part in how the program began, and it has been sustainable because of the efforts of each of the stakeholders, and particularly of Avery.
Figure 2. Dance to Learn Logic Model
Theoretical Research Foundations
As a researcher, I straddle the line between postpositivist and constructivist. My undergraduate studies focused on behavioral science research that touted the scientific method and objectivity; thus, I am most comfortable with rigorous, logical, empirical research that is oriented to determine cause and effect – often emphasized in a postpostivist interpretive framework (Creswell, 2013). In The Lively Science, Agar
! 93 (2013) describes the evolution of human social research (HSR) and distinguishes it from behavioral and social science (BSS) research. He states that many consider BSS the “gold standard” for human social research since it is based in the positivist scientific method, which values researcher objectivity and adherence to scientific control to discover causal relationships. Coming from a background in psychology, I exclusively learned about BSS research in my undergraduate career and subscribed to the scientific method as the “best” way to conduct research.
However, Stringer (2014) points out that “scientific knowledge is now recognized to be much less stable, objective, and generalizable than previously assumed” (p. 43).
The more I have read about and been involved in research, the more I have come to value the idea that there is not one specific, generalizable reality; realities are socially constructed and based on individual experiences and perceptions. Rather than prioritizing objectivity and generalizability, it is valuable to “co-construct [reality] between the researcher and the researched” (Creswell, 2013, p. 36). Therefore, my interpretive framework also reflects a social constructivist perspective.
Similarly, Agar (2013) describes the laboratory-like design of BSS to be “the fundamental flaw in this epistemological story that needs to be fixed – not by abolishing
BSS, but by reducing it from a gold standard to just another currency” in HSR (p. 10).
After using both qualitative and quantitative techniques in my Master’s research, I think
Agar’s above statement describes my positionality well: my study is HSR, but uses elements of BSS (surveys and statistics) as “another currency” in my research.
Ultimately, I use what Agar (2013) jokingly calls “quanltative” research (p. 123), which employs both numbers (quantitative data) and propositions (qualitative data). The
! 94 following sections will assert the theoretical foundations of the research methodologies used in my study. More detailed information about specific data collection techniques and analysis will be provided in the Methods section of this chapter.
Mixed Methods Research
The overarching paradigm for my study employs mixed methods, defined as “the type of research in which a researcher...combines elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches...for the broad purpose of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration” (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2011, p. 285). I appreciate the concept of methodological eclecticism, which allows the researcher to include elements of both qualitative and quantitative paradigms to strengthen the design “on the ground that this promises to cancel out the respective weaknesses of each method” (Teddlie &
Tashakkori, 2011, p. 285). Additionally, using both numbers and propositions will allow my results to appeal to multiple audiences – the stakeholders that want to see the “true impact” of the program can look to the statistics, and the rich, detailed observations and narratives will allow deeper insights into why the program works the way it does.
Specifically, I use a convergent parallel design, which “occurs when the researcher collects and analyzes both quantitative and qualitative data during the same phase of the research process and then merges the two sets of results into an overall interpretation” (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011, p. 77). I use specific data collection procedures for each component, all collected while (or shortly after) the Dance to Learn program is in session, and then each kind of data is analyzed and compared to get a more complete understanding of the results. The quantitative data collection process is indicative of my postpostitivist leanings, while the qualitative component represents my
! 95 social constructivist perspective. Combining the two for a “quanltative” study will ideally provide a stronger design than either by itself.
Comparative Case Study and Quantitative Research
A case study is defined as an “approach in which the investigator explores a real- life, contemporary bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information” (Creswell, 2013, p. 97). Because I am examining a dance program in practice, bound within the classroom and the 10-week session, and I am including multiple classrooms in my study, it can be defined as a multiple case study. Though case studies can be classified as either qualitative or quantitative (and I am using elements of both in my research), the comparative case study format is one that allows me to compare groups using quantitative analysis.
Quantitative research values objectivity and constructs like external, internal, and measurement validity and reliability. External validity relates to the generalizability of the study results; researchers independently conducting a similar study should be able to achieve similar results (Langbein, 2012). Creswell (2013) explains that in a case study, researchers do not usually attempt to generalize to other cases because each case has its own unique context. However, examining multiple cases increases the ability to generalize results (Creswell, 2013).
“Internal validity refers to the accuracy of causal claims” (Langbein, 2012, p. 27) and influences the design of the study itself. Though I am not making claims about causal relationships in my study, the concept of internal validity helped in my study design. For example, to make the study as rigorous as possible, I considered how to minimize threats
! 96 to internal validity when deciding on specific research methods. Maturation is one relevant threat to internal validity in which results (i.e., growth in socio-emotional development and executive functioning) may be due to underlying trends (i.e., the children are maturing) rather than the intervention (i.e., the Dance to Learn program)
(Langbein, 2012). To combat that threat, I included the data from the control classroom to statistically account for any growth due to maturation. With internal validity in mind, I designed the data collection procedures in order to be as rigorous as possible.
Finally, measurement validity and reliability are related to the measurement tools
(in my case, the parent and teacher surveys). Measurement validity “refers to a measurement procedure that is (relatively) absent of NRME [nonrandom measurement error]” (Langbein, 2012, p. 45); in other words, does the tool actually measure what it claims to? Measurement reliability refers to random measurement error, and is “achieved if different measures of the same phenomenon record the same results” (Langbein, 2012, p. 42). I discuss the development of my measurement tools and their reliability and validity in more detail in the methods section of this chapter.
In quantitative analysis, the random experiment is considered to be the strongest kind of research design. One of the key components in experiments is random assignment, which means that participants are assigned to either the intervention group or the control group randomly on the basis that the participants in one group will end up being, on average, no different than participants in the other (Kassin, Fein, & Markus,
2008). However, since I studied classrooms that already had pre-set groups, random assignment was impossible. Thus, my study can be classified as a quasi-experimental design. Specifically, I used a pretest-posttest comparison-group design: “there is
! 97 comparison between groups and comparison over time” (Langbein, 2012, p. 119). Using a pretest to determine a baseline for each group strengthens the study’s validity; thus, given the context of my study, I used the strongest quasi-experimental design possible.
Ethnography
Creswell (2013) defines ethnography as “a qualitative design in which the researcher describes and interprets the shared and learned patterns of values, behaviors, beliefs, and language of a culture-sharing group” (p. 90). Hammersley and Atkinson
(1995) state that “in its most characteristic form [ethnography] involves the ethnographer participating, overtly or covertly, in people’s lives for an extended period of time” (p. 1).
Because my study focuses on a specific culture-sharing group – those involved in the
Dance to Learn program at a specific location – and involves my overt participation in that aspect of their lives over time, it fits into the category of ethnographic research in addition to being a case study.
Hammersly and Atkinson (1995) detail the processes for designing ethnographic research, identifying research problems, and selecting cases. The first step is to identify
“foreshadowed problems” (p. 24) based on some kind of research inspiration. The inspiration for my study is based on my experience working in the field myself and seeing a dance program in practice. As such, I would consider it to be more topical than abstract, or primarily “concerned with types of people and situations readily identified in everyday language” (p. 31); it focuses on the substantive issue of preschool dance education rather than a more abstract or formal theory. Because I have previously worked with the ballet company, I would also consider this opportunistic research – I selected the case based on the setting itself, and “the research problem and the setting are closely
! 98 bound together” (p. 36). Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) speak about some of the perceived weaknesses of ethnographic research, particularly that it may have little impact in the real world. Based on the fact that my study is directly applicable to the ballet company and Dance to Learn, I see clear potential for my work to have a direct impact on the program and teaching artists, and ideally for future participants in the program.
One of the most important aspects of ethnographic research is getting to know and build trust with the participants. In my opinion, getting to know participants is primarily an issue of access. Fortunately, I have access to the ballet company’s program, so the issue of gaining entry to the setting was relatively easy for me. However, Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) mention that “access is not simply a matter of physical presence or absence” (p. 55). In addition to being physically present, I needed to be able to gain the trust of the people in my setting – the teaching artists, classroom teachers, and the children.
Getting to know the teaching artists. Prior to beginning my study, I already knew and had working relationships with the teaching artists. Rather than facing an issue of not building enough trust, the issue was one of potential over-rapport, which introduces the “danger of identifying with such members’ perspectives, and hence of failing to treat these as problematic” (Hammersly & Atkinson, 1995, p. 111). As such, I tried to be aware of my assumptions and make sure I could emotionally distance myself enough to be as objective as possible.
Getting to know the classroom teachers. In order to really get to know and understand the classroom teachers, I employed several strategies for impression management, as described by Hammersley and Atkinson (1995). In terms of personal
! 99 appearance, I wore my usual dance teaching attire so that I was comfortable moving with the teachers and kids. That also gives me the appearance of being a “local” (Hammersley
& Atkinson, 1995, p. 90), which shows that I have a vested interest in the program and might give me some buy-in with the classroom teachers. I did not need to change my speech and demeanor very much, because I am used to interacting with teachers and am a teacher myself. Thus, I was comfortable using the skills I already have to interact with the teachers in the classroom.
In addition to my personal presentation, I used other strategies within the interview setting as well as in the classroom to truly get to know the classroom teachers.
Dance to Learn always involves a planning meeting with the classroom teachers and teaching artists before a residency starts, so that was my initial attempt to establish a rapport with the classroom teachers. I was also able to give an informal interview for my own data collection in that setting to collect preliminary information. Hammersley and
Atkinson (1995) describe the value of simply being sociable and engaging in mundane small-talk. I used the initial planning meeting to chat with the teachers and establish some common ground, and I took the opportunity to let them know how much I was looking forward to working with their classes.
Within the interviews, I tried to use what Holstein and Gubrium (2003) call creative interviewing as a method to get to know the classroom teachers. They describe creative interviewing as a way of tapping into emotional wellsprings by creating an understanding of friendly feelings and intimacy. That often involves mutual disclosure, so I was prepared for the interview to be more of an exchange than a typical question/answer format. Additionally, Rosenblatt (2003) discusses his methods of
! 100 allowing the respondents “great latitude to construct our relationship and to define what is important” (p. 229). By being open to what the classroom teachers told me and actively listening to them, I was able to get to know them as more than just the information they provided for my research. That kind of trust and rapport building was important to truly understand their perspectives.
Finally, because I was – as Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (2011) describe – immersed in the setting (i.e., taking class with the classroom teachers and children), that also helped me get to know and understand the classroom teachers in their familiar environment.
Experiencing the program with them rather than teaching it put me on the same level and allowed me to take on their perspectives more easily. I already find that when I am teaching and notice a child do something that makes me smile, I’ll often make eye contact with a classroom teacher and share a moment of joy for whatever the child is experiencing. I tried to do that frequently with the classroom teachers in my study as well
– moments like that continued to help me build rapport and ultimately get to know the classroom teachers.
Getting to know the students. Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) describe some of the barriers that might be present due to differences in age. However, being immersed in class with the students and experiencing Dance to Learn on their level allowed me to connect with them and get to know them over the course of the residency. I tried to be supportive and encouraging – I tend to smile a lot at the kids even when I am teaching, so
I continued that kind of relationship-building behavior – and I also attempted to enter their play as a child rather than an adult. In other words, I did not correct them if they did something wrong, and I did not quiz them or ask them questions about curriculum
! 101 content. If I did ask questions, it was about how they were feeling, if they were having fun, what they liked to do, etc.
For the nonverbal students, simply being present and interacting with them nonverbally helped me get to know them as well. For example, if a child was sitting out for some reason, simply walking over and offering my hand as an invitation to come dance with me gave me the opportunity to interact with and get to know the child better.
By employing all of the aforementioned methods, I believe that my relationships with everyone in my setting moved beyond superficial researcher/participant characterizations to allow me to truly get to know and understand the perspectives of all of the groups involved.
Methods
Participants
Participants included preschool students (ages 3-5) with disabilities and peer models (i.e., “typically” developing students) that received the Dance to Learn program, as well as their classroom teachers and the ballet company’s teaching artists for those particular residencies. The sample for this study was admittedly limited by the inclusion classrooms that received Dance to Learn during the 2018-2019 school year, which was ultimately determined by the ballet company and outside funders. In 2017, the ballet company began a partnership with a preschool facility specifically for inclusion classrooms. In the inclusion classes, some of the students are diagnosed with developmental disabilities (many of whom are on the autism spectrum), and the rest of the students are “typically” developing peer models. My sample includes the three classes that the ballet company taught there in the 2018-2019 academic year. ! 102 Despite the fact that my sample is primarily purposive, there were built in control groups within the inclusion classrooms. I compared the students with disabilities to the peer models to understand the differences in growth between the two groups.
Additionally, two classes received the program in the fall, while another received it in the winter. The winter residency class served as another control group to determine how much of any growth in development was due to maturation.
Design
The paradigm for this study was a mixed methods comparative case study, using both quantitative/survey data and qualitative techniques. Each classroom served as a case; there were thus two kinds of cases – (1) inclusion classes that received Dance to Learn, and (2) the inclusion class that did not receive Dance to Learn (i.e., the control class that received the program later). Within the inclusion classes, there were also two subgroups – students with disabilities and peer models. Data from each case was compared to better understand the relationship between Dance to Learn and socio-emotional development/executive functioning in different settings. Observations and interviews were also analyzed to determine any impact on teaching artists and classroom teachers.
Quantitative design. The quantitative aspect of this study was a quasi- experimental design. The control group (the class that did not receive the dance intervention in the fall) was compared to the intervention groups (i.e., students that participated in Dance to Learn). Surveys measuring socio-emotional development and executive functioning were administered to classroom teachers and parents before and after the program. In order to strengthen the empirical design of the study, in addition to using the surveys that my participants filled out, I also obtained permission from the
! 103 ballet company to analyze the data collected during the 2017-2018 school year from the same location participating in my study.
Measurements. In 2017, I designed a survey for the ballet company’s evaluation that uses valid and reliable scales to measure components of socio-emotional development and executive functioning. Originally, the length of the survey was 24-27 questions, depending on demographic information included. However, based on teacher feedback and factor analysis, I shortened the surveys to 16-20 questions for the 2018-
2019 school year. I used this survey for my quantitative data so as not to overburden the classroom teachers and parents – since they were asked to fill out the surveys anyway, my research did not add extra paperwork for my participants. In agreement with the ballet company, I designed the survey with the intention to use it for my research, so they have given me permission to use the data obtained from the surveys.
In order to measure socio-emotional development, I modified questions from the
Social-Emotional Assessment/Evaluation Measure (SEAM), Research Edition (Squires et al., 2014). SEAM is a measurement instrument that assesses socio-emotional development in young children. It has three versions based on age; the version I used to inform my surveys was the Preschool form for children ages 36-66 months. According to the technical report (Squires et al., 2009), the Preschool Interval of SEAM shows strong test-retest reliability (Person product moment correlation r=.989, p<.01) and internal consistency (the standardized Chronbach’s alpha was .96). Additionally, SEAM has strong concurrent validity with the Ages and Stages Questionnaire: Social-Emotional (r=
-.810, p<.01). The preschool version of SEAM has a total of ten benchmarks with a range of two to ten questions measuring each. In order to lessen the burden on parents and
! 104 teachers, I narrowed the survey down to one question from five benchmarks (five questions total) based on their relevance to Dance to Learn. Together, those five questions should provide an accurate overview of socio-emotional development and related behaviors.
To measure executive functioning, I used questions from the Ratings of Everyday
Executive Functioning (REEF) assessment (Nilsen, Huyder, McAuley, & Liebermann,
2017). REEF is a 76-item parent report scale that assesses several domains of executive functioning in preschool-aged children. Studies show that the REEF has strong internal consistency (a=.97) and also high convergent validity with all subscales of the Behavior
Rating Inventory of Executive Function – Preschool (BRIEF-P) (Nilsen et al., 2017). The
BRIEF-P is an 86-item questionnaire that breaks down executive functioning into five subsections: inhibit, shift, emotional control, working memory, and plan/organize (Gioia,
Espy, & Isquith, 2003). A contact who works with children with autism at the local children’s hospital recommended the BRIEF-P as the “gold standard” test for executive functioning, and I originally intended to use that rather than the REEF. However, the questions on the BRIEF-P are worded negatively (i.e., “Overreacts to small situations,”
“Does not come prepared to class”). I worried that kind of phrasing would make parents uncomfortable or even upset, so because the REEF also showed sound reliability and validity, I opted to use the more positively phrased items from that instead (i.e., “Waits his/her turn in games and other activities,” “controls his/her anger when another person breaks the rules in a game”). I narrowed the 76 items to eight, with two items to address four areas of executive functioning as classified by the BRIEF-P (because I am using a separate measure for socio-emotional development, I omitted the “emotional control”
! 105 questions to lessen the burden on parents and teachers). Because the REEF is a parent- report survey, in order to make items relevant to classroom teachers, I changed some examples to make them more relevant to the classroom. Other than that, most items appear on the ballet company’s survey in the same way as they do on the REEF. Thus, in total, the ballet company’s surveys have 13 questions to measure socio-emotional development and executive functioning.
For this study, the independent variable is the group – students who received the program in the fall versus the winter. A further grouping variable includes whether the student is a peer model or has a disability. The dependent variables are socio-emotional development and executive functioning as measured by the ballet company’s survey.
Surveys also include demographic information to control for covariates. For example, parents record the child’s age, gender, and whether or not the child receives services in the form of an IEP or 504 plan (to distinguish students with disabilities from peer models). Teachers will record the number of students in the class, the number of years they have been teaching, and whether or not they have worked with the ballet company before. Finally, the teaching artists from the ballet company record attendance for each class. All of the aforementioned factors are potential confounding variables, so by recording the information, I can statistically control for them.
Quantitative analysis. Both descriptive and inferential statistics are important in data analysis. The ballet company’s evaluation reports frequently frame survey results in terms of percent improvement – x% of students improved on a specific measure from the pretest to the posttest. I also used t-tests and ANOVAs (analysis of variance) to further understand the statistical significance of any differences in pre- and post-surveys. As an
! 106 exploration, I tried multiple regression analysis to account for attendance, age, gender, and other demographic variables. The regression was mostly to provide insights for developing a future statistical model with a larger sample size.
For each piece of quantitative data, I coded whether the student was a peer model or a student with a disability (determined by the parent questionnaire or from the teacher, if a parent survey was missing). I was then able to directly compare each construct
(socio-emotional development or the subsets of executive functioning) between each group. The peer models served as a within-group control to demonstrate the difference in growth between students with and without disabilities.
Qualitative data collection techniques. The two ethnographic techniques I primarily used were interviews and participant observation. Hammersley and Atkinson
(1995) state that “there are distinct advantages in combining participant observation and interviews; in particular, the data from each can be used to illuminate the other” (p. 131).
Therefore, to ensure a strong research design, I utilized both techniques.
Participant Observation. For field observations, I took on the role of the participant as observer (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995). During Dance to Learn, I “took class” with the kids so that I was able to experience it with them. In order to create a comprehensive but not overwhelming account of the program, I focused my observations on specific children rather than every child in the class. By observing two or three kids with autism and one or two peer models in each class, I was able to get an in-depth understanding of how the program works without having an overwhelming amount of data to analyze.
! 107 Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) also describe the value of videotaping settings for the purpose of research. In order to help me remember what happened during class, I used video-recordings of every dance class. Logistically, the camera was fixed, but set in a place where most of the room could be seen – I was thus be able to get an overall impression of the class while still focusing on specific children.
In addition to videotaping and observing, I wrote extensive field notes about my time in the classroom. While I was in class, I was not able to take many notes simply because it would have interfered with my ability to get to know the kids – it seemed awkward for me to constantly run over to jot down notes. However, I kept a notebook and pen easily available to quickly jot ideas down in shorthand so that I did not forget details (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 2011). Additionally, I was able to jot down some notes directly after class while the ideas were still fresh. These jottings (which often took place after the students left but before I got home to elaborate on my field notes) described the key components that Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (2011) consider important: details about actions or conversations and key words to remember the activities that we did during class; concrete sensory details; emotional expressions of kids and teachers; and my own general impressions and feelings.
After making jottings, I arranged my schedule so that I immediately left the setting to go home and write longer field notes. Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (2011) mention that it is best to go directly to a computer without talking to anyone about what happened until the full field notes are completed. Frequently, recording the field notes had the effect of a “cathartic outpouring” (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 2011, p. 49) in addition to being a more comprehensive documentation of my data.
! 108 As for what I recorded in my field notes, I used Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw’s
(2011) techniques of descriptions, dialogue, and characterization. I tried to focus on concrete details rather than vague descriptions; my familiarity with the class and movement vocabulary was an asset in writing descriptions of the class. I was also able to reproduce some dialogue – especially comments from children – which were largely influenced by my jottings. I attempted to use characterization to present a full picture of the children I chose to focus on as well. Emerson and colleagues (2011) describe characterization as showing how people act by “presenting characters as fully social beings through descriptions of dress, speech, gestures, and facial expressions, which allow the reader to infer traits” (p. 69). Ideally, by using all of those techniques and writing immediately after my time in the field, I was able to create an accurate picture of what happened in each class.
In terms of organizing my field notes, the approach that was easiest for me was to take on a first-person, end-point perspective. I wrote things as I saw them, and I incorporated facts as I knew them throughout the whole narrative. Additionally, I used a separate “journal” (or Word document, more specifically) for in-process memos. These gave me the space to develop ideas and engage in analysis throughout the research process (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 2011).
Formal interviews. In addition to observing and taking field notes, I also interviewed the teaching artists and classroom teachers throughout the residency.
Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) describe the process of selecting interviewees and how there is usually a choice of informants available. I interviewed each lead classroom
! 109 teacher and each teaching artist once before and once at the end of each session. I also interviewed the teaching artists during the midpoint of the fall residency to check in.
I conducted semi-structured interviews; I had a range of topics I hoped to discuss, but was open to whatever the interviewees brought up as well. Ultimately, I used a reflexive and non-directive approach (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995). I asked
“questions designed as triggers that stimulate the interviewee into talking about a particular broad area” (Hammersley & Atkinson, p. 152) without adhering to a particular order or even the same line of questioning for each participant. I hoped for the interviews to be more of a reciprocal exchange – I actively listened to my interviewee, and also responded to questions they asked me (Narayan & George, 2003). I tried to be aware of my nonverbal communication as well; I wanted to make sure the interviewee knew I was following what she was saying, and that I was supportive and accepting of her discussion points (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995). It was important for me to be aware of perceived power differences within the interview settings as well (Briggs, 2003), especially because
I asked questions about and received answers on behalf of preschool students who may not have the agency to speak for themselves. Finally, I audio recorded the interviews and later transcribed them for coding.
Interviews as participant observation. Hammersley and Atkinson (1995) state that interviews can be not only be formally arranged meetings, but also “spontaneous, informal conversations in places that are being used for other purposes” (p. 138). I often considered spontaneous moments like small asides from teaching artists or classroom teachers as valuable data. Additionally, I did not have the opportunity to have formal interviews with the children, so informal conversations with them during Dance to Learn
! 110 were an important data source as well. For the nonverbal children, I paid particular attention to their nonverbal communication and behaviors – getting to know them required me to get to know how they communicate, so that informed my interviews-as- observations as well.
Qualitative Analysis. Analysis used techniques from content analysis
(Krippendorff, 2004) and focused coding (Charmaz, 2006) for data interpretation.
Content analysis is an “empirically grounded method, exploratory in process, and predictive or inferential in intent” (Krippendorff, 2004, p. xvii). Specifically, I used ethnographic content analysis, which “does not avoid quantification but encourages content analysis accounts to emerge from readings of texts” (Krippendorff, 2004, p. 16).
Corbin and Strauss (1990) suggest that data collection and data analysis are interrelated; thus, as I elaborated on my field notes and transcribed interviews, I simultaneously engaged in analysis and interpretation. After the initial coding, I performed focused coding, using the most frequent or significant codes to examine larger amounts of data.
As Coffey and Atkinson (1996) describe, I looked for “patterns, themes, and regularities as well as contrasts, paradoxes, and irregularities” (p. 47) to draw conclusions about the participant observations and interviews.
Ethics and Privacy
In order to be a part of Dance to Learn, all students’ parents must sign the ballet company’s permission form. I provided a separate consent form for my study that I used to obtain parental consent, along with an information sheet for recruitment (see Appendix
A for all recruitment flyers). I also provided consent forms for all the ballet company staff that take part in the residencies, as well as all classroom teachers and assistants (see
! 111 Appendix B for all consent forms). To ensure the privacy and confidentiality of the participants, I did not report the names of the students, teachers, teaching artists, school, dance program, or ballet company. All collected survey data were coded and anonymized to protect privacy and confidentiality. Any and all identifying information was obscured in interview transcripts and field notes. All procedures were carried out in accordance with approved IRB protocols, as approved in 2018 prior to data collection (see Appendix
C).
! 112
Chapter 4: Analytical Framework
Introduction
While the previous chapters have presented relevant literature and the methodology of my study, including how I carried out my research, this chapter will introduce a more nuanced analytical framework incorporating the relevant literature and applying it to specific steps in my research process. First, I discuss the overarching theoretical orientation and the five major stages of my methodology (identifying the problem/rationale for the study, designing the project, determining the outcome measures, analyzing and interpreting data, and areas of impact). I then describe more specific operationalizations of my theoretical framework to explain a more detailed analytical framework as it applies to each step of my methodology and analysis. In particular, I explain how the literature about learning and special education (UDL, MIT,
Vygotsky’s paradigm, etc.) was used to assess the delivery of the program itself. I also describe specific operationalizations of the socio-emotional development and executive function-related outcomes and how I measured those in my study. Finally, I discuss the potential impact of my study based on the existing literature.
Methodological Framework
Figure 1 in Chapter 2 displays my initial literature review mind map and shows some of the connections between the different areas of literature relevant to my study.
! 113 Initially, I organized my literature review based on common themes, and also from a broad to narrow perspective (i.e., focusing first on child development generally and then discussing studies specifically about how dance is related to development). However, different aspects of my literature review apply directly to different stages of my methodology and analysis, with some overlap between stages. Thus, I have restructured my literature review topics based on how they inform my research methods (see Figure
3).
The Social Model and My Research Methodology
The social model of disability informs the rationale for my research because of the way many classrooms are set up today. In American public education, the concept of
“inclusionism,” or diversity-based practices that include people who look and function differently from the “norm,” is frequently embraced. However, Mitchell and Snyder
(2015) state that “meaningful inclusion is only worthy of the designation ‘inclusion’ if disability becomes more fully recognized as providing alternative values for living that do not simply reify reigning concepts of normalcy” (p. 5). Additionally, Mitchell and
Snyder (2015) discuss that in public education, the goal is often to normalize those with disabilities for the purpose of professionalization rather than accepting or even valuing disability as human variation. As such, the “deficit” model still inherently exists even within public inclusion classrooms, and ultimately, I believe there needs to be a change in that system. Thus, I hope to structure my study in such a way that it provides an avenue for education that is meaningfully inclusive rather than simply a form of inclusionism, and framing it based on the social model allows me to do so.
! 114
Figure 3. Methodological/Analytical Framework
! 115 The design of my project is also shaped by the principles of the social model.
Dance to Learn itself fits within the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Vygotsky’s paradigm for special education, which both adhere to the ideals of the social model of disability. Teaching artists use strengths-based approaches and attempt to make the content accessible for all children from the outset, regardless of disability. Thus, elements of the social model are inherent in the structure of the program itself, as well as in my processes for collecting data.
In terms of outcome measurement and data analysis and interpretation, I relied on the social model for creating the parent and student surveys to be given pre- and post- program. As discussed in my methodology, to align with the strengths-based approach, I selected valid and reliable measurement tools that framed survey questions in a positive light rather than a negative one. Additionally, when I observed or interviewed participants, I looked for positive manifestations of socio-emotional development and executive functioning so as to describe the children in terms of what they excel at rather than what they struggle with. Therefore, steps three and four of my methodology are directly informed by the social model.
Finally, in terms of the impact of my research, my study is ideally an example of meaningful arts inclusion with an emphasis on breaking down the barriers of dance participation for children with developmental disabilities. By framing each part of my study within the lens of the social model of disability, I avoid promoting the stigma that frequently accompanies disability and thus my research becomes not only more accessible to people with and without disabilities, but also more meaningful and humanizing.
! 116 Step 1: Identifying the Problem/Rationale for Study
Though not specific to my methodological techniques, per se, part of my literature review helps to identify the gaps in both literature and practice and allows me to make a claim for why my study will be valuable. Additionally, it has helped me to define some of my research questions and what I ultimately hope to investigate. The three major theoretical areas that apply here are autism, special education, and dance and disability.
Autism
Because I discussed autism and the potential struggles associated with it at length in my literature review, I will not rehash that here. However, I think it is important to describe how research on autism influences me in terms of my own methodology.
Essentially, because of the high prevalence of autism (one in 59, according to the CDC), it is an increasingly relevant issue for classroom teachers, and one that is not likely to go away any time soon. As such, it is important not only to understand what autism is and how it may impact students, but also what techniques and tools are available for teachers to use in the classroom to better meet those students’ needs.
The literature on autism also guides my research questions and what areas of development I chose to investigate in my study. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013) defines the diagnostic criteria for autism in terms of social communication and interaction and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior. I wanted my research questions to focus on some of those core features and common struggles; the literature led me to conceptualize those generally as socio-emotional development (including social communication and interaction) and executive functioning.
! 117 Since challenges related to social skills are a defining feature of autism, I was particularly interested in how dance would influence socio-emotional development in children with ASD. Researchers have found nonverbal communication in particular to be a challenge for children with autism (Mundy, Sigman, Ungerer, & Sherman, 1986), and dance in itself is more or less a form of nonverbal communication. Thus, it makes sense to see if dance can be used as a tool to help facilitate the development of nonverbal communication skills in children with autism. Additionally, Moseley and colleagues
(2015) found that differences in emotion-based communication exist on a neurological level for people with autism compared to controls. Thus, as discussed in my literature review, my study will also focus on emotional expression, understanding, and regulation.
Though impairments in executive function are not necessarily considered a core feature of autism, researchers have found that children with autism often struggle with elements of EF. For example, Freeman, Locke, Rotheram-Fuller, and Mandell (2017) performed a study on EF in children with ASD, and found that across different measures,
“children’s EF were impaired relative to normative samples, and impairments were seen across both behavior regulation and metacognitive skills” (p. 1893). Kimhi and colleagues (2014) also performed a study involving EF in preschool children with autism and found that same age peers significantly outperformed children with autism on EF tasks. Finally, Lopez, Lincoln, Ozonoff, and Lai (2005) found that subsets of EF – notably cognitive flexibility, working memory, and response inhibition – were correlated with restrictive and repetitive symptoms of ASD, which is defined as a core feature of autism. Therefore, especially with the dearth of literature in how dance can relate to
! 118 executive function in children with autism, I decided to focus on EF as one of my areas of interest.
Special Education
Literature on the current status and practices within special education also informs my study rationale. Per the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), all students with disabilities are entitled to a free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. One of the ways that manifests is in inclusion classrooms, where children with disabilities are in the same class as their nondisabled peers and everyone learns together. However, there are challenges to meaningful inclusion in practice.
Kliewer (2006) discusses that the idea of “best practices” presents a kind of paradox in education, because often the “best practices” are developed by researchers and academics who are not primarily practitioners. Due to factors like limited resources or requirements related to standardized tests, the “best practices” are not always implemented by the teachers working in the classrooms, which presents a gap in education. Additionally, it raises the question of how effective the “best practices” are – if they were developed by researchers in “sterile” environments, how well do they actually carry over into the messy and sometimes unpredictable environment of the classroom? Perhaps the best practices really are just that, but they are inaccessible for teachers due to resources, lack of available training, etc. Either way, there is some kind of gap that needs to be filled in education, but I think that needs to begin with cross-communication between the researchers and the practitioners. Therefore, my study will help to partially fill that gap because it will be research in practice – perhaps if the “best practices” are developed in the classroom, they will be better understood and more accessible to teachers.
! 119 Dance and Autism
Though there are several studies that address dance/movement therapy (DMT) as an intervention for autism (Boettinger, 1978; Devereaux, 2012; Hartshorn et al., 2001;
Koch et al., 2014; Mateos-Moreno & Atencia-Doña, 2013; Ritter & Low, 1996;
Torrance, 2003), many of them involve adolescents and young adults rather than young children, and most are not very empirically rigorous. Most studies are anecdotal without systematic research methods. Additionally, since DMT is often employed as a one-on- one therapy, there is not a huge amount of research about DMT group therapy for young children, which could theoretically also be applied in a classroom. There is also a dearth of research regarding DMT techniques or the use of dance as an intervention for autism in a classroom setting rather than as a therapy session. While trends in group DMT therapy and the few studies that exist tend to show positive effects of dance on child development, more research needs to be done to determine what the real impact is.
Therefore, the literature related to dance, autism, and special education more generally has helped me to identify the aforementioned gaps to be addressed in my study.
Step 2: Project Design
After determining the gaps in the literature and what my study aims to address, it is important to turn to theory and individual studies to inform the design of my project.
Though I personally have limited control over Dance to Learn itself because it is a pre- established program, some of the relevant literature does relate to the structure of the program and will also relate to its impact. My theoretical frameworks are especially helpful, however, in terms of understanding what to look for and how to identify it within my own data collection. It is thus important to understand the foundations of relevant
! 120 theories as they relate to the design of Dance to Learn and my own methods of data collection.
Educational Philosophies and Theories of Cognition/Learning
Because Dance to Learn will take place within a classroom setting, I need to have a basic understanding of what is driving the design of educational practices and how the program fits within that structure. As mentioned in my literature review, I found the theories of experiential learning, embodied cognition, and multiple intelligences to be particularly relevant to my study. The following discussion will address those theories and specific studies related to them that influence the design of my research project.
Experiential learning. Though there are a few iterations of the theory of experiential learning, its fundamental belief is that experience is a necessary component for true learning to take place. Meaningful experiences involve acting, not just being acted upon; active engagement and direct experience are thus key components to experiential learning (Hildebrand, 2016). Aesthetic experience, then, is an effective model for experiential learning because it “fluidly incorporates thinking, feeling, and making” (Hildebrand, 2016, p. 78). Thus, Dance to Learn is an example of experiential learning because it is an aesthetic/artistic experience in which children are directly and meaningfully engaging in movement exploration related to the concepts they are studying in class.
Kolb (1984) presents a theory of experiential learning that suggests four skills that effective learners must have: concrete experience abilities (CE), reflective observation abilities (RO), abstract conceptualization abilities (AC), and active experimentation abilities (AE). Dance to Learn works to promote each of those skills, and thus aligns
! 121 nicely with Kolb’s model. During the residency, the children are involved fully in dance class. Therefore, they are building CE skills by participating in the class. (Even if they do not participate the whole time, they are at least in the room directly experiencing what is happening in some capacity.) The teaching artists help build RO skills by asking questions during the class. When moving like different animals or at different speeds, the teaching artists often pause and ask the children how those movements feel in their bodies, and thus allow the children to think about and reflect on their experience with the movement. AC is slightly more difficult to apply in a preschool class, but by relating movement practice to the concepts they are learning in the classroom, they are able to logically connect movement with other subjects. For example, a previous preschool inclusion teacher mentioned that after having Dance to Learn in her classroom, they were discussing animals in class. A student who was largely nonverbal began to move like the animal they were learning about, independently connecting the idea of the animal with its movement and thus showing his understanding of the concept (Pierman, 2016). That connection represents at least the beginnings of AC. Finally, the teaching artists also prompt AE skills by asking questions and allowing the children to experiment with different movements in response. For example, I taught a class where we were discussing world travel, and we asked the students how someone could get from Alaska to Mexico.
Ideas ranged from swimming or boat travel to a hot air balloon and even riding a dolphin, and the children were able to explore each idea through movement. Therefore, based on its structure and pedagogies, Dance to Learn is largely based on principles of experiential learning.
! 122 Though I was unable to find a study that specifically addressed experiential learning and dance education in preschool, Rönkkö, Aerila, and Grönman (2016) performed a study about experiential learning in museums with preschoolers in Finland.
Though not specifically movement related, they had a similar theoretical framework in terms of the importance of the arts and direct experience to enhance learning about topics that were discussed in the classroom. After a field trip to a museum, the students completed a number of arts-based activities related to the museum to see how significant the museum experience was to them. Researchers also video-taped the arts activities and engaged in semi-structured interviews with the children and found that the children not only met their learning goals, but also enjoyed the museum experience and subsequent creative tasks. The field trip and the arts experiences themselves were classified as experiential learning, much like Dance to Learn is experiential. Thus, my study is conceptualized in a similar way: the children were involved in the program (i.e., the experiential learning process), and I used both video tapes of class and informal interviews with students (as well as formal interviews with teachers and teaching artists) to understand how the program is significant to the children and the teachers and what kinds of learning and development are taking place.
Embodied cognition. Also related to experiential learning is the theory of embodied cognition. Broadly, embodied cognition refers to the idea that the body has a central role in shaping the mind and knowledge; the body is directly involved in cognition (Leitan & Chaffey, 2014). Leitan and Chaffey (2014) discuss the practical application of embodied cognition to education, especially for children; “children’s cognitions are theorised to be directly and inextricably linked with their embodied,
! 123 behavioural/emotion experiences” (p. 7). Furthermore, because dance itself is an embodied practice, the theory of embodied cognition is directly applicable to dance as well.
Wilson (2002) summarizes several viewpoints of embodied cognition, each of which can be applied to dance, and specifically to Dance to Learn. First, she discusses that embodied cognition is situated, meaning it takes place in the context of the task itself. Movement and dance in Dance to Learn are situated because we ask the children to think about what they are doing as they are doing it; there is an embodied “interaction with the things that the cognitive activity is about” (Wilson, 2002, p. 626). Secondly,
Wilson (2002) states that embodied cognition is time pressured because situated cognition takes place in real time. In Dance to Learn and in dance more generally, time pressure is particularly relevant. Especially in an environment where many people are dancing at once (like Dance to Learn), dancers must be aware of the others around them as well as the music directing them, which necessarily means responding to real-time feedback from the situation. Third, Wilson (2002) discusses the claim that we offload cognitive work onto the environment so we do not have to hold an immense amount of information in mind. One example of that is gesturing while speaking, which is a form of nonverbal communication. Dance itself involves gesture and nonverbal communication, and Dance to Learn asks the students to explore that as well – how can they express themselves through movement rather than verbally? Thus, offloading onto the environment is related to dance and Dance to Learn. Next is the idea that cognition is for action. Wilson (2002) discusses mirror neurons, which activate both when one is performing an action as well as when one is seeing an action performed by another.
! 124 Mirroring is a common tool used in Dance to Learn, where students are asked to watch the teaching artists and imitate their movements. Therefore, they must think about and then perform movements using principles of embodied cognition. Finally, Wilson (2002) explains that off-line cognition is body based. She discusses different forms of memory, such as working memory (also part of EF) and implicit memory. Both of those are activated in Dance to Learn as children are learning dance concepts or trying to remember a “Magic 8 dance” (where four movements are repeated eight times each to the beat of the music). Based on the aforementioned components, Dance to Learn certainly applies to and utilizes embodied cognition in preschoolers. Additionally, it encompasses working memory, which is a component of executive functioning. As such, I found it relevant to understand for my study.
Tsouvala and Magos (2016) took a similar theoretical perspective in their study of early childhood educators in Greece. Though the pre-service teachers were the primary research participants rather than children, the theoretical framework and methods are similar to my own and thus inform my study as well. Researchers interpreted dance as a form of embodied knowledge that encourages transformative learning, much like how I am conceptualizing Dance to Learn. The participants visited different areas of Greece and ultimately created dances to explore concepts like identity and space; Dance to Learn also uses the process of movement creation to explore concepts. Researchers used observations of the participants’ movements, informal discussions, written texts, and focus groups in their data collection; because I worked with preschoolers, I did not use written texts or official focus groups with them, but I was able to interview their teachers and also observe and have informal interactions with them. Thus, Tsouvala and Magos’
! 125 (2016) theoretical framework and study design certainly inform elements of my own research.
In addition to the relationship between embodied cognition and dance, Eigsti
(2013) suggests that autism is “characterized by a relative decrease or lack of embodiment” (p. 7). Therefore, by using the theory of embodied cognition, my study was able to investigate how that works specifically for preschoolers in a dance environment.
Furthermore, Yilmaz, Yanardag, Birkan, and Bumin (2004) performed an intervention study where hydrotherapy was found to improve not only balance, speed, and agility, but also children’s confidence and body awareness. Thus, physical activity can have an impact on embodied responses and knowledge for children with autism, which leaves an avenue for dance to help with issues of embodiment as well. Eigsti (2013) also suggests that synchronization or mimicry training, both of which are used in Dance to Learn, may be effective interventions for autism. Thus, it is reasonable to believe that Dance to Learn may improve embodied cognition processes specifically for children with ASD.
Embodied social cognition. Research suggests that early social cognition has an embodied foundation due to the fact that early cognitive processes integrate sensorimotor information (Fenici, 2012). Additionally, the role of mirror neurons suggests that some social cognition begins with motor planning (Goldman & deVignemont, 2009), such as low-level mindreading and inferring the mental states of others (Fenici, 2012). Mirroring is something frequently used in dance, and specifically in Dance to Learn. Thus, motor activities involving mirroring others’ movements stimulate the mirror neuron system, which promotes embodied social cognition.
! 126 Some researchers have found a potential connection between empathy and mirroring exercises, which also falls in the realm of embodied social cognition. Behrends,
Müller, and Dziobek (2012) present a framework for a DMT intervention that emphasizes empathy. The article connects many areas of literature to make an argument for why dance-based therapies involving imitation, synchronous movement, and motoric cooperation may help promote empathy in people with “problems in empathic processes”
(p. 110). They discuss the mirror neuron system (MNS) and its potential link to kinesthetic empathy, and they posit that interventions that activate the MNS, such as
DMT, may be effective in promoting empathic thinking and behavior. Authors then propose a 10-week DMT intervention to foster empathy specifically for people with autism. Elements of their intervention are used within Dance to Learn: both are ten weeks, both use a set structure beginning with a warm-up that becomes more complex throughout the residency, and both rely on mirroring activities and synchronous movement throughout each class. Therefore, Behrends and colleagues’ (2012) theoretical framework related to embodied social cognition does align with the design of Dance to
Learn.
Multiple intelligences. Howard Gardner’s (2011) Multiple Intelligences Theory
(MIT) asserts that there are at least eight different intelligences (see Table 1), and while everyone has each kind of intelligence, strengths and weaknesses differ from person to person. However, public school curricula tend to emphasize linguistic and logical/mathematical skills at the expense of the others (Rettig, 2005). It is important to note that within MIT, the identification of an intelligence is not the same as a domain or discipline; there is “a critical distinction between an intelligence associated with a domain
! 127 and an intelligence as a domain” (Groff, 2013, p. 18). Additionally, intelligences are not equivalent to learning styles, and categorizing children by “putting kids in ‘buckets’”
(Groff, 2013, p. 18) may limit their ability to explore and express themselves across each intelligence.
Rather than simply being a theory of intelligence, MIT can be used as a tool or as a method of instruction to enhance educative practices in the classroom. Bas (2016) performed a meta-analysis that found MIT-based instruction to be more successful than other educational methods as shown by academic achievement levels. Additionally, the largest effect was shown for class sizes of 1-20 children. Dance to Learn’s maximum class size is 20 children, so it also provides a suitable environment for effective MIT instruction.
Rettig (2005) provides a rationale for the use of MIT in early childhood education, specifically for children with disabilities, that directly aligns with the social model. He states that taking an MIT perspective in early childhood “may help us to discover or ‘awaken’ hidden talents…An emphasis on the multiple intelligences may help children discover what they are good at and put a focus on ability rather than disability” (Rettig, 2005, p. 256). He then lists several examples of MIT-based instructive techniques for preschool children with disabilities, including dance and yoga for bodily- kinesthetic intelligence, as well as identifying one’s own body parts for intrapersonal intelligence, all of which occur in Dance to Learn. Thus, MIT-based instruction is likely effective for preschool children with disabilities and also aligns with activities in Dance to Learn.
! 128 Perhaps the most relevant intelligence for Dance to Learn is bodily kinesthetic, but Anne Green Gilbert (2003) offers suggestions for strengthening each intelligence through dance classes. She describes specific activities that effectively utilize each separate intelligence, and also provides a sample lesson plan for use in a dance class. For example, to promote musical intelligence, using a variety of styles and meters as well as introducing music from other cultures can be helpful. Dance to Learn often distinguishes between fast and slow, and often asks the children to move with the music by tapping on the beat, alternating between counts of eight, four, two, and one. Logical-mathematical intelligence is related to dance in terms of counting how many times one performs a movement – teaching artists in Dance to Learn often discuss that the “magic number” in dance is eight, and will then perform a movement eight times. For spatial intelligence, copying both teachers’ and peers’ movements can be helpful, which often occurs in
Dance to Learn. Additionally, having spatial awareness of where others are in the room
(and exercising self-control to stay in personal space) is a large part of Dance to Learn that is relevant to spatial intelligence as well as the personal intelligences. Dance classes can support linguistic intelligence by teaching vocabulary and engaging in verbal reflection after completing an activity; both are important components of Dance to Learn.
For example, to teach what a solo is, teaching artists explain that “when one dancer goes at a time, it is called a solo. Say that with me – ‘solo’” before allowing the children to go across the floor one by one. Thus, linguistic intelligence may also be strengthened in the program. The verbal reflection – “how did moving X way make you feel?” – is also relevant to intrapersonal intelligence. Finally, social interactions like partner work can help foster interpersonal intelligence; a focus on expressing emotions through dance may
! 129 do the same (Gilbert, 2003). Both are frequently used in Dance to Learn, and thus the program is directly relevant to MIT.
Furthermore, Dance to Learn is strongly based on Gilbert’s principles of brain- based learning (A. Emory-Maier, personal communication, February 27, 2018), and thus the structure and aims of the program are driven in part by MIT as well. As a researcher,
MIT also gives me some indicators to identify what intelligences are being used and what strengths exist in each child. Therefore, it is an important theoretical framework that informs the design of my study and my observation techniques.
Special education paradigms. Because my study will take place in an inclusion classroom, it is important to understand paradigms of special education and how they can be applied to dance and creative movement. Though the classrooms themselves may not be explicitly based on the paradigms I will discuss, they do inform how I conceptualize the Dance to Learn program as it is provided in an inclusive setting. The following discussion will give a brief overview of Vygotsky’s paradigm and Universal Design for
Learning (UDL) and discuss how they relate to my research.
Vygotsky’s paradigm for special education. Vygotsky viewed special education as “a way to compensate for primary defects through facilitation and strengthening of intact psychological functions” (Gindis, 1995, p. 79). Though he never specifically described inclusion in schools, he did reject the idea that people with disabilities should be regarded as lesser in society. He also believed that disability should be conceptualized as difference rather than stigma, that education should be strengths-based, and that society needed to become more inclusive of people with disabilities (Smagorinsky,
! 130 2012). Within my research study, I take the same approach, and thus the design of my project is based upon similar principles.
Udvari-Solner (1996) performed a study about inclusive education in elementary schools and found Vygotskian theories (in addition to constructivist theories and MIT) significantly informed the teachers’ inclusive practices. She found several ways in which theoretical assumptions impacted teaching practices, each of which are also applied in teaching Dance to Learn. First, adaptation and individualization were common, each of which are paramount in Vygotsky’s paradigm. Teaching artists in Dance to Learn also base their instructional techniques on adapting and individualizing curricula for each class and for specific students within the class as needed. Secondly, student interaction was considered central to learning processes. In Dance to Learn, teachers often ask students to interact and work together, whether it be in making a circle with the whole class and then working together to change the size of the circle or galloping across the floor with partners. Finally, Udvari-Solner (1996) found that in the inclusive classrooms, all children were perceived as capable of learning, and it was up to the teachers to find ways for the students to express their knowledge. The same is true in Dance to Learn; students are encouraged to express their knowledge in many different ways. Thus, the design of Dance to Learn aligns with Vygotsky’s paradigm, so his framework will inform my observations and the general conceptualization of my study.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL). Vygotsky’s paradigm and MIT share elements of UDL, which also informs my study design. The general premise of UDL is the idea that all children can become expert learners, regardless of any disability, and that educators should focus on the children’s strengths to promote learning (Hartmann, 2015).
! 131 Within UDL, the aim is to eliminate the need for special accommodations because the design of each lesson includes avenues for all children to learn. This is accomplished by providing multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement. The arts can be easily integrated into each aspect of UDL (Glass, Meyer, & Rose, 2013), and I argue that dance is an excellent way to provide each component of UDL in the classroom.
Dance to Learn provides multiple means of representation through the use of props and physical demonstrations – content is not simply spoken or read/shown through images, but also seen and kinesthetically experienced. Additionally, rather than asking children to only verbally express their responses and knowledge, Dance to Learn allows action and expression through movement, which makes it accessible for nonverbal students as well.
Finally, the props, music, and ability to move throughout the room also provide multiple means of engagement and motivation for the students. Therefore, UDL is inherent in the structure and delivery of Dance to Learn.
Though I found no studies specifically relating UDL and dance, Grenier, Miller, and Black (2017) applied UDL principles to a general physical education class. As a result, a student with severe multiple disabilities was able to successfully participate with same-age peers. By using a mixture of open activities where everyone can play, modified activities that are altered to include students with disabilities, parallel activities with children grouped according to ability level, and separate or alternate activities, students with disabilities were able to meet IEP physical education goals. Dance to Learn has a similar structure – it primarily uses open and modified activities to allow all students to dance together. Thus, Grenier, Miller, and Black’s (2017) work gives me a specific
! 132 application of UDL to conceptualize different activities taking place within class (i.e., open vs. modified).
Dance in Education and as Intervention
Much of the literature about dance and disability is within the realm of
Dance/Movement Therapy (DMT), which is usually a one-on-one intervention provided in a therapeutic setting rather than a classroom (Devereaux, 2012). (I provided a detailed discussion of DMT in my literature review, so I will not repeat that here.) However, there are also instances of group DMT as an intervention for autism, which can be applied to
Dance to Learn. For example, Koch and colleagues (2014) performed a mixed-methods feasibility study regarding the use of DMT for young adults with autism. 31 participants
(15 of whom were controls) participated in 7 weekly sessions of group DMT with a focus on therapeutic mirroring. At the end of treatment, researchers found that those in the experimental group showed improvements in body awareness, self-other awareness, social skills, and psychological well-being as measured by valid and reliable instruments.
Teachers and assistants also qualitatively evaluated the mirroring movements based on systematic observations. My study is similar in that it employs elements of DMT in a group setting, uses survey instruments based on valid and reliable measures of socio- emotional development and EF, and will also use observational techniques as yet another source of data. Furthermore, I observed similar outcomes related to self-other awareness and social skills. I employed a control group in my study as well, so that it was as empirically rigorous as possible. Thus, Koch et al.’s (2014) theoretical orientation (DMT) and methodology are very similar to my study, and I used elements of their work to inform my own.
! 133 Hartshorn and colleagues (2001) performed a study on group DMT with young children. Their outcome measures also inform some of the things I will be looking for in my own study. They found that after a creative movement therapy-based intervention, children spent less time wandering, less time negatively responding to touch, less time resisting the teacher, and more time showing passive on-task behaviors (when they were not actively engaged in the activity, they were at least watching or passively engaged).
Mateos-Moreno and Atencia-Doña (2013) also performed a study of group DMT and music therapy for autism, and their outcome measures included improvements in imitation ability, instinct, and emotion (i.e., resistance to change, mood, anxiety). Many of the outcomes in both Hartshorn and colleagues’ (2001) and Mateos-Moreno and
Atencia-Doña’s (2013) studies involve elements of socio-emotional behavior and EF, so they are specific manifestations of the outcomes that I am hoping to observe in my own study.
Finally, Rosenblatt et al. (2011) performed a study that was less about DMT but rather included relaxation-based yoga as an intervention for autism. While Dance to
Learn uses elements of DMT, it also uses yoga poses, so the structure of Rosenblatt and colleagues’ program is somewhat similar. Their study was primarily quantitative, using paired t-test comparisons of pre- and post-scores on a reliable and valid outcome measure. Though my study is more robust than that, I also applied elements of their methodology and analysis to inform the design of my own research.
Dance in the classroom. While elements of group DMT are helpful to understand because they do apply to Dance to Learn, it is also informative to examine dance programs that have taken place within a school classroom because that is how Dance to
! 134 Learn is delivered. Gonzalez (2015) describes a movement and music program for children with autism that she implemented in a public school classroom. She discussed that consistency in routine is key, so the class structure stayed the same for each meeting.
Each class began with a greeting, followed by a set warm up. Children participated in circle dances after the warm up (i.e., walk in a circle, gallop in a circle), and continued the class by moving one at a time across the floor. Class ended with a cool down and goodbye song. Dance to Learn is structured very similarly, with a hello, warm-up, locomotor in a circle, a creative exploration, solos, and a goodbye. Gonzalez’ (2015) program had many of the same elements of Dance to Learn and was successful in a classroom setting, and thus the structure and delivery of her class informs my own study as well.
Additionally, the Andrea Rizzo Foundation provides DMT-based instruction in public classrooms in New York City, specifically for children with autism. The goals of the program include “to expand self-expression, build body awareness, define and establish healthy boundaries, release tension, build awareness of self and other, build interpersonal relationships, and improve communication skills” (Vincent et al., 2007, p.
55). Dance to Learn has similar aims, and therefore the Rizzo programs informed my own methodology in terms of what a class looks like and what I should look for in my observations.
Step 3: Outcome Measurement
After determining the general design of my study, it is important to know what to measure and how to measure it. I have briefly touched on some of those ideas already, but will go into greater detail about studies that relate to specific operationalizations of
! 135 my variables and how I will measure and observe the outcomes I am looking for. In general, the outcome measures are greatly informed by Piaget and Vygotsky’s theories of development, discussed at length in my literature review. I have explained in detail how I came up with my surveys and how I will align my data with my research questions. Here,
I will further elaborate on specific studies that have similar theoretical orientations regarding socio-emotional development, executive functioning, and movement or physical activity and explain how those methodologies inform my own. (Note that these studies are not meant to be exhaustive, but rather representative examples of how specific studies inform my research. Additionally, some studies may be relevant to both the outcome measures as well as the interpretation of data, but for brevity, I will not repeat the study descriptions more than once.)
Socio-Emotional Development Outcome Measures
Emotional expressiveness. Emotional expressiveness refers to a preschooler’s ability to express how they are feeling through facial expressions, body language, tone, and voice. Positive affect is particularly important, especially in terms of sustaining positive relationships (Denham, 2006). Specific manifestations of emotional expression would be when children smile at peers or the teacher or laugh along with peers.
Additionally, initiating hugs to show affection would be an example of positive affect and emotional expression. Conversely, if a child is visibly upset or crying, that is another indicator of emotional expressiveness. Sometimes, the curriculum of Dance to Learn relates to emotions as well, and teaching artists might ask students what their bodies look like if they feel emotions like happy, sad, angry, or excited. Watching to see which children can distinguish between the different emotions and accurately express them
! 136 helped me classify emotional expressiveness. I was also attuned to the children’s nonverbal communication, which was especially relevant for children who are nonverbal.
Boone and Cunningham (2001) performed a study about the relationship between emotional expression and body movement in preschoolers. They found that children as young as four were able to accurately express emotions through manipulating the movement of a teddy bear to music. The biggest difference between this study and my own is that children will not be manipulating the movement of an inanimate object, but rather will be expressing emotions themselves. However, this study still provides a basis for me to look for intentional emotional expression in preschoolers and affirms my choice to examine emotional expressiveness as an outcome measure.
Understanding of emotion/empathy. In addition to being able to accurately express emotions, socio-emotional development also concerns a child’s ability to read the emotions of others (Raver & Zigler, 1997) and also react appropriately (Denham, 2006).
Specific examples of emotion knowledge include a child stating that another child is sad because he is crying, or more likely in Dance to Learn, identifying the emotions of a character in a story. Additionally, if a child comforts another child when sad, that is evidence of emotion knowledge and empathy.
Boone and Cunningham (1998) performed another study to investigate whether young children could accurately interpret the emotions of others as expressed through movement. When shown a digital presentation of an adult pair expressing one of four target emotions (happy, sad, angry, scared) through movement, children were able to accurately identify which of the emotions was being expressed. Lagerlöf and Djerf
(2009) performed a similar study using video of professional dancers exhibiting the same
! 137 target emotions and found that even children as young as four years old performed above chance levels when identifying emotions. Though my study will not be as systematic in manipulating what emotions the children see, it still gives me a justification for evaluating the understanding of emotions, whether it be in a fictional character of a story or an organic interaction with another student in the class. Since other studies have shown that children are capable of understanding emotions, that validates my decision to attempt to measure a similar construct in my own study.
Identifying feelings about oneself. Raver and Zigler (1997) consider being able to identify one’s own emotions as an important aspect of socio-emotional development, and one that requires a deeper self-awareness than simply expressing emotions. For example, during a residency I taught previously, a child told me that she liked it when her friends were proud of her. She then asked me, “Miss Elle, do you remember when you were proud of me?” That showed me that she was not only taking pride in herself, but also reminding me of my pride in her, which would be an example of social cognition.
Other times, children will tell me that dancing makes them tired (particularly after a jumping sequence or quick locomotor exercises). That also alerts me to the fact that they are tuned in to their own feelings and emotions, and furthermore, can accurately express them.
I believe that this construct is somewhat related to understanding emotions, because it requires the children to recognize emotions within themselves. Therefore, the aforementioned studies (Boone & Cunningham, 1998, 2001; Lagerlöf & Djerf, 2009) also apply to this outcome measure. However, Stinson (2005) describes a study about dance in middle school; the biggest result she found was that dance was fun for students.
! 138 Unfortunately, “having fun” is not usually regarded as an important outcome measure, especially in a study within education. Stinson argues that despite the lack of emphasis, there is value in creating joy in and of itself; creating joy through dance in school can help students to self-actualize, which in turn gives them the confidence to succeed in school and in life (Stinson, 2005). Therefore, if preschool students are able to identify that they are having fun or feeling happiness, that will be a useful measure of an aspect of social cognition with potentially positive results in the long run.
Emotional regulation. Emotion regulation describes the ability to experience emotion and appropriately control one’s own behavior in response to strong emotion
(Denham, 2006). For example, if a child can calm himself down after exciting activity
(jumping up and down, galloping across the floor, etc.) or after being upset, that would show evidence of emotional regulation. Additionally, being patient and waiting her turn to go across the floor for her solo would indicate emotional regulation in Dance to Learn.
I was unable to find any studies that specifically linked dance and emotion regulation, but Brown and Sax (2012) performed a study of an arts-integration program in a preschool setting. Dance was included in the program, and among other outcomes, teachers rated the students involved in the arts-integration program to be better able to regulate both positive and negative emotions than peers who did not receive the arts- integration program. Though my study does not attempt to incorporate any arts disciplines outside of dance and music, it still provides a justification for looking at emotion regulation. Brown and Sax’s (2012) study relied solely on teacher ratings of emotion regulation, which I also incorporated in my study. Yet I also asked parents on their pre/post surveys, and I made observations as well. Thus, while my study is inspired
! 139 by Brown and Sax’s (2012), I attempted to strengthen my design by using more varied and rigorous forms of data collection.
Social relationships. Social relationships as a socio-emotional developmental construct refer to social skills and positive and prosocial interactions among peers. Thus, looking at how the children interact with one another (or avoid peer interactions) provided insight into socio-emotional development. Once again, taking turns before going across the floor in a solo would be evidence of positive social relationships, as well as listening to directions and sharing answers (verbally or nonverbally) when the teachers ask a question. Additionally, some of Dance to Learn’s movement activities require cooperation, like holding hands to make a big circle, galloping across the floor with a partner, or making a Chinese Dragon (for this activity, the children line up, gently put their hands on the shoulders of the person in front of them, and make a train while underneath a long scarf). All of those activities require cooperation and are specific manifestations of social skills and relationships.
Thom (2010) and Lobo and Winsler (2006) describe studies of movement programs for preschool students with a focus on socio-emotional development specifically. Though these programs did not take place within inclusion classrooms, their theoretical orientations and corresponding methodologies do inform my own study significantly. Thom (2010) takes a more qualitative approach and describes different observations and general trends of the class after a creative movement program, while
Lobo and Winsler (2006) provide an empirically rigorous quantitative study of creative movement in a Head Start program. Both of the studies focus specifically on children’s interactions with one another, so they can be categorized within the domain of social
! 140 relationships. Thus, I can incorporate elements of data collection techniques and outcome measures from both of the studies in my own measurement and observation of socio- emotional development.
Executive Functioning Outcome Measures
To date, I have not been able to find many empirical studies regarding the relationship between executive functioning and dance. Thus, my outcome measures for executive functioning are based primarily on the characterizations of the instruments I used to create my surveys, namely the Ratings of Everyday Executive Function scale
(Nilsen, Huyder, McAuley, & Lieberman, 2017), which is correlated with the sub-scales of the Behavioral Rating Inventory of Executive Function – Preschool Edition (Gioia,
Espy, & Isquith, 2003). Therefore, I have classified EF in terms of the following: inhibit, shift, working memory, and plan/organize.
Inhibit. Inhibition refers to the ability to withhold a motor response or restrain an impulse (Garon, Bryson, & Smith, 2008, p. 40). Related to the idea of emotion regulation, waiting patiently while taking turns is one example of response inhibition.
Additionally, refraining from talking when the teacher is talking is evidence of inhibition.
In a dance class, the teaching artists often tell the students that “dancers use their bodies, not their voices” to help children understand why they should not make too much noise.
Sometimes, however, when we are being animals like dogs or cats, the children make the animal noises even after they are asked to perform the movement without noise.
Moments like that provided me with evidence about response inhibition. Inhibition has also been linked to attention (Anderson, 2002), so when I observed and looked for who
! 141 was engaged and paying attention to the teaching artists, that was further indirect evidence of inhibition.
It is important to note that because the construct of inhibition is inherently an absence of something, it was easier to identify when children were not inhibiting behavior rather than when they successfully inhibited behavior. Thus, it was important to consider how I recorded my observations to ensure a strengths-based approach and interpretation. Primarily, I focused on improvements over time.
Shift. The ability to shift behaviors and learn from mistakes, also sometimes referred to as cognitive flexibility, is another construct of EF (Anderson, 2002). In practice, shifting can be seen when children move from one task to the next – in dance class, when we shift from locomotor movements to a seated stretch, the children must adapt their thinking accordingly. Sometimes within the seated stretch, children do not quite get the coordination of certain movements the first time, and they are able to correct themselves with the help of a teacher or simply by observing their peers; that is another operationalization of shifting. Finally, being able to adjust their behavior in different settings is an example of shifting – coming to participate in Dance to Learn itself represents an opportunity for the students to practice cognitive flexibility because it has different procedures and expectations than being in the classroom.
Working memory. Working memory refers to the ability to update and monitor information in real time (Garon, Bryson, & Smith, 2008). As in inhibition, attention can also affect working memory; ignoring distractions and continuing to stay engaged in class is thus also a specific example of working memory. In Dance to Learn, working memory can be observed by how the students follow directions. For example, teachers might tell
! 142 students to walk over to one side of the room like a penguin (step one) and then sit down criss-cross applesauce (step two). The children have to keep that information in mind as they follow the directions and monitor the information to know when it is time for step two.
Plan/organize. Planning requires managing task demands and organizing information logically (Nilsen, Huyder, McAuley, & Liebermann, 2017). For instance, in
Dance to Learn, we often use books to inform our movement practices. When students are able to tell the stories and link the events together in ways that make sense, that would be considered evidence of planning and organizing. Additionally, organizing information to remember what happened in previous weeks would fall under this EF construct as well. Teaching artists sometimes ask what the students remember from the last week, and
I consider being able to recall information and answer questions correctly to be an important cognitive construct related to organizing information. Finally, motor planning can also be grouped within this construct of EF; watching to see how students sequenced movements together was a specific manifestation of motor planning.
Despite the lack of literature on dance and EF, there are some studies that show a relationship between EF and physical activity, which is related to dance and movement.
For example, Vandenbroucke and colleagues (2016) found that first graders’ working memory, inhibition, and cognitive flexibility were positively correlated with physical activity. Additionally, Anderson-Hanley, Tureck, and Schneiderman (2011) found that in children with autism, engagement in the dance-exercise video game Dance Dance
Revolution (DDR) helped to decrease repetitive behaviors, which are associated with EF
(Lopez et al., 2005). Hartshorn et al. (2001) also found a relationship between dance and
! 143 attention/engagement, which is thought to be a part of EF. Therefore, the aforementioned studies inform my choice to see if dance as physical activity has similar results for preschool children with autism.
Step 4: Analysis and Interpretation
While some of my analysis will be taking place simultaneously with my data collection, other studies with theoretical frameworks like mine inform how I will analyze my data after it has been collected. Specifically, I can base my analysis on other studies that involve socio-emotional development and EF. I can also use the general theories of embodied cognition and multiple intelligences to help me interpret my data in terms of how the program is working. The following will be a brief discussion of each of those elements of my study.
Socio-Emotional Development
From a quantitative perspective, Pereira and Marques-Pinto (2017) performed a study about a dance program called Experiencing Emotions in a Portuguese middle school. Like my study, they had a control group and an experimental group, and they used pre- and post-tests to measure socio-emotional skills. In their analysis, they employed a 2x2 quasi-experimental design and used an ANCOVA (Analysis of Co-
Variance) to control for demographic variables like age, gender, grade, and nationality/ethnicity. I used a similar quantitative design in my study for analysis – I used the pre- and post-tests to compare the control and experimental groups while controlling for extraneous demographic variables like age, gender, and even attendance.
Ylönen and Cantell (2009) performed a qualitative case study about a DMT program for preschoolers in Finland that shares a similar orientation to my research. ! 144 Their study took an action research approach, which is different from mine, but their data analysis techniques are relevant to my own study. Researchers in the study kept experiential diaries (much like how I wrote field notes), and most of the data collection was from participant observation. The practical methods of the study in terms of program delivery were taken from DMT practices, similar to elements of Dance to Learn. When analyzing data, they separated their findings into distinct categories about the process and structure of the program, the embodied experiences had within the sessions, and finally interpretations stemming from the experiences. Their categories gave me ideas about how to classify some of my findings as well. Because the structure of their program and the theoretical frameworks align closely with my study, I took ideas from Ylönen and
Cantell’s (2009) data analysis techniques to guide me in my qualitative approach to analysis and interpretation.
Executive Functioning
Zach and colleagues (2015) did a quantitative study comparing development of
EF in children who experienced a dance program, children involved in an orienteering activity, and a control group. They used a 3x2 mixed ANOVA to analyze measures of EF in each group. My study similarly has three different groups: students with disabilities who receive Dance to Learn, peer models who receive Dance to Learn, and a control group. Therefore, I can base my quantitative analysis design on a combination of this study and the quantitative study I described above (Pereira & Marques-Pinto, 2017). Zach et al.’s (2015) work also gave me an idea of how to measure specific aspects of EF in each group, and what kinds of behaviors they deemed important or representative of EF
(i.e., attention and spatial perception).
! 145 Chen (2001) performed a qualitative study about dance and critical thinking in a public school classroom. Though critical thinking is not equivalent to EF, they both involve cognitive processes; based on the dearth of literature about EF and dance, I consider this study to be closely enough aligned with mine so as to inform my data analysis. Chen (2001) provides an extremely detailed description of the data collection and analysis process. Sources of data included videotaped dance lessons, semi-structured interviews with classroom teachers, and document collection. I did not collect documents, but videotaping and interviews are two important data-collection methods in my study.
Chen (2001) then gives a step-by-step description of the process of analysis, which I used to inform my analysis process. For example, Chen (2001) states:
I analyzed the videotaped lessons using the following steps: (a) watching each
videotaped lesson while reading the corresponding lesson transcript, (b)
identifying instances associated with constructivist-oriented teaching strategies,
(c) labeling the instances with a tentative assertion, (d) writing a descriptive
summary of the lesson, (e) comparing the instances identified and labeled on the
transcripts with the descriptive summaries, (f) grouping the similar ideas into
categories, and (g) identifying the themes by summarizing the categories. (p. 369)
Therefore, I used elements of that process to ensure I was thorough and consistent throughout my analysis.
Multiple Intelligences and Embodied Cognition
While it is useful to look to other studies to gain insight about how best to analyze my data, it is also important to have analytical frameworks through which to interpret my findings. The theories of embodied cognition and multiple intelligences give me a
! 146 platform to interpret my findings and better understand how the program is working.
Each of the theories provides mechanisms to understand not only what is happening, but also allows me to speculate how and why it is happening. For example, researchers
(Berrol, 2006; McGarry & Russo, 2011) provide explanations for the potential development of empathy through mirroring exercises. Based on the results that I find, those explanations related to embodied cognition allow me to infer what might be happening on a neural level.
Additionally, Horwitz, Lennartsson, Theorell, and Ullén (2015) describe how embodied cognition plays a role in dance, and how that may also relate to emotional competence. In their study, dancers showed lower levels of alexithymia (difficulty finding words for feelings) than non-dancers. They discussed that dancing may thus be involved in emotional regulation because dancers’ emotional regulation skills are considered embodied. Therefore, using the conclusions from Horwitz and colleagues’
(2015) work, I can infer how emotional regulation might be working in children with autism who may experience struggles similar to alexithymia.
Finally, Dale, Hyatt, and Hollerman (2007) discuss a “path of inquiry” relating dance and neuroscience, which is based on the conception of multiple intelligences. They also assert that MIT has been “useful in organizing the presentation of educational materials” (Dale, Hyatt, & Hollerman, 2007, p. 102) and that the identification of an individual’s strengths can serve as an entry point for teaching curricula. By using that framework, I can also see how different entry points may work for the children in Dance to Learn and better understand what aspects of the program were successful and why.
Furthermore, an application of both embodied cognition and multiple intelligences may
! 147 allow me to understand how to improve the program to ensure it is accessible and effective for all students.
Analysis of Dance to Learn Pedagogies and Delivery
One important point of analysis is of the program itself, related to my second research question: How does the dance integration process work when a professional ballet company enters a classroom to deliver a dance program? / What adaptations are necessary for a program to be successful in an inclusion setting as opposed to a mainstream classroom? In order to answer that question, I used the elements of Kolb’s model of experiential learning, MIT, Vygotsky’s special education paradigm, UDL, and
DMT as guidelines. I looked for specific examples of:
●! Activities promoting concrete experience abilities, reflective observation abilities, abstract conceptualization abilities, and active experimentation abilities (Kolb) ●! Activities used to engage multiple intelligences, as outlined by Gilbert (2003) ●! Adaptation, individualization, student interaction, and a strengths-based focus (Vygotsky) ●! Multiple means of representation, action/expression, and engagement (UDL) ●! Mirroring, body synchronization, creative movement (DMT)
In addition to specific manifestations of the above phenomena, I also asked teaching artists to compare their own teaching strategies and pedagogies from the inclusion residencies to other residencies not designated as inclusion. Correlating their answers with the above theories allowed me to understand some of the important ways of adapting a program for an inclusion setting, and particularly for students with autism.
Step 5: Program Impact
Not only does the literature inform the inception, design, and analysis/interpretation of my study, but the gaps in the literature also define how my
! 148 work will have an impact on the field. I have conceptualized this mainly in terms of the
Universal Design for Learning and for the field of autism in general. As previously discussed, there is not really a lot of literature about UDL for a dance curriculum, specifically. It exists for the arts in general and for physical education rather than dance as a subject. However, my study will be able to provide an example of a UDL program that uses dance to promote learning and socio-emotional development. I will be able to give specific descriptions of how Dance to Learn employs multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement so that others may replicate it in their own classrooms.
Finally, the field of autism research is vast, but when it comes to dance-based early intervention programs, there is not a lot of empirical research in existence. My study will provide a format that is based on some DMT principles (but not explicitly classified as DMT) and will be a more rigorous evaluation than many that exist today.
Furthermore, since Dance to Learn originated as a program for “typically” developing students, my study will also be able to provide a blueprint for how to adapt programming to meet the needs of a population of students with autism.
In conclusion, the transdisciplinary nature of my study requires me to have a foundational understanding of many different areas of literature. Each of those bodies of literature informs my study in a unique way, so my analytical framework is ultimately a culmination of the intersections of dance, development, disability, and education theories.
! 149
Chapter 5: Data Presentation and Analysis – Program Infrastructure and Pedagogies
Overview and Analysis Procedures
This chapter will detail my analysis of the Dance to Learn program, including how well it aligns with disability pedagogy as well as factors regarding the necessary infrastructures and sustainability of such a program. My data sources were primarily qualitative in nature; though I did not collect any survey measures related to the program itself, I was able to glean important information from my own observations and especially my interviews with the teaching artists and classroom teachers. My analysis will begin with a discussion of the infrastructures that were in place to allow the program to be successful, and it will continue with an analysis of the program design and some of the adaptations that were incorporated to make it more inclusive and accessible. I will also detail some of the specific teaching strategies used by the teaching artists throughout the program. Finally, I will discuss potential and perceived challenges of implementing a program like Dance to Learn, as well as the strengths articulated by classroom teachers and teaching artists.
For clarity, I want to provide a brief introduction of the teaching artists and classroom teachers that participated in this study. Leslie and Beth were the two teaching artists from the ballet company that taught the inclusion residency, and Erin was their accompanist. Leslie has been with Dance to Learn since its inception; she taught in the
! 150 pilot program and has since been in several general education settings as well as inclusion and special needs classrooms. Leslie was also a co-teacher at the inclusion center in
2017-2018. Though Beth has been with the ballet company for several years, she was fairly new to teaching the Dance to Learn program; she taught two different general education residencies during the summer of 2018, so the inclusion center would be her third time teaching in the program and first time teaching inclusion. The fall session was also Leslie and Beth’s first experience co-teaching together. Erin has also been with the ballet company for several years, and accompanied at the inclusion center in 2017-2018.
The classroom teachers also played an instrumental role in the program. Lorin was the teacher for Class 1 and had been teaching for 21 years at the center; inclusion started in 2001, which means she had about 17 years of experience specifically with inclusion. Danielle was the Class 2 lead teacher, and she had been at the center for 28 years. Kristen, the Class 3 teacher, had also been in education for 28 years, and all but 12 of those years were preschool education. Though she spent 12 years as a university faculty member, she returned to preschool education because she preferred being in a preschool classroom.
Before I begin the program analysis, I think it is also necessary to reiterate my study’s alignment with the social model of disability. Though I did my best to approach my observations from a strengths-based social model perspective, it is important to acknowledge that the study takes place with the backdrop of the medical model; the dominance of the medical model makes itself evident throughout my study. Historically, disability has been considered as a personal problem that should be “fixed” or cured by a medical professional if possible. Conceptualizing disability as a problem creates a state of
! 151 dependency for people with disabilities, which leads to the implicit assumption that people with disabilities are inferior or unable to perform tasks as well as nondisabled people (Mertens, Sullivan, & Stace, 2011). The social model of disability did not emerge until the 1970s (Shakespeare, 2006), which makes it a relatively new way of thinking. It takes time for institutions like education to make dramatic shifts, which leads to difficulties in making overarching pedagogical and strategic changes. Though we have made strides in education related to meaningful inclusion, assumptions and biases related to the medical model creep into “inclusion” settings.
Despite being an inclusion center and having children with disabilities and nondisabled peers in the same class, elements of or assumptions related to the medical model appear throughout my observations and interviews, particularly in terms of language. Language is powerful, and yet something that is largely embedded within existing hegemonic structures; we often are not actively thinking about the effects of the language we use every day. There were times in my interviews when language tended to normalize general education (i.e., not inclusion) or nondisability, revealing implicit biases about disability. Part of the way that I reconciled that as a researcher is that unless we have personally been affected by something, we might be unaware of our assumptions - that is the nature of assumptions. All of the classroom teachers and teaching artists were able bodied and neurotypical, so unless they are actively thinking about and aware of the language they are using, it is easy to fall into the historical medical model that has been embedded within societal institutions like education. Even as a scholar studying disability, I frequently have to slow down and actively think about the language I am using - it takes constant awareness and reflexivity. Thus, despite my efforts to apply the
! 152 social model of disability, it is impossible to disregard the effects of the medical model within education.
Program Infrastructures and Support
In Chapter 3, I provided a general discussion about the history and necessary support systems needed for Dance to Learn to be successful. This section will elaborate on how those infrastructures manifested within an inclusion environment and any differences between the inclusion program and other programs that take place in general education classrooms. Though the main infrastructures were the same for this program as in other locations, there were some additional considerations and supports in place that would be especially important for an inclusion or even purely special education setting.
In addition to funding, these include factors related to the center itself, support within the ballet company, and co-teaching.
Funding
The amount of funding a given center has determines the number of classrooms that will receive Dance to Learn. As I discussed in Chapter 3, funding is a frequent concern for nonprofit arts entities, and when sponsors reduce or pull their funding, it can limit the availability of the program. In some cases, individual centers will pay for the program out of pocket, but otherwise, the ballet company relies on external funding sources to deliver the program.
During 2017-2018, when the ballet company first began its partnership with the inclusion center, four classrooms had the program – two in the fall, one in the winter, and one in the spring. However, only three classrooms participated in 2018-2019 – two in the fall and one in the winter. The ballet company would have liked to offer more classes ! 153 there in 2018-2019, but funding challenges prevented the center from hosting more than three classrooms. For 2019-2020, that number has been reduced further to two classrooms. Therefore, it is evident that funding limitations can greatly lessen the potential impact of the program, particularly when external funding sources become scarce.
Support from the ballet company. In addition to obtaining funding from outside sources, it is also essential to have support within the ballet company itself. The education department is just a single entity in a multi-faceted organization, and thus it is important for the program’s sustainability to have the approval and backing of the other leaders within the organization. Dance to Learn fortunately does garner that support from the ballet company’s leadership, and that was especially apparent within the inclusion center.
Depending on the funder, sometimes representatives from funding organizations will come to observe a Dance to Learn class. Those appointments are set up through the education department, and the representatives are often accompanied by the Director of
Education as well. During the eighth week of the winter session at the inclusion center, we had two representatives come watch class, and rather than just having the Director of
Education join them, they were also accompanied by the Director of Development and the Executive Director of the ballet company. Thus, it was clear that the education department’s foray into inclusion was of particular interest to the Executive Director.
Following their observation, the visitors asked us questions about the program and had highly positive things to say about their experience. Continuing support from the
! 154 Executive Director and other departments is essential for a sustainable program, so their observation was indicative of the potential of the program to continue to flourish.
Partnership with the Inclusion Center
To have any successful community program, community partnerships are essential. The ballet company has built a strong partnership with the inclusion center, and as a result there is a lot of administrative and teacher support from the center – both of which are necessary for Dance to Learn’s success. In my own experience, administrative support can make or break a program like Dance to Learn, and within the inclusion center, the Director is incredibly supportive of arts experiences and of dance in particular.
Because she finds value in our work, she makes it clear that she is available if the ballet company faculty needs anything, and she checked in frequently to make sure things were going well. She even sat in on the initial planning meeting with the classroom teachers that had the program in the fall, despite that only the teaching artists and classroom teachers were required to be there.
The teaching artists also recognized the support of the administration in the inclusion center. Leslie, one of the teaching artists in Dance to Learn, mentioned in our post interview that “going back to somewhere that you’ve had a good experience is always starting off in a hopeful light.” The support from the administration truly trickles down to the classroom teachers and the teaching artists, and despite unique challenges that may arise within an inclusion setting, the teaching artists were excited to be there.
Maintaining strong partnerships is an important part of sustaining any program, so the fact that this center values what the ballet company does sets the foundation for a long, mutually beneficial relationship.
! 155 Additionally, the structure of the classrooms in the center can be helpful. Each class has one lead teacher and at least two assistants, not including the occupational and physical therapists that also float between classrooms or pull students for additional therapies. Though the maximum preschool class for Dance to Learn is 20 students, classrooms in the inclusion center have a maximum of 16 students, which lessens the student-teacher ratio and allows more opportunities for one-to-one support. Furthermore, the teaching artists noted that “in an inclusion class, you definitely have more adults in the room.” They felt that having more adults was a strength, and that was something that they did not always see in other locations. Extra help is especially important within an inclusion setting because it is more likely that the students will need one-on-one assistance.
Beyond the structures and support that already exist, it is also important to consider the role that Dance to Learn plays within the center. In my interviews with the classroom teachers, I wanted to get an idea about the other kinds of arts experiences that the students have regularly. The classroom teachers do arts or multisensory activities with the students daily, and there is another organization that comes in once a month to do music programming, but other than that, there is not a lot of arts or dance-specific programming within the center. In that sense, the ballet company is filling a gap by providing dance curricula to the students. Additionally, the teaching artists attempt to align dance with what the teachers are working on in their classrooms, which provides further reinforcement of the skills that the students are already learning. As such, the ballet company’s role within the center is unique and valued by the administration, which provides the basis for a sustainable partnership.
! 156 Classroom teacher support. The classroom teachers were also an important part of the successful, sustainable partnership between the ballet company and the inclusion center. In many centers that host Dance to Learn, there is a high rate of teacher turnover.
Within the inclusion center, all three teachers had been in education for 21-28 years, and most of them had spent the majority if not all of that time within that particular center.
Thus, the classroom teachers have a level of stability and experience that we do not always see in other locations, which certainly helps the program to succeed.
All three of the classroom teachers that participated in my study had experienced the program the year prior, so they were already somewhat familiar with its structure and expectations. Because of their knowledge of the program, and because it was an inclusion center, they were able to give us some more information up front that helped the teaching artists not only to know what to expect, but also allowed them to think ahead about specific modifications for students. Leslie noted that in other centers, “we don’t get that candid specific kind of information” that the teachers were able to give us at this center, so once again, despite unique challenges that may arise in an inclusion setting, the teachers were armed with more information that helped them to build in accommodations to their lessons. The teaching artists expressed how much they appreciated the specific information that the classroom teachers could give them, which also helps boost morale and individual relationships between the classroom teachers and teaching artists.
Additionally, the classroom teachers’ attitudes and support of the program had a huge effect on the success of the program. That was a common theme within my interviews with the teaching artists; they frequently noted that the “teachers are super involved” at this center, or that “all the teachers for the most part are...all in.” Leslie
! 157 stated that “the classroom teachers are cheerleaders as well,” and Beth commented on
“the participation of the teachers with the students and how greatly that affects just how successful a class can be.” Having that hands-on support and active participation of the classroom teachers demonstrates to the students that the program is important, and it makes the students more excited and willing to participate. Therefore, the program at the inclusion center was uniquely set up for success compared to other centers; having that foundation of administrative and teacher support is essential for creating a successful and sustainable program.
Co-Teaching
Built within the pedagogy of Dance to Learn is a system of co-teaching – each residency, no matter the location, has two teaching artists and an accompanist to deliver the program. Though that internal partnership is foundational to the program itself, it becomes especially important within an inclusion setting. One of the themes that constantly arose in my interviews with the teaching artists was how they were working with each other, and how that collaboration was different than in other residencies they had previously taught.
Though the inclusion residency was the first time that Leslie and Beth would teach together, they were eager to learn from each other. In our first interview before the fall session, Beth described her enthusiasm to be able to learn from Leslie, and Leslie also said she was looking forward to seeing the strategies that Beth used. I thought it was important to acknowledge that regardless of experience, they were both able and excited to learn from each other throughout the program.
! 158 During our later interviews, Beth and Leslie elaborated on their experience teaching together. They discussed that even within class, they were able to bounce ideas off of each other and provide each other in-the-moment support that would be difficult to plan for. Especially by the winter session, they were very comfortable working together, and knowing each other better made it easier to make “game-time decisions” and shift their teaching strategies more fluidly. More so than in a general education residency, they bounced ideas off of each other during class, and sometimes would change their plan based on a spur-of-the-moment aside. They both mentioned that frequently, they would briefly chat and then adjust their plan; I noticed that pattern occur more often here than in other residencies. Thus, it appears that while co-teaching is helpful and important in any residency, it was especially important in the inclusion classes.
Furthermore, both Beth and Leslie talked about having to provide almost consistent one-on-one help when they were not leading class. Beth mentioned that she had a heightened “awareness of each other and what was going on in the class” in the inclusion classes; “I think I’m also really aware of the person that’s not teaching.” I noticed, too, that despite the different amount of teaching experience they had, they truly had an equal partnership in the class. Before class, they solidified their game plan for the day, and any time there was a need to change it, they would find a way to communicate with each other (sometimes nonverbally) to ensure that they were both on the same page.
Having that heightened awareness of each other was helpful in maintaining that equal partnership throughout all of the classes.
Usually in a Dance to Learn residency, the teaching time is split up pretty evenly.
One person will lead the first half of class, usually consisting of locomotor exercises and
! 159 warm-up, and the other person leads the second half focused on the story or theme and the solos. Sometimes there is a bit more variation in who leads what, but the teaching load is usually 50/50. Though Beth and Leslie started out trying to use that structure and maintain consistency for the students, there were times when a specific student was attached to one of them, so the other one took the lead even if they hadn’t initially planned it that way. For example, right before Leslie was going to lead the story, Heidi, a student with autism in the third class, sat in Leslie’s lap. Rather than disrupt Heidi and to continue encouraging her participation, Leslie asked if Beth wanted to lead the story that day, so Beth took over until solos. Leslie said that in the inclusion center, there was
“definitely more of that where we kinda had to be like, ‘Alright, you’re on, ‘cause I’m stuck!’” Beth agreed, noting “multiple times where I think it was just eye contact” and they decided to make a switch. She continued, saying “I feel like those moments of,
‘Okay, it’s your turn now’ did not always happen with the natural breaks or transitions in the class.” I told them that as an observer, those shifts never seemed abrupt or disruptive to me; it always seemed intentional. That exemplifies the importance of knowing the co- teacher and the program well enough to make even the unplanned transitions seamless. In an inclusion setting, it is also more likely that those moments will arise frequently.
In addition to having heightened awareness of each other and effective verbal and nonverbal communication, the teaching artists noted that having me there even in my
“student” capacity was helpful. The additional adults in the room from the center were especially helpful because they knew the students and were always willing to step in when someone needed extra help or to tackle certain behaviors, but having another person with the dance vocabulary and familiarity with the program was also helpful
! 160 because I could encourage students in a way that was different than the center professionals. Unless there is an assistant in training, there is usually not a third affiliate of the ballet company dancing with the students, so having that extra set of eyes and hands was particularly helpful for the teaching artists in the inclusion setting. Beth also wondered if that was partly what made the classroom teachers – especially Kristin, who taught the third class – more willing to step back. Therefore, one of the aspects that allowed the program to be successful had to do with the co-teaching and support from the adults affiliated with the ballet company.
Summary of Infrastructures
Though certain infrastructures like funding, partnerships, and co-teaching are instrumental for any Dance to Learn residency, there were specific aspects of those infrastructures that became unique for the inclusion center. The center itself came with a large amount of support from the administration and from the classroom teachers. While other classes have seen success with less supportive administrators and teachers, because of the nature of inclusion, I do not think the program would have been nearly as successful without that important aspect of the partnership. The willingness of the classroom teachers to provide information about specific needs was also unique and incredibly helpful for the teaching artists.
Co-teaching also became more interactive due to the necessity for the teaching artists to spontaneously change their own roles depending on what the students needed at the time. Though that is important in any Dance to Learn class, it was especially necessary in an inclusion setting. Even though my role in the class was not as a co- teacher, they also found my presence in the room helpful, which highlights the
! 161 importance of having extra help in an inclusion classroom. Therefore, despite unique challenges related to teaching an inclusion program, ultimately, we had everything in place to make the program successful. Those infrastructures are particularly important to enhance the sustainability of the program.
Program Design
My second research question asks about the Dance to Learn program itself; how does the process of teaching creative movement to foster social-emotional development and executive functioning work when a ballet company enters a preschool classroom? I am also interested in the specific adaptations that occur for an inclusion setting. As such,
I focused some of my observations on the structure of each class and the pedagogies and teaching strategies used by the teaching artists. Therefore, the following discussion will analyze how the program aligns with the learning theories and pedagogies described in my literature review and analytical framework.
The learning theories discussed in my literature review include Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning, Gardner’s (1998, 2011) Multiple Intelligence Theory (MIT), the
Universal Design for Learning (UDL; CAST, 2014), and Dance/Movement Therapy
(DMT; ADTA, 2016). I also discussed Vygotsky’s paradigm for special education
(Gindis, 1995) and embodied cognition (Borghi & Cimatti, 2010). The next section will elaborate on how the program aligns with Vygotsky in a discussion about specific teaching strategies used by the teaching artists, and I will apply embodied cognition and embodied social cognition within my discussion and conclusion. This section will primarily address Kolb, MIT, UDL, and DMT because those are most relevant to the structure of the program itself.
! 162 Because the elements of the class structure stayed consistent each week and between the two sessions, it makes the most sense to organize my program analysis based on specific parts of class. Though the curriculum varied across the sessions, each class always included a welcome, locomotor movement, Brain Dance warm-up, story exploration, solos, and goodbyes. The order of those activities varied depending on the needs of the class on any given day, but each of those events took place in every single class, regardless of classroom or session. Thus, the following section will describe each part of class and break down how that aligns with the aforementioned learning theories.
Part One: Welcome
Because Dance to Learn is a new and different school experience for many students, the teaching artists began each day with a specific welcome to allow the students to easily transition into the class. Depending on the day and the amount of energy each class had, the amount of time spent on the welcome varied. However, Beth mentioned that they “tried not to get stuck in whatever that welcome was for too long.”
Usually, as the students entered the room, the teaching artists would try to gather them in a circle, either standing or sitting based on how they came in. Many times, the welcome began with several students bursting in and running around the room for a moment before settling into class. Once the teaching artists had everyone’s attention and most students were somewhat organized in the circle, they would have the students greet each of the ballet company affiliates by name – Miss Leslie, Miss Beth, Miss Erin (our accompanist), and me. We always waved and said, “Hi Miss Elle!” (or Miss Whomever) but sometimes
Leslie would prompt the students to use various body parts to say hello – “Put your hands on your knees, and wiggle your knees to say ‘Hi Miss Elle!’” We would also try to
! 163 include some kind of rhythmic tapping on various body parts – legs, shoulders, toes, etc.
– to focus the students in. Sometimes the tapping happened before the official greetings, and sometimes they happened sort of consecutively. The teaching artists adjusted based on what they felt the students needed in the moment.
Alignment with Kolb. Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory discusses four abilities that learners must have to be successful: concrete experiences (CE), reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptualization (AC), and active experimentation (AE).
Even just within the welcome, the teaching artists are already employing two of the four skills. Though RO and AC skills are not quite as relevant to the welcome, CE and AC skills are already directly applied just within the first few minutes of class.
Coming into a new space signifies a new concrete experience, and students hopefully arrive without bias. Most of the time, the majority of students came in excited to dance, so they certainly seemed open to the new experience. Those who initially did not seem as open to engaging in a new concrete experience became more willing to participate over the course of the program. Because students are expected to come in and fully engage in movement rather than just talk about concepts, dance and creative movement certainly reinforce and align with Kolb’s (1984) discussion of CE skills.
Additionally, the teaching artists stretch the students even just in the welcome by asking them to use various body parts to say hello. The common “hello” gesture is to wave one’s hand at someone, so when the teaching artists prompt them to use their shoulders, elbows, knees, or feet to wave, they must experiment with those greetings to find new ways to communicate. Especially if we were standing and instructed to use a foot to say hello, the students had to experiment with balancing and motor control in
! 164 order to complete something as simple as a greeting. Thus, the welcome also immediately engages AE skills.
Alignment with MIT. Gardner (1998, 2011) names eight different intelligences that all learners possess (see Table 1 in Chapter 2) and discusses that everyone has variations in strengths and weaknesses. Anne Green Gilbert (2003) describes how each of the intelligences can be fostered through dance class. Because Dance to Learn is based on Gilbert’s (2003) principles of brain-based learning, her framework is particularly relevant to the program. Even within the brief welcome, the teaching artists already engage many of the intelligences including bodily-kinesthetic, musical, mathematical, spatial, intrapersonal, and interpersonal.
Within dance class, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is inherent in the structure and activities. “Using our bodies, not our voices” is somewhat of a mantra for Dance to
Learn, so even just by greeting others using various body parts and tapping their own body parts engaged bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. The students also must move down the hallway from their classroom to the dance room, and entering the room in a safe and controlled way exercises kinesthetic skills. However, there are more aspects of MIT evident within the welcome.
Tapping our legs in rhythm engages musical intelligence because students must listen to the music and tap on beat. Tying the movement to the music is an important way to simultaneously engage musical and bodily-kinesthetic intelligences. Additionally, tapping body parts involved mathematical intelligences as well, because the teaching artists would often start in counts of eight and reduce those by half. For example, Beth often had them alternate between tapping their legs (thighs, usually) and their toes. We
! 165 would start with eight of each, divide that to four, two, and finally one so that they were simply alternating between legs and toes. Thus, mathematical intelligence was systematically built into the welcome.
Spatial intelligence was an important component of having everyone enter the room without bumping into one another. Especially for those who were running around, they needed to be aware of where they and others were in space to be safe in their movements. Additionally, whether directed to sit or stand, having everyone form a circle at the beginning involved spatial intelligence. Orienting to whomever we were greeting at the time also involved some spatial intelligence skills.
Finally, the personal intelligences were also emphasized within the welcome.
Rettig (2005) discusses that in preschool, having students identify their own body parts is indicative of intrapersonal intelligence. Using various body parts to wave and tapping their bodies in rhythm both involve correctly identifying their own body parts to be able to follow along, so intrapersonal intelligence is an important component of the welcome.
The greetings themselves involve interpersonal intelligence related to social relationships, so the beginning of each class largely emphasized interpersonal intelligence as well.
Alignment with UDL. According to the Universal Design for Learning (CAST,
2014), everyone can be an expert learner if given the opportunity; it is the responsibility of the teacher and the curriculum to provide multiple means of representation, action/expression, and engagement. Dance in itself is an excellent means of providing all of those things because it is a different way of communicating and learning than the traditional classroom. Additionally, within dance class, teaching artists can make things more accessible by incorporating elements of UDL.
! 166 In the welcome, teaching artists use multiple means of representation by providing both verbal instructions and also modeling the behavior for the students to imitate. Though they did not use visual schedules in this class, a visual schedule can be helpful especially for students with autism because it allows them to know what is coming and what to expect. Multiple means of action and expression are also built into the foundations of Dance to Learn because rather than simply providing a verbal response, students also use their bodies to demonstrate comprehension. In the welcome, using body parts to wave and also verbally saying hello were multiple ways to express the greetings each day. Finally, the mere opportunity to move around in a new space provides an additional means of engagement that is not available during other parts of the school day. Music can also be motivating to students, so combining movement and music provides multiple means of engagement. Therefore, as evidenced within the welcome,
Dance to Learn not only aligns with but also employs elements of UDL within its structure.
Alignment with DMT. Dance/Movement Therapy emphasizes the development of the whole child, employing strategies like mirroring, movement synchronization, and building social connections (ADTA, 2016). The individual, synchronous greetings are one way to begin building that social connection, especially for the students who are unfamiliar with the program and who have not met the teaching artists or me before.
Additionally, synchronizing the tapping of our body parts is one way to establish a connection and simultaneously engage with movement together. Finally, the fact that the teaching artists were attuned to how the students came into the room affected how they began the class – if there was a lot of energy, they may try to have them sit to calm
! 167 themselves and focus. Sometimes the students came in and sat down without expressly being told to, so the teaching artists went with that and began sitting too. If there was a low energy class, they might keep the students standing so as not to risk them zoning out by sitting on the floor. That kind of attunement and individualization is a foundation of
DMT as well. Therefore, the welcome aligns with principles of DMT.
Summary. Though the welcome was a brief part of any given class, it really set the pace for the day and gave the teaching artists an idea of what to expect for the class. It also allowed the students a clear transition into the dance class so that they could adjust their behaviors accordingly. Depending on how the students came in, the welcome sometimes even affected how the teaching artists approached or structured the rest of the lesson. Despite it being a minimal amount of time, it is clear that the welcome already begins to align with all of the aforementioned learning theories and pedagogies, thus making it an accessible and inclusive program for all students.
Part Two: Locomotor
Immediately following the welcome was usually the locomotor portion of class, which resembled the game Follow the Leader. For the last session, the teaching artists noticed that it would be better for student engagement to continue the warm-up directly after the welcome and then go into locomotor directly before the story. Therefore, the order of events was not always exactly the same for each class depending on student needs, but there was always some kind of locomotor movement after the welcome and before the story. Locomotor usually began by prompting the students to make a line behind Beth, who would be the leader. After the students had formed the single file line,
Beth led them around the room to ultimately make a circle again. Throughout the
! 168 exercise, Beth would direct the students to move in different ways; usually, she started by having them march, and then varied her movements to tiptoe feet with arms reaching up high, sweeping arms low to high on either side with bent knees, wide steps with arms reaching out to either side, small fast steps with arms squeezed in by their sides, and then usually galloping both ways (left and right) to finish. Sometimes, to switch things up,
Beth had them jump instead of gallop, but the last part of locomotor was often something to raise their heart rates but also exercise control.
Alignment with Kolb. The locomotor portion of class engages all four of Kolb’s
(1984) learning skills. Rather than simply watching or talking about movement, the children engage in the concrete experience of moving together in various ways. Even the students that were not always performing the movements exactly with the rest of class were able to travel around in the circle with the rest of the class, signifying some level of engagement. Toward the end of the residency, even the students that were hesitant at first were staying with the circle and trying the movements as Beth led them. Thus, all students eventually fully engaged in the concrete experience of movement exploration and were able to locomote in different ways.
In addition to CE skills, students did engage in some RO skills at the end of locomotor. After galloping, which can be very exciting for the students, the teaching artists slowed them down and had them take deep breaths, putting one hand on their heart and one hand on their belly. The teaching artists usually asked, “Do you feel your heart beating faster?” to bring attention to how locomotion made them feel. Those kinds of questions, even when rhetorical, allowed students to reflect about their experiences with movement.
! 169 I mentioned in my analytical framework that AC skills are slightly more difficult to apply in a preschool setting, but the teaching artists often used language that not only was developmentally appropriate, but also was able to relate to other things that the preschoolers understood. For example, as we went around in a circle sweeping our arms from side to side, one of the teaching artists described that as “drawing a smiley face with your arms.” They also used the metaphor of a train when the students were using fast feet
– when Beth wanted to stop so that they could reorient for galloping, she told them to
“put the brakes on your train.” Using phrasing and metaphors like the teaching artists did in locomotor allowed students to make connections between abstract concepts like dance and other things that they know about, like smiley faces and trains. Therefore, students were able to begin to engage AC skills in the locomotor portion of class.
Finally, AE skills are inherent throughout locomotor as students must experiment to make their bodies move in the circle in the same way that Beth was moving. Marching or tiptoe feet might be familiar to students, but often, it took practice to master movements like the big wide steps, smiley face arms, and even galloping. Galloping comes naturally to students in a cross-lateral pattern – one foot in front of the other – but the teaching artists conceptualize it as a right-left movement that goes sideways. Students had to experiment with what it felt like to keep their bellies facing the center of the circle during gallops. The students had to explore movement to see what felt right to them and how they could make their bodies look like what Beth was doing.
Additionally, the students were able to experiment even in the process of lining up. Sometimes, before Leslie asked them to go make their line, she would prompt them to get there in a specific way. For example, one day, she had them put their hands on their
! 170 knees and keep them there while they walked over to line up (kind of akin to the
“Thriller” dance). Students had to experiment not only to make their bodies do that, but also to get into line without crashing into anyone else. Therefore, though the activity was structured, the students were able to use AE skills during locomotor.
Alignment with MIT. Many of the intelligences used in the warm-up were also employed in locomotor. Changing the way that they moved around the circle immediately stimulated bodily-kinesthetic intelligence. The teaching artists also did their best to march, tiptoe, etc. to the beat of the music, which allowed students to exercise musical intelligence as well. Spatial intelligence was particularly important – rather than finding a spot and staying there, students had to be able to navigate the room full of other dancers. Additionally, they had to work to maintain the circle, which requires even more spatial awareness than just moving around the room at random. Thus, locomotor was probably the most complex spatial activity in the class because it involved maintaining personal space while moving throughout the room on a specific pathway, which makes it a prime example of spatial intelligence.
The personal intelligences were also once again inherent in locomotor. Students needed to first identify their own body parts to make their movements match Beth’s – they had to understand what their knees were in order to use strong marching knees.
Additionally, knowing where their belly buttons were was important to turn their bellies to face the middle of the circle for galloping. Often times, the teaching artists would scaffold that and ask everyone to stop, point to their bellies, and then turn their bellies to face the center of the circle, so students were even actively identifying various body parts. Interpersonal intelligence was emphasized when exercising spatial awareness – it
! 171 was important to notice others in the room so as not to bump into them. There were also some emotion words used to describe the movements, like the “smiley face arms.” Those descriptions allowed students to tap into their understanding of emotions, which is an interpersonal skill as well. Therefore, the locomotor portion of class exercised several intelligences at once, providing clear alignment with tenets of MIT.
Alignment with UDL. Like the welcome, the locomotor portion of class both aligns with and employs elements of UDL to make it accessible to students of all abilities. For multiple means of representation, the teaching artists both modeled the behavior and used verbal prompts. Sometimes, they even used physical prompts if a student needed extra assistance. For example, Leslie often held hands with a student to help him/her to get the arms correct or held her hands above a student’s head, encouraging the student to reach for her hands to make him/her stretch his/her arms up higher. The various ways of prompting the students and modeling the behavior exemplify multiple means of representation for the students.
Additionally, though there was technically a “correct” way to move, the teaching artists allowed for multiple means of expression in the movement. If a student was having trouble staying in line but was moving and partially doing the movements correctly, the teaching artists accepted that as a form of expression. Changing the movements themselves also offers multiple means of action and expression – some students may have struggled with tiptoe feet, but were excellent at marching or fast feet. Thus, giving options for locomotion provided multiple means of action and expression during Follow the Leader.
! 172 Finally, music and movement were once again additional means of engagement for students. Furthermore, sometimes the students walked with partners, whether that was intentional or not. Though the goal was to encourage all students to move independently, at first, the teaching artists let them hold hands with one another before trying to elicit more independence later on in the residencies. Having that peer support was an additional motivator for many of the students. There were even some occasions when students made suggestions for a movement and the teaching artists would honor that – having that kind of choice or agency in movement is yet another means of engagement for students.
Therefore, locomotor movement aligns with and directly reinforces all components of
UDL.
Alignment with DMT. Like in the welcome, teaching artists encourage students to synchronize their movements with each other and with the music. Rather than mirroring, however, locomotor was structured as a shadowing exercise where students followed the person in front of them. However, that still requires attunement to the other students and the teachers in the classroom, which is a foundation of DMT. Furthermore, students were able to build connections with each other and the teaching artists when they held hands. Even if that wasn’t necessarily an intended component of locomotor, it still served to foster social connections.
Additionally, DMT emphasizes building coordination and timing, which are important within locomotor. Moving to the music in time with the other students in the class is important – understanding how to time one’s movements so as not to run into other students is necessary to make locomotor successful. The use of different movements during Follow the Leader also encourages coordination in a variety of ways,
! 173 whether it is marching and swinging arms cross-laterally or using big wide steps for right-left or whole-body movement.
Finally, one of the goals of DMT is to expand a student’s window of tolerance, which is essentially the ability of the nervous system to regulate from extreme over- to under-arousal. Galloping is often an exciting activity that causes over-arousal of the nervous system, so the students must work to regulate that as they continue or slow their movements. There is also a lot happening with locomotor between the movements, the pathway, and the music, and often the added stimulation of spontaneous comments, laughing, or even yelling among the dancers. All of that can be a lot to take in, especially for a student who struggles with sensory sensitivities, which is common for students with autism. Thus, simply being in the room for locomotor can help to expand the window of tolerance.
Summary. Given all of the elements involved in the locomotor portion of class, it certainly aligns with all of the learning theories mentioned above. It uses each aspect of
Kolb’s four learning abilities and explicitly engages five of the eight intelligences articulated in MIT. It both aligns with and uses elements of UDL to make it accessible and inclusive, and also employs the major principles of DMT to make it therapeutically sound. As such, the program continues to be meaningfully inclusive.
Part Three: Brain Dance Warm-Up
Each class incorporated a warm-up based on Anne Green Gilbert’s (2003) Brain
Dance, which engages movement patterns that mirror the stages of neuromotor development: breath, tactile, core-distal, head-tail, upper-lower, body side, and cross- lateral. To begin, the teaching artists usually had everyone take deep breaths together,
! 174 feeling their bodies expand and contract with their breath. They also did some more tapping or tickling of body parts to engage the tactile neuromotor pathway. Those movements built into the other ones, often involving reaching the whole body out wide and back in (core-distal), wiggling or cat-cow for spinal movement (head-tail), reaching just arms or just legs out long (upper-lower), extending the right arm and right leg out (or left – body side), or crossing midline by reaching one hand to the opposite toe (cross- lateral). The specific movement exercises varied from class to class and became more complex throughout the weeks, but those movement patterns were consistent throughout each Brain Dance.
Alignment with Kolb. As with the other parts of class, students are actively engaged in performing the movements themselves rather than just watching or discussing the movements. Some students admittedly were more reluctant to fully engage in earlier weeks, but even the most hesitant students sat with a teacher who helped them move their arms along with the rest of the class. That shows that even students who were passively engaged were still involved in the concrete experience of dance class, aligning with
Kolb’s (1984) articulation of CE skills.
Though the Brain Dance was an active warm-up, the teachers still occasionally posed reflective questions for the students. They would ask how we could make our bodies do something slightly different than what the teaching artists were leading at the moment and allow the students to guide the next movements. That requires students to reflect about their current movement and then figure out how to alter it to make it different. Occasionally, students suggested those ideas without prompting, showing active reflection and observation during the warm-up. The teaching artists tried to
! 175 acknowledge and honor those choices and prompt the whole class to do what a student suggested. In some capacity, the process of understanding the current movement and then changing it does involve reflective observation skills.
As for abstract conceptualization skills, the students often made unprompted comments that showed they were making logical connections to themes outside of dance class. For example, during a standing exercise where students were alternating making their bodies look like the letter X and the letter I (essentially jumping jacks with the arms overhead), one student noted that the I shape was like a pencil. Thus, students were engaging AC skills as they were performing the warm-up even when they were not specifically prompted by the teaching artists.
Active experimentation skills in the Brain Dance were similar to locomotor – the students were guided in their movements but had to explore how to make their bodies do what the teaching artists were doing. Especially for more challenging tasks like balancing, students had to experiment with how to hold their bodies to balance without falling over. As the complexity of each exercise increased, the students were able to explore movements further outside of their comfort zones. Thus, though still heavily guided by teaching artists, the students were able to utilize AE skills during the Brain
Dance.
Alignment with MIT. The Brain Dance once again exercises many of the intelligences. As in both the welcome and locomotor, the students are using their bodies to perform movements to the beat of the music, which involves both bodily-kinesthetic and musical intelligence. Spatial intelligence is important to be able to find space to move around without bumping into anyone else, but it becomes less complicated than moving
! 176 in locomotor since the movement is mostly stationary. Therefore, it uses a different kind of spatial intelligence than the locomotor portion of class.
Similar to the warm-up, logical-mathematical intelligence is stimulated by counting the number of times we perform a movement. For example, sometimes the teaching artists would have everyone practice their marching knees in place, using both hands to tap their knees each time they marched (engaging the cross-lateral pathway).
They would do that for a bit, and often there would be a countdown of eight more marches. The teaching artists encouraged the students to count down from eight with them, which engages logical-mathematical intelligence.
In order to figure out how to make their bodies do what the teaching artists were doing, the students tapped into intrapersonal intelligence once again. Interpersonal intelligence was stimulated when students watched and imitated the teaching artists’ movements. Occasionally, some students would also sit in a teacher’s lap, which signified an interpersonal connection. Like locomotor, though that was not always an intended part of the Brain Dance, the moments where students would sit with me or
Leslie (Beth was usually leading Brain Dance) indicated that they did crave some interpersonal connection. Therefore, the Brain Dance engages six of the eight intelligences.
Alignment with UDL. Multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement were ingrained in the Brain Dance. Since students were seated and watching the teaching artists, they had a visual representation of the movement as well as verbal descriptions from the teaching artists. Additionally, having multiple adults in the room participating gave students multiple points of reference for that visual input. When
! 177 necessary, teachers would also provide physical prompts to help students who were more likely to struggle with coordination and motor exercises. Having a student sit in a teacher’s lap often meant there would be some kind of physical prompt, whether it was helping the student to physically move their bodies or simply tapping them on the arm to encourage them to stretch their arm. Therefore, there were multiple means of representation of the movement itself for the students to follow along with.
Once again, the teaching artists tried to be very open and supportive of movements that the students tried. If a student that previously did not participate ended up sitting in the circle for Brain Dance, the teaching artists considered that action a success and praised the student for moving closer to the group. Additionally, if a student started just reaching arms up while not engaging their legs after previously sitting and watching, that was considered an expression of understanding and improvement. Giving the students multiple opportunities to try the same movement before moving on was also a way to provide multiple means for action and expression.
Finally, the students had multiple means of engagement through movement and through the music. One of the really exciting moments for the students was when they were sitting and instructed to extend their arms and legs as far as they could, but only when Miss Erin played a big “ta-da” on the piano. Lots of the students thought that was exciting and were listening very closely for the piano to know when to reach their arms and legs. Rather than listening to and watching the teaching artists, the use of music as the direction provided another means of engagement during Brain Dance as well.
Therefore, the Brain Dance certainly used all of the elements of UDL.
! 178 Alignment with DMT. The Brain Dance also dove more deeply into elements of
DMT than the previous sections of class. For example, synchronization was a large part of the warm-up when as they tapped their legs or reached their arms up with the music.
Additionally, the warm-up relied on mirroring rather than shadowing – they watched the teaching artist and mirrored what she did. That signifies attunement between the students and the teaching artists, and also provides a basis for building connection with them.
To further build connections with students, the teaching artists always tried to recognize and praise when a student was doing something interesting or creative. For example, if we were tapping our legs and one student started alternating between tapping legs and clapping hands, introduced a cross, or tapped one hand at a time, the teaching artists would acknowledge what that student was doing and then encourage other students to try it. Those moments of praise and affirmation worked to build trust between the teaching artists and students.
Finally, the teaching artists encouraged motor coordination and rhythm, which is another important component in the later stages of DMT. Whenever the students were tapping their legs or reaching their arms up and down, they would do so to the beat of the music, which means students had to attune to the music as well as to the teaching artists’ movements. Between the mutual regulation (synchrony), building connection, mirroring exercises, and use of rhythm, the Brain Dance utilizes all of the core components of
DMT.
Summary. The Brain Dance is different from locomotor movement in that it is primarily stationary; however, it still effectively uses elements of all of the aforementioned learning theories. Though the movement is still very guided by the
! 179 teaching artists, it still allows students to engage all of Kolb’s skills in addition to most of their intelligences. Aligning the structure of the Brain Dance activities with UDL and
DMT also help to make it more accessible. Thus, the first half of the class, including the welcome, locomotor, and warm-up all adhere to effective pedagogies for inclusion.
Part Four: Creative Story
The teaching artists tried to split the class up into clear halves – the first half included the warm-up and locomotor to help focus and acclimate the students to dance class, while the second half of class went into the more creative, theme-based movement activities. For both sessions, each class chose to use the theme of a story that somehow paralleled some of the things they were talking about within their classrooms. Both fall residencies – Classes 1 and 2 – chose to use the book Head to Toe by Eric Carle, which details various animals moving different parts of their bodies from head to toe. For the winter session, Class 3 opted for the book Pete the Cat and the Magic Sunglasses by
Kimberly and James Dean. That story focused more on emotions and how looking at things in a new way can make someone feel better. However, it also involved animals like the titular Pete the Cat as well as Grumpy Toad, Angry Squirrel, and Frustrated
Turtle, so there was a lot of animal-related movement exploration in both classes. For each class, the teaching artists based the movement curriculum on the book and did just a page or two per day. Usually, Leslie (who often led the story portion of class) had the students explore movement in place and then built up to locomotor movement around the room.
Alignment with Kolb. In terms of concrete experiences, students were able to both read the book along with Leslie as well as embody the characters and the
! 180 movements. Furthermore, they could explore the movements both in place and traveling around the room. The embodiment of the concepts that they were reading about emphasizes the concrete experience of the story and ideally allows them to remember and understand the story better. Thus, CE was an important part of the creative story portion of class.
Though the teachers used the book for most of the themed part of class, they also pulled from what the students already knew to make content more relatable. For example, in session one, Beth was teaching about fast versus slow, and she told the students, “I’m thinking of an animal.” She proceeded to give them clues about the animal – it is green, it has a shell, it lives in the water and on land – until they were able to guess that it was a turtle. The turtle moves slowly, so Beth had them move their bodies slowly like the turtle.
She did the same thing with a cheetah for fast movement, and the students were excited to move fast like a cheetah. Making that logical connection, not only of guessing what the animal was but also applying that animal’s movement to their own, shows evidence of abstract conceptualization skills.
Reflective observation was also an important part of the creative story time.
Especially as we got through more animals, Leslie always began with a review of previous animals. Students had to reflect on both the animals we had discussed as well as their movements, and even sometimes the corresponding emotions. Especially in Class 3, there was a lot of reflective observation about feelings and emotions. Even before talking about the story, Leslie asked the students to identify what emotions she was showing
(happy, sad, and mad) and then think about how they could show that in their own bodies. To embody that emotional expression, the students had to reflect about what it
! 181 felt like to have those emotions and apply that feeling to their posture and face. The teaching artists also asked other questions that required the students to reflect and observe. For example, in Head to Toe, the second animal is a giraffe that bends its neck.
Leslie posed the question, “How can we make it look like we have long necks like the giraffe?” That required the students to reflect about what they looked like, what the giraffe looked like, and how they could change their bodies to look like the giraffe.
The giraffe example also ties into active experimentation. Within the story portion of class, the teaching artists did not require mirroring as much as in the first half of class
– that was the time to ask questions and let the students use creative movement to explore answers. After being asked how they could look more like a giraffe, one student experimented by reaching both arms up as high as he could, palms together, and bending his whole body to the side to show the long, bent giraffe neck. Once he did that, other students tried, too, experimenting with the movement for themselves. Therefore, Kolb’s
(1984) pedagogy is particularly relevant to the creative story part of class.
Alignment with MIT. Embodied exploration inherently engages bodily- kinesthetic intelligence, which is evident throughout each part of class. However, musical intelligence was emphasized a bit more within the creative story as well. Once the students had mastered doing an animal movement both in place and moving, Leslie often had them make a “Magic 8” dance out of the movements. They would move around like the animal for eight counts, and then stop and do the movement from the book in place for eight counts. For example, the buffalo in Head to Toe shrugged its shoulders, so
Leslie had them move around on all fours (hands and feet, not hands and knees) for eight counts before standing up to shrug their shoulders eight times. That requires a more
! 182 complex understanding of the music with the movement, so the Magic 8 dances relied heavily on musical intelligence as well as bodily kinesthetic intelligence. Additionally, doing things in sets of eight also engaged logical-mathematical intelligence.
Spatial intelligence was again an important factor for the creative story time, especially when we traveled our movements around the room. In locomotor, the students were supposed to follow a circular pathway, which can be complicated. However, for the story, they could move wherever they wanted. That meant that they had to be aware of where they were in relation to others in the room and make the choice to move away from the other dancers. Spatial intelligence was definitely a skill that took some time to master – when we did the buffalo walks, everyone went toward the middle of the room and basically collided with each other, so Leslie had to stop them and remind them to move their buffalo somewhere away from the other buffalos. Over time, their spatial intelligence skills improved.
Unlike the other parts of class, the story portion also engaged linguistic intelligence because it focused on a written book as inspiration for the movement. The students were able to apply the written story to their dancing, understanding that a story has a beginning, middle, and end, and connecting verbs like “shrug” and “bend” with their own movements. Leslie always started by reading the page that we were covering that day, so the students heard the language in the story and were able to apply it to the movement. Therefore, the program effectively ties in elements of linguistic intelligence, despite the fact that “dancers don’t use their voices.”
Finally, the personal intelligences were again important within the story portion of class. Intrapersonal intelligence was particularly important for the Head to Toe book that
! 183 was focused on identifying body parts and how they move. For the Pete the Cat story, students were able to reflect on how it felt to be angry or sad, which is another element of intrapersonal intelligence as well. Being able to identify those emotions in others, as they did when Leslie demonstrated them, is also indicative of interpersonal intelligence.
Alignment with UDL. For multiple means of representation, students were able to see the story and the pictures in addition to listening to Leslie read the story and then seeing her demonstrate the movement. Especially in Head to Toe, the illustrations do a nice job of showing how the animal was moving, even though they were still. Having that extra element of representation seemed particularly helpful for some of the students, and the rest of the students were either listening and doing the movements or watching the teaching artists and sometimes each other.
Additionally, when it came to action and expression, the teaching artists accepted both verbal and nonverbal answers to questions. The student who came up with the giraffe neck did not use his voice, but rather demonstrated his understanding nonverbally.
Other students, when asked to remember animals, would respond verbally with the correct answers. The teaching artists also encouraged multiple ways of performing the animal movement – when the buffalo shrugged its shoulders, we could shrug both shoulders at the same time or one shoulder at a time. Thus, the teaching artists allowed students the opportunity to express their understanding in the way that was most comfortable for them.
Finally, in terms of engagement, having a story at all provides a means of engagement beyond just movement and music. Many of the students in Class 3, for example, were familiar with and excited about the character Pete the Cat, so that was a
! 184 reason for them to engage. Props can be a very useful tool for engagement, so actually having the book and reading from it was exciting for students. Therefore, the story portion of class certainly upheld all tenets of UDL.
Alignment with DMT. The story portion is the part of class that is most student- led – the teaching artists take their cues from what the students do and build on that.
Having an individualized curriculum is an important component of DMT, and so taking the students’ lead reinforces that individualization. Ultimately, the idea is still to synchronize movements, beginning with mirroring before allowing the students to explore the movement throughout the space. In terms of coordination, the teaching artists made sure that the animal movements were largely different from one another – in Head to Toe, the buffalo movement was done on hands and feet, not hands and knees. For the cat that arched its back, the teaching artists had the students move into a tabletop position on hands and knees to arch their backs. One student noticed that it might look more like the picture if we were on our feet rather than our knees, but Leslie told her that we already did that for the buffalo movement, so we should try something new for the cat.
Using many different kinds of movements allowed students to exercise various coordination skills, and incorporating a Magic 8 dance connects those movements to the rhythm and timing of the music. Thus, the creative story portion of class aligns with key elements of DMT.
Summary. Like the elements in the first half of class, the creative story portion addresses and aligns with all of the learning theories described above. It is slightly more student led than other activities, which allows it to uniquely address some of the specific elements of experiential learning and DMT. Additionally, the use of a book incorporates
! 185 linguistic intelligence in addition to the other six intelligences previously mentioned.
Therefore, the structure of the creative story part of class effectively incorporates meaningfully inclusive pedagogies.
Part Five: Solo
After exploring movements all together, both in place and around the room, the teaching artists instructed the students to go over to line up next to the window wall across the room from the door. On the first day, Leslie spent some time discussing what a solo was. She taught them the word solo and told them that a solo was when one dancer goes at a time. Leslie then brought out a little red circle and showed it to the class, asking,
“What shape is it?” They all answered, “Circle!” She then asked, “What color is it?”
They knew it was “Red!” Finally, Leslie asked, “What do we normally do when we see something red?” The students knew that red meant to stop, so Leslie placed the circle on the ground about halfway across the room and told them that was where they needed to stop for their solos. She used that spot pretty much every class after that as well to visually mark to the students where they should travel.
After establishing the stopping point, Leslie gave instructions for the solo that day. She always tried to tie it in to the animal movements that we had discussed that day, sometimes even giving the students a choice if an animal had moved two different ways or if we talked about two different animals. The instructions were always to move like that animal all the way to the red dot, and once they arrived, they should either do a big
“ta-da” shape on the circle (frozen like a statue) or perform the animal movement on the spot. For example, for the buffalo, they would walk over to the spot on their hands and feet and then stand and shrug their shoulders on the spot. Once the instructions were
! 186 given, Beth usually started at one end of the line and told each student when it was their turn. The solos allowed each student to “show off” a little bit and receive praise and acknowledgement for their success; however, some students were intimidated by the thought of dancing by themselves, so they either opted out or went with an adult or a friend.
Alignment with Kolb. I would argue that both watching other students perform solos and actively performing solos both constitute concrete experiences. The students were actively engaged in applying their movement knowledge systematically across the floor, and they were also able to see how others did the same. They got to experience being both an audience member and a performer, which are two important aspects of dance. Occasionally, students came in with some anxiety or bias against the solos – they did not like the idea of performing by themselves. However, most of the students overcame that fear or bias to confidently perform solos throughout the residency.
Therefore, whether actively moving or not, the solo engages CE skills for students.
Reflective observation is another important part of the solo, especially for the students that initially did not want to take part but later changed their minds. They were able to reflect about their experience, and then make the choice to actively engage in the future. I think being an audience member elicited some RO skills as well since students were able to watch one another and think about what those students chose to do in comparison to their own choices. In making a choice, they also had to reflect about which animal movement felt best to them. Therefore, RO skills play into the solos at the end of each class.
! 187 Abstract conceptualization applies to the solos because it is taking the information that they have learned and the movements they have explored and asks them to put it together in a very specific way. One of the classroom teachers also mentioned that after having Dance to Learn, she applied the concept of solos in her classroom not with movement, but with sharing stories – she had one student sit on a stool and share a story about themselves, going one at a time. Thus, the solo concept was integrated into their classroom so that students could connect the idea back to dance class as well.
Finally, active experimentation skills are perhaps most evident in the solos.
Students are given general instructions about how to complete the solo, but ultimately they have a choice about how to move and what to do when they get to the spot.
Sometimes, students just ran across; other times, students started one way, changed their minds, and finished the solo a different way. The ta-das were also very individualized, so students could experiment with what that looked like for them. Therefore, throughout the solos, all of the aspects of Kolb’s learning theory were emphasized.
Alignment with MIT. All of the solos took place with music, so again, both bodily-kinesthetic and musical intelligences were in play during the solos. Spatial awareness emerged in an interesting way as well; students were instructed to go from the wall to the red spot, but the pathways they took to get there sometimes varied. Many students went in a straight line across, but some zigzagged back and forth, or even did some circles around the room before being directed to stop on the spot. Because they were going by themselves, they did not have to navigate other dancers, but it was interesting to see the many ways they chose to navigate the space itself.
! 188 Intrapersonal intelligence became important especially for the dancers that were uncomfortable going at first. They were aware of their anxiety about doing the solos, and for many, they were able to find ways to overcome that anxiety by the end of the residency. They knew what they needed to feel comfortable and acted on that.
Interpersonal intelligence was evident as students watched each other go. Sometimes students cheered for each other as they went across the floor, and seeing that encouragement showed me that they were really supporting one another.
Linguistic intelligence was even at play a little bit at the beginning. The students learned the word solo and its definition, and then were able to embody that themselves.
Leslie asked them each week some version of the definition – either “What is it called when one friend goes at a time?” or “How many dancers go during a solo?” That verbiage was reinforced throughout the residency, so students were able to understand and apply it in class.
Alignment with UDL. The solos were a unique part of class that did not have concurrent representation and student movement. The students were instructed to do the solo, but unless they were struggling, the teaching artists did not continue to demonstrate the solo with the student. Before the first dancer went, Leslie verbally described and performed the solo so they were able to see and hear the instructions. Additionally, the red spot was a nice visual indicator of where they should stop, so that served as another means of representation of directions. I also think that when students watched each other perform the solos, each solo in itself served as another means of representation of what the solo could look like. Therefore, though the students danced by themselves, the teaching artists still incorporated multiple means of representation into the solos.
! 189 Regarding multiple means of expression, the students often had a choice of how to move, and the teaching artists even allowed some duets if that was necessary for the student. The solos did not have to be exactly what the teaching artists demonstrated and nothing else – the student had the ability to make it his/her own. Thus, there were multiple means of expression built into the solos as well.
Finally, having that choice in movement is an important means of engagement for students. Allowing them to go with peers could be motivating as well. For some, the opportunity to show off and have everyone else watch was in itself a means of engagement. The fact that the teaching artists consistently praised everyone for something no matter what they did was also motivating for students. Therefore, though structured differently than the rest of the class, the solos effectively utilize each tenet of
UDL.
Alignment with DMT. Given the principles of DMT, the solos are probably the part of class that least aligns with traditional dance/movement therapy. However, one of the goals for DMT is to build connection and expressivity, and the solo is one moment where the student is truly able to express him/herself in a way that he/she chooses. For some students, having that connection was important too – they would rather go with another person than by themselves, so the teaching artists honored that and fostered that connection. Therefore, even though solos do not emphasize things like synchrony or mirroring, it still supports some of the foundational goals of DMT.
Part Six: Goodbyes
Much like the structured and consistent welcome each day, the teaching artists had a structured goodbye that they tried to keep relatively consistent each week. The
! 190 solos were the last big part of class, so after everyone had finished doing the solos, they ended up sitting in a line near the door. The teaching artists often did the goodbyes from that position, waving to each of the ballet company affiliates in turn to say, “Thank you
Miss [name]!” If they had extra time, they would end with some more tapping, similar to the welcome. The biggest difference from the welcome was that the teaching artists tried to apply the different animal movements to say goodbye to each person: “Shrug your buffalo shoulders to say, ‘Thanks Miss Beth!’ Bend your giraffe neck to say, ‘Thanks
Miss Elle!’” Rather than just using random body parts, they integrated the information from the story to reinforce that content one last time before officially ending class for the day. They then challenged the students to stand up tall without letting their hands touch the floor, which takes both coordination and strength. Finally, they instructed the students to quietly line up at the door, and the classroom teachers usually gave further instructions from there.
Because of the similarity to the welcome, I will not go through how the goodbyes are relevant to each of the learning theories – that is already described in detail in the discussion of the welcome. However, I felt it important to describe the process since it was a consistent part of class each day and it circles back to how they started. I also appreciated the mini-review built into the goodbyes to further reinforce the content they had covered thus far in the class.
Summary of Program Design
Though specific content and even sometimes the order of the class varied week to week and class to class, all of the classes included six main elements that were consistent throughout the residencies. The welcome was a brief acclimation to the room and
! 191 greeting to the ballet company affiliates; locomotor challenged the students to travel the room using various movements; warm-up allowed students to exercise neuromotor pathways articulated in the Brain Dance; the creative story allowed specific movement exploration of literary works related to what they were learning about in class; the solos gave each student a chance to apply what they learned and perform by themselves; and goodbyes signified the end of the class for the day. I have discussed several learning theories and pedagogies that are considered to be important for inclusion or specifically for students with disabilities; these pedagogies are also relevant for nondisabled students.
Though each part of class is structured a bit differently, all of them incorporate the major principles of each of the aforementioned theories. Throughout the six parts of class, teaching artists encourage students to use all four of Kolb’s (1984) learning skills.
Within MIT (Gardner, 1998, 2011), seven intelligences were variously applied; the only intelligence not emphasized was naturalist, but there are lesson plans for Dance to Learn that discuss natural objects or phenomena (i.e., weather, water, seasons), so it certainly can be applicable to the program in general. Pedagogies also aligned with UDL (CAST,
2014), employing multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement. Using Grenier, Miller, and Black’s (2017) application of inclusion to a general education classroom, all components of Dance to Learn were either open or modified. The welcome, creative story, and goodbye were all open, allowing all students to participate without having to specifically make accommodations for students. The locomotor, Brain Dance, and solo activities did allow for specific one-on-one modifications for students who needed them. None of the activities were parallel or separated, which meant that all students were consistently dancing together. Finally,
! 192 elements of DMT such as mirroring, synchrony, and student-led movements were integral to the class structure as well.
I discussed specific examples of those elements that were implemented in the inclusion setting, but most of those descriptions hold true for any Dance to Learn program. In an interview, Beth even said, “I think I was expecting a lot more variation to...what a normal...Dance to Learn class is. And it’s really not.” Leslie reiterated that sentiment, saying “we’re just adapting what’s going on as opposed to changing something completely.” To me, that says that the program itself is already built on inclusive principles, and the foundations and infrastructures are there to easily make the program fit the needs of whomever is in the class at the moment. I also think that says a lot about dance as a medium for inclusion; given an established program with an existing curriculum, it is possible to adapt the program without fundamentally changing it. It is also possible to apply the principles of the aforementioned learning theories to a pre- existing program to guide its inclusive practices. The following section will discuss specific teaching practices that were adapted for the inclusion setting.
Pedagogical Strategies for Inclusion
This section will review the themes that arose throughout my field notes and interviews regarding specific teaching strategies and adaptations for inclusive practices.
There is certainly some overlap with the previous learning theories and pedagogies related to the structure of the program, but this discussion will primarily address the teaching artists’ methods. It will also focus on elements of Vygostky’s paradigm, such as individualization and adaptation, allowing more time to learn, and the strengths-based approach centered around the assumption that all students are capable of learning.
! 193 I grouped the trends from my observations and interviews into seven major themes with additional subthemes. Categories range from preparations and planning prior to the start of the residency to in-the-moment strategies for adaptation. My intention is to use these themes as the foundation for my blueprint for adaptation to help others apply those modifications to make existing programs more inclusive and to build in inclusive practices when designing new programs. I will provide the blueprint in Chapter 7.
Mindset: “Assume that they can, help if they can’t”
When considering inclusion or even just disability in general, it is common to have several assumptions about what a teaching experience might be like. Assumptions may be that children with disabilities are not as capable as their same-age peers, or that they will not be able to do the same things and still be successful. There also might be assumptions about how much students with disabilities will understand in a classroom setting. Those assumptions can be detrimental because they may affect how one teaches, what expectations a teacher has, and even the perception of what students are doing or are capable of. Oftentimes, these assumptions are not strengths based.
Maria was a staff member within the center. She had previously been the preschool supervisor but had transitioned into a different position during the 2018-2019 school year. For some reason, I got a sense of disapproval from her, as if she was not supportive of the ballet company’s work or did not trust us. Because of her duties in the center, she was usually not in the classroom during Dance to Learn, so she often did not see what was happening in dance class.
In Class 1, there was one student – Natalie – that often wandered or did not always perform the dance activities with the class. However, in just a few weeks, she made vast improvements and had proven herself to be a capable mover when she was engaged. I was excited to see her progress and gain independence. In Week 7, Maria came into the room and joined in with Dance to Learn for the first time all year. During our warm-up following locomotor, she made her way to stand right behind Natalie. When Natalie
! 194 noticed, she turned around and greeted her, saying “Hi Miss Maria!” A couple of minutes later, Natalie crawled across the circle to find a new spot as Beth began tapping her legs, and Maria followed to remain right behind Natalie.
At this point, we knew Natalie was capable – she could sing Head, Shoulders, Knees, and Toes and tap all the correct body parts, and had shown tremendous improvement in attention and focus thus far. It usually took her a minute to get situated and fully engage, but she could perform the correct movements independently. Maria saw that Natalie was just sitting rather than tapping with the class, so she started engaging Natalie and tried to encourage her to keep tapping, using physical prompts to help her move. It got to the point where I thought to myself, “I know Natalie can do this, because I’ve seen her do it. Maria hasn’t, and Maria is operating under the assumption that Natalie can’t or won’t do it, and I almost feel like she’s overstepping and should let Natalie try on her own!” I was frustrated that Maria seemed to have so little faith that Natalie would come back into it on her own after I had seen that happen myself, several times. Because of her assumptions, Maria never gave Natalie the chance to show she could do it herself.
A teacher’s mindset is something that can make or break the success of a class.
Before even entering a space, it is important to check any assumptions and go in as open- mindedly as possible – otherwise, biases may cloud judgment and make a program less successful. In our interviews, Leslie mentioned that she always goes into an inclusion class assuming that it will be like any other class: “We go in thinking that we’re gonna run it more like a ‘typical’ class, quote-unquote, and then make the adjustments as needed. As opposed to dumbing it down.” Therefore, even before entering the space, she checks any assumptions that the students will be less capable than in other general education settings. One of my favorite quotes from any of the interviews was when Leslie said, “assume that they can, and help if they can’t, but let’s assume that they are capable.”
I think that perfectly sums up the basis of the necessary mindset to be successful in any class, especially inclusion.
! 195 Beth also made the comment that she appreciated the amount of information we were able to get about each student prior to beginning the residencies. However, she tried not to let that information “cloud our judgment for what we actually were experiencing.”
Even going in and being told that a student like Natalie might have trouble staying with the class, the teaching artists still gave her the opportunity to be independent and follow along, and she consistently rose to the occasion. Therefore, one of the most important things to be aware of as a teacher is one’s own mindset – it is imperative to go in with an open mind and not assume that just because some students have disabilities, they will not be able to do it.
In addition to being open-minded, the teaching artists mentioned several times that it was important to be very aware of what is happening during class. Beth mentioned that “we were hypervigilant in this setting,” and perhaps more aware of students that might be struggling. Especially as the teacher who was not leading at a given time, it was important to stay tuned in so that they knew how to assist students or provide one-on-one help for students that were having trouble. They mentioned that in any Dance to Learn class, awareness is important, but there was a hyper-awareness in inclusion – their awareness of individual students was magnified in this setting. Therefore, as part of a teacher’s mindset, it is important to prepare to be increasingly attuned to what is happening in the moment.
Another theme that continued to arise in both my own observations and the interviews was the importance of flexibility. Each day, the teaching artists went in with a plan and a general goal of what they hoped to accomplish, as well as what they would do to accomplish that goal. However, in preschool in general and inclusion in particular,
! 196 things often happen that require a change of plan in the moment. Thus, along with hyper- awareness, it is important for teaching artists to realize when something is not working and make changes as they go. Leslie mentioned it is important to have the “flexibility to say, ‘That’s not working. So let’s try-’ But I think not necessarily let it go, but let’s see how we can try it in a different way to try to accomplish the same thing.” Another important component of flexibility relates to the co-teaching structure of the program – if one teacher is doing something that is not having success, the other teacher can jump in and try a different approach. Ultimately, it is imperative to be able to think on one’s feet and have the flexibility to change the plan based on what is happening in the moment.
Related to flexibility, the teaching artists reiterated that it is important not to get discouraged if the plan does change or if something does not work the first time. Beth mentioned, “I feel like we don’t necessarily get discouraged if we don’t get through everything that we meant to get through.” Beyond not getting discouraged, Beth also mentioned the importance of “not taking it personally if you’re leading the class and it’s, like, going off the rails...as a teacher, not being like, ‘I’m failing,’ or taking it personally.” Unpredictable situations arose every day, so neither Beth nor Leslie felt bad about tagging the other teacher in if what they were doing was not working.
Finally, it was important for the teaching artists to adjust their definition of
“success” and recognize what a victory was for each student. Leslie mentioned that with an inclusion class, “it might be baby steps, but sometimes those baby steps feel like a bigger victory.” Furthermore, Leslie commented that she always goes into class and tries to “catch them doing it well as opposed to always correct them,” and is consistently
“making sure everybody gets caught doing something good. Not just those kids that have
! 197 some more difficulty.” In other words, much like Vygotsky’s (Gindis, 1995) paradigm, it is important to recognize the strengths of all students – not just the students with disabilities – and to come in expecting and actively looking for successes rather than expecting that some students will be incapable. As Natalie and many other students proved, success may not always look identical in every student, but with the right mindset and given the opportunity, all students were able to be successful in Dance to Learn.
Planning
Before beginning any Dance to Learn residency, there is always built-in planning time for the teaching artists. Ideally several weeks before the residency begins, both teaching artists meet with the classroom teachers to discuss the program and determine the theme or focus of the residency. After the initial planning meeting with the classroom teachers, the teaching artists meet to detail a week-by-week outline based on the information from the first meeting. These meetings are an important part of the program and allow the teaching artists to come up with a preliminary idea of what to teach and how to teach it.
Planning with classroom teachers. The planning meeting with the classroom teachers usually takes place at the location of the class itself. Going on-site for the first meeting allows the teaching artists to familiarize themselves with the center and also see the room where the class will take place. During the planning meeting, the teaching artists provide information to the classroom teachers about what to expect from the program, what its benefits are, and confirm the dates and times to make sure everyone is on the same page with scheduling.
! 198 The planning meeting also serves as the opportunity to solidify the curriculum for the particular residency. The teaching artists always ask for classroom teacher input so that they can do their best to align Dance to Learn with content that the students are learning about in their own classroom. As a collaborative program, the ballet company hopes to reinforce other learning areas. In the planning meeting at the inclusion center,
Leslie even said to the teachers, “if there’s something that if we come in with it, it’s really gonna hook ‘em, let us know and we’ll see if we can come up with something too.”
The teaching artists try to be flexible and if there is not a lesson plan or pre-existing curriculum for a certain book or subject, they will take the time to write it to make sure that the classroom teachers are satisfied with the content of the program.
The initial planning meeting also serves as a time for the teaching artists to get as much information as possible about the students and plan for any necessary modifications. In general education classrooms, the teachers are not always able to provide a lot of specific information, but in the inclusion center, the teachers were very open to giving information that would allow the teaching artists to plan more effectively.
For example, in Class 1, there was a student in a wheelchair who had just had surgery – while he had previously been able to get out of the chair and do movements on the floor, he would be unable to get out of his chair at all during Dance to Learn. Having that kind of information helped the teaching artists figure out how to structure the program in a way that would include him as much as possible.
Finally, going to the site and seeing the available space for dance class is an important part of the planning meeting. At minimum, Dance to Learn requires an open space with a table, chair, and outlet for the keyboard. Sometimes it takes place in a gym,
! 199 which is already an open space, and sometimes the teaching artists go into the classroom and just move the desks and furniture to the sides of the room for class. Again, they can be flexible to make a center’s situation work.
For inclusion, however, there are several other aspects of the environment to consider. More so than in other residencies, it is important to limit the distractions in the room and be aware of how the sound echoes. Students with autism often have sensory sensitivities, so it is important to understand how the sound flows in a space to limit that kind of discomfort for students who might be hypersensitive to noise.
Additionally, keeping other objects that might be distracting out of the room is important. For Dance to Learn at the inclusion center, we were in an unused classroom with no desks or furniture in the room other than the table and chair for our accompanist.
In the second week of the fall session, someone had moved several toy cars – essentially car-shaped wagons that students could ride in – into the dance room for storage. After not having them the first week, they became quite distracting for the students the second week. The teaching artists fortunately found a closet to store them in for dance class, so they did not continue to be distracting, but that was something to consider for the inclusion class that might not have been as distracting in another setting. Sometimes rooms have bookshelves or cubbies, so covering up those kinds of areas can be helpful to prevent distractions as well.
Keeping the space consistent also proved to be an important component within the inclusion class. During Week 7 of the fall session, there was a miscommunication about the room scheduling, and we had to move to another room in the building for the day.
That was very distracting for some of the students; it was a particularly difficult class that
! 200 day, I think because of the new environment. There were also a couple of times where additional people came in and out – someone from the inclusion center’s marketing department came in to take photos during the fall session, and that took some of the attention away from the teaching artists. Thus, consistency in location and the people in the room is perhaps more important in an inclusion setting than in general education.
Finally, if it is possible, it is helpful to give the students time to acclimate to the space before starting dance class. Though time constraints and schedules may not always permit that, there was one day that Class 3 was in the room already when the teaching artists and accompanist arrived. That day proved to be the smoothest and most efficient transition of the residency, and students that often took some time to warm up to class were engaged immediately. Giving the students the extra moments to adjust before starting the class helped it to go more smoothly, so though we did not have that luxury every week, it is something to consider when planning for future residencies.
Planning with teaching artists. After meeting with the classroom teachers, seeing the space, and determining the focus of the curriculum, the teaching artists meet to specify the plan for the residency. If the teacher has requested a specific story, the teaching artists set a plan for how to move through the story and how much to teach each day. If the teachers just offer ideas for general themes that they will be covering (seasons, animals, weather), the teaching artists either find stories to match or set general lessons each day (i.e., dancing like snowflakes in the winter or falling leaves in autumn). They set a general game plan of how much they want to cover each day and discuss the overarching pace of the class. However, once they enter the space and start to work with the students, that plan is always subject to change.
! 201 The planning meeting with the teaching artists is also a way to build in modifications from the outset. For example, the student in the wheelchair was a participant in the 2017-2018 program, and though he used a wheelchair to move around, he could get out of the chair and do stretches on the floor. Rather than set up the class to begin with locomotor, move to a seated stretch, and then move back up into the story exploration, the teaching artists grouped all of the floor activities together and all of the standing activities together so that the student did not have to move in and out of his wheelchair repeatedly. Since he was unable to get out of his wheelchair at all for the
2018-2019 session because of his surgery, the teaching artists had to figure out how to do as little sitting on the floor as possible or do it in a way in which that student would still feel included. It is helpful to build in those kinds of modifications at the beginning, which emphasizes the importance of getting as much information as possible about the students early on.
In addition to incorporating specific modifications, the planning meeting allows the teaching artists to determine multiple possible approaches to class. Beth mentioned that “you need to overplan, so that way if A doesn’t work, you have a B. And if B doesn’t work, you have a C.” It is important to set a goal for how much to get through each day, but coming up with multiple approaches for reaching that goal is helpful. It is also important to go in with the realization that it will take some time to get to know the students. When talking about planning and the structure of class, Beth said, “a lot of that we didn’t figure out until week two or week three.” Having a more open-ended, flexible plan for the first few classes can be helpful until the teachers get to know the students and determine what kind of pacing and structure is appropriate for each individual class.
! 202 Class Structure and Transitions
It is important to have a clear, consistent class structure that remains largely the same each week, especially for an inclusion class. The classroom teachers discussed in the post-interviews how helpful it was to have the consistent structure each week. The students came in knowing what to expect, and the structure of Dance to Learn built on the established routines that they have in the classroom. It also helped the children to be more comfortable and ready for dance class.
Within the class structure, the teaching artists were also deliberate about how they built up to certain activities and reviewed previous content. Before moving on in the story each week, Leslie did a quick student-led review of the animals we had talked about in previous weeks. If the review was cut short for some reason, Leslie found a way to incorporate those animal movements into the goodbye so that there was always some kind of review in addition to the new content for the day.
When the teaching artists began to go over new content, they often scaffolded it, building up to the more complex movements by starting with much simpler ones. For example, Leslie discussed that before encouraging the students to go across the floor by themselves for solos, she wanted to give them time to explore the locomotor movement as a group. Often, we would start moving in place, then around the room, and finally build up to that sequenced solo movement one at a time.
Beth frequently used scaffolding in the warm-up and in locomotor. For example, rather than just having them move from tiptoe feet to big wide steps in locomotor, she had them stop and reach one side (arm and leg) out really wide, then reach the other arm and leg out wide. After they made the shape in place, she encouraged them to walk
! 203 around the room holding that wide shape and taking big wide steps. Once in warm-up,
Beth wanted them to hop on one foot, so she began by having them balance on one foot and see if they could hold it. When they mastered one side, she had them try the other side. Only after balancing did she introduce the idea of hopping on one foot. One of the classroom teachers even praised the teaching artists in our post interview, saying
“breaking it down as slow as you did really helped them understand more of their body mechanics.” Thus, taking the time to break the movements up into smaller pieces and then scaffold those together was an effective way to structure the class.
In addition to having a clear, consistent, and repetitive structure, it is also important to have clear transitions into class and between activities to help the students shift more easily. In the inclusion class, that often involved ways of getting the students’ attention. Frequently, one of the teaching artists would use the cue, “If you can hear me, touch your head! If you can hear me, touch your belly!” (I have also modified to “see me” in classes with students with hearing impairments.) Doing that repetitive call and response let the students know that something new was coming. The teaching artists were also very clear about when they were shifting who was leading, often saying something like, “Turn your eyes and ears to Miss Leslie to see what comes next.” Beth even noted that when shifting to the story portion of class, “What’s the name of our book?” was always the transitional question to begin the review of previous content. Having those specific, clear transitions helped the students to prepare for the next activity and allowed class to run more smoothly.
Leslie also said that in her technique classes, she was instructed to have students dance the transitions. Though not a technique class, she tried to apply that mentality to
! 204 Dance to Learn as well. Therefore, if we were going to move to line up for locomotor,
Leslie might have them do a specific movement like tiptoe feet or moving with hands on knees to go line up. Dancing the transitions in that way kept the students engaged and kept them in the mindset of dance and movement even between activities.
Though we did not use them in this class, visual schedules can also be helpful as transition tools. Most of the classroom teachers discussed having a visual schedule for their own classes and said that some students also have personal visual schedules to use.
Having visual schedules aligns with UDL, giving the students additional ways of representing what is coming next, and allows them to prepare to shift activities.
Pacing
Rather than making major changes to the content or structure of the program, the teaching artists discussed that the biggest adaptation they made was to slow the pacing of the content. It was not necessary to completely overhaul the program, but allowing a little bit more time for the students to master the content was necessary. When comparing inclusion classes to other settings, Leslie said that it’s important to “know that you’re not gonna get through as much as you think.” However, Beth said that despite the slower pacing, it still felt like we were accomplishing a lot of content each day, especially with the repetition of previous concepts and allowing student choice for solos. Simply because the pacing was slower didn’t mean we accomplished less than another residency.
In addition to taking things more slowly and breaking movements into smaller chunks than they might in a general education setting, the teaching artists were also willing to wait longer before transitioning from one movement to the next. Leslie stated,
“you have to take the time to let them all catch up with you” within any part of class. To
! 205 accommodate, the teaching artists often repeated movements longer than they normally would – for example, they would have the students continue to gallop until most students not only got it correct, but had the chance to really experience the correct movement around the room before switching to the next activity. They wanted all of the students to feel successful in performing those movements, so they stayed in activities until most students had the time to experience success.
Additionally, the teaching artists talked about taking some extra time as the students entered the room. Rather than jump right into class, they were a little bit more lenient with this group, giving them the opportunities to come up and share their excitement with the teaching artists. Leslie noted the importance of “giving them that time to come in and be like, ‘Hey! I’m wearing my new shoes!’ or whatever.” Allowing that extra time within the transition to class helped the students to acclimate to the space and get comfortable before focusing in on the movement activities for the day.
Another interesting pacing trend that I noticed had to do with the tempo of the activities themselves. Many of the preschoolers expressed that they liked to move fast – their internal tempo seemed quicker than the adults in the room. The teaching artists often started an activity with a slower tempo, tapping or raising and lowering our arms to the beat of Miss Erin’s music. As the students became comfortable, the teaching artists allowed them to speed up until they were going as fast as they could. That increased tempo was exciting for the students, especially the ones who wanted to show off how fast they could go. Changes in tempo also helped to re-engage students whose attention might be wandering. For example, during one of the transitions, Leslie was saying, “If you hear me, touch your head!” She increased her tempo just to saying body parts as fast as she
! 206 could – “Belly! Back! Shoulders! Knees!” – to get the students to listen and follow along.
The faster she went, the more engaged students seemed, and the more smiling and laughter I noticed as well. Thus, the varied pacing of individual activities can not only accommodate all of the students, but also can help as a re-focusing tool.
Finally, the teaching artists noted that sometimes, those pacing decisions happened in the moment. To me, that indicates the importance of knowing the priorities of class – if something takes longer than expected, then what is the most important thing to get to for the day, and what can sort of fall by the wayside? For example, occasionally, one of the classes in the fall would come in a couple of minutes late, so the teaching artists had to adjust their pacing to get through the most important things. The same pacing decision happened when the teaching artists wanted to get through two animals per day in Head to Toe rather than just one; they decided to cut the review a little bit shorter to ensure that they got through the new content that they wanted to cover. A lot of times, those decisions were made on the spot based on what was happening in the room.
In sum, slowing the pacing of activities and repeating movements for a bit longer is helpful to allow all students to understand and succeed. It was not really necessary to completely change or simplify the content itself, but it was helpful to take some more time to let students master the content. One of Vygotsky’s (Gindis, 1995) tenets of special education is to give students more time to learn, so Dance to Learn certainly adheres to that. As Leslie said, “give us some time, and we’re...probably gonna be able to accomplish it.”
! 207 Building Trust
For any program to be successful, it is important to have a level of trust between the people delivering the program and the people receiving it. For Dance to Learn, that meant that the teaching artists needed to build trust with not only the classroom teachers and administrators, but also – perhaps especially – with the students. That trust is particularly important in an inclusion setting. One of the foundations of DMT involves building a level of trust between the therapist and the child, and the teaching artists took that very seriously and worked hard to make sure the students trusted and were comfortable with them.
One of the recurring themes in my interviews and observations was the correlation between trust and improvement. As the students became more comfortable and trusting of the teaching artists, they improved more in areas of socio-emotional development, executive function, and even movement. Beth, who did not teach the 2017-
2018 program, mentioned that the fact that some of the students had the class before made a difference – “You can tell that there’s a level of trust and comfort” with the repeat students. I was curious about how the teaching artists thought about and actively went about building trust, so I asked about it in one of my interviews with them. Their answers varied from aspects of the program to their own teaching strategies and behaviors.
As I have mentioned previously, having a consistent program structure each week helped the students to know what to expect, which allowed them to feel more comfortable in Dance to Learn. In addition to the structure, the program itself was, as the
Class 3 teacher said, “age appropriate, developmentally appropriate – [the teaching artists] never asked [the students] to do a movement that was too challenging for them.”
! 208 Leslie noted that “they’re starting to trust that we’re not gonna make ‘em do something completely way way out of their comfort zone,” which allowed them to let go of potential anxiety and really enjoy the program. Thus, the program itself, in content and structure, allowed for trust to be built between the teaching artists and the students.
There was also an interpersonal theme of building trust throughout the residency that occurred within social interactions between individual students and teaching artists.
The students wore name tags every time they came in, so the teaching artists were able to call students by name from the beginning. Providing affirmations with the student’s name also helped the teaching artists to get to know the students better. Therefore, though the name tags were a small part of the residency, they were instrumental in developing those strong relationships between the adults and the students.
The teaching artists did their best to acknowledge students’ ideas as well. With
Leslie’s mantra of “catch them doing something good,” the teaching artists would announce when they noticed a particular student succeeding or showing creativity.
Allowing the students to come up and share information about their personal lives (i.e., “I went to Grandma’s this weekend!” or “Look at my sparkly shirt! Look at my shoes!” or even “My pants have five pockets!”) was another important interpersonal trust-building step. Beth mentioned that if a student says “they have five pockets in their pants mid warm-up...bring that back at the end so they...understand that you heard them. Even if it might have been in a moment where we couldn’t really dive into it.” Danielle, the Class 2 teacher, also mentioned the significance of the interpersonal interactions: “[The teaching artists] listen, they hear [the students]. They let them know that they hear them; they
! 209 notice things that they’re doing.” Thus, personal interactions with the students allows the teaching artists to build trust with them.
I think perhaps one of the most important aspects of trust building within Dance to Learn is the fact that the teaching artists don’t make anyone do anything they are uncomfortable with. The teaching artists respect the students’ personal boundaries and comfort level with the movement activities. Leslie said, “we never use a harsh tone...We’ll encourage them in multiple ways, but if it’s just not happening today...we’re not gonna make ‘em.” There is always a kindness in their teaching, which is essential within an inclusion classroom.
Along with respecting the students’ boundaries, the teaching artists provided consistent affirmation, encouragement, and praise to individual students each class. Even if they corrected a student, they framed it positively: “I love that you remember how we did it before, but right now, we’re doing X.” They also found ways to frame the correction around the teaching artists and not the student – rather than saying “You need to try this by yourself,” it was, “I would like to try this by myself.” Putting that onus on the teachers rather than the students allows the students to feel like they have the agency to “let” the teaching artists do it by themselves – it gives students the power. When they noticed the students doing something correctly, the teaching artists found a way to praise them either verbally or with a high five. They especially tried to acknowledge improvement – if a student, for example, was pulling on others while holding hands in a circle and was able to be gentler after a correction, the teaching artists acknowledged it by saying, “Thanks for using a gentle hand.” In looking for those moments of improvement and success, the teaching artists constantly used a strengths-based
! 210 pedagogy, which also aligns with Vygotsky’s paradigm (Gindis, 1995) for special education.
Finally, there were several occasions when the teaching artists had to manage trust-building or social relationships with teaching the class. Especially within locomotor, students who were capable of doing the movements independently often took a teaching artist’s hand. In those cases, the teaching artists prioritized building and keeping that trust
– rather than squash the social invitation, they would hold the student’s hand for locomotor at least for a while before trying to encourage that independence. In that way, the teaching artists made it obvious to me that building those relationships with the students to encourage comfort and trust was an essential part of the program. I believe that mentality is a large part of how the students were able to be as successful as they were.
In-the-Moment Teaching Techniques
Bryce was a particularly energetic student in Class 2. During the second class, he was having a hard time regulating himself. As we were transitioning to line up for solos, Bryce curled up in the middle of the room and refused to move. One of the classroom teachers went over to talk to him and then eventually picked him up to move him out of the way – he was right in the pathway for the solos, so it was kind of a dangerous place to be. He didn’t want to be moved, and he became very angry when she picked him up, yelling: “I hate you!” Ignoring the verbal outburst, Leslie told him, “That’s not a safe choice for solos,” to which he declared, “I need to lay down.” Leslie said that he needed to move out of the way, and he did scoot over just a little bit, but he stayed near the middle of the room.
Despite the prompting of several teachers and the attempt to physically move him out of the way, Bryce did not move from his spot on the floor. Leslie adapted and moved the red dot over to one side so the students’ pathways would not run into Bryce. I got to do a solo, and I was second to go. Another student went first, and as he was walking to the red dot, Bryce popped his head up and said, “Hello!” Leslie told the student, “Nope,
! 211 Bryce’s just on the ground. It’s time for your solo,” ignoring Bryce’s behavior.
As I was doing my solo, Bryce yelled, “Miss Elle, don’t step on me or anything!” Leslie, who was concerned about safety, went over to stand right in front of Bryce, creating a sort of road block so that he would certainly not be stepped on by anyone. Beth and I were impressed by her quick thinking and the way she handled such an unpredictable situation in the moment – she was firm and did not give in to the attention that Bryce was seeking, but still made sure the class continued in a way that did not disrupt other students.
After setting the foundation for a successful class, it is important for the teaching artists to be able to think on their feet and adapt in real time based on what the students need. In any preschool class, and especially in an inclusion setting, unpredictable situations arise – there was no way to plan for a student throwing himself down in the middle of the floor and refusing to move. Therefore, in-the-moment adaptations and teaching techniques are important to keep a class running smoothly. However, when I asked the teaching artists how they made decisions in-the-moment, such as addressing a situation like the one above, they were unable to answer. Laughing, Leslie said “I have no idea.” Though they couldn’t articulate their decision-making process, they both were able to exercise their discretion and adapt in the moment. I think their decisions really depended on what was happening in the moment and what they felt like the students needed at that time. To me, that kind of adaptation comes with practice as well as a familiarity with both the program itself and the students in the room. The following discussion will address several themes about teaching in-the-moment that arose in my field notes and interviews.
Specific teaching strategies. In addition to the major pedagogical strategies of the program, such as scaffolding, trust-building, and figuring out the appropriate pacing, I
! 212 noticed several teaching strategies that the teaching artists frequently employed. I asked the classroom teachers what kinds of teaching strategies they used in the classroom to get an idea of what the students might be familiar with, and they mentioned things like modeling, consistency and routine, simple and specific directions, and lots of reminders.
Without specifically communicating with the classroom teachers about teaching strategies, the teaching artists used many of those techniques as well. Because of the nature of a dance and movement class, there was inherently a lot of modeling in addition to verbal cues. Sometimes the teaching artists would model in lieu of verbal cues to give the students a different way to attend and follow along. Kristen, the Class 3 teacher, appreciated the “quick directions with demonstrating.” Thus, many of the teaching strategies in Dance to Learn mirrored those used in the classroom, which seemed to be helpful for the students.
In addition to clear directions and modeling, I noticed a pattern of simple “first, then” commands. For example, if a student received praise for thinking of a new way to do a movement, other students often tried something new in the attempt to earn that praise and have the class do their movement. Leslie and Beth always tried to acknowledge and honor those students, but it was difficult when there were many students vying for that attention. Instead, Leslie would say, “I’m waiting for you to try it my way, and then we’ll try it your way.” In other words, “First mine, then yours.” The
“first, then” technique can be especially helpful for students with autism, as well, so providing that kind of two-step instruction was a powerful teaching tool.
If there was a student that started doing something off-task or began wandering, I also noticed a lot of redirection. Many times, that involved a classroom teacher
! 213 intervening and sending a student back to the group, but there were also times when the teaching artists would acknowledge and redirect behavior. For example, there were several students that liked to move as fast as they could. If we were sitting in a circle and tapping and students started moving too quickly, one of the teaching artists might say, “I know you want to do it faster, but I need you to let your body slow down.” They acknowledged what the student was feeling to show their understanding, and then they redirected the student to move in a way that was safer or closer to what the rest of the class was doing.
Because there was a high likelihood of a student needing one-on-one assistance, the teaching artists were also very deliberate about their own spacing throughout the room. Whoever was not leading would usually try to find a spot in the room opposite the leader so that there were multiple points of assistance available throughout the room.
Leslie mentioned that “in this one I think we were very strategic in finding our, like, the spacing of us in the circle.” Those adjustments often happened in the moment, which reiterates the importance of hypervigilance in an inclusion setting as well. The teachers needed to read the room to see where they would be most helpful.
Finally, the use of props was helpful for many of the students. Having the red spot as a visual stopping point for the solos allowed many of the students to clearly see their goal and then actually perform a specific movement from the starting line to the ending point. Some students became interested in the spot itself, picking it up and trying to play with it, or even handed it back to a teaching artist. Though picking up the spot was not necessarily following directions, it was a way to engage the students that otherwise hesitated to participate. The physical book had a similar effect – even students who had
! 214 previously not been actively participating were more likely to run over to the book to look at the pictures. Thus, having those props was an important, in-the-moment strategy to better engage the students.
Language and framing. The Education Director of the ballet company often discusses with all of the teaching artists that language is powerful – she believes that the way we say things can make a difference. For example, one time after observing me teach, she told me not to abbreviate “gonna” and instead be deliberate about saying
“going to” – that has really stuck with me and made me aware of how I say things when I teach. That attention to detail is evident in what I saw from the teaching artists at the inclusion center as well. It was important to use language that would be clear and resonate with the students, and I noticed that the teaching artists always described concepts in terms that the students would understand. For example, when describing fast and slow movement, Beth described animals – a cheetah and a turtle, respectively – to frame the different tempos of movement in a way that the students could relate to.
Another example of using language that the students understood had to do with learning about personal space. To begin the lesson, Beth pretended she had a bottle of bubbles and “blew a bubble” to each student – she instructed them to catch the bubble on their hand. After she had gone to each student individually, she told the students to blow up their bubbles even bigger, until they were so big that the students could step inside them. We then painted our bubbles (with imaginary paint) all around, using our favorite colors – Beth encouraged everyone to paint up high, down low, in front, behind, and on the sides so that their whole bubble was painted. That allowed them to really understand their range of motion and how far their own personal space extends. Finally, she
! 215 explained to them that if they bumped into another friend, their bubble would pop, so the goal was not to pop anyone’s bubble. All of that was to teach them about personal space and help them find the awareness to avoid bumping into others. However, Beth put it in terms that the students could relate to and would even be excited about – bubbles and painting.
In addition to using metaphors that students would understand, the teaching artists also worked to give very specific and concrete instructions. For example, Leslie was attempting to get the students to make a table-top position for cat-cow, which can be challenging for students. For students that were in downward dog rather than table top
(legs straight instead of knees bent), she asked, “Are my knees bent? Make sure your knees are bent too.” For the students that were sitting back on their heels, she said, “No bottoms touching shoes.” Then, to get a student to arch her back correctly, she went over to the student, lightly touched her upper back, and said, “Make this part of your back go up.” The student was easily able to follow that specific instruction and do an excellent cat back. Providing those details and specific instructions allowed students to understand exactly what they needed to do, and that helped many of the students to correct themselves to be successful.
I also appreciated the way that the teaching artists used questions rather than statements to provide information – they guided students to answers rather than simply giving them the answers. For example, during the fast and slow lesson, Beth gave the students clues about the animals rather than just saying “Turtles go slow.” She started with general hints and then got more specific – “I’m thinking of an animal that is green, it can live in or out of the water, it has a shell, etc.” Whenever a student guessed an
! 216 incorrect answer, rather than saying “No, that’s incorrect,” Beth asked, “Hmm. Can a fish live in the water and out of the water?” The students concluded that the answer was no and continued guessing until they got the correct answer. Framing information as questions rather than answers allowed the students to use their critical thinking skills and come to their own conclusions, which likely helped them remember and understand the information better.
Finally, the teaching artists often framed things in a way to help students engage and follow directions without calling them out for not following directions initially. For example, after going over the idea that dancers do not use their voices, Beth instructed students to gallop. Galloping, a high-energy and fun activity, led the students to yell and laugh and use their voices. Rather than reprimand students for talking when they shouldn’t, Beth said, “Let me see a smile on your lips! That’s the challenge – keep a smile on your lips the whole time you’re galloping.” Another time, to prevent students from running around before locomotor, Leslie said, “The challenge is to make a line as slowly as possible.” Instead of “don’t do that,” the teaching artists framed it as “try it this way instead.” I appreciated the positive, strengths-based approach in those moments.
Individualization. One of the biggest aspects of many inclusive education paradigms (ADTA, 2016; CAST, 2014; Gindis, 1995) is the individualization of the curriculum for the students. Rather than trying to get the students to do what they want them to do, the teaching artists meet the students where they are and try to figure out how to adapt their own teaching to help the students reach their goal. In Dance to Learn, individualization happened on two levels – the whole class and student by student. A lot of individualization strategies happened in the moment, often in response to something
! 217 that occurred during class. Having a co-teacher was important because the person who was not leading was able to provide one-on-one assistance for specific students or help make decisions that would affect the whole class.
Class individualization. Though the teaching artists came in with a general game plan, there were several days in which they deviated from that plan or from what a general education session might look like. Each day, they took into account how the classes came in and used that energy to shape the warm-up activities. Sometimes Class 1 came in and stayed standing for the warm-up, while Class 2 needed to begin seated for whatever reason. Occasionally, the teaching artists noticed that during class, student attention started to wander – rather than trying to maintain activities and finish despite a lack of engagement, the teaching artists moved to the next task to re-engage the students.
For Class 3, that went even further – after a few weeks, the teaching artists restructured the entire warm-up to help the class stay engaged. Those observations about what was happening in the room helped the teaching artists to do what they thought was best for most of the students at any given time.
There were also times where the teaching artists included a lesson that they hadn’t originally planned due to student behavior. For example, during week one of Class 3, the students were very excited and thus rather noisy. Beth subtly mentioned to Leslie that she thought they should remind the students that dancers don’t talk. Leslie agreed and jumped into a lesson on how to show they were excited without using their voices. They did not necessarily plan to do that, but after seeing what the students needed, Leslie adapted and even tied that lesson into the socio-emotional theme for the residency, introducing other emotions as well. The students were thus exposed to the idea that they shouldn’t be
! 218 talking, but also that they could express many emotions with their bodies. After that spur- of-the-moment lesson, the teaching artists went right back to their original plan for the day.
Finally, the program made some specific adjustments to accommodate the inclusion setting. Normally during the last week of Dance to Learn, there is a parent observation; teachers invite families to come in and watch the class. It is not a performance, per se, but rather a chance for family members to come in and see what the dancers have been working on. The observation does not change the structure of the class
(although there might be a little more explanation for the parents’ sake), but having an audience can greatly impact the kids’ behavior, for better or worse. Because the teachers felt like having parents in the room would be too much of a distraction for this particular group, we decided to forego the observation on the last day of class.
Individualization for specific students. More so than in a general education class, there were many examples each day of teaching artists individualizing the curriculum for particular students. Part of that had to do with giving individual attention for things, whether to help a student succeed or to praise a student for his/her accomplishments.
Being in the inclusion setting, the teaching artists were particularly mindful of making sure to affirm and praise everyone – not just the students with disabilities. I think a lot of times, the assumption with inclusion is that it is only necessary to individualize for students with disabilities, but for meaningful inclusion, educators need to consider what is best for all students. The teaching artists embodied that mentality – I felt like their goal was to say every student’s name at least once each week.
! 219 In addition to addressing students individually, the teaching artists also made themselves available to provide one-on-one assistance for students. Usually that fell to the person who was not actively leading class. For example, Beth was leading warm-up one day and prompted the students to shake one leg, then the other. Leslie was sitting next to a student who used a wheelchair – as he was strapped in, he was unable to shake his legs. Leslie had him tap his legs with his hands instead. I thought that was a great modification in the moment, and it was done without bringing any attention to the fact that this student needed to do it a little differently. There were numerous other instances of teaching artists holding a student’s hand during locomotor or helping a student sitting next to them in warm-up; that one-on-one help allowed those students to be successful while still providing a challenge for students who might be more advanced in their movement.
There were also instances where the teaching artists individualized the whole class’s curriculum for a particular student. In the class with the student who used a wheelchair, for example, they did a lot of standing warm-ups instead of sitting on the ground; they modified the whole class to make sure that student did not feel excluded.
There was also a time when one of the students who tended to wander – Natalie – began singing Head, Shoulders, Knees, and Toes during tapping. Rather than ignore her or correct her, Beth had everyone join in and do a round of Head, Shoulders, Knees, and
Toes so that Natalie would be included and successful. Similarly, there was a student during week three that became overwhelmed at the thought of doing his solo across the floor. He was so paralyzed that he was unable even to walk across the room to go line up after class had ended. Noticing what he needed, Leslie had everyone move all the way
! 220 over to that side of the room and then go all the way back to the door as a group so that the student did not have to go alone. She did not bring attention to her reasoning for instructing the students to cross the room again, but she made sure that the anxious student had what he needed to feel comfortable.
In general, the ability to individualize the curriculum for specific students was dependent on the teaching artists getting to know the kids and staying alert and aware during class. Learning the students helped the teaching artists to know how much to encourage a student to keep trying and when to let it go. Their knowledge of students also allowed them to modify things appropriately and understand what was “a win for certain students,” as Beth said. As I mentioned, there were numerous moments in each class where the teaching artists made modifications or accommodations for specific students based on what they needed at the time. I think that is one of the most valuable aspects of
Dance to Learn – it is relatively easy to individualize the curriculum to meet the needs of all students in the class.
Classroom management. An important part of teaching any class involves managing student behavior. Especially in a preschool environment, students are still learning self-regulation skills, and it is necessary to have tools to help students stay engaged and ensure the class runs smoothly. Those tools might be slightly different in an inclusion setting as opposed to a general education setting.
In a movement class, it can be helpful to build some of the classroom management strategies into the movement activities. For example, the teaching artists always had the students stop and take deep breaths after galloping, helping them to calm themselves after the high-energy locomotor movement. The idea that dancers do not use
! 221 their voices is also one that helps students to stay quiet so that everyone can hear directions. Leslie’s strategy of dancing the transitions also builds into classroom management – every activity is meaningful and requires student attention and focus.
However, in an inclusion setting, it is necessary to have a higher tolerance for different behaviors. For example, students with autism who are sensory-seeking may try to self-stimulate (stim) by engaging in repetitive, stereotypical movements. That could manifest as either making vocalizations, flapping their hands, or even spinning in circles.
Rather than expecting a silent classroom, it is important to realize that there may be some extra noise or movement in the room, and instead of signifying defiance, that indicates a level of arousal for the students. Those stimming behaviors also do not preclude the student from participating. It is important to have that understanding before entering into an inclusion space, and to accept those behaviors as communication from the student.
Within Dance to Learn in particular, the teaching artists frequently tried to frame classroom management positively – instead of “don’t talk when I’m talking,” they said,
“dancers don’t use their voices – try doing it like a dancer!” Another helpful tool for classroom management was for the teachers to “do it like dancers” – they might change the volume of their voice to a whisper to draw students in closer or even just demonstrate the movements without verbal cues. Those strategies were particularly helpful to quiet the class without explicitly telling the class to be quiet.
Yet another strengths-based approach to classroom management involved praising students who were following directions rather than reprimanding students who were not.
Most of the time, the teaching artists simply tried to ignore behaviors to extinguish them.
Rather than giving students negative attention, they kept going as if they didn’t see the
! 222 student who was being disruptive or not following directions. For example, when students shouted out answers without raising a hand, the teaching artists often ignored them and called on the students who were raising a quiet hand. That was often punctuated with “I love how you raised your hand so quietly!” or some other affirmation of the student that was following directions. In that way, the kindness that was so important within building trust also manifested in the classroom management techniques.
If there ever was an occasion where the teaching artists had to address a negative behavior, they always made sure to explain why that behavior was not acceptable. When
Bryce was pulling on Leslie’s arm in warm-up, Leslie explained, “It hurts my hand when you pull like that, so I can’t let you pull on me.” As a result, he stopped pulling on her, so
Leslie responded, “Oh, that’s a gentle hand. Thank you very much.” Instead of just telling him to stop, she explained why he needed to stop, and then affirmed him when he corrected his behavior.
In general, especially within an inclusion classroom, even classroom management techniques need to be open-minded and strengths-based. I noticed that the teaching artists were very deliberate not to call out specific students for wrongdoing, but rather to praise students that were doing well to encourage others to try to do well so they could also receive that praise. Once again, all of the in-the-moment teaching strategies were based on catching the students doing something well. In that way, even the specific teaching techniques adhered to the previously discussed learning theories and pedagogies.
Daily Evaluation
The final theme regarding the pedagogical strategies in Dance to Learn was the constant reflection and evaluation. After each class, even just informally, the teaching
! 223 artists would reflect and talk about what worked and what didn’t work. If they had a gap between Class 1 and Class 2, they would also debrief quickly then and talk about whether they should change anything for the next class. In some cases, those evaluations led to a different teaching approach for certain concepts. Those daily reflections were also what led to the decision to change the order of the warm-up in Class 3.
Some of the daily mini-evaluations even happened on the spot during class. If
Beth noticed that the class was losing their attention during warm-up, she cut the warm- up short and passed it off to Leslie to start the story. If Leslie noticed that the class came in and was having trouble calming down, she suggested to Beth that we do some tapping first before starting locomotor. The teaching artists were constantly evaluating themselves, and because they came in willing to be flexible and change their approach if necessary, they achieved better engagement from the students and, in general, greater success.
Potential and Perceived Challenges
Any partnership or program is bound to experience some challenges, and Dance to Learn was no exception. Because I was interested in both potential challenges and perceived challenges, I asked about them in both the pre-interviews and the post- interviews with teaching artists and classroom teachers. I was interested to see that some of the potential challenges that the classroom teachers discussed prior to the residency were not as difficult or detrimental as expected. Additionally, many of the perceived challenges after the program did not have to do with the delivery of the program itself.
When I spoke with the teaching artists, some of the challenges that they had experienced in other locations were not of concern to them here. I mentioned the high
! 224 level of teacher support and involvement in the inclusion center – lack of teacher support is one of the biggest potential challenges for any Dance to Learn class. The teaching artists were confident that they would have the support they needed from the center itself.
Instead, their biggest concern had to do with the fact that the program is for preschoolers, and preschoolers are unpredictable. Leslie mentioned that “there’s always the possibility of that meltdown,” but that it is important to go in with “an open mind of not...assuming it’s going to be that perfect classroom where they all stand in their good dancing spots all the time and don’t talk.” Thus, despite a potential challenge related to student behavior, they were still prepared to go in without making assumptions about the class.
The classroom teachers echoed similar concerns about student behavior.
Especially for Class 1 and Class 2, the classroom teachers had not really gotten to know the students yet, so they were unsure of how some of them would react to the program.
Lorin, the teacher for class one, also voiced some concerns about specific students like
Natalie and the student in the wheelchair and “how we can incorporate their unique abilities into what is happening in the program.” Natalie was one of the students who grew the most, based on my observations, so in my experience, we were able to overcome that challenge. Kristen, the teacher for Class 3, said that the kids getting to know the program in the first few weeks as well as the teaching artists getting to know the kids would be the biggest challenge – though it took a couple of weeks, I believe we overcame that challenge as well.
I also mentioned in my pre-interview with the teaching artists that it would be important to communicate clearly with the classroom teachers, both to let them know if we needed anything and for them to give us feedback about what we could do to better
! 225 accommodate the students. Since all of the classroom teachers were more familiar with the program, having had it the year before, that communication became easier. The Class
3 team was especially open about communication as well, which ended up being very helpful. Thus, that did not end up being as big of a challenge as I thought it might be.
Throughout the residencies, a number of things that we could not control occurred
– those, for me, tended to be the most challenging. For example, Class 3 took place during the winter, and it was a particularly bad winter for inclement weather. Due to center closings, Class 3 only met every other week for the first several weeks of the program. That inconsistency was difficult for both the teaching artists and the students.
There were also a number of student absences that were challenging. On any given day, the specific groupings of students in attendance could affect the dynamic of the classroom. Additionally, there were several students that were pulled for various therapies during Dance to Learn that limited my ability to collect data. (I also found it frustrating that the students who might benefit most from the program were the ones who were frequently pulled out from it.) The variation in student attendance was an unanticipated challenge that affected the class more than I realized it would.
Furthermore, I noticed potential teacher biases that may have impacted the program. I will discuss this in more detail in my chapter about student data, but there was one teacher that was particularly harsher in rating her post-surveys than either of the other teachers. This teacher also disclosed that she has back issues, which slightly limits her mobility. I wondered if that could have had something to do with her perception of the program. Additionally, as shown in the situation with Maria and Natalie, there were some
! 226 biases about students with disabilities not being able to do the activities, which in some cases limited their opportunity to successfully participate.
While the above descriptions were my perceived challenges during the program, I also wanted to get an idea of what the teaching artists and classroom teachers thought.
The teaching artists said that the most challenging part was the inconsistency in the challenges – especially in Class 3, there were different behaviors and hurdles each week.
Though the teaching artists handled them all in stride, the difficulty was in the unpredictability of what each day would bring. When I asked them about challenges in
Classes 1 and 2, Leslie's response was, “I don’t feel like it was a challenging class.” I found that interesting because it meant that disability is not necessarily what makes a class challenging. To me, that speaks for the program itself and the teaching artists’ abilities to make the program accessible.
A similar trend held true for the classroom teachers – their biggest perceived challenge had to do with the students’ behaviors. While some students were on behavior plans, other students surprised the teachers with their resistance or hesitance. One teacher mentioned that she was surprised by the student that struggled to do his solo, saying, “I didn’t realize [he] was gonna be so backward about things.” For Kristen, the only challenge she mentioned was getting the paperwork in a timely fashion (release forms and parent surveys). In other words, none of the perceived challenges of the program had to do with the program structure or teaching. The inclusion setting posed some unique challenges related to extreme student behaviors, but otherwise, the issues that arose were potential issues that could come up in any Dance to Learn class.
! 227 Program Strengths
In my interviews, I asked specific questions about how the teachers and teaching artists felt the program reinforced or supported socio-emotional development and executive function skills since those were the constructs I was interested in measuring.
Both in answering those questions and just speaking more generally, I ended up getting a lot of (unsolicited) information about the strengths of the program. None of the interviewees said anything negative about the program, but that might be because of my affiliation with the ballet company; they may not have wanted to say negative things to me. However, based on the feedback I received, I felt it was pertinent to elaborate on the perceived strengths of the program.
Socio-Emotional Supports
Because of my focus on socio-emotional development, I wanted to get a sense of how the classroom teachers and teaching artists felt the program related to elements of socio-emotional development. The classroom teachers’ biggest comment had to do with the way the teaching artists interacted with the students, listened to them, and validated their ideas. They also mentioned the focus on body awareness in space in relation to others – that was helpful for the students to respect personal space and avoid bumping into one another.
The teaching artists also discussed the correlation between the program and respecting personal space. They noted that the students learn through cooperative exercises how to gently hold someone’s hand and not pull them down, and they start to realize if they are standing too close to another person. Additionally, they stated that movement itself facilitates socio-emotional development. Leslie said that “moving in
! 228 general kinda helps that. So just...letting them...gallop around the room for sixteen counts, or whatever...lends itself to some sort of emotional release, if nothing else.”
In addition to personal space and movement, the teaching artists also noted the increase in pride and confidence throughout the program. Though they did not specifically say this, I interpreted that to happen partly because of all of the positive reinforcement, praise, and affirmation that they gave to the students. Being kind to the students and modeling that kind of socio-emotional behavior also provides a foundation on which students can build.
Finally, the teaching artists mentioned how specific curricula can reinforce socio- emotional development. Pete the Cat and the Magic Sunglasses, the focus of Class 3’s curriculum, is all about identifying and managing emotions. Thus, using a particular lesson plan can home in on some of those socio-emotional skills.
Executive Function Supports
When I asked about how the program supports executive function, the most frequent response had to do with the consistency of the routine each day. The similar structure of each class mirrored the students’ own classroom routines, and that also helped them to shift their behaviors more easily. Along with that consistency, the classroom teachers praised the weekly review of previous content before introducing something new.
Both the teaching artists and the classroom teachers also mentioned that the structure of the solos reinforced transitioning and waiting one’s turn. I also felt that the solos were a great example of working memory skills – giving the students two step directions and then allowing the students to remember and execute those by themselves
! 229 engaged working memory. Furthermore, the teaching artists mentioned that in the solos, the students were often given a choice. Having a to make a choice forced the students to plan ahead for what they would do, which is another important part of executive function.
Finally, the emphasis on movement rather than talking allowed students to exercise inhibition skills. Waiting and taking turns was another way to encourage inhibition and self-regulation as well. Thus, within each of the activities, there was some element of executive function that was necessary and at times specifically emphasized throughout the program.
Strengths of Teaching and Program Structure
In my interviews with the classroom teachers, I never specifically asked about the strengths of the program. I asked about their biggest takeaways or how they thought the program aligned with elements of SE and EF, and even what kinds of improvement (if any) they had seen in the kids. However, despite my lack of direct questioning, the classroom teachers did end up talking about some of their perceived strengths of the teaching and structure of Dance to Learn.
The classroom teachers appreciated the structure and the individualization of the program. Danielle, the teacher of Class 2, stated, “It was organized…they knew exactly what they were doing, how they were doing it.” She went on to express, “I think as they watched our kids, they were tailoring it to the kids.” Lorin mentioned that she liked how the teaching artists brought in what the students were doing, like Natalie with Head,
Shoulders, Knees, and Toes. She said, “that was kind of nice to kind of try to include her and bring that in to see if that would help her to stay.” They also appreciated the tolerance
! 230 for different levels of engagement – the teaching artists were fine with a new student just circling for a while before really trying to jump in and participate.
Specific teaching strategies like clear instructions, positive reinforcement, and gentle encouraging were other strengths that the classroom teachers brought up. They valued how the teaching artists broke down the steps and slowed the pacing so that everyone had a chance to get the movement right. The content itself was also considered to be age appropriate; movements were challenging enough, but not too complex for the students. Kristen also stated, “I like the pre-planning where I said, ‘I really want the emotional stuff covered.’” Thus, the collaboration with the classroom teachers was important and valuable as well.
Finally, the classroom teachers made several comments about the teaching artists themselves. In addition to the way they interacted with the students, the classroom teachers praised their demeanor throughout class, saying, “All of you were so gentle, and so calming, and supportive.” Even when giving a correction, the teaching artists were still very positive, which the classroom teachers appreciated. Kristen said, “the teachers are, all of you, are amazing. You’re positive, you model well, you’re not afraid to jump in with really tough kids.” Thus, the willingness of the teaching artists to make sure the program was the best it could be for all of the students did not go unnoticed by the classroom teachers, and I would consider that one of the biggest strengths of the program.
Other Strengths
In addition to reinforcing socio-emotional and executive function skills and having strong teaching artists, the classroom teachers mentioned that the students all had fun in the program. Lorin said, “I just felt like it was something that they could all do,
! 231 and they all enjoyed.” Kristen stated, “The kids absolutely loved it.” Though I did not focus on motor development for the purposes of this study, the classroom teachers also discussed the improvement in motor skills and understanding their own movement and body mechanics, which is another strength of the program.
Another interesting trend that I did not necessarily anticipate was that the classroom teachers were able to learn more about their own students through Dance to
Learn. Kristen said that she was able to take IEP data for movement-based goals, which reiterated to me that dance can align with IEP goals in education. They were excited to see “some of the kids do things that [the classroom teachers] didn’t know they could do.”
Since the classroom teachers could take a step back from actively teaching the class, they were able to get to know their own students a little better, which I think is valuable.
In my interview with the teaching artists, they mentioned that they considered there to be wins in every class. Despite the fact that it was an inclusion center and some students struggled with movement more than others, there were still victories and successes every day. Some days were certainly harder than others, but even on the difficult days, we all saw student improvement. Furthermore, the fact that the teaching artists were able to keep the program structure largely the same as in a general education classroom seems to me like a strength of Dance to Learn and the medium of dance in general.
After stepping back and analyzing the program based on my field notes and interviews, I can confidently say that the program not only aligns with established inclusion paradigms, but it also inherently works to reinforce socio-emotional development and executive function skills. Not only did I consider the program a success,
! 232 but the teaching artists and classroom teachers expressed how much they and their students enjoyed the program as well. As Kristen said,
I can’t be more complimentary. Of every-everybody, everything, all the teachers.
Just so fun to work with. So professional, so knowledgeable, so age appropriate.
And not afraid with some really tough kids with severe disabilities. You were
great with them!
Based on that feedback, I am confident that the program is successful and sustainable in an inclusion setting.
Answering Research Question 2
Research Question 2 asks: How does the dance integration process work when a professional ballet company enters a classroom to deliver a dance program? / What adaptations are necessary for a program to be successful in an inclusion setting as opposed to a general education classroom? From the above program analysis, it is clear that dance in and of itself is an inclusive medium, even for students with physical impairments. Inherent within the program are certain pedagogies that lend themselves to meaningful inclusion. Specifically, I discussed how Dance to Learn incorporated elements of experiential learning (Kolb, 1984), Multiple Intelligence Theory (Gardner,
1998; 2011), Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2014), and Dance/Movement
Therapy (ADTA, 2016). Without modification, the program itself aligns with all of those learning theories and pedagogies, so it is positioned for success in an inclusive environment.
However, certain aspects of Dance to Learn were altered to allow the program to be as successful as possible within inclusion classrooms. First and foremost, there were
! 233 more adults in the room to provide one-on-one assistance for students. The classroom teachers and their assistants, and sometimes even physical and occupational therapists, were all actively involved in the class each week. Having those extra people in the room proved essential for the success of the program, especially in the first few weeks of class.
Additionally, the teaching artists made several adjustments to the program delivery to accommodate each student. Though they did not necessarily change the content of the program to make it different than what they would do in a general education setting, they did slow the pacing of the program and repeat activities more often than they would in a different setting, which aligns with Vygotsky’s paradigm
(Gindis, 1995). They also tried to keep the order of activities consistent each week to allow the students to become familiar with the routine.
The teaching artists discussed the hypervigilance that they felt during the program as well – being in an inclusion setting introduced more potential challenges for specific students, so they went in and were more aware of individual students and even each other. That awareness allowed them to provide individualized modifications to specific students, which was more necessary in this residency than in general education settings.
Furthermore, the teaching artists provided more individual affirmations and really focused on praising each victory, big or small. They noted that sometimes, students needed some extra encouragement, so that was important to be aware of in this setting as well.
In sum, dance appears to be a uniquely powerful way to engage in meaningful inclusion. The classroom teachers praised the Dance to Learn program and the teaching artists for its impact on the students, which provides clear evidence of the program’s
! 234 success. The following chapter will discuss specific trends in socio-emotional development and executive function.
! 235
Chapter 6: Data Presentation and Analysis – Students
Overview
The following chapter focuses on collected data related to the students who participated in Dance to Learn, particularly in terms of socio-emotional development and executive functioning. In order to gain a holistic understanding of development over the course of the program, I discuss both quantitative and qualitative data for socio-emotional and executive function measures. Quantitative data was collected using the ballet company’s yearly evaluation surveys, which I designed with their permission and the intent to use for my dissertation. I also received permission from the ballet company to review the 2017-2018 data from the same center in which my study took place, so that data is compared to my own to get a more thorough understanding of the program’s potential impact on development. Qualitative data primarily consists of my field observations as well as interviews with the classroom teachers; using content analysis and focused coding, I was able to see emergent trends in terms of socio-emotional growth and executive functioning skills.
Student Demographics
In order to get a more comprehensive understanding of the context of the program and the classroom environment, it is important to understand the make-up of each
! 236 classroom. For the purposes of this analysis, “Class 1” is the first class that came in during the fall – the 9:30-10am time slot for the first ten-week session (beginning
September 26). “Class 2” is the class that participated immediately after Class 1 – the 10-
10:30am time slot for the first ten-week session. “Class 3” is the only class that participated during the second ten-week session (beginning January 9). All three classrooms had 16 students, six of whom were diagnosed with a disability or received services like an IEP or 504 plan. In the first and third classes, there were seven boys and nine girls; in the second class, there were ten boys and six girls. The median age in each classroom was four years old; each class had a range of students from 3-6 years old. The first class’s mean age was 4.14, the second was 3.94, and the third was 4.07.
In addition to understanding the general demographics of each classroom, it is helpful to know a little bit about some of the students that I focused my observations on.
With 16 students per class, it would be overwhelming to attempt to record observations about every student. Because I am specifically interested in autism, I tried to focus my qualitative observations on the students I knew to have an autism diagnosis, as well as at least one peer model per class so that both groups were represented in my data.
In Class 1, the three students with autism that I focused on were Natalie (female, age 4), Brandon (male, age 5), and Adam (male, age 5). In Class 2, Bryce (male, age 5), who does not have an autism diagnosis but does receive services for a disability, often dominated my observations because of his big personality and his frequent interaction with me. The other student from Class 2 that I tried to focus on was Nick (male, age 5), who did have an autism diagnosis. Finally, in class three, Heidi (female, age 3), Daniel
(male, age 5), and Jeremy (male, age 3) were the three students with ASD that I observed
! 237 ! Name! Gender! Age! Disability! Natalie! Female! 4! Y!–!ASD!
Adam! Male! 5! Y!–!ASD!
Brandon! Male! 5! Y!–!ASD! Class313 Drew! Male! 3! Y!
Fiona! Female! 4! N!
Rachel! Female! 4! N!
Nick! Male! 5! Y!–!ASD!
Bryce! Male! 5! Y!
Class323 Jacob! Male! 3! Y!
Corey! Male! 4! N!
Sadie! Female! 4! N!
Heidi! Female! 3! Y!–!ASD!
Daniel! Male! 5! Y!–!ASD!
Jeremy! Male! 3! Y!–!ASD!
Robin! Female! 5! Y!
Class333 Charlie! Male! 5! Y!
Annie! Female! 4! N!
Mindy! Female! 3! N!
Grant! Male! 5! N!
Luke! Male! 4! N!
Table 2. Student Demographics
! 238 most closely. There were other students with disabilities that I interacted with – like
Drew (male, age 3) from Class 1, Jacob (male, age 3) from Class 2, and Robin (female, age 5) from Class 3 – and made some observations about, but for the most part, I wanted to home in on how dance influenced the students with autism.
I also noted when I had significant interactions with peer models. In Class 1,
Fiona (female, age 4) and I frequently sat next to each other or danced together, so I did make several observations about our social interactions. Corey (male, age 4) and Sadie
(female, age 4) from Class 2, as well as Annie (female, age 4) from Class 3 also shared significant interactions with me, so those were the peer models that I focused my observations on. Table 2 shows a breakdown of the students that I largely focused on throughout my participant observations.
Analysis Overview and Limitations
Quantitative Analysis
Quantitative limitations. Prior to analyzing the survey data, it is important to understand potential limitations for survey data collection. Upon my initial receipt of the surveys, I noticed some inconsistencies in both the parent and student surveys. For example, one parent turned in the pre-survey twice; one of the copies was not dated, so I do not know which one the parent filled out first. However, despite that the surveys were both completed prior to the program and presumably around the same time, the parent’s answers were not consistent between the surveys. Furthermore, for the questions that were answered differently, one survey was not consistently higher or lower than the other, so there was no discernable pattern in the different answers. Though that phenomenon does not in itself invalidate the surveys, it does introduce potential bias into ! 239 the data; for some reason, the parent answered some items on the survey differently on a different day. Because I was unsure which survey was more “valid,” I averaged the scores for that student’s pre-parent survey as I felt that was the fairest way to use the data.
However, it is difficult to say how that affects the data analysis because none of the other students had multiple parent pre-surveys.
Furthermore, regarding the parent surveys, there was significant attrition between the pre- and post- surveys. While I received between 81%-100% of pre-surveys from parents in each class, only 38%-53% were returned. That greatly limits the amount of information that can be gleaned from the parent surveys.
The student surveys (filled out by the teacher) were also subject to some potential bias. The pre-surveys for the first two classes and the control group were filled out at the beginning of the school year, which may not have given the teachers enough time to really get to know their students; thus, it is important to consider the possibility that the pre-surveys are less accurate than the post-surveys. Additionally, teacher mood while filling out the surveys could have contributed to differences in scores. For example, one teacher rated all of her students consistently lower in the post-test compared to the pre- test, which is not the trend seen in any of the other teachers from either 2017-2018 or
2018-2019. Since that trend contradicts the data collected from other teachers and from qualitative sources (including interviews with that teacher), I hypothesize that there was some other confounding variable (i.e., teacher mood, teacher stress, etc.) that influenced the survey data.
Additionally, for the 2017-2018 data, some of the student surveys were left partially blank, limiting the amount of discernable data for that year. The end of the
! 240 surveys included questions evaluating socio-emotional development, so while most of the student surveys had information about executive functioning, the data on socio-emotional development was more limited.
Finally, though I had intended to consider Class 3 a true control group, I only received one pre-survey from that classroom teacher. My intention was to collect one at the beginning of the year, one at the beginning of her residency in January, and one at the end to account for potential effects of maturation. However, the classroom teacher filled out one pre-survey in October and resubmitted a copy of the same pre-survey again at the beginning of her residency; the survey answers were unchanged from the first submission. That impedes my ability to determine any causal effects of the program. I still considered Class 3 a control classroom and attempted to detect differences between the sessions that may account for maturation, but it is impossible to say that Dance to
Learn caused any changes in development – only that it may have contributed to such changes. Due to the aforementioned limitations, it is important to consider the qualitative and quantitative data holistically.
Quantitative analysis procedures. Because of the variability and potential bias in the surveys, I used multiple approaches to statistical analysis and looked for convergence of results among the tests to understand the most robust effects. I began by employing a simple t-test comparison between pre- and post-survey results to see if the post-surveys were significantly different from the pre-surveys. These t-tests did not account for any potential confounding variables, but allowed me to get a general sense of trends within the surveys. I grouped all of the data together, regardless of class or session, and performed a whole group analysis as well as independent analyses for peer models
! 241 and students with disabilities. I repeated this process for both the parent surveys and the student surveys.
Within the t-test analysis, I grouped the survey questions in different ways to better understand program impact. I ran an analysis of each question on the survey to see any differences in specific items. However, because multiple questions addressed the same construct, I also grouped questions together and totaled the categories to come up with an “index” of each construct. For socio-emotional development (SE), that meant combining the scores of the five SE questions on the survey. Since executive function
(EF) was made up of several individual constructs, I separated each of the individual pieces in addition to the overarching EF index. Thus, I combined the two questions for inhibition, shifting, working memory, and planning and organizing to get an individual index for each, and also combined all eight EF questions for a total EF index. I applied this framework to both the parent and student surveys.
After analyzing the surveys using simple t-tests, I also used mixed-model analysis of variance tests (ANOVAs) to take into account variables in addition to disability, such as session (fall or winter), class, gender, age, attendance, and whether or not the student had had the program before. Rather than performing ANOVAs for each survey item, I used difference scores (post – pre) for each of the indexes I created: inhibit, shift, working memory, plan and organize, executive function in total, and socio-emotional development. The difference scores were the within-subjects variable – the repeated measure – while disability was the between-subjects variable. Session, gender, age, attendance, and whether or not the student had the program in 2017-2018 were all accounted for as covariates. Using ANOVAs allowed me to see more comprehensive
! 242 information about what may have affected the students’ development as well as the program impact. Like the t-tests, I performed ANOVAs on both the parent and student surveys.
Finally, after completing the statistical analysis of 2018-2019 data, I also ran similar tests on the data from the same center in 2017-2018 in order to see how data compared between the two years. Because of the parent survey attrition, I only analyzed the student surveys (filled out by teachers) from 2017-2018. I was also able to see how the students that had the program in both 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 compared to their peers to identify potential longitudinal effects of Dance to Learn. It is important to note that the surveys for 2018-2019 were shorter than the ones for 2017-2018, so while I ran t- tests and ANOVAs for the whole 2017-2018 survey, I also created an “adjusted” index to specifically look at the questions that were consistent from year to year. Finally, I compared my results to the yearly evaluation reports of Dance to Learn to see how the center compared to the entirety of the Dance to Learn program.
Qualitative Analysis
Qualitative analysis procedures. Analysis of qualitative data primarily used content analysis procedures (Krippendorf, 2004). I used the socio-emotional and executive function components outlined in Chapter 3 and the quantitative survey as a guide to operationalize what development looked like. However, I also tried to be open- minded about emergent themes not specifically covered by the survey or my predetermined theoretical framework.
My first step in qualitative analysis was to code my field notes and interview transcripts. I read through all of that data, highlighting emergent themes as I went. After
! 243 the initial read-through, I went back through each document and engaged in focused coding; I looked more closely at the highlighted information and sorted it into various themes related to socio-emotional development, executive function, and other emergent themes. I then looked at those themes week by week to get a sense of development over time. Finally, I compared those themes and overarching trends with the quantitative results to see how various data sources aligned.
Qualitative limitations. Despite my effort to be as objective and unbiased as possible, my field notes and observations were all subject to my own interpretation and lens. I tried to focus on specific students rather than attempt to document everything that happened during the class; because of my focused attention, it is likely that there was additional improvement happening or other trends that I did not notice. For example, because I knew ahead of time which students had disabilities and which were peer models, I tended to attend primarily to the students with disabilities, and especially the students with autism. Therefore, I did not focus quite as much on the peer models, and so their growth is not as apparent in my field notes as the growth for students with disabilities.
Additionally, I tried to take a positive and strengths-based approach to my field notes. However, especially with constructs like inhibition and regulation, it is much easier to document when students are not inhibiting or self-regulating their responses. It took time to get to know the students and understand what “improvement” would truly look like, so especially with the earlier weeks, I noted more observations of students not doing what they were supposed to than anything else. Along similar lines, when I was writing my field notes using the videos as a guide, I was less likely to name all students
! 244 that were doing what they were supposed to; I did not document every child that was consistently on-task. Therefore, when looking for trends in my field notes,
“improvement” manifested among specific students, but my observations were guided by students that had previously struggled to follow directions, inhibit responses, self- regulate, etc. I did make several notes (especially toward the end of the residencies) about when all students were following along, which I think does demonstrate a general upward trend in socio-emotional and executive function skills; however, my observations are certainly not exhaustive. Just because I did not note specific instances of students (usually peer models) engaging in prosocial behavior or following along does not mean it did not happen.
Before specifically analyzing socio-emotional and executive function trends, I wanted to get an idea of my general observations throughout the program. After coding my observations, I was able to chart the general trends I saw across both areas of development. Though my actual observations and codes were much more complex than a binary score, I recorded the number of observations based on successes vs. struggles in socio-emotional skills and executive function. Part of the reason I wanted to get a general idea of these observations was because in my pilot study, I learned that I was much more biased toward recording when students were not successful, and I did not want to fall into the same biases for this study. Figure 4 shows the overarching qualitative trends, including trendlines for both success and struggle. In general, I recorded more “success” observations than “struggles,” which reinforces the strengths-based approach to my field notes. The trendlines also show a general increase in successes throughout the ten-week
! 245 residency as well as a decrease in struggles, which demonstrates general improvement throughout Dance to Learn.
Figure 4. Overarching Qualitative Trends
One of the biggest takeaways from my observations is that “improvement” is often not a straight trajectory; even near the end of the residency, there were some days that were more challenging than others. However, despite ups and downs, there appeared to be a general trend of improvement throughout the program. The following sections will provide more detailed analysis and discussion of quantitative and qualitative findings for socio-emotional development and executive functioning.
! 246 Socio-Emotional Development: Results and Discussion
Quantitative Analysis
In general, the 2018-2019 surveys did not show robust results for socio-emotional development. I first looked at the indexed t-test comparing the pre- and post-surveys for the full group and saw that there was no significant difference in pre- and post- scores for either the parent surveys or the teacher surveys. Those results were similar when looking at the independent samples for peer models and students with disabilities; the post-test scores were not significantly higher than the pre-test scores for either group. However, it is interesting to note that while the results were not significant, the mean score for the SE index slightly increased for children with disabilities (the pre-survey mean was 14.29 and the post-survey mean was 15.41; the highest score possible was 25) while the mean score actually decreased for peer models (pre-mean was 21.14 and post-mean was 20.41) on the student surveys (see Figure 5). Part of that could be because of the potential teacher bias discussed earlier – one of the teachers consistently rated her students lower on the post-survey than on the pre-survey. However, despite that discrepancy, the mean for the children with disabilities still increased, which suggests that dance might be especially beneficial for promoting socio-emotional development in children with disabilities.
! 247
Figure 5. Socio-Emotional Development Index
In addition to looking at the indexed t-test scores for socio-emotional development, I also analyzed the individual survey questions to better understand what, specifically, the Dance to Learn program might have an impact on. When looking at the peer models, the results remained largely consistent with the indexed scores; four of the five questions did not show a statistically significant difference between pre- and post- survey scores for the student surveys, and none of the items on the parent surveys were significant. Interestingly, the item “Describes emotions of others” was marginally statistically significant (p<.073, ɑ=.1) for the peer models, but a closer look at the means shows that the scores actually decreased from pre- to post-survey (pre-mean = 4.28; post- mean = 4.00) (see Figure 6). Once again, that could be due to the aforementioned teacher
! 248 bias; qualitative data do not show that there was a decrease in socio-emotional development throughout the program.
Figure 6. Socio-Emotional Development: Peer Models
Like the peer models, none of the SE items on the parent survey were significant for students with disabilities. However, when looking at the student surveys for students with disabilities, there was a slightly more positive change in socio-emotional development from pre- to post-program as compared to the peer models. Four of the five questions showed an increase in mean score from the pre- to post-survey; the only mean that decreased was for “Describes emotions of others,” which also occurred for the peer models. That leads me to wonder if the question itself was ineffective. However, only the item “Cooperates in play or when completing a task” showed a significant increase
(p<.013, ɑ=.05) for students with disabilities (pre-mean = 2.76, post-mean = 3.47) (see
! 249 Figure 7). These results show that even with some potential measurement bias, the program was still associated with stronger positive effects for students with disabilities, suggesting that dance can be especially helpful for socio-emotional development in students with disabilities.
Figure 7. Socio-Emotional Development: Students with Disabilities
Despite the lack of robust results from the t-tests, I also ran ANOVAs on the indexed socio-emotional scores for both the parent and student surveys. Using an
ANOVA is helpful because it can take into account confounding variables that the t-tests ignore. Therefore, I wanted to see if there were any specific factors that interacted with the survey data that might have affected the results. The parent surveys did not provide much more insight than the t-tests; there was a significant main effect for disability
! 250 (p<.029, ɑ=.05) which simply means that there was a difference in the scores for the peer models and the students with disabilities. However, none of the other covariates were significant according to the parent surveys.
The teacher ratings provided slightly more information than the parent surveys, however. There was a stronger main effect for disability in the student surveys (p<.000,
ɑ=.05) which reiterates that there was a difference in growth between the peer models and the students with disabilities (see Figure 8). As the t-tests suggested, the students with disabilities improved more than the peer models.
Figure 8. Socio-Emotional Development Index: ANOVA Results
Additionally, two of the covariates produced significant interaction effects, which provides some insight into other factors that affect the survey results. Because I noticed
! 251 that one teacher seemed to evaluate the post-surveys more harshly than others, I decided to include class as a covariate to statistically control for which teacher completed the surveys. The ANOVA for socio-emotional development showed that there was a slightly significant interaction for class (p<.080, ɑ=.10). That means that the classroom teachers did appear to rate their students differently, which introduces more potential bias into the statistical model. It also suggests that the post-survey results for the teacher whose scores consistently decreased might be an outlier; the other teachers did not show the same trends. Thus, there may actually be a stronger positive correlation between Dance to
Learn and socio-emotional development than is expressed in the surveys. Furthermore, there was a slightly significant interaction for repeat students (p<.067, ɑ=.1); those students who had participated in the program in 2017-2018 scored higher on average on both the pre- and post-survey than students who were participating for the first time, which suggests that there could be positive longitudinal effects of Dance to Learn.
Comparison to 2017-2018 data. Reviewing the results of the 2017-2018 data further suggests some anomalies in the more recent data. While data for 2018-2019 did not show particularly robust effects for socio-emotional development, the opposite was true for 2017-2018. T-tests for the whole group suggest that socio-emotional ratings were significantly higher in the post-test than in the pre-test (p<.005; ɑ=.05). The same held true when looking at the adjusted index – for the questions that were the same on both the
2017-2018 and the 2018-2019 surveys, means for the whole group significantly increased in terms of socio-emotional development (p<.044; ɑ=.05) (see Figure 9). Thus, overall,
Dance to Learn correlated with a general increase in socio-emotional development skills.
! 252 When looking at the individual questions related to socio-emotional development on the 2017-2018 survey, two of the seven were individually significant for the whole group; one of those was also included on the 2018-2019 survey. Similar to the results for students with disabilities in 2018-2019, “Cooperates in play or when completing a task” showed a significant increase from pre- to post-test for the whole group (p<.005; ɑ=.05).
Additionally, the item “Shows off work, takes pride in accomplishments,” which was not included on the 2018-2019 survey, showed a significant increase from pre- to post-test
(p<.036; ɑ=.05). Though none of the other means showed a significant increase, all means for socio-emotional development items increased somewhat from pre- to post-test, suggesting that those items that decreased on the 2018-2019 survey were anomalous.
Interestingly, though the whole group showed significant improvement in aggregate, the peer models’ indexed socio-emotional scores by themselves were not significant. For students with disabilities, however, there was a significant improvement in socio-emotional development scores both for the whole survey (p<.019; ɑ=.05) and for the adjusted survey including only questions that appeared on the 2018-2019 survey
(p<.035; ɑ=.05). The individual questions also showed more robust results in the 2017-
2018 survey compared to the more recent data. None of the means for the questions decreased, although the mean for “Describes emotions of others” stayed exactly the same, which once again suggests that that particular question might be flawed. Two of the means showed a significant (or slightly significant) increase: “Responds appropriately to others’ emotional responses” (p<.054; ɑ=.1) and “Cooperates in play or when completing a task” (p<.046, ɑ=.05). These results, in conjunction with the results from the 2018-2019 survey, suggest that dance intervention can be especially helpful for promoting socio-
! 253 emotional development in students with disabilities, and particularly within the realm of working together or cooperating with peers.
Figure 9. ’17-’18 Socio-Emotional Development Index
Comparison to 2019 Dance to Learn program evaluation report. In order to see how the results from the center compared to the Dance to Learn program as a whole,
I referred to the most recent yearly evaluation report for the program. This report takes into account results from all students that participated in the program and does not distinguish between students with disabilities and nondisabled students. However, it can be a useful tool to see whether the results at this center align with the rest of the program, and thus can be an indicator for how well the program was adapted to meet the needs of students in inclusion classrooms.
! 254 In general, the trends reported on the parent surveys were consistently weaker than those that the teachers reported. Like in my own results, that is largely due to parent attrition; many parents did not complete a post-survey. For that reason, I will focus primarily on teacher reports. Based on a factor analysis from the surveys, four items contributed to the construct of socio-emotional development: “Cooperates in play or when completing a task;” “Shows affection and empathy toward you, familiar adults and children;” “Responds appropriately to others’ emotional responses;” and “Describes emotions of others.” In general, 57% of preschoolers who participated in the Dance to
Learn program improved on measures of that construct, which was a statistically significant trend. Thus, as reflected in the 2017-2018 data from the inclusion center,
“preschoolers taking part in [Dance to Learn] showed significant improvement in their socioemotional abilities over time, as rated by teachers. This makes sense, as the dance instruction emphasizes the ability to understand and respond to emotions” (Ballet
Company Evaluators, 2019, p. 27). In addition to their socio-emotional development index, evaluators also found that teachers reported significant improvement in each of the individual items. Thus, it appears that in aggregate, the program does correlate with improved socio-emotional skills. As previously discussed, part of the reason for the discrepancy between the 2018-2019 surveys for the inclusion center and the 2019 program report in aggregate could be because of confounding variables related to the teachers as they filled out the post-surveys. To further elaborate on socio-emotional growth, the following section will examine the trends from the qualitative data regarding socio-emotional development.
! 255 Qualitative Analysis: Socio-Emotional Development
I think it is important to preface my qualitative analysis with a discussion about the classroom teachers’ goals for the Dance to Learn experience. Before each session, I met with the classroom teachers not only to get to know them a little bit better, but also to understand what their hopes and expectations for the program were. After speaking with all three teachers, it was clear that there were several components of socio-emotional development that the teachers hoped the program would positively impact. First, all three teachers stated that they hoped the program would be fun – they wanted their students to enjoy it and have a positive experience with movement. One of the classroom teachers mentioned that she also hoped the dance program would support expressiveness and help to develop self-confidence in her students. Self-regulation was another goal for the students; the teachers wanted the program to emphasize opportunities for the students to manage their own emotions. In addition to emotional regulation, the teachers expressed that the program should help the students with body awareness as well – not only being able to move their bodies more easily, but also to navigate rooms with other people without bumping into one another. Finally, one teacher mentioned that she hoped the program would be a bonding experience for the children, and that their friendships would be made stronger as a result of the program.
After reviewing my field notes and interview transcripts, there were five major themes related to socio-emotional development that emerged (see Appendix D for a summary of indicators). These largely coincided with the themes outlined in my theoretical framework: emotional expressiveness, identifying feelings about oneself, emotion understanding, emotion regulation, and social relationships. Within each of those
! 256 major categories, I also noticed several sub-themes or specific behaviors that demonstrated skills in the corresponding socio-emotional category. I also used the teachers’ goals as guides for these themes to understand whether or not the program was effectively meeting their expectations. My theme of emotional expressiveness captured the teachers’ goals of both expressiveness and fun/enjoyment of the program. I categorized themes of increased confidence under the category of identifying feelings about oneself. The theme of bonding related to emotion understanding because of the empathy required to bond and to understand others’ emotions. Emotion regulation ties to self-regulation; those concepts are also closely intertwined with inhibition, which is a construct I defined under executive function. Finally, the idea of body awareness in relation to others as well as friendship fit under the social relationships theme. By aligning my themes with teacher goals, I was able to further understand not only the program impact for the students, but also how the program fits into the rest of the school environment.
After looking at all of my socio-emotional observations during Dance to Learn, I noticed strong trends that were less apparent in the surveys. Overall, “successful” socio- emotional behaviors increased while “struggles” with socio-emotional skills decreased throughout the program. Figure 10 shows the general observations I made about socio- emotional development throughout the residencies. Based on the sheer number of socio- emotional observations as well as the strong trends, it is clear that the surveys do not capture everything that occurred in terms of socio-emotional growth. The following sections will explain major trends in each of the aforementioned themes.
! 257
Figure 10. Socio-Emotional Observations
Emotional expressiveness. One of the primary skills in socio-emotional development is the ability to express emotions. Denham (2006) discusses the importance of positive affect within emotion expression as well, especially in preschool. In order to operationalize emotional expression, I looked specifically at what I considered “positive affect,” which often manifested as excitement (i.e., jumping up and down, enthusiasm, or verbal expressions of excitement). I also noted when children smiled, especially children that hadn’t smiled a lot previously or tended to have flat affect. I recorded several observations of specific students or the whole class laughing; excitement, smiling, and laughing helped me to come up with a “positive affect” category of observation. I observed several occasions when students initiated hugs or were somehow affectionate toward either the teaching artists or each other – I considered that to be a facet of
! 258 emotional expressiveness as well. Because emotional expressiveness is not limited to positive affect, I also recorded moments when students became upset or frustrated.
Finally, there were several instances in each class when the students were directed to express a certain emotion. Especially in Class 3, the characters in the story felt emotions like sad or mad, and the teaching artists asked the students to demonstrate what those emotions might look like with their bodies. Because that kind of expression is directed and not necessarily organic, yet still demonstrates some kind of emotion knowledge, I categorized those instances as “Purposefully expressing emotions.”
Positive affect. As mentioned previously, I considered positive affect to be demonstrated by smiling, laughing, and excitement. Figure 11 shows the number of observations of each throughout the program, averaging the number of observations from the first half compared to the second half of the residencies. I also included trendlines to see how each category changed from the first to the second half. As shown in Figure 11, there seemed to be high positive affect and excitement from the beginning – though each measure of positive affect increased at least slightly, it started out high to begin with.
Even on the first day of the residency, the students were excited to tell us their names, and I noted “excitement” or “enthusiasm” 19 times on the first day alone. Admittedly, some of the students were returning students from the prior year, so they were already familiar with the program and with Leslie, Erin, and me. However, the fact that most of the returning students were so excited means that they likely have fond memories of the program from the previous year; that illustrates something positive about the program as well.
! 259
Figure 11. Positive Affect
I found it interesting that at first, a lot of the excitement and positive affect was nonverbal; I interpreted the students’ emotional expressions based on their body language and movement. However, there was an increase in the number of verbal expressions I heard throughout the residency as well. For example, Robin, a student in Class 3, was a repeat student who had been very hesitant her first year. I noticed that immediately, she was engaged in the class and seemed excited by dance. At first she expressed her excitement through actions like jumping up and down, but during week three, she became so excited during galloping that I heard her say, “This is fun! This is so much fun!” Then during the locomotor portion of week four, she looked directly at me and said, “I love this part!”
! 260 Jeremy, another student in Class 3, also increased in his verbal expression. He was not a repeat student, but was one of the students diagnosed with autism. He was also very timid at first and frequently stayed close to his teacher, Kristen. During week six,
Kristen told him that she wanted him to dance. I looked at him and offered him my hand, and he came right over to me and said, “I want to dance.” That was the first time I heard him vocalize his excitement about participating in dance class.
Even the teaching artists noticed increased positive affect throughout the residency, especially in the students with disabilities. In our post-interview, Beth mentioned a student from Class 1 – Adam – and how at first, he would not really participate in the solos. He usually ran across the floor to one of his teachers rather than doing the movement and stopping on the red circle. However, during week eight, Beth asked him if he was ready to go for his solo. Instead of just running across, he smiled and told her he was ready, and then he followed directions and did the solo exactly as instructed. Those specific instances demonstrate that especially for kids with disabilities, there was an increase in expressive behavior throughout the residency.
Within positive affect, a recurring word in my notes was “smile” or “smiling” – though I did not jot down every instance of a student smiling, I did take note of instances where students who had flat affect or who had previously not expressed much positive affect openly smiled. Many times, it was also within a personal interaction – I noted when a student made eye contact with me and smiled. Though my jottings were by no means all-encompassing of the smiles that took place, there were many moments that were significant enough to me to write down. For example, Jeremy often had flat affect and was hesitant in his movements. Even when he told me he wanted to dance during
! 261 week six, he didn’t smile at me when he said it. Then, during week eight, Leslie was trying to transition from one activity to another, and she said, “If you hear me, touch your head! If you hear me, touch your knees!” She repeated several different body parts, progressively speeding up so that the students had to really pay attention to be able to do it. Jeremy was next to me, and as he sped up his movements, he beamed at me – it was a huge smile that I had never seen from him before. I then made note of several instances during weeks nine and ten that he was smiling, too. Week eight seemed like a breakthrough for him in terms of emotional expression, and I was excited to see his improvement in expressiveness.
Laughing was also something I noticed more of in the later weeks of the residency. During the first week, I made no observations of students laughing, while in week ten, I noted laughter seven different times. I believe the outward expression of positive affect corresponded with an increased level of comfort and trust throughout.
Though it took some time for some of the students to become comfortable, ultimately all of the students demonstrated positive affect at some point during the residency.
The teaching artists and classroom teachers also noticed positive affect throughout the residency. Lorin, the classroom teacher whose surveys tended to be lower than the other teachers, even said in our post interview that the program was something “they all enjoyed. It didn’t matter whether they were kids that...are pretty high-functioning, or if they were not quite as high-functioning. I think they all still got something out of it and enjoyed it.” Kristen, the teacher in Class 3, echoed that sentiment, saying “the children were always very excited.” Even the teaching artists noted that the students “always came in excited and ready.”
! 262 Based on my own observations and the comments from the teaching artists, I can conclude that the program was enjoyable and fun for the students, as the classroom teachers hoped it would be. There was high positive affect from the beginning, and that increased throughout the program. As the students’ comfort level increased, their outward expression of positive affect also increased. Thus, that is one indicator that the program correlates with growth in emotional expressiveness, especially for students with autism.
Initiating hugs. When a student initiates a hug with a peer or a trusted adult, that is a sign of affection, which I also consider to fall under emotional expression. Similar to positive affect, I think that initiating hugs is more likely when the students feel more comfortable with the teaching artists and the program. Throughout the residency, I noticed more children initiating hugs not only with the teaching artists, but also with each other. For example, during the first week, only Robin came over to me and hugged me – she remembered me from the year prior, so she already had a sense of comfort and trust with me. By the end of the residency, I noted multiple instances in each class where students expressed affection through hugs. To me, that demonstrated a clear improvement in emotional expression.
Adam, one of the more hesitant students, frequently withdrew from physical contact, even just holding hands with his peers. Whenever we did exercises that involved being in a circle, he would often stand a bit outside of the circle, sometimes just watching and sometimes imitating some of the movements the rest of the class was doing. Any time a teacher went over to him and asked him to dance or hold their hand, he gave a huge smile and firmly said, “No.” Though his smile demonstrated positive affect, he was not comfortable outwardly expressing affection. Several weeks into the residency, Beth went over to Adam and bent down to say something. Without hesitation, Adam wrapped his arms around Beth in a huge hug. She looked at me, shocked by the sudden gesture. That was the most emotional expression I had seen from Adam thus far, and I was so glad that he finally felt comfortable enough with us to express himself.
! 263
Crying/frustration. Despite the many positive expressions of emotion that I saw throughout Dance to Learn, I also noticed moments when children became upset or frustrated for various reasons. An important aspect of emotional expression includes being able to express negative emotions effectively, so I looked for those instances as evidence of socio-emotional skills. In general, I noticed fewer expressions of negative affect as the residency went on (17 in the first half of the program vs. 12 in the second half). I believe part of that has to do with the increased comfort with the program.
However, I also recognized improvement in the expressiveness itself. For example, one of the classroom teachers disclosed that Jeremy was having some trouble separating from his mom while he went to school. There were a couple of times where he came in upset or crying because of separation anxiety. At first, he had trouble focusing and participating when he was upset. Then, during week six, he started begrudgingly participating with a teacher; by the end of the class, he had cheered up enough to dance independently and even show some excitement.
Perhaps the biggest point of anxiety for some of the students was the solo at the end of class. While some students reveled in the chance to perform their movements for an audience, other students became paralyzed with fear over the thought of moving across the room by themselves. Corey was a new student this year, and he was a peer model in the classroom. The first week, Corey did his solo exactly as demonstrated, and even did a silly pose at the end. By the second week, however, Corey was horrified at the thought of doing a solo. Rather than perform his solo, he stood, frozen with anxiety, and cried while he waited until everyone else was done with their solos. He then walked across the floor, still visibly upset and crying. Week three escalated – Corey was not only too upset to do his solo, but he was even unable to simply walk across the floor to line up and leave. Leslie had to have all of the students walk back to that side of the room so that Corey could walk with everyone else to go line up. Anticipating his anxiety, during week four, I asked Corey if he would go with me for his solo – I told him I was nervous to go and wanted a friend to go with me. I asked him right as
! 264 we were lining up so that he didn’t have time to worry about going by himself. We did our solos together, hand in hand, and Corey did not show any anxiety at all about going across the floor with me. In the following weeks, he at least ran across the floor by himself, and eventually even began doing the actual movement for the solos. To me, that demonstrated a clear improvement in expressing negative emotions.
I saw more evidence of healthy emotional expression later in the residency as well. Heidi was a student in Class 3 – she was diagnosed with autism and was largely nonverbal. Mindy was a peer model in her class. At one point, Heidi tried to engage
Mindy by getting close to her and vocalizing loudly. Mindy clearly got frustrated, but rather than crying or lashing out, she simply walked away from Heidi. Her facial expression showed she was upset, but she did not act on her frustrations and also did not let that prevent her from participating in class.
Charlie, another student from Class 3, also showed similar improvement in expression. During week seven, another student got in his space a little bit, and rather than letting that derail him, Charlie used his words: “You popped my bubble!” He referred to the lesson on personal space from the very first day of class – we all have our personal bubble, and if we get too close to another dancer, our bubble pops. Not only did
Charlie remember the concept, but he was also able to apply that to express his frustration in a healthy way. Therefore, the decreased number of negative emotions expressed over time says something positive about the program, but the fact that the expressions themselves became healthier and more effective also provides evidence that the program correlates with increased emotional expressiveness.
Purposefully expressing emotions. Throughout the residencies, Beth and Leslie often directed the students to express emotion in some way. “Put your hands on your hips
! 265 and a smile on your lips” was a commonly used phrase, and Class 3’s theme was specifically on emotion, so there were several opportunities for students to perform directed expressions of emotion. I consider that different than organically expressing emotion because of the specific instruction to make their body look a certain way, but it still requires knowledge of what that emotion is and how they would express it in their own bodies. I admittedly did not see improvement in this construct, per se, but that was really because everyone was able to purposefully express their emotions from the very first day. For example, on the first day of Class 3, Leslie asked everyone to show what it looks like to feel sad. Luke, a peer model, slumped over, dragged his feet, and had a frown that nearly broke my heart to look at. We made eye contact as we were walking past one another, and I gave him a thumbs up to show him that I appreciated his sad face.
Without breaking character, he gave me two thumbs up. I almost laughed at the irony, but it was clear to me that from the first day, Luke and really the majority of the other students were able to embody different emotions purposefully.
In sum, after looking at observations regarding positive affect, initiating hugs, crying or frustration, and the directed expression of emotion, it is clear that there was growth in emotional expressiveness over time. Furthermore, emotional expressiveness seemed to increase with their comfort level. Though it took time to build trust, eventually everyone was able to express joy within the program.
Identifying feelings about oneself. Going a step further than emotional expression is the ability to identify one’s own emotions. Though similar to emotional expression in some capacity, it takes a deeper sense of self to be able to identify the emotions one is feeling. I determined three different sub-themes within identifying
! 266 feelings about oneself. The first had to do with prompted expression, usually observed when I asked a student how they were feeling and was given a response or confirmation of their feelings. Sometimes, students verbally expressed their emotions without prompting; I recorded those spontaneous comments as verbal expression of emotion.
Finally, I often noted when students expressed pride in themselves – I felt that was an important part of this construct because it not only involves emotional expression, but also the acknowledgement that they have tried and succeeded in something.
Prompted identification. If a student was showing obvious or strong emotion, I sometimes asked them a question – usually “Are you excited?” or something similar to gauge not only how they were really feeling, but also how they would express that to me.
I usually only noted these kinds of observations when I asked a student a direct question, so it is likely that more prompted identification happened that I simply did not hear or see. My question was usually motivated not only by emotional expression, but also my desire to get to know and build trust with the students. Asking a direct question also allowed the less verbal students to outwardly identify their emotions for me by either nodding or shaking their heads, although even the less verbal students could usually say
“yes” or “no.”
Throughout the residency, I recorded several observations of students who were able to identify emotions. There was only one time it appeared that a student did not accurately identify emotion. Daniel was one of the students with autism in Class 3, and he missed several classes either because he was absent from school or was in other therapies. He often seemed less engaged than other students when he was in the room, especially toward the beginning of the residency. However, he always looked like he was
! 267 having fun. At the end of the first day, I noticed a big smile on his face, so I went over to him and asked if he had fun in dance class. He turned his huge smile to me and said,
“No,” verbally indicating that he had not, in fact, had fun. His smile told me something different though – it is possible that he was joking with me, but at the time I couldn’t tell if that was the case.
Other than Daniel, everyone I asked confirmed their feelings and showed me that they were able to identify their emotions. Usually I got confirmation that a child was excited, but I was able to get other information from my questions too. One day, I noticed
Jeremy rubbing his eyes. He seemed to have low energy, and he was kind of leaning on me during our seated warm-up. I asked him if he was tired today, and he confirmed that he was. Another student, Bryce from Class 2, frequently got excited about galloping. I asked him, “Is galloping your favorite?” and got an enthusiastic “Yes!” in response.
Because prompted identification was contingent upon my asking a question, there was not an identifiable trend that indicates improvement in identifying emotions.
However, other than Daniel on the first day, everyone answered my questions in a way that aligned with their physical expression of emotion, so at the very least, the children did not become less able to identify their own emotions throughout the residency. I also think that prompted identification is perhaps a precursor to spontaneously identifying and declaring emotion, so there is some kind of socio-emotional foundation apparent there.
Verbally expressing emotion. Verbally expressing emotion without prompting goes beyond physical expression and shows evidence of the deeper sense of self necessary to identify one’s own emotions. Throughout the residency, I saw a clear increase in verbal expressions of emotion – during the first five weeks of the residency, I
! 268 noticed that students verbally identified their emotions two times, but I made 13 observations of that in the second half. For example, Bryce in Class 2 was a mover – he would go nonstop with high energy. At the end of class, he frequently collapsed to the ground and declared “I can’t! I’m too tired!” or expressed his exhaustion verbally. He clearly understood his emotions and had no trouble declaring them.
Another peer model in Class 2 also became more willing to identify her emotions for us. After reaching our arms up and down slowly and then as fast as we could go, she looked right at Beth and said, “Miss Elle, I was tired of that.” I appreciated her honesty and her understanding of her own feelings. Later in the residency, there were even more instances of emotional expression beyond tiredness. During week nine, Bryce was gently tapping his legs with the rest of the class and declared, “Nice and relaxed.” That seemed to be a new feeling for him in dance class, so I was impressed by his verbalization.
During Week 8 of the winter session, we had visitors from the ballet company and funders come to observe class. Introducing new people into the environment often is a bit chaotic, and Week 8 was no exception. Energy was high, but things were mostly running smoothly until we all made our circle and began to move around for Follow the Leader. Luke had been standing next to Charlie, but moved across the circle, and a couple of other students moved from their spots in the circle as well. For some reason, Charlie became very upset about that – he was visibly agitated. The teaching artists noticed, and acknowledged him, and Charlie took the opportunity to explain in detail why he was upset. He knew we were in the circle and we shouldn’t go out of line – he talked about that for about a minute or so before Leslie stepped in and said that since it was a circle, as long as everyone had a place, it would be alright. Charlie seemed soothed by her answer and was able to calm down enough to continue. That kind of reaction was a little bit uncharacteristic of him, but I remember being incredibly impressed that he was able to so clearly identify and express how he was feeling and what had made him upset.
The general upward trend in spontaneous identification of emotions shows some improvement in identifying emotions throughout the residency. The increase could be
! 269 related to the students’ comfort level – not only did they feel more comfortable expressing emotion, but they were more willing to disclose to us how they were feeling.
It is important to note that my observations of emotion identification required some kind of overt action by the children, prompted or not. It could be that the students who were physically expressing emotion were also able to identify their emotions and simply did not express that to me, so it is likely that there was more emotion identification occurring than what I was able to perceive. Either way, it is clear from my observations that the program correlates both with increased emotional expression and identification.
Pride/confidence. One of the most exciting things for me to see as a researcher was the increased confidence in the children throughout the program. Increasing confidence was one of the goals of the classroom teachers, so I was on the lookout for evidence of self-confidence and taking pride in work. Figure 12 shows my notes about pride and self-confidence each week – there is a clear upward trajectory in my observations. At the beginning of the residency, there were several students that demonstrated either a lack of confidence or shyness. I noticed that not only in the solos, but even during the Brain Dance and in the circle warm-up – Adam, for example, was frequently on the outskirts of the circle during our Follow the Leader game as well as the
Brain Dance. During week two, Adam participated a little bit more than in week one, but he stepped back during the gallops. I wondered if he lacked confidence in doing the gallops, which are a more complex movement than marching or using tiptoe feet.
However, as the residency progressed, Adam stayed in the circle, at the very least moving in the same pathway as the class if not actually completing the movements. He often had
! 270 his hands in his pockets as he walked around, but by weeks eight and nine, he was fully participating in the locomotor exercise, even reaching his arms up high.
Figure 12. Expression of Pride/Self-Confidence
Jeremy was another student that showed a huge increase in confidence. At the beginning, he was hesitant to try things, but usually ended up at least partially doing what the rest of the class was doing. During week four, Jeremy completed his solo and came over to sit down next to me. As he was walking forward, he said, “I did it! I turned around!” I asked him if he was proud of his solo, and he said he was – he repeated that he had turned around. From that week on, he frequently made declarations like, “I did it!” or
“I’m doing it!” I could tell how proud he was, especially since he was so hesitant at the beginning.
! 271 There was another student in Class 2 – Jacob – who had a disability that greatly limited his mobility. He frequently had a teacher with him during class to help him participate. He didn’t have a lot of language, but he smiled a lot and seemed happy to be in dance class. Throughout the ten weeks, his confidence seemed to skyrocket – he started doing parts of locomotor on his own, and every time he was by himself, he had a huge smile on his face. I was with him during the last week, and he was having some trouble with his name tag. I helped him put his name tag back on, and he pointed at it and clearly said, “Jacob!” with a huge smile on his face. I smiled too and said, “You’re
Jacob!” He went over to another student and pointed at their name tag and tried to say their name too – I could tell that even if he couldn’t vocalize the name, he clearly knew that student’s name, and he was so proud of himself.
Based on my observations, there was a definite increase in self-confidence throughout the program. That trend was corroborated by my interviews with the teaching artists and classroom teachers as well. Lorin, the Class 1 teacher, said, “I felt like several kids developed a lot more self-confidence...I definitely could see the confidence level in several of the kids go up.” Kristen noted that in solos, “Even a couple that are very shy were doing the ta-das at the end.” The teaching artists noticed a similar trend for locomotor exercises – Beth stated that “the ones that maybe just kinda walked around in the circle in locomotor definitely started actually doing things,” which indicates an increase in confidence. They even specifically named Adam, Jacob, and Jeremy as students who really improved. Therefore, there was a clear correlation between the program and self-confidence, especially for students with disabilities.
! 272 Emotion understanding. In addition to expressing and identifying emotions within oneself, an important component of socio-emotional development is emotion understanding, or being able to identify emotions in others. Within Dance to Learn, I identified two indicators of emotion understanding: identifying others’ emotions and responding appropriately to others’ emotions. Like observations of identifying emotions in oneself, emotion understanding was slightly more difficult to observe because it relies on overt actions from the students. Therefore, it is likely that there was more understanding of emotion than I realized.
Identifying others’ emotions. At first, the most obvious way to see the students identifying others’ emotions was as a response to a demonstration from the teaching artists. In Class 3, Leslie introduced the idea of emotions on the first day. She talked about how we can express emotions like dancers – using our bodies and not our voices.
She then demonstrated different emotions like “angry” and “sad” and asked the students to see if they could tell how she felt even though she was not using her voice. As a class, the students were able to identify when she was mad and sad, and then they were able to demonstrate those emotions themselves. That activity showed me that when prompted, the students came in with the ability to identify emotions in others.
I also noticed more organic interactions between students that showed understanding of emotions. On the first day, a peer model in Class 1, Fiona, noticed another student had come in late. Immediately, she realized that everyone else had name tags, but the student that just walked in did not have one yet. Fiona realized that might make the other student feel sad, so she immediately spoke up and reminded the teaching artists that the new student needed her name tag.
! 273 Brandon, a student with autism in Class 1, also showed a lot of evidence of increased emotion understanding throughout the residency. At the beginning, he tended to be pretty independent, but by week six, he was very interested in being a helper. He came in for our sixth class pushing a student in a wheelchair, which was a new partnership. When he lined up for Follow the Leader, he was several students ahead of the student in the wheelchair, and he followed along for the first few movements. At one point, though, he stopped, left his place in line, and went to go check on the student in the wheelchair to make sure he was coming too. After Brandon checked to make sure, he went right back to his original place in line. That shows me that he understood how the student with less mobility might be feeling during the part of class where we’re all using our legs, and he wanted to check and make sure everything was alright before continuing in the circle himself.
During week ten, Class 3 had a new partnership as well. Daniel and Mindy, whom
I had not previously seen interact, stuck together for almost the whole class. At one point during Follow the Leader, Daniel let go of Mindy’s hand and ran away (which was pretty characteristic of Daniel during locomotor exercises). Mindy started to run after him, and when he realized she was following him, they both stopped. Mindy held out her hand and had a sad look on her face, like she was offended or hurt that Daniel ran away from her.
Daniel saw that and immediately went back to take her hand again. I was impressed with
Daniel for his response and empathy – that was a different response than I think he would have given at the beginning of the residency.
Though I noticed a general increase in emotion understanding, it is important to mention that I also saw moments where there was a lack of understanding of emotion.
! 274 However, it seemed as if those instances were socially motivated and certainly not malicious. For example, during week five, Charlie went over to Daniel and tried to give him a hug. Daniel was clearly uncomfortable, but was only expressing himself nonverbally. Charlie certainly did not hug Daniel with the intent to upset him, but didn’t quite realize that he should step away. Robin came to Daniel’s rescue, saying, “Get away from him! It’s not okay to hug Daniel!” As soon as she said that, Charlie stepped away, realizing his mistake. Charlie did not attempt to hug Daniel again for the rest of the program, so he gained an understanding of others’ emotions through the feedback that
Robin gave him.
Despite the difficulty of accurately observing emotion understanding, it appears that throughout the program, there was an increase in the ability to identify others’ emotions. Though there were a few cases in which students did not correctly identify emotions of others, I never saw malicious intent – there was a desire for social interaction, and those instances became learning experiences for the students.
Responding appropriately. The ability to respond appropriately to others’ emotional responses is another part of emotion understanding, and also demonstrates empathy. Though I saw some evidence in responding appropriately to others, particularly from Brandon, I also noticed that the children tended to struggle with appropriately responding mostly due to an intense desire to help one another. For example, in the third class, Bonnie, a peer model, actively sought out opportunities to help others, even if they did not necessarily want or need that help. Robin frequently acted like she was unable to do things when she was perfectly capable – it seemed like she needed some positive reinforcement from the teachers. During one of these instances, Bonnie rushed over to
! 275 help and grabbed Robin’s hand to touch it to her toes, saying “Just touch your toes!”
Robin was able to do it and did not want Bonnie’s help, but Bonnie intervened anyway.
Fiona was another peer model who took helping very seriously, even coming over to me during locomotor and insisting that she would help me (at the expense of doing it by herself). In those instances, I did not get the impression that there was a sheer lack of understanding of emotion, but rather that the desire to be helpful led the students to interpret situations in a way that would allow them to help.
There were a few instances, however, where I noticed students respond appropriately to others by withholding a hands-on helping response. Brandon, for example, also frequently wanted to help, but he realized when he didn’t need to help someone else and went back to participating with the class. For example, when he went over to check on the student in the wheelchair during locomotor, he realized that the student did not need his help, and he went right back to his spot in line. That shows me that he recognized what was needed (or not) in the situation, and he responded appropriately to it.
In general, when looking at my observations from across the residency, I did not really notice a robust trend of improvement regarding appropriate responses. Though there was perhaps less growth here than in other areas of socio-emotional development, all of the challenges had to do with students whose intentions were pure. Despite the lack of robust growth, it says something about empathy that at least the students wanted to help their friends, so in that sense, I consider the observations to be positive.
Emotion regulation. The ability to regulate one’s own emotions is an important part of socio-emotional development, and one that is of particular importance in
! 276 preschool. Within my observations, I found a lot of overlap between emotion regulation and the executive function construct of inhibition. Due to the similarities, this discussion will primarily focus on emotional responses as opposed to physical responses like running, talking, or turn-taking. However, there are certainly themes that cross over into the realm of executive function as well.
Controlling response to strong emotion. The first sub-theme of emotion regulation emerged as an ability to control responses to strong emotions. One of the biggest trends I noticed was the relationship between excitement and lack of regulation; throughout the residency, I made over twenty observations that were along the lines of
“he/she got excited and ran/screamed/jumped etc.” Most of the challenges with emotion regulation had to do with how excited the children got, so though it was harder to regulate responses to that intense emotion, there was still strong positive affect. This is also a construct that is much easier to observe when it doesn’t happen – it is easier to point out children who are not regulating rather than those who are. There were two students in particular that frequently had trouble regulating their emotions, so the vast majority of my observations were about them. However, both of them showed a lot of improvement throughout the residency as well, which is promising.
Drew was a brand new student during Week 2 of the program, and he had joined Lorin’s class the same day that we saw him for the first time. It was not only his first day at the center, but also his first experience in any preschool setting, and he was understandably incredibly overwhelmed. During the first class, Drew was unable to regulate himself at all – he began screaming and refused to participate, so Lorin had to remove him from the room. By his second class, he was able to stay in the room the whole time, but he did not participate. He stayed in Lorin’s lap for the whole class and did not make an effort to move with the rest of the students. Eventually he started moving around in the periphery or running laps around the room as we were dancing. Slowly but surely, his emotional control and regulation
! 277 were improving enough that he was not only engaging in class, but also enjoying it! His experience was the most dramatic growth in emotional regulation that I saw in any of the children.
Despite some hard days, Bryce showed gains in emotional regulation. At the beginning of the program he tended to draw my attention from other children because of his big personality. Between weeks one and three, he curled up in the middle of the room, refusing to move out of the way for students’ solos, and yelled “I hate you!” when a classroom teacher came to move him. He also yelled “Shut up!” at Leslie at the beginning of a class and told me “I don’t like him” about another student before going over and pushing that student. With Bryce, there were some days that were a lot harder than others, but even with those behaviors, they tamed a bit in the last few weeks. Even if he would get upset, he would wander in the periphery of the room rather than collapse in the middle of everything to disrupt the rest of the students. His actions also made it easy to identify when he was controlling his emotions, and I do have several notes about how he patiently waited for his turn or calmed himself down after getting upset. To me, all of those changes in behavior – calming himself down, staying to the side, not yelling at the teachers – show an improvement in emotion regulation.
Other students also showed improvement in emotion regulation throughout the residency. I noticed more patience in a lot of the kids – Nick, for example, frequently wanted to be first in line for solos and for locomotor. He was a student in Class 2 who had an autism diagnosis, but he was largely independent and verbal. There were several occasions where he went to try to be first in line for locomotor after another student was first – occasionally, there was some drama about who was going to be first in line.
Whenever Nick noticed the drama happening, he calmly took his place somewhere in the
! 278 middle of the line rather than react strongly to someone for not letting him be first.
Within locomotor itself, there were several pile-ups, especially in the first few weeks.
However, even though some students ran into each other, no one ever became upset, and everyone just kept going after the line spaced out enough for them to move. Therefore, in general, I definitely noticed an increase in the ability to control responses to strong emotions.
My observations were paralleled by the classroom teachers and teaching artists as well. When I asked Lorin about her favorite moments from the program, she told me,
I keep going back to Drew, but it’s just because it was such a dramatic entry into
Dance to Learn for him. And just to see him going from where he couldn’t even
be in the room to then kind of like, he would kind of look, and then run away.
And he would run laps. And then where he was kind of in the middle of the circle
and kind of watching kids. And then where he was kind of parallel to kids and
kind of doing some of the same motions. So to kind of watch him progress, it was
kind of nice to see that that’s possible.
I was particularly happy with Lorin’s response because I hadn’t specifically asked her about regulation – she brought that up on her own. One of her goals for students was increased regulation, so I was glad to see the program was able to meet that goal for her.
The teaching artists mentioned that Drew was less vocal the more times he attended class, too, so his growth was a highlight for everyone. Furthermore, the teaching artists noted that though Bryce’s regulation was largely week to week, by the end, he was “able to remove himself...as opposed to flopping in the middle of the floor.” Therefore, based on
! 279 my observations and the interviews, there was a strong improvement in emotion regulation throughout the ten weeks of the program.
Calming self. The second construct under emotion regulation that was slightly different than controlling responses to strong emotion was calming oneself down after experiencing strong emotion. Especially with solos at the beginning of the residency, some students seemed to have a hard time calming down after being asked to do a solo.
Corey, for example, needed the whole class to come back over to that side of the room so he didn’t have to walk by himself to line up. Another challenge I noticed at the beginning was having to stand still and attend to directions after doing locomotor movement – the students seemed to have a harder time of paying attention after being excited by galloping.
As the weeks progressed, I did notice an increased ability in students to calm themselves down. I noticed several occasions when students (Bryce, among others) were able to slow themselves down in locomotor if they were about to bump into someone else. Additionally, students who were dealing with minor upsets or discomfort were able to join in more quickly rather than let the upset derail them for the rest of class.
Mindy was a student that flew under the radar for much of the dance program. She was very small and very quiet and was usually following right along for everything without complaint. During Week 8, Beth noticed that Mindy was not participating – she was just slumped over instead of moving around in Follow the Leader. Beth approached her and asked, “Do you want to join us?” Mindy clearly said, “No,” which surprised Beth – Mindy didn’t talk much, and Beth expected a nonverbal response like a shake of the head. Recovering quickly, Beth told Mindy, “Well, if you want to join us, come find me and I’ll dance with you.” Mindy didn’t respond, so Beth continued on in locomotor. About three minutes later, Mindy stood up, walked across the room, and joined in with Beth. She was able to recognize her frustration, control it, and calm herself down enough to join in without any other teacher intervention.
! 280
Despite difficult weeks and variation in regulation from week to week, I did notice a general trend in increased emotion regulation, both in the ability to respond to strong emotions, as well as the ability to calm down after experiencing strong emotions or exciting activity. My observations were corroborated by the teaching artists and classroom teachers as well. Even the students that struggled more with regulation were able to show evidence of improvement throughout Dance to Learn, which signifies a strong correlation between the program and socio-emotional skills.
Social relationships. One of the most important aspects of socio-emotional development has to do with relationships with other people. Because of the setting, I was able to observe many different facets of social relationships throughout the residency.
The majority of my socio-emotional observations fell into this category; seven different sub-themes emerged related to social relationships.
Greetings and goodbyes. Especially for children with autism, greetings can be particularly difficult. In Dance to Learn, there are structured greetings and goodbyes each day – the children are instructed to wave (or wiggle some body part) toward each teacher and accompanist in turn and say hello or goodbye. Throughout the residency, I noticed an increase in students greeting or saying goodbye to both teachers and peers. This increase was particularly apparent for students with autism. Figure 13 shows my observations of greetings and goodbyes throughout the residency.
! 281
Figure 13. Greetings/Goodbyes
Because I did not want to bias results against nonverbal students, I considered a greeting or goodbye to be either verbal – “Hi Miss Elle!” – or nonverbal, such as waving.
In both verbal and nonverbal greetings, I saw a drastic increase throughout the program, especially for students with autism. For example, though he was quiet much of the time,
Adam came up to me after class week three and clearly said, “Thank you Miss Elle!” I also had an exciting interaction with Heidi during the last week – I said, “Bye Heidi!”
She did not look at me, but I distinctly heard her respond, “Bye!” after I said her name. A student in the first class, Natalie, also has autism, and she began greeting not only the teachers in the class, but also her own peers. There were several times that I saw her approach a peer and clearly say, “Hi Fiona!” (or whomever she was talking to) before
! 282 walking away. Therefore, especially for students with autism, there was a clear increase in greetings and goodbyes, which is an important component of social relationships.
Imitation. Much of dance class involves imitation – the teaching artists lead something by demonstrating and the students imitate their movements and follow along.
Once again, for children with autism, imitation can be very difficult. To successfully imitate or mirror someone, there needs to be a social connection; the child has to see and respond, synchronizing movements with the leader. Because so much of dance class involves imitation, I only wrote down observations that stood out to me for a significant reason – usually when the students with autism were successfully imitating or showed some kind of improvement in imitation skills. Figure 14 shows a week by week breakdown of my observations of imitation.
Throughout the residency, I saw increased imitation in students following teachers or adults. Adam, for example, often started out on the periphery of the room, but by week seven, he was right in front of Beth as he mirrored her. I also noticed improvement in Jeremy’s imitation ability. His imitation skill became almost a reflex, in fact. During week eight, I went over to Jeremy to tell him something. I bent down to get on his level so I could talk to him, and as soon as I bent down, he immediately bent down like I did. That pattern happened a few times toward the end of the residency, and I could tell that he was really trying to imitate me and synchronize his movement with mine.
Heidi and Natalie also showed huge improvements in imitation. Heidi was much better able to imitate in locomotor especially, and Natalie was really hooked into imitation with
Beth on several occasions.
! 283
Figure 14. Imitation
Additionally, starting week four, I also noticed that the students began to imitate each other. That was significant because in a dance class, it is expected to imitate the teacher; it shows more evidence of peer relationships and social connection when the students are mirroring each other. For example, Adam frequently watched Brandon in warm-up and would mirror him – Adam was more likely to participate if he could imitate
Brandon rather than a teacher. At another point, Natalie saw Fiona speed up her movements, and then sped up her own movements as a result. During week ten, a student in Class 2 walked like a t-rex, and Nick and Bryce both copied him. Even within solos, the students were watching each other; if one student chose to do a solo a certain way, it was likely that the next several students would make the same choice. There were also
! 284 several instances of emotional contagion – if one student started to laugh, for example, often many other students would break out into laughter as well. Clearly, the students were paying closer attention to each other as the residency progressed, and that demonstrates an obvious growth in social relationships.
Figure 15. Eye Contact in Students with Disabilities
One correlation I noticed had to do with imitation and eye contact. For Natalie, especially, if she held eye contact, she was much more likely to imitate movements. Like imitation itself, eye contact can be difficult for students with autism, yet I saw clear improvements in eye contact in students with disabilities throughout the residency. Figure
15 demonstrates my observations of eye contact (usually when students made eye contact with me, but I also noted when a teaching artist told me she made eye contact with a
! 285 student). Thus, for both imitation and eye contact, there were clear improvements throughout the residency, especially for students with autism.
Body awareness. I grouped body awareness within social relationships because it involved knowing where one’s own body is in space in relation to others to be able to avoid bumping or crashing, which is common in preschool. Body awareness is challenging because it requires an awareness of self as well as an awareness of the space, and navigating many moving bodies in a space adds yet another element to be aware of.
In my field notes, I documented moments that stood out to me when students did not use body awareness, such as getting too close to one another or bumping into each other, but also moments where I noticed clear evidence of body awareness. That was a bit harder to observe, because once again, it requires overt action, but when a student moved away from another student or vocalized something about their personal space, I considered that to be an operationalization of body awareness.
Because having 16 preschoolers safely moving in a room is an important part of a dance class, the teaching artists explicitly teach about personal space on the first day, whether it be directing students to find their “perfect dancing spot” that is not too close to anyone or anything in the room, or with our “bubble exercise” to visualize our own personal bubbles. Class 3 participated in the bubble exercise – they blew up their imaginary bubbles, reaching in a circle around themselves from top to bottom and front to back using their fingers, and they were instructed that if they bumped into someone else, their own bubble popped.
In the beginning of the residency, I noticed a lot more accidental bumping into one another or standing too close to one another. For example, during week two, the
! 286 teaching artists did an exercise to ultimately get the students to do jumping jacks. Since that involves reaching out wide and jumping, it is important to have space to perform the activity safely. In Class 1, I noticed that without realizing it, Natalie stood directly in front of Corey so that he couldn’t see. She did not maliciously block him, but rather was unaware that he was standing there. There was also a trend that in the first few weeks, the students needed help finding perfect dancing spots. The teachers often had to say a student’s name and direct him/her to an open space by pointing, or sometimes would physically help a student move to a new spot. Leslie even stood next to one of the more active students in Class 3 throughout an exercise to help him maintain his space.
I also noticed a lot more bumping in locomotor at the beginning. If a student slowed down for some reason, either because they were talking to a classroom teacher or had a shoe malfunction (of which there were several throughout each residency), the students were likely to bump into one another and cause a pile-up rather than going around or slowing themselves to avoid bumping. Similarly, during the story portion of class, they often flocked toward the leading teacher instead of finding their own space.
During week four, Class 2 was directed to move like buffalos on their hands and feet, and everyone started moving into the middle of the room toward each other, causing a buffalo pile-up. The teaching artists had to have everyone freeze, stand, and move into their own space before starting the activity again. It took several reminders to “move your buffalo away from the other buffalos” for students to gain that awareness. These instances were common during the first few weeks of each class.
By week four, I began noting instances of students clearly demonstrating body awareness. There was less bumping and crashing, and more students moving
! 287 purposefully away from each other to actively find personal space on their own. Some students were even able to vocalize their needs – Sadie, a peer model in Class 2, declared,
“I have no room here!” when someone got too close to her. With Leslie’s help, she was able to politely ask her friends to please scoot over. Charlie frequently followed Grant around in Class 3, and in later weeks, Grant was able to help direct Charlie to a new spot.
Even Brandon, who was constantly nearby Adam, was able to say, “I need space!” when
Adam wanted to be close to him. At one point, Charlie even vocalized, “You popped my bubble!” which demonstrated not only body awareness, but an application of the bubble exercise from day one.
Though I did note instances of students being too close to each other throughout the residency, toward the end, those interactions were often not because of a lack of body awareness. Oftentimes, the bumping was purposeful – Bryce sometimes had trouble regulating his emotions and ended up shoving another student, but the shoving was
(unfortunately) purposeful and not because of a lack of body awareness. Other instances of students getting too close to one another – like Charlie with Grant and Adam with
Brandon – also seemed to be due to a desire for social connection and not necessarily because they didn’t realize they were too close. Therefore, overall, I did see increased body awareness throughout the residency.
My observations about personal space were confirmed by the classroom teachers and teaching artists as well. Danielle noted in our post-interview, “I don’t think I see as much crashing...they’re more aware of where they are in space.” Kristen noted that
“sometimes children with disabilities don’t get the space...when you guys needed the movement and the space for them to be able to move around, that supported...our talk [in
! 288 class about personal space].” Therefore, particularly for students with disabilities, the teachers noted increased body awareness. The teaching artists also noticed “less bumping into each other” and increased “spatial awareness...noticing that maybe he doesn’t want me to sit right next to him.” One of the goals of the classroom teachers was for the students to gain body awareness, so based on all of my data sources, I felt as though that goal was met by the program. The increased body awareness in relation to others also demonstrated to me an improvement in social relationships.
Cooperation. I consider cooperation to be an important part of social relationships because it involves working effectively with others. Especially in Dance to Learn, it also requires body awareness because most cooperative actions are movement based. Though the Brain Dance, story, and solos all encourage independence, the full class balloon exercise and even locomotor movement require working together and cooperating to be successful. Thus, most of my observations about cooperation were within those two parts of class.
The full class balloon exercise involves taking hands and making a circle with the whole class – everyone should be included in the circle and there should be no gaps, so everyone is holding two hands. We gently move in toward the center to make the circle smaller, and then “blow up our balloon” and move backward to make the circle bigger. In the balloon activity, I considered successful cooperation to be synchronous, gentle movement without tugging on friends or moving too quickly. During locomotor, I considered successful cooperation to be when students stayed in the circle without passing anyone and kept the circle big enough that everyone had room to move.
! 289 At the beginning of each residency, it seemed to be a little bit harder for students to effectively cooperate with one another. I noticed that trend both because of specific behaviors as well as the amount of time it took for everyone to work together to make a circle. For the first few weeks, Leslie and Beth had to do a lot more prompting to make a circle, and it took longer to get everyone to their spots. There were also some students, like Adam, who did not want to hold hands in the circle. Those students stayed outside of the circle at first. After a couple of weeks, Adam joined the circle but would only hold
Brandon’s hand, but not the person on his other side, signifying more tolerance for the exercise but still some hesitation to fully cooperate.
Bryce was also one who struggled to cooperate, but that was also connected with his regulation skills. He usually ended up in the circle next to me, and he often ran backward and pulled on my arm as we were changing the size of the circle. That sometimes even resulted in him falling down. After direct prompting, he usually was able to be gentler, but he had a hard time with cooperation at first.
The locomotor movement shared a similar trend – especially at the beginning for
Classes 1 and 2, the students had a harder time staying in their places in the circle while traveling around, and the circle was much more likely to collapse rather than remain big and circular. Galloping was a particularly challenging movement to do while maintaining the circle, so for the first few weeks, Leslie and Beth had to stop and re-form the circle after galloping one way before galloping to the other side.
By the end of the residency, nearly everyone was actively participating in the balloon exercise. The transitions were faster, so they worked together more efficiently to find the initial circle, and even Adam was holding hands with two different people. Bryce
! 290 was also better able to be gentle from the outset rather than attempting to pull me down with him. On the last day, Class 1 actually came into the room and started doing the balloon exercise on their own without any prompting or teacher help. The teaching artists and I just stood and watched them make the circle bigger and smaller a couple of times before they officially began class, shocked that we hadn’t even said our hellos yet and they were already working together effortlessly. Lorin commented on that in our post interview as well, saying “even in our last session, some of our kids were already forming...the balloon.” That was one of the biggest indicators of increased cooperation that I saw.
I also noticed better cooperation within the locomotor activities as the residency progressed. Like the trend in body awareness, I saw less bumping into one another in locomotor, but I also saw students slowing down for one another instead of just going around people. Bryce really improved in his ability to cooperate and stay in his place during Follow the Leader, even when we were galloping. Based on my observations as well as the comments from the classroom teachers, there was an increase in cooperation for everyone throughout Dance to Learn.
Helping. One of the values of this particular center seemed to be peer support.
Several of the classes used the buddy system in the hallway, and one of the goals for the classroom teachers was even for the students to bond. I noticed a high desire to help friends within the Dance to Learn classes as well. I consider helping to be even a step further in social relationships than cooperation, because it not only involves the willingness to work together, but also the observation that someone else is trying and might need a little extra assistance.
! 291 In general, I did notice an increase in helping behaviors throughout the residency.
Many times, that took the form of a peer model helping a student with a disability by guiding them toward the group or holding hands during Follow the Leader. For example,
I saw Molly, a peer model in Class 3, help Heidi with her name tag in the second week.
Grant also helped Charlie not only to do the correct movements (I heard him say, “Do it this way!” while demonstrating to Charlie what to do), but also to find personal space when they were too close together. Bonnie tried to help Robin several times as well, even if Robin wasn’t necessarily open to being helped by Bonnie. However, I also noticed that students with disabilities demonstrated more helping behaviors as the residency progressed. Brandon, for example, became quite the helper throughout the residency. He often helped other students with disabilities, but was also aware of when his hands-on help was not necessary. I thought it was interesting that helping behaviors increased for both the peer models and the students with disabilities.
Brandon and Adam seemed to be good friends. They often came into class together, holding hands, and Adam was very attuned to Brandon throughout each dance class. Even if Adam would not mirror a teaching artist, he was likely to look at Brandon and copy his movements instead. During Week 6, Beth was leading us through the tickling sequence: “Tickle your head! Tickle your shoulders! Tickle your knees!” Brandon and Adam were sitting right next to each other, and Brandon was following along with Beth. Adam was watching but not always participating; he stopped partway through the exercise. When we got to elbows, I asked Adam, “Where are your elbows?” Brandon heard me and immediately turned to Adam and said, “Adam, where are your elbows?” Brandon then started tickling Adam’s shoulder, and then his elbows, which prompted Adam to do the same. Beth moved on to belly next, and Brandon started tickling his own belly before looking over at Adam and gently tickling Adam’s belly too. As soon as Adam started participating, Brandon stopped helping and let Adam do the movements on his own. It was interesting to see how he took responsibility for Adam’s participation, too.
! 292 The classroom teachers also noticed the increased helping behaviors, and Lorin even mentioned that those had carried over to the classroom. She said,
I have noticed other kids also trying to, like, engage Natalie, or, you know, trying
to- Brandon was trying to engage Drew today. And it was like the cutest thing! He
was just running after him like, “You wanna play? Drew? Drew?” Like, just, like,
going after him, so it’s, it’s been really interesting to see some of those behaviors.
Thus, based on my observations and the classroom teachers’ comments, there did appear to be improvement in helping that carried over to the classroom.
However, the teaching artists and I also noticed another trend in helping that I had not seen before. While we were all impressed that the kids were so inclined to help one another, it became a phenomenon where the helping behaviors came at the expense of full participation. The teaching artists want to see everyone be able to do the movements independently, and they understand that in some cases, helping can be just that – helpful.
However, as Beth said, “Some days I think [the peer helping] was a really positive thing in terms of us trying to accomplish a movement class, and some days I feel like it became something we had to sort of navigate.” The students were so invested in helping one another that they were more focused on their peers than on their own engagement in the class.
Fiona in Class 1 was a student who constantly wanted to help others. She often took the hands of students that were participating less enthusiastically than she thought they should be – peer models and students with disabilities alike. At one point, she even came over to me during locomotor and took my hand, telling me, “I’ll help you!” Though
I appreciated the gesture, I did not need that help myself, and I felt bad that I was
! 293 distracting her from participating to her full ability. Rachel demonstrated a similar pattern with Natalie one week as well. Rachel and Natalie had been buddies coming in, and I wondered if Rachel had sort of taken responsibility for Natalie for the day. Natalie could certainly be independent, but she tended to wander as well. For most of that class, Rachel was running around after Natalie rather than following along herself.
The ineffective helping behaviors were most obvious during locomotor movements – students were frequently holding hands with one another, and Leslie and
Beth had to tell them, “We’re not holding hands right now!” to try to encourage everyone to be independent. However, the desire to help is not a negative trait; as far as social relationships go, helping is prosocial behavior. The teaching artists mentioned that they
“didn’t want to squash that,” but were not always sure how to approach situations where students wanted to be overly helpful at the expense of their own movement.
Ultimately, I saw an increase in both true helping and ineffective helping throughout the residency in each classroom. From a social relationships perspective, both, at the very least, indicate a desire for peer relationships and signify some kind of social bond. Since Lorin mentioned that she hoped for Dance to Learn to be a bonding experience, I would argue that my observations indicate improvement in both actual helping as well as social relationships.
Interactions with adults. The majority of my observations about student social relationships fell into the category of interactions with adults, mostly because I was more aware of and tended to record significant moments in which students interacted with me.
I consider student-teacher interactions to be an important part of social relationships because they involve interpersonal interaction, but there is an inherent power difference
! 294 between children and adults in a classroom environment. Though I tried to be a “student” in the class, the students could tell that I was not one of them – I was clearly an adult in the room even if I was not actively teaching the class. I tried to keep that power dynamic in mind as I was observing and participating. Because of the power difference, there were often moments where students looked to me or the teaching artists for approval or comfort, and it took some time to build trust with the students so that they did feel comfortable interacting with us. I was able to further group my observations into three major trends: dancing with (as opposed to next to or nearby), conversations and sharing, and affection. Figure 16 summarizes the major trends I noticed throughout the residency with regard to student-adult interactions.
Figure 16. Positive Adult Interactions
! 295 At the beginning of the residency, I noticed a lot more hesitance from the students in their willingness to interact specifically with the teaching artists and me. We were new to many of them, and we had to develop relationships with them until they became more comfortable and trusting of us. There were two themes I considered to indicate less comfort than the positive themes denoted in Figure 16: hesitance in interactions and requesting help. While both of those involve kinds of social interactions with teachers, they maintain the power difference and thus the separation between the adult and the child. For example, I have discussed that Adam did not want to hold hands with a teacher for locomotor at the beginning of the residency. Even though the teaching artists and I each approached him on different occasions, he politely refused to come with us, showing some hesitance. By week three, that had changed, as he hugged Beth enthusiastically. Daniel also provided another example of hesitance – at one point, he was lying on the ground, so I approached him to see if he would come dance with me. He firmly told me “No.” During week ten, however, he was holding my hand for the majority of the locomotor part of class, which shows that he did become more comfortable over time.
There were also several interactions at the beginning of the residency that were solely based on needing help from an adult rather than motivated by social relationships.
If a student accidentally pulled off his/her name tag, for example, he/she would come over to one of us for help to put it back on. Jeremy also offered me his untied shoe during the first class in hopes that I would help him tie it. Because those kinds of interactions reinforced the separation between the students and the adults, I did not consider them to be a positive indicator of growth in social relationships. However, from week four to the
! 296 end of the residency, I did not record any observations of hesitance from students. All of the student-adult interactions showed increased trust and comfort, including the ones that requested help.
It was our last class, and Jacob, who was usually with Beth, was standing by himself. I approached him to see if he would come dance with me, and as I got closer, I realized that he had unclipped his name tag from the front of his shirt. He handed it to me, so I asked him if he wanted me to help him put it back on, maybe on his back so it wouldn’t bother him. He seemed to agree, so I tried to clip it onto the back of his shirt, but he turned around before I could attach it. I tried handing it to him again, but he refused to take it. Unsure of what else to do, I asked if he would let me wear it. He said, “Yes!” and I clipped it onto my jacket and wore it for the next part of class. Later, Jacob walked over to me and tried to take his name tag off of my jacket. It was clipped onto my pocket, so he could reach it pretty easily, but he had a hard time pulling it off, so I unclipped it for him. I asked him if he wanted me to help him put it on, and he said, “Yes!” I clipped it onto his shirt, and then he pointed at it, looked at me, and said, “Jacob!” He was so happy and so proud, and I really think my eyes almost started welling up because he was so joyful. I smiled at him and said, “Yeah! Jacob, that’s right! Are you Jacob?” He responded, “Yes!”
As we began to earn the students’ trust, I recorded several different kinds of behavior that I considered to be positive interactions between students and adults. When I noticed students doing something well, I often offered a high five to show my support. I noticed that as the residency continued, when I gave one student a high five, there were often one or two more that approached me for a high five as well. I considered those moments to be a nice bonding experience for me and the students because we reinforced our support for each other.
Another trend that one of the teaching artists noticed and that became apparent in my own notes was the concept of dancing with us as opposed to just next to or nearby.
For example, there was one day where Beth made strong eye contact with Natalie, and
Natalie hooked in and mirrored her for a few moments. Because of that social connection
! 297 beyond just following along, I considered that to be a significant social interaction. I had similar moments with both Jeremy and Natalie – during week ten, Natalie came over and took my hand when we were dancing through the story. She held on to me with some strength, and as we switched to the next animal, she sort of turned me in a circle with her.
Jeremy did something similar a couple of weeks prior as well – he held my hands and turned in a circle so that we were really dancing together instead of just next to each other. Though I did not notice moments like that every week, I did see more of that kind of interaction as the residency went on.
I also noticed that as comfort and trust increased, so did the students’ willingness to initiate conversation or share things with us, verbally or nonverbally. Leslie mentioned that especially within the last couple of weeks of the first session, the students “were sharing their lives with us, for lack of a better way.” They wanted to tell us what they were excited about or what they had done over the weekend. Jeremy frequently shared that he was excited to go outside after dance class. On the last day, Jeremy initiated conversation with me spontaneously; I was excited and impressed that he had gone out of his way to make conversation. One student also approached me during the middle of the residency to ask, “Will you be my friend?” Especially during the final week, there were many instances of the students either making conversation or telling us about parts of their lives or things they were excited about, so that shows me that they became much more comfortable with us and interacted to bond rather than just to seek help.
Finally, I noticed a big increase in affection throughout the residency. I discussed initiating hugs as a form of emotional expression, so that along with other initiation of affection – holding hands, leaning on, sitting in our laps – became more and more
! 298 common throughout Dance to Learn. For example, on the last day of Class 3, I had three friends trying to hold my two hands, not because they needed help moving, but because they wanted a social connection. Daniel, Mindy, and another peer model, Annie were all with me the whole time we were following the leader, and Jeremy tried to squeeze in at some points too. Heidi sat on my lap more frequently near the end of the residency, and even Bryce showed me affection by coming over to lean against me during his calmer moments.
The teaching artists and classroom teachers noticed increased positive student- adult interactions as well. Kristen was particularly appreciative that the teaching artists and I made ourselves available to have those interactions with the children. The increase in student comfort and child-initiated interactions with adults demonstrated an obvious increase in not only a desire for social relationships, but also improved social skills.
Peer interactions. I made a number of notes describing spontaneous interactions between peers that were not facilitated by a teacher, so I categorized those observations as peer interactions. Interacting organically with peers demonstrates social skills perhaps even more so than interaction with teachers, so I found those to be an important facet of social relationships. Certainly, my observations were not exhaustive – I only jotted down interactions that stood out to me for some reason, and I’m sure there was more going on than I was aware of as well. However, in general, I noticed increased positive interactions among peers throughout the residency.
At the beginning of the residency, most of the interactions that I noticed between peers were either facilitated by the teachers, like the balloon exercise or the buddy system as they walked into class, or took place within previously established friendships, like
! 299 Adam and Brandon or Grant and Charlie. However, I saw more dynamic interactions between peers as the residency continued. From one observation in week one to 13 observations in week ten, it was clear that the students became more comfortable with one another and really were able to use the program to facilitate peer bonding.
Additionally, the nature of some of the individual interactions became more nuanced. For example, I overheard an interesting conversation between Sadie and another peer model in Class 2. I think someone tried to give Sadie a hug, and maybe a kiss. I overheard Sadie talking very calmly to her, saying, “Don’t kiss me. You can hug me, but don’t kiss me. I just need you to understand not to kiss me, okay?” I was impressed by her maturity – she wasn’t yelling at the other student, but she explained very clearly that she didn’t want that student to kiss her. I thought that was a particularly positive interaction that showed not only evidence of social relationships, but also emotional expressiveness and regulation.
The other clear trend in peer interactions had to do specifically with peer support.
At the beginning of the residency, I think everyone was focused on getting used to the routine and what was expected of them in the class. However, after week two, I noticed students starting to watch each other and say, “Good job!” after solos. That cheering for each other and support stayed pretty consistent after week two. During week six, one student in Class 1 even started a chant during solos that several students joined in on: “Go
[name] go!” The students repeated this cheer for multiple solos across the floor. The teaching artists also noticed the peer support and mentioned that they were “verbalizing their pleasure of seeing each other dance” more often. The classroom teachers also noticed that the children were “supporting each other. The, the kids were happy and
! 300 supportive,” and that carried over to the classroom as well. Like Brandon trying to engage Drew in the classroom, Lorin also mentioned other students trying to engage
Natalie after the program. Based on the clear increase in positive peer interactions, there is strong evidence that the program further correlates with development in social relationship skills.
Summary. In sum, I recorded and categorized my own observations based on five major themes: emotional expressiveness, identifying feelings about oneself, emotion understanding, emotion regulation, and social relationships. Each of those major themes had two to seven sub-themes of operationalized indicators of socio-emotional development. Though some of the themes (i.e., emotion regulation) showed variations in social skills from week to week, my general conclusions were that socio-emotional development increased in each category from the beginning of the program to the end.
While my observations were not exhaustive, many of the trends were corroborated by the classroom teachers and teaching artists. Therefore, based on the qualitative data, there appears to be a correlation between the program and socio-emotional development.
Holistic Analysis: Answering Subquestions 1a & 1c
The first question this study attempted to answer was how dance influences development in a preschool inclusion setting. Specifically, I want to know: 1a) How does dance influence socio-emotional development, and 1c) How does the process work differently for different students (peer models vs. students with disabilities)? In order to fully understand any impact on socio-emotional development, it is important to analyze data holistically to see which themes are reinforced in both qualitative and quantitative sources. While there were fewer questions and less robust results on the survey for socio-
! 301 emotional development as compared to executive function, the teaching artists and classroom teachers brought up more observations about socio-emotional behaviors as opposed to executive function. Therefore, it is clear that the survey does not quite capture the true impact of the program. As described above, both methods have limitations; comparing the results from all data sources paints a more comprehensive picture of how socio-emotional development changed throughout the residency and how that change compared for students with disabilities and peer models.
Emotional expressiveness. Based on the quantitative data, there was not a significant change in emotional expressiveness after Dance to Learn. For the students with disabilities, expressiveness increased slightly, but for the peer models it decreased.
However, the survey question about emotional expressiveness was specifically about showing affection, which is much more limited than the qualitative observations that I recorded. I was likely to pay closer attention to students with disabilities than to the peer models for the purposes of my research, and my observations did show a bigger increase in emotional expressiveness for children with disabilities – especially autism – than the peer models. However, I did not notice a decrease in emotional expression in the peer models – observations like positive affect and expressing frustration effectively increased for peer models and students with disabilities alike. I also categorized affection as part of social relationships, and Figure 16 shows the increase in expressions of affection from week one to week ten. Those observations included both peer models and students with disabilities – peer models were as likely as students with disabilities to give me a hug, sit in my lap, or hold my hand, so it appears that the trend in emotional expressiveness was more significant than the survey would suggest.
! 302 It is also important to note that based on observations from the first day, especially in Class 3, the students came in with skills in expressing emotions – they demonstrated their skills when the teaching artists had them purposefully make their bodies look like different emotions. The initial skills were most obvious in the third class, partially because the curriculum allowed for that kind of demonstration, but also likely because of maturation. According to the survey data, it appears that students with disabilities in the first session grew more than students with disabilities in the second session, so that could also be explained by maturation. However, accounting for the limitations of the surveys and the narrow focus of the survey question addressing emotional expressiveness, I can conclude that both peer models and students with disabilities showed growth in emotional expressiveness, and the students with autism grew more than the peer models.
Identifying feelings about oneself. The shortened survey used to collect data for this study does not explicitly address the ability to identify feelings about oneself. Despite the lack of concrete quantitative data, trends in my qualitative data suggest that there was an improvement in identifying feelings about oneself throughout the residency, and that was especially apparent for students with autism. Additionally, the survey from 2017-
2018 included a question about taking pride in accomplishments, and the data from that year did show a significant increase in taking pride in oneself for the class in aggregate.
That aligns directly with my qualitative observations as well – I noted an increase in expressions of pride and confidence from week one to week ten, and that was particularly true for students with disabilities. Perhaps part of the reason that there was a less robust increase in socio-emotional development on this year’s survey is because that question
! 303 was missing. Regardless, based on my observations and the trends that emerged about self-confidence in my interviews with both the classroom teachers and the teaching artists, I can confidently say that the program correlated with increases in both emotion expression and identifying feelings about oneself.
Emotion understanding. Two of the survey items addressed emotion understanding: “Describes emotions of others” and “Responds appropriately to others’ emotional responses.” For both the peer models and the students with disabilities, scores for “Describes emotions of others” decreased in the post-survey. After reviewing my qualitative data, I believe that the word “describes” introduces bias, especially for nonverbal students. In my notes, the trend of “identifying others’ emotions” emerged, and the ability for students to identify others’ emotions (as demonstrated through interactions between peers or nonverbal behaviors) certainly increased. However, I did not hear anyone actually describe someone else’s emotion unless Leslie was demonstrating an emotion and explicitly asked them to describe what she was feeling. Therefore, contrary to what the survey data would suggest, there was an increase in emotion understanding even if students were not outwardly describing others’ emotions.
“Responds appropriately” was insignificant for both the peer models and the students with disabilities on the survey, but the means decreased for peer models and increased for students with disabilities. That trend was actually reinforced by my qualitative data – students with autism, like Daniel and Brandon, showed an increased ability to respond appropriately to others, while I noticed more unnecessary helping within the peer models. However, based on the context, I do not count that as being negative or as an inability to understand the emotions of others – the students perhaps
! 304 interpreted situations in a way that would give them the opportunity to help others, which is prosocial behavior at the very least. Thus, the qualitative data provides some more insight on the quantitative trends; though the trends align, I consider the results to indicate gains in socio-emotional development.
Emotion regulation. The survey addressed emotion regulation in terms of the ability to calm down after exciting activity; my observations encompassed calming as well as responding to strong emotion. Though not significant, the quantitative data suggests that students with disabilities increased in emotion regulation abilities while peer models decreased slightly. My observations align with the trends for students with disabilities, but actually show the opposite for peer models. One reason for that could be that the peer models seemed to come in with more advanced regulation abilities in general; most of my observations of emotion regulation were about students with disabilities, which means that I rarely noted occasions where peer models were unable to regulate. That means that as far as regulation goes, the peer models didn’t have as far to grow, so that manifested in very similar scores on the pre- and post-surveys. Even for the peer models that did struggle to regulate, like Corey in his solo, I saw obvious improvement in regulation throughout the residency. Thus, I am inclined to believe my qualitative observations and say that even the peer models showed improvement in regulation.
As for students with disabilities, I noticed more improvement than the surveys suggested as well. Even for students that were constantly excited and exuberant, they were able to contain their excitement somewhat as the program progressed. The classroom teachers and teaching artists expressed the same sentiment – everyone noticed
! 305 a clear upward trajectory in regulation ability for students with disabilities. Therefore, once again, there was more occurring than the surveys were able to capture, and there was a clear improvement in emotion regulation for peer models, but especially for students with disabilities.
Social relationships. The only item addressing social relationships on the survey
(other than showing affection) was about cooperation, which was one of the seven sub- themes I identified within social relationships. Thus, the survey has again proven to be very limited in what it actually measures. The item about cooperation was the only socio- emotional measure that significantly increased for students with disabilities; my observations certainly align with that trend. Additionally, I noticed improvement in each of the six other subcategories of social relationships, especially for students with disabilities. Therefore, it is clear that students with disabilities in particular demonstrated gains in social relationship skills.
For the peer models, the quantitative trends related to social relationships were ultimately nonexistent, which is not what I saw in my qualitative data. Though perhaps the peer models did not show quite as much growth as the students with disabilities, they did show improvements in each of the subcategories. Even the challenges in things like helping behaviors showed that the peer models had pure intentions and were motivated by their desire to help others. Therefore, there were definite trends in improved social relationship skills, particularly for students with disabilities.
Answering subquestions 1a & 1c. Based on all of the above themes, it is clear that Dance to Learn correlates with and supports gains in socio-emotional development.
Though the surveys were limited in the kinds of socio-emotional behaviors they were
! 306 able to measure, qualitative data clearly shows improvements in each theme operationalizing socio-emotional development. For each trend, students with disabilities, particularly autism, demonstrated even more growth than peer models; though they may not have reached the baseline of the peer models, the growth in socio-emotional development was more robust for students with disabilities. Thus, dance has the potential to positively influence socio-emotional development, especially for preschool students with autism.
Executive Functioning: Results and Discussion
Quantitative Analysis
Because of the way I broke down elements of executive functioning on the survey, I was able to garner some more specific information about changes in EF over the course of the program as compared to socio-emotional development. My analysis process was similar to that for socio-emotional development. First, I will discuss the indexed t- test results for the whole class, then for peer models and for students with disabilities.
Next, I will break those results down into their four component parts: inhibition, shifting, working memory, and planning and organizing. Within each discussion, I will compare the 2018-2019 results to results from the 2017-2018 surveys at the same location. Finally,
I will look at overarching trends and compare those to the 2019 whole program evaluation report.
Executive function: Indexed results. Much like the parent surveys for socio- emotional development, there were very few significant results from the parent surveys when it came to executive function. There were no significant results for peer models in the parent surveys, and only one question was significant for students with disabilities. ! 307 Those results are likely due to attrition, and as such, I will primarily focus on the results from the student surveys (as recorded by teachers).
T-test results for the whole group showed significant growth in executive function from pre- to post-test as recorded by teachers (p<.005; ɑ=.05), which suggests a stronger correlation between the program and executive function than socio-emotional development. When breaking down the results into groups of peer models and students with disabilities, there was a much stronger effect for students with disabilities than peer models. The peer models’ data did not show a significant difference between the pre- and post-tests; though the mean increased, it was only marginal. The children with disabilities showed a much larger increase (3.5 points) in EF that was statistically significant
(p<.003; ɑ=.05) (see Figure 17). These results suggest that like socio-emotional development, dance is potentially associated with a positive impact on EF, particularly for students with disabilities.
ANOVA results mirrored those of the t-tests and provided additional information on other factors that may contribute to growth in EF. There were significant main effects for both the difference in pre- and post-test scores (p<.015; ɑ=.05) and for disability
(p<.000; ɑ=.05). That means that as the t-test confirmed, the post-test scores were significantly different than the pretest scores, and the groups (peer models and students with disabilities) were different as well (see Figure 18).
! 308
Figure 17. Executive Functioning Index
! Figure 18. Executive Functioning Index: ANOVA Results
! 309 Additionally, there were a number of interaction effects that were significant for the EF index. In the ANOVA, I was able to control for covariates such as session, class, gender, age, whether or not the student had participated in the program the previous year, and attendance. Of those covariates, all but session, gender, and attendance showed a significant or slightly significant result, which means that there are several factors in addition to disability that contribute to EF development. However, the fact that session did not play a significant role suggests that maturation did not have as great an effect on any improvement in executive function over the course of the program. In other words, it is more likely that growth is due to either the program itself, other interventions, or some combination of the two.
Because of my concerns about potential teacher bias in the surveys, I chose to include classroom as a covariate in addition to just the session. Though the session did not have a significant interaction effect, the classroom did (p<.000; ɑ=.05), which further confirms that the teacher who rated the majority of her students lower on the post-test was different than the other two teachers in the study. Regardless of that discrepancy, there was still a significant increase in scores for students with disabilities, suggesting that the program does positively correlate with growth in EF.
There was a slightly significant interaction effect for age as well (p<.079; ɑ=.1), which makes sense because EF is thought to develop rapidly in preschool years. In other words, there should reasonably be a difference between EF in the three-year-olds and the four- and five-year-olds in the class. Further analysis showed that to be the case: the four and five-year-olds scored significantly higher than the three-year-olds, and the five-year- olds experienced statistically significant growth (p<.059; ɑ=.1).
! 310 There was also a significant interaction for whether or not the students had participated in Dance to Learn in 2017-2018 (p<.012; ɑ=.05): the students who had the program in 2017-2018 scored higher on average than the students who did not have previous experience, which mirrors the trend for socio-emotional development. Part of that could be due to age and maturation – those students are now one year older than they were before, which we know has an impact on EF. This trend could also suggest potentially positive longitudinal effects of the program. However, further analysis also showed that students who did not previously have the program grew significantly
(p<.008; ɑ=.05) while the repeat students did not show statistically significant growth.
That suggests that the program is particularly effective (or at least engages more EF skills) for first-time students. More research is needed to parse out those results.
Finally, it is interesting to note that while there were no significant effects for the t-tests based on the parent surveys, the ANOVA picked up on a significant main effect for the pre- and post-tests (meaning that the post-tests were significantly different than the pre-tests; p<.011; ɑ=.05) and also an interaction for disability (meaning that the scores for peer models and for students with disabilities were significantly different; p<.003; ɑ=.05). Aligning with the teacher data, it appears that according to parent report, students with disabilities grew more in EF than their same-age peers (see Figure 19). By parent report, it actually appears as though EF decreased in peer models over the course of the program, but results from other analyses and data sources show that trend to be an anomaly.
! 311
Figure 19. EF: Parent Survey ANOVA Results
Comparison to 2017-2018 data. Unlike the trend for socio-emotional development, executive function data from 2017-2018 show a less powerful result than data from 2018-2019. For the group in aggregate, the EF index was only slightly significant for both the full questionnaire (p<.076; ɑ=.1) and for the adjusted index that included only the questions that also appeared on the 2018-2019 survey (p<.087; ɑ=.1).
For the peer models, the full questionnaire also suggested only slightly significant results
(p<.077; ɑ=.1), and the adjusted questionnaire was not significant. For students with disabilities, neither of the indexed measures of EF were significant (see Figure 20).
! 312
Figure 20. ’17-’18 Executive Function Index
Much like in 2018-2019, the ANOVA uncovered a slight interaction effect for age
(p<.092; ɑ=.1) as well as a significant main effect or disability (p<.033; ɑ=.05), which means that scores for students with disabilities were significantly different than the scores for the peer models. It is difficult to ascertain why the scores for 2018-2019 grew so much more than the scores from 2017-2018, but it is important to keep in mind that the earlier surveys were longer, so there might have been more teacher fatigue filling out the surveys in 2017-2018 compared to the more recent data. It could also have something to do with a difference in curriculum – perhaps the specific skills emphasized in the 2018-
2019 class were more related to developing executive function than in 2017-2018. A
! 313 curriculum study would be needed to understand the impact of the lessons on developmental growth; that is beyond the scope of this study, however.
Inhibition. When the whole group’s scores for the two questions measuring inhibition were aggregated, there was not a significant difference between the pre- and post-survey scores. The mean actually appeared to decrease slightly from pre- to post- survey, going from 6.63 to 6.50. Analyzing the specific groups and individual questions more closely reveals an interesting pattern, however.
The peer models’ t-tests scores for the inhibition index (combining the scores of the two questions that measured inhibition) were slightly significant (p<.096; ɑ=.1).
However, their indexed scores ultimately decreased from 7.38 to 6.86, which makes it appear that their inhibition skills worsened from the beginning to the end of the program.
When looking at the individual questions, however, the results are not so straightforward.
Both items measuring inhibition showed a significant difference from pre- to post-test; however, the item “Waits his/her turn in games and activities” showed a significant increase (p<.000; ɑ=.05) while the item “Does not talk at inappropriate times” showed a significant decrease (p<.000; ɑ=.05) (see Figure 21).
The mixed results for inhibition do align somewhat with the program, however.
For example, in each class, students must wait their turn to do a solo across the floor at the end; waiting one’s turn is something that is specifically emphasized in the program, so it makes sense that that particular skill increased. However, teachers also aim to develop a friendly and supportive rapport with the students. The fact that the students decreased in the skill of not talking at inappropriate times (i.e., they frequently talked at inappropriate times) may actually suggest a level of comfort with the program and the
! 314
Figure 21. Inhibition: Peer Models
teachers that grew throughout the duration of the residency; students were more comfortable with the teaching artists, and so they were more likely to speak up and try to share their thoughts and ideas toward the end of the program. The peer models tended to be more vocal in general than the students with disabilities, as some of the students with disabilities were nonverbal, so this result can be interpreted in accordance with the program (and perhaps reinforces the socio-emotional indicator regarding interactions with adults).
For students with disabilities, the inhibition index did not show a significant change from pre- to post-survey. Though the post-scores were slightly higher than the pre-test scores, the result did not have statistical significance. However, once again, a
! 315 look at the individual questions provides further information. Much like the trends for the peer models, the scores for the item “Waits his/her turn” significantly increased (p<.007;
ɑ=.05). Again, based on the structure of the program, this result makes sense. The post- test mean for the item “Does not talk at inappropriate times” was slightly lower than the pre-test, although the result was not significant (see Figure 22). As mentioned before, that could partly be due to an increased level of comfort with the teaching artists, which suggests additional growth in socio-emotional development as well. As compared to peer models, it does appear that once again, at least on the first item (“Waits turn”), the students with disabilities grew more than the peer models.
Figure 22. Inhibition: Students with Disabilities
! 316 ANOVA results largely mirror those of the t-tests; while there was no significant main effect for the pre- and post-surveys (meaning that the post-survey results were not significantly different than the pre-survey results), there was a significant main effect for disability, which states that students with disabilities were significantly different from the peer models. A closer look at the means shows that, similar to previous trends, the students with disabilities grew more in their inhibition skills than their peer models (see
Figure 23).
Figure 23. Inhibition Index: ANOVA Results
Comparison to 2017-2018 data. Though the means for both the full inhibition index from 2017-2018 as well as the adjusted index rose slightly, neither of those results were statistically significant for the whole group. However, the item “Waits his/her turn
! 317 in games and activities” was slightly statistically significant for the whole class (p<.07;
ɑ=.1), which is consistent with the results from 2018-2019.
For peer models, there was a slight increase in the indexed means, but it was not a statistically significant increase. None of the individual items measuring inhibition showed a significant increase for the peer models either. For students with disabilities, the full index was not statistically significant, but the adjusted index using only the questions that appeared in the 2018-2019 survey was slightly statistically significant
(p<.068; ɑ=.1). Thus, based on the measures that were used in the 2018-2019 survey, the students with disabilities improved more than the peer models during the 2017-2018 school year. That result holds with the aforementioned trends in both socio-emotional development and EF in general (see Figure 24).
Figure 24. ’17-’18 Inhibition Index
! 318 Shift. Based on teacher reported data, the ability to successfully shift between activities was something that improved across all groups. For the aggregated group, post- survey scores on the indexed measure of shift were significantly higher than the pre-test
(p<.000; ɑ=.05). The same pattern was true for both the peer models (p<.002; ɑ=.05) and the students with disabilities (p<.014; ɑ=.05) (see Figure 25).
Figure 25. Shift Index
When looking at the individual survey items measuring shift, it appears that the program is specifically correlated with improvements in the item “Can shift gears and easily adapt behaviors to a new task.” Students with disabilities as well as their same age peers scored statistically significantly higher on the post-test than on the pre-test
(disability: p<.007; ɑ=.05; peer models: p<.000; ɑ=.05) for that item. These results
! 319 suggest that the dance program, which is in itself a new task different from what usually takes place in the classroom, promotes shifting skills in all preschool students regardless of disability.
However, the second item measuring shift, “Adjusts behavior to different situations,” did not show significant growth for either group. The means increased slightly for both groups, but not enough to say there was a significant change. I hypothesize that has to do with the nuance of the question; when given a specific task
(such as following along in dance class), perhaps students are able to shift their behaviors to complete the task, but other, more generalized behaviors (wandering, talking, etc.) may not necessarily change as much with the setting. More information from other data sources will be helpful to better understand that trend.
Interestingly, the ANOVA did not pick up on a main effect for pre- and post- scores, which does not align with the t-test results. The ANOVA showed a significant interaction for class but not for session, which once again suggests that one teacher’s survey results were different than the other teachers. There was a significant main effect for disability (p<.000; ɑ=.05), which means that the scores for the two groups were different. In this case, it appears that growth was similar for both groups, but the students with disabilities simply scored lower overall (see Figure 26). Especially for children with autism, that makes sense; children with autism are more likely to struggle with changes in routine and shifting behavior, which means that their baseline would reasonably be below those of the peer models.
! 320
Figure 26. Shift ANOVA Results
The ANOVA also revealed significant interactions for both age and gender. Much like the EF index, the four- and five-year-old students scored higher on average than the three-year-olds, and statistically significant growth occurred for both the four-year-olds
(p<.004, ɑ=.05) and the five-year-olds (p<.059; ɑ=.1). These results align with the developmental trajectory of EF. Additionally, shift was the only measure to show a significant interaction for gender. Further analysis shows that while both males and females grew significantly in items related to shift, the female students scored higher than the males on average for both the pre- and the post-test. Part of that statistic could be explained by the fact that with autism, boys are four times more likely than girls to be diagnosed, and one of the core features of autism has to do with rigidity or struggling to
! 321 shift routines and behaviors. Therefore, particularly for shifting, it makes sense that the females would score slightly higher than males. More research is needed to discover the nuances of these interactions.
Comparison to 2017-2018 data. The 2017-2018 data for shift shows the same trends as the data collected in 2018-2019. For both the full survey data as well as the adjusted data that only includes the questions from the 2018-2019 survey, post-test scores as rated by teachers were statistically significantly higher than the pre-test for the aggregate group, peer models, and students with disabilities (see Figure 27). For the aggregate data, that trend became even stronger for the adjusted index (p<.003; ɑ=.05) as compared to the full survey’s index (p<.022; ɑ=.05).
Figure 27. ’17-’18 Shift Index
! 322 Interestingly, when the data is broken down by question, the only individual item that reached significance for shift was “Adjusts behavior to different situations,”, which is the one that did not show significant growth in the 2018-2019 data. That trend was true for the group in aggregate (p<.001; ɑ=.05), the peer models (p<.039; ɑ=.05), and the students with disabilities (p<.012; ɑ=.05). However, for students with disabilities, the third shift item from the 2017-2018 survey that was not included on the 2018-2019 survey was also significant: “Learns from trial and error in mastering a new task”
(p<.028; ɑ=.05). Therefore, it is possible that movement exploration helps students with disabilities more so than their same-age peers in terms of shifting behaviors while learning a task; that specific information was not measured in 2018-2019, so more research is needed to determine the actual outcome.
Working memory. Like shifting, teacher responses show that working memory skills significantly improved across all groups. For the aggregated group, post-survey scores on the indexed measure of shift were significantly higher than the pre-test (p<.000;
ɑ=.05). The same pattern was true for both the peer models (p<.001; ɑ=.05) and the students with disabilities (p<.002; ɑ=.05) (see Figure 28).
For both the peer models and the students with disabilities, both individual items addressing working memory were significant. The first item measuring working memory was “Follows and plays games with two-step directions without reminders.” The mean for peer models increased .65 points on the post-test (p<.003; ɑ=.05). Though scores were lower on average, the students with disabilities experienced the same amount of growth from the pre- to post-survey (p<.004; ɑ=.05). The second item was “Remembers all steps involved in completing tasks,” which again showed a significant increase for
! 323
Figure 28. Working Memory Index
both peer models (p<.002; ɑ=.05) and students with disabilities (p<.020; ɑ=.05). Again, the growth was identical for both groups. The consistency of these results implies that dance can potentially positively influence working memory skills for all students.
The ANOVA results reiterate the trends found in the t-tests. There was a main effect for the pre-post scores, meaning that the post scores were significantly different than the pre-scores, as well as for disability, which means that the two groups’ scores differed from each other. In this case, growth was similar for the two groups, but the peer models’ scores were higher on average than the students with disabilities’ (see Figure
29).
! 324
Figure 29. Working Memory: ANOVA Results
In addition to reiterating the previously mentioned trends, the ANOVA also revealed significant interaction effects for age (p<.000; ɑ=.05) and for whether or not the student had the program in 2017-2018 (p<.003; ɑ=.05). In keeping with previous trends, four- and five-year-olds tended to score higher than three-year-olds for working memory skills. Though all groups experienced statistically significant growth in working memory skills (3: p<.052, ɑ=.1; 4: p<.011, ɑ=.05; 4: p<.004; ɑ=.1), the five-year-olds showed the greatest growth as compared to the other age groups. Since EF develops rapidly in preschool, it makes sense that the older students would generally perform better on working memory tasks.
! 325 The same trend emerged for students who had the program before, which is consistent with previous repeat student interactions. On average, repeat students scored higher than students who had not had the program before; however, students who had not had the program before grew more than repeat students. Both groups showed statistically significant growth in working memory skills, but the first-time students grew about twice as much as the repeat students. I hypothesize that perhaps there is a ceiling effect for working memory. For students who are familiar with the program, they are more likely to remember information from the previous year as well as from the current session. Since the structure of the class remains largely similar from year to year even when individual lesson plans change, students who have had the class before have an advantage when it comes to remembering directions and tasks that are already familiar. Yet, because it is already familiar, they do not necessarily have as much room to grow in working memory skills as the students who are brand new to the structure.
Comparison to 2017-2018 data. Trends from the 2017-2018 t-test data do not align with results from 2018-2019. While all working memory items in 2018-2019 were significant, none were significant in 2017-2018 according to the t-tests. The ANOVAs were able to provide a bit more detail however; based on ANOVA results, there was a significant main effect for the pre- and post-tests (meaning that the post-scores were significantly different than the pre-scores) in both the full questionnaire (p<.035; ɑ=.05) as well as the adjusted questionnaire that matched the 2018-2019 items (p<.027; ɑ=.05).
There was also a significant main effect for disability in both surveys (p<.001; ɑ=.05; p<.000; ɑ=.05), which means that the scores for the two groups were different from each
! 326 other (see Figure 30). Once again, we see similar growth for both groups, but the peer models have a higher average than the students with disabilities.
Figure 30. ’17-’18 Working Memory Index: ANOVA Results
Plan/organize. In terms of planning and organizing, improvement varied across groups. Looking at the class in aggregate showed no difference between the pre- and post-test scores for the plan/organize index; the peer models’ difference score was also insignificant (although the post-test mean was actually slightly lower than the pre-test).
However, the students with disabilities did show a slightly significant increase in planning from pre- to post-survey (p<.07; ɑ=.1). Similar to previous trends, it appears that students with disabilities grew more than their same-age peers in skills related to planning and organizing (see Figure 31).
! 327
Figure 31. Plan/Organize Index
The two items that measured planning and organizing on the survey were 1)
“When telling a story, real or fictional, links events in a way that makes sense” and 2)
“Can do things that require mental effort.” The peer models’ mean score on the first item decreased .03 points on the post-survey, while the students with disabilities scored .36 points higher on average on their post-test; however, neither difference was statistically significant. For the second item, the students with disabilities showed an increase of .18 on the post test, but that score was also not significant. However, while the peer models’ score was slightly significant on the second item (p<.088; ɑ=.1), their score actually decreased by .28, making it appear that planning and organizing skills lessened over the duration of the program. That negative result could be due to a number of factors,
! 328 including the teacher bias previously discussed in the chapter or even the wording of the question. Based on developmental maturation trends over time, it is unlikely that the students actually became worse at doing things that require mental effort, so it does not appear that the result accurately reflected what truly happened. Triangulating these results with the qualitative data will help elaborate on this trend.
Figure 32. Plan/Organize: ANOVA Results
ANOVA results mirror the results from the t-test; there was no significant main effect for the pre- and post-scores, which means that in aggregate, the scores on the pre- and post-surveys did not change. There were also no significant interaction effects. There was a main effect for disability, however, which means that the scores for students with disabilities were different than those of the peer models – this trend was reflected in the t-
! 329 tests as well. Once again, the students with disabilities appeared to grow significantly more than the peer models (see Figure 32).
Comparison to 2017-2018 data. The 2017-2018 data shows a similar result as the
2018-2019 data; based on the t-tests, there are no significant changes in behaviors related to planning and organizing throughout the duration of the program. The differences in means are reversed, however; the peer models slightly increased in planning/organizing behaviors, while the students with disabilities decreased, according to teacher report.
However, because none of those results are significant, it could just be due to chance that the results show those patterns. Because of the lack of significance in both the 2017-2018 and the 2018-2019 surveys, I wonder if perhaps the questions themselves do not effectively operationalize planning and organizing behaviors. More analysis of other data sources will be important to uncover trends related to planning and organizing information.
Summary and discussion of quantitative EF trends. Because of the multifaceted nature of EF measurement in this study, I find it prudent to provide a brief summary of the trends found specifically for the 2018-2019 program (see Table 3). In
Table 3, the check-marked boxes indicate a significant or slightly significant result. If the result was an increase in mean score from pre- to post-survey, that check is green; if the result was a significant decrease in mean score from pre- to post-survey, the check is red.
Nonsignificant results are denoted with an X.
! 330
Table 3. T-Test Executive Function Data Summary
Based on the summary of findings in Table 3, according to the teachers, there was significant improvement for at least one group in each area of EF. The group in aggregate improved in seven out of thirteen categories of measurement. Those trends seemed to be more common for students with disabilities; students with disabilities improved in eight out of the 13 areas of measurement, while the peer models improved in six out of the 13 and seemingly decreased in three of them. However, reasons for the appearance of peer models’ regression in some of the categories could be due to other factors and not indicative that the dance program causes harm.
Another reason for the differences could be due to the fact that the center in my study was specifically an inclusion center. It is possible that the teachers had some prior expectations (perhaps even implicit ones) that influenced their perception of students’
! 331 observed behaviors. For example, if the classroom teachers implicitly expected the peer models to excel where the children with disabilities struggle, that may be reflected in some of the downward trends noted in the peer models’ behaviors. If the peer models didn’t do significantly better than the children with disabilities, the teachers may have scored them more harshly, even without consciously doing so. The alternative could be true as well; perhaps there were some expectations that the children with disabilities would struggle more than the peer models, so when they were successful, the teachers rated those behaviors more positively than they would for the peer models. It is impossible to say whether and how much these biases were present in the teacher responses, but it is something to be aware of as a limitation to the survey data collection.
In some of the ANOVA results, there were also significant interactions for variables like age and whether or not the student had participated in the program in the year prior. Further analysis shows that interactions with age align with the literature: older students tended to score higher on items of EF. Since EF develops rapidly in preschool, this interaction makes sense. Additionally, students who had been involved in the program previously tended to score higher as well, which also makes sense. Those students had a sense of familiarity with the program and thus were more easily able to engage in executive functions such as working memory. These results suggest a potential longitudinal effect of the program. However, the students who were experiencing the program for the first time tended to show greater growth than the repeat students, which suggests a possible ceiling effect, or perhaps simply a greater impact for first-time students.
! 332 In the exploration of data from the same center in 2017-2018, there were some similarities in trends, but also several differences. Socio-emotional development appeared to improve much more drastically in 2017-2018 than in the more recent program, while executive functioning as an index did not seem to improve all that much. These results are the opposite of what I found in my own data collection. Earlier in the chapter, I mentioned potential limitations of the surveys, including attrition and potential biases.
Further analysis has shown that there was one teacher who was significantly more stringent on her post-surveys than other teachers, and it is difficult to say how that affected the rest of the data and analysis. Those potential issues could explain some of the differences in results between the two years. Additionally, the lesson plans differed from session to session and year to year; in 2017-2018, multiple classes experienced lessons that were primarily about socio-emotional development, which could have explained the bigger improvement in socio-emotional development for that data set. A curriculum analysis would be necessary to understand the impact of the specific lessons on development, but that is beyond the scope of this research.
It is also important to note that the surveys themselves changed from 2017-2018 to 2018-2019; in order to decrease teacher workload, the more recent surveys were shortened, and thus some items were left out. It is difficult to say how the shortened surveys may have affected the way the teachers understood the questions, so that is yet another potential reason for the discrepancies in the two data sets.
Comparing EF data to 2019 Dance to Learn program evaluation report. In order to see how my collected data compares to the rest of the population of students who received the program in 2018-2019, I will refer to the 2019 full program evaluation
! 333 report. Evaluators grouped information together slightly differently than I did; they considered “cognition” in general and specifically found results for multi-step actions and cognitions, which is a subset of EF. The four items they used to create this construct included both working memory items (“Follows and plays games with two step directions without reminders” and “Remembers all steps involved in completing tasks”) as well as both planning items (“When telling a story, real or fictional, links events in a way that makes sense” and “Can do things that require mental effort”). Inhibition and shifting were not included in their definition of “multi-step actions and cognitions.”
Grouping the four factors together, evaluators found that 59% of preschoolers improved overall. In general, there was “significant improvement in their ability to perform multi-step actions and cognitions over time, as rated by teachers. This makes sense, as the dance instruction emphasizes the ability to plan, remember, and execute multiple, connected motions” (Ballet Company Evaluators, 2019, p. 21). Across all participants of the program, evaluators found significant improvement on each of those items. That somewhat conflicts with the data that I collected, especially with regard to planning. However, the working memory data is consistent with what I collected.
Though the inhibition and shifting items did not statistically fit into another category, evaluators did find significant growth in both items related to shifting behaviors as well as the inhibition item involving waiting one’s turn. There was not a significant change for the other inhibition item (“Does not talk at inappropriate times”). I wonder if that phrasing is challenging to rate because it involves reversing the scale: 5 means he/she does not talk at inappropriate times while 1 means he/she does not not talk (i.e., talks) when inappropriate.
! 334 Once again, there are both similarities and differences in the overall trends of the program and the specific inclusion center from which I collected my data. Part of the reason for discrepancies could have been due to the previously mentioned potential biases as teachers filled out the questionnaire. There is also the fact that the center that participated in my study is specifically an inclusion center, while most other classrooms were considered general education classrooms. My data clearly shows that there was a difference in scores for children with disabilities as compared to peer models, and those interactions may not be as relevant in other kinds of classrooms. The following section will examine the trends from the qualitative data regarding executive functioning to further elaborate on the quantitative results.
Qualitative Analysis: Executive Functioning
Like socio-emotional development, the classroom teachers mentioned several goals for the program that aligned with constructs of executive function. Following directions was perhaps the biggest goal here – all three teachers mentioned that they hoped to see growth in their students’ ability to follow directions. The teachers also expressed that they wanted to see the students listen and comprehend what the teaching artists were saying or asking. Finally, all of the teachers mentioned that they hoped the program would support movement, especially for students with disabilities.
Focused coding led me to identify four major themes that align directly with my quantitative survey, as well as four emergent themes that relate to other elements of executive function. Themes of inhibition, shifting, working memory, and planning and organizing coincided with the quantitative measures and each included two to four sub- themes. Additional emergent themes included attention and engagement, following along,
! 335 comprehension and creativity, and independence. I also actively looked for evidence of the teachers’ expressed goals throughout my data. I included behaviors related to following directions within the category of working memory, which also involves listening skills. Attention, which is thought to moderate EF, relates to listening as well. I noted an emergent theme of comprehension, which was one of the teacher goals specifically. Finally, I grouped movement within planning and organizing because movement involves motor planning, and one of the classroom teachers mentioned that motor planning was difficult, particularly for some of her students with disabilities.
Looking specifically for indications that the program met teacher goals allowed me to see not only specific impacts on EF in the students, but also highlighted the potential value of the program for the classroom teachers.
Detailed review of all of my qualitative data sources showed general improvement in each of the aforementioned themes. Figure 33 shows the overarching trends in EF observations. Interestingly, while the surveys addressed EF in more detail and showed more growth than socio-emotional development, my qualitative observations of EF were not quite as rigorous as my socio-emotional observations, and trends in the interviews also favored socio-emotional themes more so than EF. Despite that, overarching trends showed that successful demonstrations of executive function increased throughout the residency, while students struggled less with executive function as the dance program progressed. The following sections will address specific aspects of
EF and the emergent themes that arose in my data.
! 336
Figure 33. Executive Function Observations
Inhibition. Inhibition involves withholding a response to something, usually a motor response. Especially for preschoolers, inhibition seemed to be the most difficult aspect of executive function to master. As I mentioned in my discussion of emotion regulation, there was often a lot of excitement during Dance to Learn that led to a lack of inhibition. Based on the nature of inhibition, most of my observations were about students who were not inhibiting because those are the instances that produce observable behavior. Therefore, I attempted to classify trends in improvement rather than focusing on individual non-inhibited behaviors.
Because of the overlap in emotion regulation and inhibition, there were many similarities in my data that crossed over between socio-emotional development and
! 337 executive function. Since I have already discussed the emotional aspects of inhibition, this section will primarily focus on general observations that did not explicitly demonstrate emotionally charged behaviors. I categorized my observations of inhibition into four sub-themes, including withholding responses, wandering, not talking when inappropriate, and waiting to take a turn.
Withholding responses. This category served as my catch-all for observations of inhibition – anything that did not explicitly relate to the other categories fell into
“withholding responses.” I considered any behavior that demonstrated a child’s self- control or self-regulation as part of this sub-theme. Observations in this category frequently manifested as students running around the room, moving too fast instead of with the music, or passing other students in locomotor rather than staying in line. As mentioned, the majority of my observations occurred when students did not withhold their responses; by nature, inhibition means not responding, so the non-inhibited responses were the ones I could actually observe. The caveat is that if I noted a specific child was not withholding a response, it is likely that the majority of the other students were actively inhibiting their responses at the time. Thus, despite the fact that I have more observations of struggles to inhibit, it is likely that overall, inhibition skills increased over the course of the program. Additionally, noting the students that frequently struggled to withhold responses allowed me to understand the significance of when those students successfully withheld responses, so in that sense, I was able to apply a strengths-based approach to my observations.
Figure 34 shows my general observations of the whole class’ ability to withhold responses. Since most of my observations were about specific children, I wanted to see
! 338 the trends in what I noticed about the majority of the class throughout the residency. The observations described in Figure 34 are times when I specifically mentioned “many kids” or “everyone” did something: “none of the students were unsafe with their movements as they turned around” is an example of successful whole group withholding, while “many of the kids ran closer to Beth” is an example of a struggle to withhold.
Figure 34. Withholding Response: Whole Class
In general, though I did not make nearly as many whole class observations as I did about specific students, there was a downward trend in the “did not withhold” responses. That indicates that students became better able to withhold responses throughout the program. There is also a downward trend in “successfully withheld” responses, which at first glance seems disheartening. However, I attribute that trend to
! 339 two factors. First, I was already less likely to document when the whole class was actively withholding responses because by definition, that means they were not doing something. It is much easier to observe overt behaviors than absence of behavior, so that could account for the lack of “successful” observations toward the end of the program.
Secondly, as it became more common for most of the students to successfully inhibit their responses, I did not find it as noteworthy or necessary to document. Therefore, the fact that the “did not withhold” responses decreased is a stronger indicator that there was a gain in inhibition skills throughout the program.
I think it is also important to note that as comfort and trust increased between the students and the adults, it was more likely that students would act out in the hopes for either attention or validation. Shy students were more likely to speak up or shout out answers as they became comfortable, and students that were hesitant to come dance in the first weeks were more excited and likely to run around toward the end of the program.
Those behaviors account for the spike in “did not withhold” observations seen in week nine. Because some of the decreased inhibition correlates with increased comfort and trust, I do not consider that to be an inherently negative trend or an indication that the program caused a decrease in ability to inhibit responses.
Natalie in Class 1 took a while to warm up to full participation in Dance to Learn. In our pre-interview, Lorin described her as a student who “marches to the beat of her own drummer” and told us she expected Natalie to have some challenging behaviors. On the first day of class, it became apparent that while Natalie loved music and movement, her impulse was to run over to the keyboard and bang on the keys rather than do the movements with the rest of the class. In the first weeks, she went over to the piano several times throughout class and needed teacher intervention to redirect her attention back to movement. During Week 4, we were stretched a bit thin – there were not quite enough adults in the room to give all of the one-on-one attention that was necessary for the students that day. Natalie escaped to
! 340 the keyboard for the second or third time that day, and all of the other adults were with students, so no one was available to redirect her to the group. At first, it just sounded like Natalie was playing randomly. Erin, our accompanist, was playing something with a pretty fast beat – eighth notes, perhaps – and to our astonishment, Natalie started playing exactly on the beat with Erin so that they were hitting the keys at the same time. Erin then slowed her playing, and Natalie slowed right down with her. The teaching artists and I were actually incredibly impressed – I was laughing so hard I had tears in my eyes. Her affinity for music and rhythm explained why she loved to run over to the piano, but we still wanted to see her participate in the movement part of the class.
Slowly, we started to see changes in Natalie’s impulse to run to the piano. During Week 6, I noticed that she started to run over, but she was able to redirect herself away without teacher intervention. She did the same thing once during Week 8; I considered that a substantial improvement. I also noticed that by Week 7, she withheld her response longer – the first time she ran to the keyboard in Week 7 was over halfway through class. She continued to improve, waiting longer each week to go to the piano and going fewer times per class. During Week 10, she made it until solos at the end of class before wandering to the keyboard, and that was partly because we were all going over to that wall to line up for solos anyway. That was the only time during Week 10’s class that Natalie approached the keyboard. To me, that shows a drastic improvement in withholding responses.
I noticed that a number of specific students (like Natalie) who tended to struggle to withhold responses improved throughout the dance program. Bryce, whom I described in my discussion of emotion regulation, frequently went too fast, passed others during
Follow the Leader, or threw himself down on the floor instead of controlling his body.
For example, during week two, I noted six different occasions where Bryce flung himself down on the floor during or after an activity. However, for the most part, he grew in his ability to control himself and to withhold impulsive responses throughout the residency.
Though his behavior truly varied from week-to-week, he stopped purposefully falling on the ground as much and was able to refrain from passing people in locomotor by the end of the ten weeks. Even the classroom teachers mentioned that they saw him improve in
! 341 his impulse control after the program. Thus, based on my observations of specific students as well as the class in general, I am confident that the ability to withhold responses increased throughout the program.
Wandering. Though many students did an excellent job of paying attention and following along for the duration of class each week, there were a few students that I noticed would wander around rather than fully participate in the movement activities.
While wandering could be considered a subset of attention and engagement, I grouped it within inhibition because it also relates to withholding a movement response. I considered a behavior to be “wandering” specifically when students moved around the room without fully engaging in the directed movement, which distinguishes it from other
“withholding” responses like falling to the floor or moving too quickly. Figure 35 displays the number of times I observed students wandering each week; there is a clear downward trend in wandering behaviors, which also suggests an increase in inhibition over the course of the program.
There were a few students in particular that were more likely to wander than others, including Natalie and Heidi. The teaching artists mentioned that for Natalie, they noticed more wandering than participating in the first few weeks of class. However, she became significantly more engaged and less likely to wander as class progressed. By the last class, the only observation I made about wandering in Classes 1 and 2 was that there was very little from anyone that week, which signifies to me that Natalie’s and other students’ inhibition skills grew during the residency.
! 342
Figure 35. Wandering
Heidi followed a similar trend. At the beginning she often needed a teacher to guide her to the class or to help her stay on track, and if a teacher was not with her, she would move around the room freely rather than dance with the rest of the class. However, the amount of time that she wandered around decreased significantly throughout the residency, and if she did begin to wander in later weeks, she was able to re-engage more quickly than before. I thought that was also indicative of increased inhibition skills.
Therefore, based on my observations, I can conclude that wandering behaviors decreased throughout the dance program, which demonstrates improvement in inhibition skills.
Not talking when inappropriate. An important part of inhibition, especially in early childhood education, is the ability to refrain from talking when inappropriate.
! 343 Within the classroom setting, that often requires raising a hand to be called on rather than shouting out an answer. In dance class, since we encourage students to be like dancers who don’t use their voices, “not talking when inappropriate” is built into the class. That became challenging when we were partaking in a movement activity and students started making verbal comments or sometimes animal noises, depending on the story. Like many other facets of inhibition, talking when inappropriate also correlated strongly with excitement – students got excited about knowing an answer or having an idea, so they expressed it without raising a quiet hand. Bryce also frequently shouted out what came next in class because he remembered from the previous year; he would state what was coming before the teaching artists could give directions.
Week one seemed to be the most challenging week for the students in terms of refraining from talking. I think part of that had to do with the fact that the program was new for many of them, and they were unsure of protocols for class. Improvement was evident by week ten, but again, inhibition varied from week to week. One distinct trend I noticed was in waiting to be called on – more students raised their hands to give answers to questions later on in the residency, whereas virtually none did at the beginning. I also noticed fewer instances of students actively shouting things out or making remarks during the Brain Dance in the final weeks of the residency. Thus, there appeared to be some improvement in the ability to refrain from talking when inappropriate.
Waiting one’s turn. Perhaps the most obvious example of inhibition in early childhood is the ability to take turns; waiting patiently while others go requires self- control and regulation. For Dance to Learn, this ability was most apparent during solos; the majority of the class focused on synchronous movement or whole group exploration,
! 344 but since solos happened one at a time, each child had to wait their turn to go and then wait patiently for everyone else to finish. Like other categories of inhibition, I was much more likely to notice when someone wasn’t waiting his/her turn, so each observation of someone not waiting implied that many other students were successfully waiting their turns.
Figure 36. Turn Taking
Figure 36 illustrates my observations of students waiting to take turns each week
– these observations only encompassed what I wrote in my field notes, so I did not include the implied successes of waiting turns in the chart. Despite that, there is a clear downward trend of students not waiting their turns as well as an upward trend of observations where students successfully waited. The positive observations were mostly
! 345 indicative of improvements in specific students – I noted when students that had previously struggled to wait their turns improved in some capacity.
I noticed particular improvement in the students with autism. For example, Daniel had a hard time waiting to do his solo the first week. In line, Kristen was holding onto him, essentially physically restraining him from moving as he tried to run across the floor. Finally, she had to tell Beth, “Daniel needs to go next.” Beth, who was going down the line telling students it was their turn, went out of order and gave Daniel permission to go. During week nine, Daniel was able to wait a little longer without a teacher’s help. He watched several students go before declaring, “Daniel’s turn!” and making his way across. Though he did go out of order, he was at least able to wait a little bit before going.
Finally, during week ten, he was about to do the same thing – he said, “Daniel’s turn!” and stepped forward, about to go. He realized, though, that it wasn’t actually his turn, so he stepped back into line and waited for Beth to give him the go-ahead.
Natalie also showed a significant improvement in her ability to wait her turn during solos. Like Daniel, she would usually just take her turn first even if she was not first in line. However, in later weeks, she was able to wait for a student to finish before she started her turn. At one point, she even started to go before realizing that someone else was in the middle of their solo – Natalie stopped and waited for that student to finish before continuing her turn. In our post interview, Leslie noticed that even if Natalie didn’t quite wait as long as she was supposed to, “she was able to wait an amount of time before she went ahead,” which showed considerable improvement from the beginning of the residency. The classroom teachers also commented that they noticed the students “did a little bit better with waiting” after the residency. Therefore, according to specific student
! 346 improvement and general trends, it is clear that the students demonstrated growth in waiting to take turns in addition to other aspects of inhibition.
Shifting. Shifting is a component of executive function that allows for switching tasks and changing behaviors to adapt to new situations. Because coming to Dance to
Learn in itself requires an adjustment from their usual preschool day, there is ample opportunity for the students to practice their shifting or adaptation abilities. Within the category of shifting, two sub-themes emerged – transitions and self-correction.
Transitions. I considered transitions to and from dance class to indicate some ability to shift because the students are taken out of their normal day and have to adapt to not only a new activity, but also new teachers. Transitions between activities also allowed an opportunity for the students to adapt their behaviors. Partly due to excitement and energy coming into dance class, the transition to begin dance class usually took a couple of minutes. The transition time each day was also largely dependent on how their morning had gone so far; for that reason, some days were more difficult than others. A lot of times, students came in and ran around the room a little bit before settling in, so the teaching artists tried to give them a minute to get that out before having them all join together in a circle. There were also other factors that made transitioning into class challenging – some days, the classes came in late, and there were also a couple of times when the students didn’t have their name tags on yet, so the classroom teachers were trying to pass out name tags while the teaching artists were starting class. However, as soon as everyone was initially on board and ready to go, the students were always very successful at transitioning to dance class.
! 347 Interestingly, the smoothest transition into class happened during week seven with
Class 3. That morning, there was a tornado drill, so to avoid having to deal with that, the teaching artists and I waited outside of the building until the drill was over. That meant that while we had all arrived on time, we were a couple of minutes late getting into the classroom, and Class 3 was already inside sitting in a circle and singing “The Itsy Bitsy
Spider” with Kristen. It took us a few minutes to get the keyboard set up and get ourselves situated, and by the time the teaching artists were ready to start class, everyone was sitting in the circle and already engaged – even the students that usually took a little bit longer to transition. It seemed as though having them in the room and acclimated to the space before starting the actual dance class made a big difference in their ability to shift.
Class 1 also showed significant improvement in their ability to transition into class when they came in for week ten and began the balloon exercise by themselves without teacher guidance. They knew the routine, and they shifted seamlessly into class without prompting. Therefore, despite variations that were outside of the teaching artists’ control, there appeared to be an increase in shifting ability throughout the program as demonstrated by transitions into class.
Transitions within class also showed evidence of better ability to shift as the program went on. Especially as students learned the routine, the transitions between each activity within class became much smoother. It did not take as long to switch from the hellos to locomotor or from the story exploration to solos. Their ability to predict what was coming next based on the consistency of the routine supported their ability to change tasks, even to the point where they shifted before the teaching artists wanted them to.
! 348 There were a couple of days during the animal movements in Classes 1 and 2 where
Leslie was leading and took her animal movement over toward the wall where we lined up for solos. Both of those times, the kids did the correct animal movement and then went and lined up against the wall even though Leslie was not ready to teach the solo yet. As soon as Leslie told them we weren’t ready for solos, though, they all were able to shift back into group movement exploration.
In my post interview with the teaching artists, they also noted that in addition to shifting between activities, the students were easily able to shift between who was leading. Since the program relies on co-teaching, the students have to shift their attention to whomever is leading at the moment. For the most part, the teaching artists kept their roles consistent: Leslie led hellos, Beth led the Brain Dance warm-up and locomotor,
Leslie led the story and taught the solos, and Beth told them whose turn it was for solos.
One day in Class 3, they decided to have Leslie lead locomotor instead of Beth. The teaching artists prompted students to “line up for Follow the Leader…” and everyone quickly made a line behind Beth before she said “...behind Leslie!” The students took the shift in stride and all went over to stand behind Leslie; no one had a breakdown or was unable to adapt to the new directions. Thus, in general, I saw improvement in transitions both into and out of class as well as within the class itself.
Self-correction. I defined self-correction to be when a student doing a movement realized that what they were doing was not quite what the teachers were leading and were able to shift and adjust their own movement without prompting from a teacher. There were many cases when the teaching artists noticed that students were doing something but not quite to the best of their ability, so they would verbally prompt the students and
! 349 say, “Can you reach your arms higher?” or give some instruction to help the students shift. Self-correction, however, requires closer attention – the student realizes what his/her movement is, that his/her movement is not quite correct, and what he/she needs to do to correct it without intervention from a teacher. Figure 37 illustrates the trend in my observations of self-correction from week to week.
Figure 37. Self-Correction
In general, I noticed that students needed a lot more specific prompting at the beginning of the residency. The teaching artists would often call students by name and give specific instructions to help them correct themselves. In later weeks, I saw students watching and correcting themselves without verbal or physical prompting from the teaching artists. Sometimes those moments happened in conjunction with socio-
! 350 emotional behaviors. Natalie, for example, was wandering, but then made eye contact with Beth and imitated her buffalo shoulders during week four. She was not verbally prompted, but she connected with Beth and was able to correct herself. I also noticed
Brandon do something similar during week four – while we were tapping our shoulders, he did not have his hands exactly how he was supposed to. I made eye contact with him and was doing the movements correctly, and as soon as we made that connection, he was easily able to shift and correct himself. The majority of the self-correction behaviors that
I noticed were in students with autism – that suggests that dance and imitation can be particularly helpful in developing shifting strategies for children with autism.
Despite that I saw an increase in self-correction behaviors until week four, Figure
37 illustrates a downward trend for weeks five through ten. I attribute that to the fact that the children were more likely to perform the movements correctly initially, thus decreasing the need for self-correction. The teaching artists also mentioned that they felt they did not have to prompt the students as much at the end of the residency, which also suggests greater accuracy in movement as the weeks progressed. Therefore, I do not consider the decreased self-correction as a negative trend; rather, the students improved in their ability to shift to the correct movement the first time they attempted it. Therefore, between the smoothed transitions and the trends in self-correction, the students demonstrated increased shifting skills throughout Dance to Learn, particularly students with autism.
Working memory. Working memory skills involve the ability to hold information in mind even despite distractions. In preschool, remembering and following directions are important, and that requires working memory skills. I separated my
! 351 observations of working memory into three sub-categories: following directions, remembering and following two-step directions, and ignoring distractions.
Following directions. All of the classroom teachers mentioned they hoped to see improved skills in following directions as a result of Dance to Learn. Being able to follow directions also involves listening and comprehending what is being asked, which were two other goals articulated by the classroom teachers. Because it involves updating information in real time and responding to that information, I considered the subcategory of following directions to be an important aspect of working memory. Observations that fell into this category largely had to do with students following one-step verbal instructions in the moment – that makes it distinct from something like imitation, following along, or remembering and carrying out two-step directions.
As I mentioned when discussing shifting, at the beginning of the residency, it often took extra prompting for students to follow directions. The teaching artists might give an instruction once and then have to repeat themselves or prompt individual students specifically to get them to follow directions. That trend was particularly noticeable when it involved students not making a noise while they performed a movement. For example, during week two, the students were instructed to show a “ta-da” shape with no voices.
Leslie had to have them try it several times before the majority of the students did the “ta- da” silently. Doing the “ta-da” without noise also involves inhibition skills, so improvement in following directions also aligns with improvement in inhibition.
There were also a couple of students that the classroom teachers told us were specifically working on following directions. Robin was one of those students; she frequently claimed she couldn’t do something (often while she was doing it correctly),
! 352 likely because she wanted some kind of attention from the adults. However, though she had more trouble following directions at the beginning of the residency, she was better able to follow directions toward the end. It also seemed that when she didn’t follow directions, it was usually because of a socio-emotional need rather than outright defiance or failure to pay attention.
Throughout the Dance to Learn program, the students improved in their ability to follow directions, including those who initially struggled with it. The teaching artists noted that they needed to prompt less at the end of the residency because students were listening and following directions the first time. They also noted that instead of having to single students out by name, a more general correction directed at the whole class – “See how high you can reach your arms!” – was effective. That means the students were actively listening even if the teaching artists were not directly talking to them, and they were responding appropriately. Kristen was also emphatic about the dance program’s impact on following directions. In our post-interview, she told me that “kids that don’t often follow directions were following directions.” When I asked her generally if any part of the program carried over into her classroom, she immediately said that it “completely directly impacted following directions.” Therefore, I am confident that there was an improvement in following directions, and that improvement was likely supported by the program itself.
Remembering two-step directions. Rather than following directions in the moment, two-step directions require listening to instructions, remembering both steps, and then performing both steps accurately. Students must hold the directions in mind as they carry them out, so it is an important aspect of working memory. In Dance to Learn,
! 353 two-step instructions were most common during the solos. The students were instructed to 1) move in a specific way to the red circle and 2) either freeze or move a certain way on the red circle. Because of the consistency in the structure of the solos, most of my observations about two-step directions were tied to the solos. Overall, I saw drastic improvement in following two-step directions, especially for the students with autism.
It is important to note that there were several students in each class that did the solos correctly each time without extra prompting. I did not necessarily write down every time a student did the solo perfectly – instead, most of my observations were about students that showed some improvement from the early weeks. There were several students who needed a lot of prompting or reminders during their solos at first, particularly Natalie, Heidi, and Adam. At the beginning of the residency, Natalie did more wandering than directly moving from the line to the red circle. When she did make it to the red circle, she often spun around several times, and it took many repeated verbal prompts to get her to freeze on the spot. Sometimes a teacher had to go physically intervene to allow the next child a chance to go. However, by week four, Natalie was spinning less on the circle and did some of the movement accurately. Gradually, she became more responsive to verbal prompts during the solo, and her whole transition process for solos went much faster. By week seven, Natalie did not spin at all, and she performed the correct movement on the spot, which was a huge improvement.
Consistently for the rest of the residency, she was able to complete her solo, demonstrating a drastic improvement in remembering and following two-step directions.
Heidi also showed a similar trend of wandering instead of going directly to the circle, and at first, she did not really stop on the circle for her “ta-da” moment. In later
! 354 weeks, she was able to take a more direct route, and she even did her own version of a ta- da in weeks nine and ten. Her improvement also showed an increased ability to remember and follow two-step directions. For Adam, his shyness seemed to be what held him back rather than not remembering or following directions. At first, he just ran across to the teacher without attempting to do any of the movements or freezes. Once his comfort level increased, though, he was able to correctly go to the dot and do his ta-da – especially if
Brandon went right before him. Thus, he also demonstrated improvement in following two-step directions.
The teaching artists noticed drastic improvement in the solos as well. In our post interview, they mentioned to me that not only did they have to prompt the students less during their solos in later weeks, but they also noticed the students moving directly from the line to the circle without wandering, and they were more likely to really try the movements rather than just run across. Therefore, based on the positive change in the solos, I can conclude that there was improvement in remembering two-step directions throughout the program.
Ignoring distractions. An important component of working memory involves being able to continue working while ignoring potential distractions. In a preschool classroom, there are often distractions, whether that be another student, a new object in the room, or even light-up shoes. We also used name tags with the students, which they were not used to wearing on a daily basis, so those proved distracting as well. At the beginning of the residency, I noticed frequent reactions to distractions, and often they required teacher intervention to redirect the student. However, toward the end of the
! 355 residency, the students that I saw getting distracted by various things either did not react as much to those stimuli or were able to refocus themselves without teacher intervention.
Three students that I noticed considerable improvement in regarding ignoring distractions were Brandon, Jeremy, and Natalie. Brandon seemed to be particularly interested in the ceiling fans – I frequently saw him looking up at the fans intently, especially if they were running. I remember that from the previous year as well – he was constantly distracted by the fans. However, each week, he was able to refocus himself a bit more quickly. Even if he glanced up during locomotor every once in awhile, he would continue moving rather than stop and look up. Eventually, I saw him refrain from looking up at the fans entirely, totally focused on what was going on in class. Thus, there was a clear trajectory of improvement in ignoring distractions.
During week nine, Jeremy was wearing what I took to be a new watch. I think it was a gaming device, because it had a screen, and it looked like he was playing on it as he came in. At the beginning of class that day, he was very excited to show me his watch, but then he became completely immersed in that rather than dance class. As the class continued, though, he looked at his watch less and less, ignoring that distraction and participating in the movement activities. I never told him to pay attention or anything – I tried to share in his excitement about the watch, but I did not want to become a teacher figure, so I did not try to redirect him. I was impressed by his ability to refocus himself and ignore his watch even though he was so clearly excited about it.
In addition to music and movement, Natalie also had an affinity for light-up shoes. Ever popular in preschool, many kids in her class had shoes that lit up when they stepped, and at the beginning of the residency, Natalie was enthralled by them. She
! 356 frequently stopped to watch them in locomotor or followed very closely behind someone to pay attention to their shoes without really trying the movement. At one point during
Brain Dance, she even went over to another student with light-up shoes and started hitting the bottom of the shoes in an attempt to make them blink. However, like Brandon and Jeremy, she became less and less distracted by others’ shoes and was better able to ignore that distraction and pay attention to dance class. I think her improvement is also demonstrated in her decreased trips over to the keyboard throughout the residency – the fact that she was not constantly over by the piano shows she could ignore that distraction and instead focus on Dance to Learn. Based on the general improvement in following directions, remembering two-step directions, and ignoring distractions, it appears that the program correlates with an increase in working memory skills.
Planning and organizing. Within executive function, planning and organizing is often equated with goal setting or managing future task demands. Though it can be seen as early as preschool, these skills typically develop between ages 7-11 (Anderson, 2002).
To make it more applicable to preschool, I am also considering the cognitive ability to organize and remember information a part of planning and organizing. Additionally, because Dance to Learn is movement based, I included motor planning within this construct of planning and organizing. Based on my definition, I classified four distinct categories within planning and organizing: remembering information, correctly answering questions, making connections, and planning ahead or motor planning.
Remembering information. Frequently, the teaching artists would begin the story portion of class with a review of what we had discussed in previous weeks. Rather than just remind students, however, the teaching artists asked questions and prompted the
! 357 students to remember the information themselves. Though the session used different books as the theme, both books involved animals and animal movements. In both sessions, there was a consistent ability for students to name the animals we had talked about and identify the correct movements we had performed for each animal. I noticed the students consistently remembering, even the students that were less verbal. If Leslie asked which movement a certain animal had done, some students would do the movement rather than say it verbally – thus, I was able to see evidence of remembering information in all of the students.
Danielle was also impressed by the students’ ability to remember information.
She expressed in our post-interview that even she had trouble remembering some of the animals we had talked about, but the kids knew exactly what animals we had talked about and how we moved as each of them. The teaching artists noticed a positive trend in remembering as well – by the end, they saw the students remembering the movement without needing all of the prompts they had used at first. I noticed this improvement in both the students with disabilities and the peer models.
In addition to remembering the story, the students frequently showed an increased ability to remember the format of class and be able to plan for what came next. For example, on the last day, Bryce really wanted to be first for his solo. We were going over two different animals that day instead of just one, and after we finished moving like the first animal, Bryce went over and stood where the line would begin for solos so that he could be first. He stayed even while we danced like the final animal, and sure enough, was first in his solo. The instances where the students lined up for solos early – after
Leslie had danced in the direction of the line – also indicate memory of what came next.
! 358 Finally, the first class performing the balloon exercise on their own during the last class was further evidence that the students were better able to remember previous information and apply it to plan ahead for that day. Based on all of the aforementioned examples, there was obvious improvement in remembering information and thus planning and organizing.
Correctly answering questions. In addition to prompting the students to remember information from previous weeks, the teaching artists would also ask new questions based on what we were doing. For example, on the first day, Leslie showed the students her red circle to signify their stopping place for solos, and she asked them,
“What shape is it? What color is it?” and let the students tell her instead of giving them the information. She also did that frequently with the stories – she would show a picture of an animal and ask for them to identify it, or ask questions about the animal, like “How many legs does it have? Is it big or small?” The ability to correctly answer these questions requires organizing information and applying it, so I considered this theme to fall under planning and organizing.
As a group, I saw improvement in the ability to correctly answer questions throughout the residency. I made 11 observations in the first half of students successfully answering, and 17 observations in the second half of the program. I also noticed that the questions became more difficult as the residency went on. Rather than asking about colors and shapes, Leslie would ask, “How else can we move like X animal?” or “What is another way that we can make our bodies do X?” Rather than observing and answering, the students had to think more critically about the questions to provide a “correct” answer.
! 359 I noticed improvements in both peer models and students with disabilities with regard to correctly answering questions – while the peer models were often more vocal, the students with disabilities were more likely to answer nonverbally. For example, when asked how we could make our bodies go from a low to a high level, Nick demonstrated by standing up on his tiptoes. Therefore, I saw general improvement in correctly answering questions for both peer models and students with disabilities throughout the dance program.
Making connections. When students made comments that suggested they were applying concepts in dance class to their own lives or to what they know outside of dance class, I considered that to be making connections. For example, we were balancing on one leg during warm-up one day, and one student said, “Like a flamingo!” In locomotor one day, we were waving our arms slowly up and down, and another student said, “It’s like flying!” Comments like these show not only logical organization of information and the ability to make comparisons, but also the higher level ability to observe and apply information in different settings.
Though I did not jot down observations of students making connections every week, I did see a general increase in the connections made throughout the ten weeks.
Within the first five weeks, I noted five occasions where students made connections; in the second half of the program, I had 11 observations of making connections. It is also important to note that all of those instances were spontaneous – the teachers did not specifically prompt the students to make those connections. That indicates that students were thinking critically on their own and noticing how dance could be relevant to other areas of their lives, which distinguishes this sub-theme from the theme of correctly
! 360 answering questions. This was also perhaps the only category in which I made more observations of peer models than students with disabilities. Regardless, the increase in ability to make unique connections among the peer models shows some improvement in planning and organizing.
Planning ahead. Planning ahead requires understanding what a goal is and preparing to meet that goal. I grouped motor planning within this category as well because that was the kind of planning most relevant to the Dance to Learn program.
Overall, I noticed trends of improvement in the ability to plan – I made 11 observations of successful planning or motor planning in the first half of the residency and 24 in the second half. It was interesting to see that sometimes, the ability to plan ahead manifested in clever ways of getting around the rules of class. For example, many students were successfully able to wait their turn in solos. However, while Brandon frequently waited patiently for his turn, he also quietly moved up in line so that his turn would be sooner than if he stayed in his spot. He never went until he was told to go by a teacher, but he planned ahead and did everything he could to make sure that time came sooner. I noticed other students do that as well, which I thought was a creative way of exhibiting planning skills. Other students, like Natalie, also demonstrated planning ahead when she was sitting in the circle and realized she was too close to people around her and would not have room to dance when we stood up; she crawled across the circle to a more open spot before we stood up to start moving, which I thought was clear evidence of planning.
Annie, a peer model in Class 3, had proven herself to be a very capable mover. She completed all of the group activities with ease, never missing a beat. Yet when it came time to do her solo, Annie was shy – though she could accurately do the movements, she did not like the idea of having to go by herself. We noticed her shyly walk across the floor for her solo for several
! 361 weeks, and we were all baffled because she was such an active participant during the rest of the class. As we were lining up for solos during Week 9, Annie walked right up to me and asked if I would go with her. I was surprised because until that point, we had not interacted very much. Wanting to nurture this social interaction, I told her I would be happy to go with her, but she should choose how we moved. She wanted to roll, so we rolled and did our ta-das together before going to sit down. It was only afterward that I realized what a big step that was for her. Annie knew she would be uncomfortable going across by herself, so she proactively came and asked me to go with her. That was one of the most salient moments of planning ahead that I noticed throughout the residency.
The teaching artists also noticed evidence of planning ahead when the students were given a choice about what solo to do. For example, there was one day that students could either crawl on their bellies like an alligator or do a lunging walk like a camel bending its knees. Nick decided that he wanted to be an alligator, so as he was waiting his turn, he got low to the ground to get ready. When Beth got to him to tell him it was his turn, he was already in position ready to go. Therefore, I observed clear improvement in planning ahead throughout Dance to Learn.
There was also improvement in motor planning and coordination throughout the residency, especially for students with disabilities. That was particularly clear in students like Jacob, who had some difficulty moving by himself at first, but gained confidence and independence over the course of the program. The classroom teachers noticed that the students had a better understanding of their bodies and body mechanics than they had before.
Galloping was one of the movements that showed distinct improvement. In Dance to Learn, galloping is a right-left movement that moves to the side, stretching one leg out and then scooting the other one in. Many children like to gallop cross-laterally moving forward, but the teaching artists really encouraged everyone to keep their belly buttons
! 362 facing the center of the circle as we moved around. Danielle noted the diligence with which they focused on galloping correctly: “you guys really worked hard on slowly teaching ‘em how to gallop, and you know, my kids can all do that now.” The increased motor coordination implicitly shows the improvement in motor planning; thus, given increased skill in remembering information, correctly answering questions, making connections, and planning, I am confident that Dance to Learn correlated with improvements in planning and organizing.
Attention/engagement. Attention is thought to moderate EF, and in order to successfully exercise EF skills like inhibition, shifting, working memory, and planning, it is important to be paying attention to the task at hand. Though attention is inherent in each EF skill, I noticed an emergent theme of attention or engagement in class throughout my notes. Therefore, I think it is important to address specific trends in attention and engagement independently from the other facets of EF.
After going through my notes, I categorized levels of engagement into six categories (see Table 4). I considered a student “not engaged” if he/she was in the room but not paying attention or watching what we were doing. For example, Daniel sometimes lay down and did not watch what was going on, so I considered that to be disengagement. “Watching” classifies students who were paying close attention by watching a teaching artist, but were not actively participating in any movement themselves. Partial participation includes some movement, perhaps walking in the circle during locomotor, but not fully doing the directed movements. Full participation is the category that most students fell into most of the time – they were watching and participating to the best of their ability. I also wrote down some observations about
! 363 students who had previously not been engaged coming back to participate in the class.
When that occurred with teacher intervention, I labeled it “re-engagement with help.” If students were able to come back to the class on their own and refocus themselves, I called it “re-engagement independently.”
Attention/3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Week3 Engagement! 1! 2! 3! 4! 5! 6! 7! 8! 9! 10!
Not!Engaged! 3! 2! 3! 0! 3! 3! 3! 3! 1! 2!
Watching! 2! 5! 2! 1! 2! 11! 0! 2! 0! 0! Partial! Participation! 6! 4! 4! 4! 2! 3! 2! 1! 3! 0!
Full!Participation! 4! 2! 3! 2! 5! 3! 6! 2! 4! 1! Re8Engagement! with!Help! 1! 1! 0! 0! 0! 1! 0! 0! 2! 0! Re8Engagement! Independently! 0! 0! 0! 0! 3! 1! 0! 2! 0! 0!
Table 4. Attention/Engagement
When documenting attention and engagement, I was more likely to notice if students were not paying attention because that often resulted in wandering or zoning out.
I also was much more focused on specific students like Daniel, Jeremy, Heidi, Natalie, and Adam – primarily the students with autism. Thus, while my observations are not exclusively about students with autism or even students with disabilities, the major trends that I noticed most strongly pertain to the students with autism.
Throughout almost every week, there was at least a brief moment where one of the students was not engaged, whether because of a distraction or a personal choice not to participate. That stayed relatively steady throughout, but it is also important to remember
! 364 that the population is preschool students. In preschool, attention spans are relatively short, and I would not expect 100% of students to be engaged in a half hour class 100% of the time. For example, Heidi tended to zone out when we moved from a standing activity to a seated activity. In stillness, she found it more difficult to pay attention. We did some seated activities on the last day, and though Heidi’s engagement increased overall, she still zoned out a little bit when we sat down. Therefore, I do not find the trend of “not engaged” students to be particularly interesting or indicative of something substantial related to attention and engagement.
More relevant trends occur within “watching” and “partial participation.” In the final weeks of the program, both watching and partial participation decreased; I did not write down any instances of a child just watching or only partly participating in the last week. That indicates a higher level of full participation across the board that week. (I was less likely to note when all students were paying attention and fully participating, so that accounts for the low number of “full participation” observations in week ten.) Therefore, the general increase in “full participation” observations outside of week ten coupled with the decrease in “watching” and “partial participation” observations indicates improvement in students’ ability to attend and engage in dance class, particularly in students with autism.
I also noticed more independent re-engagement in the second half of the residency. For example, during week five, Natalie was wandering for part of the story review. However, as soon as we started talking about moving our shoulders like a buffalo, she came right back and re-engaged with the class on her own. She showed similar independent refocusing behaviors in later weeks as well. Thus, there was a
! 365 general increase in ability for students to refocus themselves and shift their attention without teacher intervention.
Following along. Another emergent trend that arose in my field notes had to do with students who were following along with the teaching artists. I consider this to be different than following directions because it involves watching in real time and doing what others are doing as opposed to listening to an instruction and then carrying it out. It is also slightly different than imitation because it does not always involve direct mirroring – following along could involve following the teacher in locomotor movement or doing their own version of a movement during the story exploration. Because following along does not necessarily equate to synchronous movement, it is distinct from imitation. Since the ability to follow along also involves working memory, attention, and shifting, I consider it to fall within the construct of executive function.
The majority of my observations about following along were when the whole class was following along for an extended time or when specific students who frequently did not follow along were doing so effectively. Figure 38 shows the trend in my observations throughout each week. Though I made quite a few observations of successful following even at the beginning of the residency, there was still an upward trend in following along. I noticed that the repeat students who had the program the previous year started out stronger in their ability to follow along. That could be due to maturation and also program familiarity. However, I noticed improvements even in some of the repeat students that had struggled to follow along in the previous year – Robin, for example – as well as in other specific students and for the class as a whole. Based on my observations, I see a clear improvement in students’ ability to follow along in dance class.
! 366
Figure 38. Following Along
Comprehension and creativity. Because one of the classroom teachers mentioned that she hoped to see improvements in students’ comprehension abilities, I made some notes about behaviors that showed me students were comprehending what the teaching artists were saying. Especially for nonverbal students that were perhaps less engaged than their peer models, I was able to interpret their comprehension based on nonverbal cues and movements. I also noted several instances of students introducing unique ideas based on what we were doing at the moment. I classified those innovations as “creativity” and grouped it with comprehension because it takes comprehension a step further. For example, if we were tapping our legs and one student started alternating taps
! 367 and claps, that showed me that there was comprehension of the rhythm and the activity itself, but also creativity in suggesting a new way to continue tapping in rhythm.
I noticed a distinct increase in comprehension throughout the residency, especially from students with disabilities. For example, sometimes it was difficult to tell if Heidi was paying attention or understood what the teaching artists were doing. She often had a classroom teacher with her and did not always fully participate in the movement activities. I was with her one day during the story, and Leslie was reminding everyone of Pete the Cat’s arched back. I said something to Heidi about Pete the Cat, and though she did not participate in the cat-cow activity we were doing, she started saying,
“Meow! Meow!” That indicated to me that she was engaged at least on some level – she was comprehending what the teaching artists were doing even if she was not doing it herself. I noticed more instances of comprehension like Heidi’s as the class continued, so that upward trend indicates an increase in listening and comprehending.
My observations of creativity did not show as clear a pattern as those for comprehension, but I always found it interesting when students explored new ways to move. For example, in Class 3, Leslie was talking about Grumpy Toad from the Pete the
Cat story and had everyone sit in their turtle shells (sitting on the floor hugging their knees) and extend one limb at a time. One of the students put her hands behind her and lifted her belly up for a kind of crab-walk position. Leslie did not plan to do anything in a crab-walk that day, but because it is a complicated movement and one of the students creatively tried it, she shifted her plan to give students the option to “move with their turtle shell below them, trying to lift the turtle shell off the floor” rather than just crawl on hands and knees. The teaching artists usually tried to acknowledge and have everyone try
! 368 the innovative ideas that students came up with, so in that sense, everyone benefited from each student’s creativity. Because of the increased comprehension and various creative or innovative movements that I noticed throughout the residency, I consider the program to correlate positively with comprehension and creativity.
Independence. The ability to move independently was an emergent trend both in my notes and in my interviews with the teaching artists. I made observations of independence when I saw a student perform a movement by themselves. I also noted when students had a teacher with them. Jacob, for example, has some physical limitations due to his disability, so he frequently needed physical help to complete different movements or to stand up from the ground. Other students, like Heidi, needed teacher help to stay on task and fully participate. When a student who had previously needed teacher help for either of those reasons was able to be independent, I considered that an improvement. Figure 39 illustrates my observations of independence and non- independence; I observed a clear decrease in non-independent movement and a substantial increase in independence throughout the program.
At the beginning of the residency, I noted a lot more students who were sitting in teachers’ laps or holding hands with a teacher during Follow the Leader. Drew, Jeremy,
Heidi, Daniel, and Jacob, for example, all stayed close to a teacher either because they needed physical help or because they required guidance to stay engaged. It also felt like a socio-emotional need at times – students wanted the approval of an adult in the room, so they stuck close to me or a teacher. However, at the end of the residency, I noticed a lot more independence, especially from the students with autism. For example, Heidi and
Daniel were both able to stay engaged during Follow the Leader without having a teacher
! 369
Figure 39. Independence
right next to them. Drew was able to at least participate partially without being in Lorin’s lap for the whole class. Even Jacob gained the physical strength to be able to gallop and march independently.
Kristen voiced a similar observation to me in our post interview. She and her team were particularly attentive to what the teaching artists needed, and she checked in each class to see if we thought we needed more support from the classroom teachers or if they should step back more. Her ultimate goal was to be able to step back without having to actively intervene in the classes – she wanted all of her students to gain that independence. In the post interview, she said, “the assistant teachers and I were supporting the kids a lot in the beginning, especially the kids with autism. And about
! 370 midway through, all the sudden, I realized they didn’t need as much support.” The teaching artists also noticed the increased independence, particularly for students with disabilities. Therefore, there was a definitive increase in independence that was magnified for students with autism.
Despite the clear increase in the ability to be independent, I also noticed a phenomenon of what I called non-independence by choice. The previous discussion was primarily about instances where students really needed support at first and were able to break away from that later on in the residency. However, there were some students that appeared to go backward – they could be independent, but they were constantly seen holding hands with a peer or a teacher despite their capability. Daniel and Robin frequently held hands for locomotor, and while both of them could do it on their own, they chose not to. Natalie, who experienced gains in independence and who had been doing an excellent job of participating in locomotor in the final weeks of the program, was holding hands with Fiona at the beginning of locomotor during week ten. Leslie approached her and asked if she wanted to go by herself or holding a hand, and she clearly responded, “Holding a hand.” She was capable, but she chose not to be independent.
Much like the unnecessary helping behaviors, I interpreted non-independence by choice as a socio-emotional response, and I think that says something about the strengthened peer relationships that grew throughout the program. However, the teaching artists mentioned that it was challenging to navigate those situations – they did not want to squash the social benefit of dancing together, but they wanted to encourage independence. Despite the challenges and the increased non-independence by choice
! 371 throughout the program, I still saw increased independence in students who previously needed help. For that reason, I consider increased independence to be a positive effect of the program.
Summary. In sum, I categorized my observations and interviews into four major themes related to executive function: inhibition, shifting, working memory, and planning and organizing. Each of those themes had two to four sub-themes that identified specific behaviors operationalizing EF. Additionally, four emergent themes arose in my data that did not conform to any of the aforementioned categories but were still relevant to EF.
These included attention and engagement, following along, comprehension and creativity, and independence. Though many of these categories lent themselves to identifying off-task behavior rather than success, I focused on looking for improvement and identifying when students who had previously struggled were successful. As such, I was able to maintain my strengths-based approach for analysis.
Ultimately, I noticed improvement in every category, and for most categories, those improvements were magnified for students with disabilities. Planning and organizing was the only theme in which I had more observations for peer models than for students with disabilities; everything else showed more growth for students with disabilities and often specifically for students with autism. Many of my observations were also echoed by the teaching artists and classroom teachers, reinforcing the indication of improvement for all groups, and especially students with disabilities.
Therefore, according to my qualitative data, there appears to be a correlation between
Dance to Learn and increased executive function skills.
! 372 Holistic Analysis: Answering Subquestions 1b & 1c
Returning to my research questions, this study set out to examine how dance influences development for preschool students with disabilities. In addition to socio- emotional development, I wanted to understand 1b) How does dance influence executive function, and 1c) How does the process work differently for different students (peer models vs. students with disabilities)? Once again, it is important to analyze all data sources – qualitative and quantitative – holistically to get a complete understanding of any changes that occurred in executive function throughout the course of Dance to Learn.
In general, the surveys showed more significant results for growth in executive functioning compared to socio-emotional development. Those trends in improvement were largely reinforced throughout the qualitative data as well, although in interviews, fewer themes related to executive function emerged as compared to socio-emotional development. Due to limitations associated with both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods, it is important to compare the results from all data sources to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how executive functioning skills changed throughout the residency and how that change compared for students with disabilities and peer models.
Inhibition. Quantitative data about inhibition suggested mixed results. Both peer models and students with disabilities experienced significant gains in the ability to wait their turn – that was certainly reinforced in my qualitative data as well. Within the structure of the program, students actively exercise their turn-taking skills while they wait for others to perform solos. Therefore, it makes sense that the ability to wait one’s turn improved. Also reflected in both the quantitative and qualitative data was greater
! 373 improvement for students with disabilities, particularly autism. Though the peer models also gained turn-taking skills, the students with disabilities improved more drastically, suggesting a potential gap-bridging effect of dance on EF skills.
Though turn-taking skills undoubtedly showed improvement throughout Dance to
Learn, the survey data was not so positive for the skill of not talking at inappropriate times. Previously, I discussed potential reasons for the decrease in means both for students with disabilities and especially for peer models. I think the survey item is not phrased in the most effective way, and I suggested a potential socio-emotional reason for the increased amount of talking at inappropriate times as well. After careful review of my qualitative data, it seems that students were more likely to speak out at inappropriate times as they felt more comfortable in the program. As they got to know the teaching artists and me, they were more likely to try to gain our approval by sharing their ideas, so the desire for bonding (which I consider a positive thing) is what led to more students talking at inappropriate times. The survey question was also limited in its scope – it did not mention anything related to raising a hand to be called on or waiting patiently to share. Though student talking varied week to week, I saw a distinct increase in students raising their hands and waiting to be called on before speaking, which to me indicates improvement in inhibition beyond what the survey could measure. Though results may not have been as drastic as in other areas of inhibition or EF, there was evidence of an improved ability to refrain from speaking when inappropriate despite the surveys’ downward trends.
Furthermore, I noticed other aspects of inhibition that were not addressed by the survey at all. In my qualitative analysis, I discussed that the ability to withhold responses
! 374 appeared to increase throughout the program, and wandering decreased. The teaching artists also corroborated those trends, citing Natalie’s decreased wandering and even
Bryce’s increased ability to withhold impulsive responses. Therefore, based on both qualitative and quantitative data, it appears that students realized gains in inhibition skills throughout the program, especially students with disabilities.
Shifting. Quantitative and qualitative data align to show a definite improvement in shifting skills throughout the program. The shift index for both peer models and students with disabilities showed significant improvement based on the survey, and that was apparent in the question about shifting gears and adapting behaviors to new tasks.
Qualitative data support that trend as well; I discussed that transitions both into class and within class improved and became more efficient each week. Ability to shift is also readily apparent in the self-correction behaviors that I noticed, particularly for children with autism.
Though the individual survey question about adjusting behavior to different situations did not show significant improvement, I did see that students were able to effectively adjust their behavior from their classrooms to dance class. I mentioned that the nuance of the question might have something to do with the lack of significant improvement; after reviewing my qualitative data in conjunction with the surveys, it also appears that there may have been a ceiling effect for that question particularly for the peer models. Especially after they became familiar with the routine, everyone came in ready to go and smoothly made the adjustment from their normal school day to dance class. Therefore, as evidenced by both the qualitative and quantitative data sources, there seemed to be a correlation between the program and improved shifting skills.
! 375 Working memory. Working memory skills were the only area of development that showed clear improvement for both students with disabilities and peer models in the indexed scores as well as both individual survey questions. From the outset, it appears that there is an undeniable correlation between Dance to Learn and working memory skills. Factoring in the qualitative data reinforces that correlation; I noticed vast improvements in all sub-themes related to working memory, and those were echoed by the teaching artists and classroom teachers as well.
In addition to the improvements seen on the two survey items, I also noticed further improvement in the ability to follow directions in real time as well as ignore distractions, both of which also fall under the category of working memory. The classroom teacher was especially vocal about the direct impact the program had on her students’ ability to follow directions. Thus, based on my qualitative analysis and the survey data, there was certainly drastic improvement in working memory that could likely be attributed directly to the program. As with many of the other facets of development, improvement was greater for students with autism as compared to peer models.
Planning and organizing. Within the surveys, it did not appear that planning and organizing changed much from the beginning to the end of the program. Neither of the individual questions were significant for either peer models or students with disabilities, and the indexed score showed only slightly significant improvement for students with disabilities. Planning and organizing skills usually develop most dramatically between the ages of 7-11, so perhaps the age group was still too young to demonstrate clear gains
! 376 in planning and organizing skills. However, qualitative data suggests a larger impact than the quantitative data implies.
Interestingly, planning and organizing was the only index in which the relative amount of growth between groups was contradictory based on the data source. In the surveys, it appeared that students with disabilities grew more than peer models; however, based on my own observations, I saw more growth in the peer models. Perhaps that means that both groups did experience some amount of growth in planning and organizing skills.
One of the survey questions asked if the student “can do things that require mental effort.” Qualitatively, I classified that as the ability to remember information, correctly answer questions, and make connections. All three of those areas improved, especially for the peer models and somewhat for the students with disabilities. The survey question about logical storytelling was perhaps less relevant in the dance setting – the students read a story gradually over ten weeks but did not really have the opportunity to tell stories themselves. However, logical storytelling also involves remembering events and making logical connections, both of which improved according to my observations and the classroom teacher’s comments. Additionally, I saw major evidence of planning ahead at the end of the residency with students like Annie who proactively asked me to go with her during her solo. Therefore, I consider the program to correlate somewhat positively with planning and organizing skills.
Emergent themes. Several unique themes arose in my observations that were not addressed on the survey. Despite that they did not clearly fit into a predetermined category of EF, I considered the emergent themes to involve qualities of EF that made
! 377 them relevant data. Attention and engagement improved throughout, which is important to all facets of EF. Following along, related to working memory and attention as well as shifting, also improved. One of the classroom teachers noted that she hoped that comprehension skills would improve, and by my observations, that was the case for students with autism in particular. Finally, the ability to work and move independently drastically increased throughout the residency.
I also found themes that arose in the quantitative data – particularly about age and repeat students – to be reinforced within my qualitative data as well. The repeat students tended to have an advantage in EF-related skills partly because they were familiar with the program. The classroom teachers also observed that the students who had the program previously were excited about it and already showed improvement from the previous year just within the first week. I also found that the youngest students, whether diagnosed with a disability or not, were the ones that struggled most to be independent and use working memory skills. Some of those skills come with age and maturation, so those trends make sense.
Answering subquestions 1b and 1c. Based on all of the named themes related to
EF as well as emergent themes, it is clear that Dance to Learn correlates with and supports gains in executive function skills. Once again, we see that the survey data is incomplete – while it may hint at certain trends, careful consideration of qualitative data is necessary for a complete picture. In general, the data from each source reinforces the others, and the trends largely indicate improvement in EF skills. Additionally, other than planning and organizing, students with disabilities, particularly autism, showed more drastic improvement than their same-age peers. Therefore, like socio-emotional
! 378 development, this data indicates that dance has the potential to positively influence executive function skills, particularly for preschool students with disabilities.
Answering Research Question 1
Research Question 1 asks: How does dance influence development in students in a preschool inclusion classroom? In order to answer that question, particularly within the realms of socio-emotional development and executive function, I analyzed various data sources using qualitative and quantitative methods. Though survey results suggested greater gains for executive function than socio-emotional development, qualitative data suggested growth in both areas of development, particularly socio-emotional. Combining information from data sources and taking into account the contextual factors within the program and each classroom allows us to understand the potential for dance to positively influence both socio-emotional development and executive function. Due to limitations of the study design, it is impossible to say that the improvements were caused by the dance program; however, it is clear that at the very least, dance does not harm developmental growth, and at best it supports the development of socio-emotional and executive function skills.
! 379
Chapter 7: Discussion and Conclusion
Overview
This study is the first that I know of to address and evaluate dance programming for preschoolers with autism. Most studies that relate dance and autism do so through the lens of Dance/Movement Therapy (DMT), which is a therapeutic intervention. Other studies look specifically at yoga or physical education rather than dance and creative movement. This study provides a framework for an outside entity (in this case, a ballet company) to enter into an educational space to deliver a dance program; the results suggest that dance may be an effective avenue to support socio-emotional development and executive functioning for all preschool students, but particularly students with disabilities.
The following chapter will review the major findings of the study and specifically address each research question. I will also relate the general findings back to my theoretical and analytical frameworks to provide a discussion of how my study fits within the existing literature. Those frameworks will also allow me an avenue to understand how and why the program worked as it did and why the existing results emerged. After generalizing my findings about the program itself, I will provide a blueprint for educators who hope to adapt or develop programming for an inclusive environment. Finally, I will discuss the limitations of this study and potential future research directions.
! 380 Research Question 1: Dance and Development
One of the primary aims of this research was to understand the potential impact of dance on development in students with disabilities, specifically autism. After observing three preschool inclusion classes, I saw general improvements in all areas of measurement related to socio-emotional development and executive function. As discussed in Chapter 6, growth was particularly evident in students with disabilities, and especially students with autism. My observations were corroborated by multiple data sources, including surveys and interviews with classroom teachers and teaching artists. In addition to understanding the potential relationship between dance and autism, it is also important to see how my study results fit with the existing literature and my own theoretical and analytical frameworks. The following sections will independently address the trends I noticed in socio-emotional development and executive function and discuss how they apply to existing literature.
Socio-Emotional Development
For the purposes of this study, I conceptualized socio-emotional development in terms of five categories: emotion expression, identifying emotions about oneself, emotion understanding, emotion regulation, and social relationships. Each of those categories also had a number of sub-themes operationalizing specific behaviors that exemplified the main category. Based on pre- and post-survey data, my own participant observations, and interviews with classroom teachers from the center as well as teaching artists from the ballet company, I determined that over the course of the program, all students experienced growth in each of the aforementioned categories of socio-emotional development. That growth was particularly robust for students with autism.
! 381 Multiple Intelligence Theory. In Chapter 4, I discussed Multiple Intelligence
Theory (MIT, Gardner, 1998; 2011) as a way to interpret my study’s findings. Based on the premise that everyone possesses eight distinct intelligences, MIT serves as a tool for inclusive and strengths-based educational practices. Incorporating MIT in education allows educators to identify student strengths, which provides various entry points for teaching curricula. Additionally, the knowledge of MIT may allow for individualization in presenting educational materials (Dale, Hyatt, & Hollerman, 2007). Thus, using an
MIT framework can help not only to engage students, but can also help develop some of the intelligences themselves. Because two are personal intelligences – interpersonal and intrapersonal – MIT is directly related to socio-emotional development.
The nature of dance and movement inherently aligns with socio-emotional development; Leslie mentioned that if nothing else, being able to move around with high energy provides an emotional release. Following MIT, the teaching artists noticed when students needed a little extra time to gallop around the room during locomotor and allowed them that time to help them engage more deeply with the curriculum. They recognized what the students needed, reorganized their presentation of class activities, and allowed that locomotor exercise and subsequent emotional release to be an entry point for engagement. Additionally, there were some students who were much more captivated by movement when it was locomotor rather than stationary – Heidi, for example, loved to move around the room, but often disengaged if we sat down.
Recognizing her strength of paying attention when moving around, the teaching artists sometimes decided to perform the warm-up standing to help her stay focused on the
! 382 class. Therefore, they were able to use the principles of MIT to help make the material more accessible to individual students.
Daniel was another student that frequently wandered or didn’t pay attention but was drawn in by locomotor activities. During the second to last class, he was sort of playing with Beth as she was leading locomotor. She said that he would catch up to her, run ahead, and stop and turn around, making eye contact the whole time. Once Beth caught up, he ran ahead again. Rather than being defiant, he was engaging with Beth socially – locomotor movement served as an entry point and a means for him to exercise his interpersonal intelligence.
Combining both linguistic intelligence and interpersonal intelligence, I noticed that a particularly effective entry point for students was the story. Even students who were not fully engaged during the warm-up seemed to check back in during the story, especially when Leslie was showing the pictures and reading the narrative. Adam, who was usually shy and quiet, often got excited to name the animals that we had done as
Leslie led the review. He even approached the teaching artists to share his knowledge, engaging socially to answer questions. Thus, the use of the story as an entry point allowed Adam to both engage with the material and even develop some skills related to interpersonal intelligence.
Jeremy was another student who was frequently drawn in by the story. Even if he was having a hard day, the story usually cheered him up. There was a poem in the story about feeling better – “The sun is shining / the sky is bright / the birds are singing / and
I’m feeling aaaaalright!” The teaching artists taught a little dance to that poem, including a big jump up when they said “alright.” When Jeremy came in upset or anxious, he
! 383 always got excited about the poem, and he frequently came and danced with me for it.
Thus, the book was an important entry point for him that exercised aspects of linguistic intelligence and allowed Jeremy to have an interpersonal connection with me.
In general, I saw significant gains in socio-emotional skills throughout the program. Using the framework of MIT, it is clear that even moments that did not specifically address socio-emotional themes were able to engage the personal intelligences, which are directly related to socio-emotional development. Furthermore, the personal intelligences served as an entry point for students to the curriculum itself.
Thus, my findings fit into the framework of MIT, which provides some information about the mechanism of the program – MIT can help explain how the program works and why I observed gains in socio-emotional development.
Embodied cognition. Another area of literature that I described in my theoretical and analytical frameworks was that of embodied cognition. The theory of embodied cognition is founded upon the notion that the body is directly involved in cognition, not simply a product of the mind. Especially in early childhood, cognition is thought to be largely embodied. As dance is inherently embodied, it fits well within the framework of embodied cognition.
Wilson (2002) discusses the similarities between embodied cognition and situated cognition and argues that spatial cognition is often situated. During Dance to Learn, the students were in a classroom – though the classroom had no desks, there were still counters, cabinets, and cubbies lining the walls. Students had to use their spatial awareness to avoid getting too close to those fixtures in the room. They were also actively moving around the room together – 16 students and several adults moving in a
! 384 single space without bumping certainly requires spatial cognition in the moment. Spatial awareness was something that I considered to be encompassed within the realm of socio- emotional development, and it was also something that I saw vast improvement in throughout the residency. The classroom teachers also noticed that the students were better able to understand their bodies in space, and they saw less bumping and crashing as a result of the program.
Additionally, Yilmaz, Yanardag, Birkan, and Bumin’s (2004) study using hydrotherapy as an intervention for autism found that embodied, physical practices not only improved movement and coordination, but also confidence and body awareness. My study’s results were similar; using embodiment and dance as a physical activity, the students gained self-confidence and particularly body awareness. Therefore, by engaging elements of embodied cognition, teachers were also helping students to develop their confidence and spatial awareness and thus their socio-emotional skills.
Embodied social cognition. Another facet of embodied cognition is specifically linked to socio-emotional development. Researchers argue that though social cognition is minimally embodied in adulthood (Goldman & de Vignemont, 2009), cognitive and social processes in early childhood are largely embodied (Fenici, 2010; Leitan &
Chaffey, 2014). Social processes like empathy and emotional contagion do have a foundation in the body, so those are particularly relevant to embodied social cognition.
Additionally, the mirror neuron system provides evidence that some social cognition actually begins with motor planning (Goldman & de Vignemont, 2009).
Within Dance to Learn, there was an implicit focus on emotions in the first session, and an explicit curriculum about emotions in the second. When students were
! 385 instructed to “put your hands on your hips and a smile on your lips” before galloping, many students smiled. Compounding the excitement of galloping, the act of smiling in itself may have caused the students to feel joy or excitement, which is an example of emotional contagion. In Class 3, we also spent time identifying and acting out different emotions, which is yet another example of embodying social processes.
Furthermore, much of the warm-up involved mirroring exercises – the students watched the teaching artists and tried to match their movements. Since many researchers have connected activation of the mirror neuron system to the development of empathy
(Behrends, Müller, & Dziobek, 2012; Berrol, 2006; McGarry & Russo, 2011), there is a theoretical foundation for the idea that dance promotes empathy. I did notice an increase in empathic behaviors throughout the residency, especially from Brandon. Lots of other students were very interested in helping one another, and mirroring even served as a tool to get students engaged, like when Natalie mirrored Beth’s buffalo shoulders. Thus, it is feasible that the use of elements related to embodied social cognition helped promote socio-emotional skills and development in students. Thus, though my own study cannot confirm that the dance program caused the growth in development, there are certainly mechanisms in place for the dance program to support socio-emotional development.
Autism. Despite being in an inclusion setting with students that had various disabilities, I wanted to focus my study on how dance influences development in students with autism. One of the core features of autism has to do with social challenges like communication and Theory of Mind skills, among others (APA, 2013). Since dance itself is linked to emotion, I felt that dance could be a particularly powerful avenue to promote social-emotional skills in students with autism.
! 386 One aspect of Theory of Mind skills involves the ability to infer mental states based on the actions of others (Johnson & Myers, 2007). For students with autism, that may be particularly difficult. However, using dance as a means of expression, students were able to identify others’ emotions and even embody those emotions themselves.
Even when not specifically prompted to identify others’ emotions, I noticed growth in students’ emotion understanding throughout the residency. Especially because of the explicit focus on emotion in Class 3, I saw a definite increase in Theory of Mind skills in all of the students, but particularly the students with autism.
Much of dance class is also based on the theme that “dancers do not use their voices.” Thus, it can focus on both communicating nonverbally as well as understanding nonverbal communication from others. In Class 3 when the students were excited and talkative, the teaching artists encouraged them to show they were excited without using their voices. Thus, all of the students – those who had language and those who were nonverbal – were suddenly on equal footing. Students were able to practice communicating without words in addition to understanding others who did not use words.
Since both verbal and nonverbal communication can be challenging for people with autism, the focus on nonverbal communication in dance class provided a unique avenue to develop alternative communication skills. Thus, dance can be particularly helpful for mitigating core features of ASD and developing socio-emotional skills in children with autism.
Executive Function
Executive function was broken down into categories of inhibition, shifting, working memory, and planning and organizing. Each of those categories were made up
! 387 of sub-themes identifying specific behaviors that demonstrated EF. Additional emergent themes included attention and engagement, comprehension and creativity, independence, and following along. Based on all of my data sources, both quantitative and qualitative, I was able to confirm improvement in each of the individual categories of executive function. Like socio-emotional development, those improvements were greater for the students with disabilities, and particularly those with autism.
Multiple Intelligence Theory. Again, MIT can help to explain how the program functioned to foster EF skills in preschool students. Perhaps the biggest impact of MIT was on attention and engagement. Previously, I spoke about interpersonal intelligences as a way to engage students in the program. In terms of executive function, I noticed that musical and bodily-kinesthetic intelligences served as another entry point for engagement. Natalie, for example, was very musical and rhythmic, and that was especially obvious when she started performing Head, Shoulders, Knees, and Toes as we were in the middle of warm-up. Beth used that as an entry point for her to stay with the class – we all did a round of Head, Shoulders, Knees, and Toes together, and that allowed
Natalie to really start to pay attention to and appreciate what we were doing in the program. Thus, her musical intelligence served as a way to allow her to improve her attention span and ability to focus, which are important elements of executive function.
As a dance program, the primary intelligence that was used throughout each class was bodily-kinesthetic. However, the teaching artists also tied that in to executive function when they discussed controlling their bodies or moving and then freezing. In other words, they used the students’ bodily-kinesthetic intelligence to reinforce executive function skills like inhibition and self-regulation. Tying more difficult skills like
! 388 inhibition into the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence of highly embodied preschoolers allows those concepts to become more relevant and thus gives them an avenue for improvement in executive function skills.
Overall, I observed ample growth in executive function skills throughout the residency. Some of the biggest gains I noticed were in attention; the teaching artists were able to appeal to individual strengths and interests of students to help them focus and attend for longer periods of time. Using individualized strengths related to different intelligences allowed the students an avenue for engagement they might not otherwise have had. Because the teaching artists were able to use different intelligences to reinforce
EF concepts, the framework of MIT can help explain why some of that growth occurred.
Embodied cognition. Based on Wilson’s (2002) framework, the students were frequently using embodied cognition throughout each Dance to Learn class. Especially when discussing the story, the teaching artists were very deliberate about asking the students to think about different animal movements as they performed them. By thinking about and attending to the movements as they were physically acting them out, the students gained a better understanding of the different animal movements. I noted comprehension as something that fell under the umbrella of executive function, and embodying the “answers” or the concepts evoked in the story helped the students to better comprehend information about animals and about their own movement.
Wilson (2002) also describes working memory as being embodied. The students were frequently required to use working memory during dance class to follow directions, especially for the solos each day. The same was true when the students were prompted to do a Magic 8 dance incorporating the animal movements they had learned. Correctly
! 389 doing a solo or a Magic 8 dance meant that the students had to attend, actively think about their movements, and remember what came next as they were dancing. Thus, the frameworks of EF and embodied cognition served to reinforce each other throughout
Dance to Learn. Because children’s cognition is already largely embodied, the framework of embodied cognition can help to explain how the children improved in their working memory and comprehension skills over the course of the program.
Autism. In addition to social symptoms, another core feature of autism is inflexibility or insistence on sameness as well as repetitive, stereotypical movements
(APA, 2013). Participating in a movement program that is different than a typical day requires some flexibility and willingness to adapt to a new environment and schedule.
Within each dance class, the teaching artists did multiple activities with the students, which involved transitions and shifting. Thus, being involved in Dance to Learn could help the students with autism to become more flexible or tolerant of change.
I also noticed repetitive, stereotypical behaviors in some of the students with autism; hand flapping and spinning were two common stereotypies I saw frequently.
However, in dance class, the teaching artists were able to either celebrate those behaviors or redirect them to other kinds of movement. When redirected, the students had to learn to inhibit their impulses to engage in the repetitive behavior; by the end of the residency,
I noticed significantly less hand flapping and spinning in students. That inhibition of impulsive, repetitive movements is also an important executive functioning skill, so at the same time that Dance to Learn is potentially helping students to manage common challenges with autism, it is also promoting executive function skills.
! 390 Summary: Research Question 1
Using the frameworks of Multiple Intelligence Theory and embodied cognition and applying what we know to be true about autism, it makes sense that the students experienced improvement in all measured domains of socio-emotional development and executive function skills. One of the most consistent findings about interventions for autism is that early intervention is most effective. Both socio-emotional and executive function skills develop rapidly in preschool as well, so that makes the Dance to Learn program particularly relevant to support both SE and EF skills in preschoolers. I noticed that students with autism seemed to be the most positively impacted by the program, so therefore, my study reinforces the notion that dance is a particularly relevant and useful
(if underused) intervention for all children, and especially for children with autism.
Research Question 2: Implications for the Dance to Learn Program
Based on my analysis of the infrastructures and pedagogies used in Dance to
Learn, I have determined that without modifications, the program is already decently inclusive, which affirms that dance can be an effective method of inclusive education.
However, the teaching artists made specific adaptations to the program to make it more accessible to the population of students they were working with. The general program structure as well as the specific modifications for inclusion provide a number of implications for educators interested in adapting programming to make it more inclusive.
Though the blueprint was created based on the model of the Dance to Learn program, it can theoretically be applied to any arts program – new or existing – to make it more meaningfully inclusive.
! 391 Blueprint3for3Inclusive3Program3Adaptation3
PreKProgram3Considerations! ●! Establish!community!partners!! ○! Experts!to!provide!behavioral!assistance! ○! Locations!to!deliver!the!program! ●! Administrative!support! Community! ○! Establish!clear!communication!between!partners! Partnerships! ○! Establish!the!role!of!the!program!in!the!setting! ●! Classroom!teacher!support!(if!entering!a!classroom!setting)! ○! Establish!clear!expectations!of!teacher! Support! involvement/roles! Structures! ●! Determine!program!budget! ●! Determine!funding!sources! Funding! ○! Private!donors,!grants,!community!partners! ○! Establish!sustainability!of!funding!sources!
Intra8! ●! Establish!how!program!aligns!with!mission! Organizational! ●! Garner!support!from!organization’s!leaders! Support! ●! Build/train!team!of!staff!for!program!delivery!
●! Establish!specific!program!goals! ●! Decide!on!a!curricular!theme! Program!Goals! ●! Build!lesson!plans!with!UDL!in!mind! ○! Multiple!means!of!representation,! Planning! action/expression,!and!engagement!
Information! ●! Discuss!particular!needs!of!participants! about!! ○! Determine!specific!accommodations!or!necessary! Population! modifications!for!lesson!plans!
●! Check!space!prior!to!the!first!day!to!ensure!it!is!appropriate! Site!Visit! ●! Plan!how!to!set!up!any!necessary!materials!/!arrange!room!
●! Remove!distracting!objects!from!room! Limit! ○! Cover/barricade!distractions!that!can’t!be!removed! Environment! Distractions! ●! Acoustics!–!plan!for!potential!sensory!sensitivities! ●! If!possible,!allow!students!time!to!acclimate!to!space!!
●! Return!to!the!same!space!for!each!class! Consistency! ●! Structure!the!space!similarly!each!time! ●! Keep!staff!consistent!for!each!class!
Continued Table 5. Blueprint for Inclusive Program Adaptation
! 392 Table 5 continued
Daily3Considerations! ●! Check!assumptions!about!student!potential!or!ability! Open8! ●! Don’t!let!information!about!students!cloud!judgment!about! mindedness! what!is!occuring!in!the!class! ●! “Assume!that!they!can,!help!if!they!can’t”!
●! Hypervigilance!! Awareness! ●! Awareness!of!students!who!are!struggling! ●! Awareness!of!other!faculty!in!the!room!
Teacher!! ●! Willingness!to!shift!lesson!plan!in!the!moment! Mindset! Flexibility! ●! Willingness!to!alter!strategy!in!the!moment! ●! Thinking!on!one’s!feet!
●! Don’t!get!discouraged!if!it!doesn’t!run!perfectly! Positivity! ●! Not!taking!it!personally!if!lesson!is!not!completed!
●! Recognize!small!victories! Redefining! ●! Understand!what!is!a!success!for!each!student!–! "Success"! individualization! ●! Catch!them!doing!something!good!
●! Keep!lesson!consistent!each!week! Consistency! ○! A!visual!schedule!can!be!helpful!! ●! Repetition!of!concepts!
●! Break!things!down!into!smaller!pieces! Scaffolding! ●! Build!upon!smaller!pieces!to!support!more!complex!tasks!
●! Use!clear,!purposeful!transitions! Transitions! ○! “Dance!the!transitions”! Lesson!! ●! Give!notice!before!transitioning! Structure! ●! Slow!the!pacing! Pacing! ●! Repeat!specific!tasks!multiple!times! ●! Wait!longer!before!transitioning!from!one!thing!to!the!next!
●! Extra!hands!are!helpful!–!one8to8one!support!when! Co8Teaching!/! necessary! Volunteers! ●! Establish!co8teaching!relationship!and!rely!on!co8teachers! for!help! Continued
! 393 Table 5 continued
●! Kindness! ●! Positive!social!interactions!with!students! ●! Acknowledge!and!praise!student!ideas! ○! Provide!extra!encouragement! Building!Trust! ●! Learn!student!names! ●! Respect!student!boundaries! ○! Let!students!say!“no”! ○! Don’t!force!students!to!complete!activities! ●! Affirm!improvement!and!student!strengths!
●! Use!simple,!clear!directions! ○! “Do!this!”! Giving!Directions! ●! Modeling/demonstrating!! ●! “First,!then”!prompts! ●! Use!props!for!extra!visual!
●! Awareness!of!co8teachers!in!the!space! Spacing! Teaching! ●! Teachers!should!make!themselves!available!to!help! Strategies! ●! Use!terms!students!can!relate!to! Language! ●! Specific!and!concrete!descriptions! ●! Framing!–!“Try!it!this!way”!instead!of!“Don’t!do!that”!
●! Consider!what!the!whole!class!needs! Individualization! ●! Consider!what!individual!students!need!in!the!moment! ●! Focus!on!strengths!
●! Build!into!activities!as!much!as!possible! ●! Understand!when!“off8task”!behaviors!are!not!defiant,! but!rather!communicative! Classroom! ●! Praise!students!who!are!following!directions!rather!than! Management! reprimand!students!who!are!not! ○! Praise!improvements! ●! Explain!why!we!have!certain!rules! ●! “Do!you!need!a!break?”! Continued
! 394 Table 5 continued
PostKProgram3Considerations! ●! Reflect!and!discuss!with!co8teachers!what!was! successful!! Daily! ●! Discuss!what!did!not!go!as!well!as!planned!! ○! How!can!the!teachers!change!what!they’re! Evaluation! doing!to!help!the!students?!
●! Re8connect!with!partners!and!discuss!the!program! Post8Program! ●! Did!the!program!meet!the!expectations!of!the!partners?!
From my knowledge of the program and the specific findings from this analysis, I have created a blueprint for adaptation that could be modified for other dance or general arts programs. This blueprint addresses considerations for adaptation based on the successes that I saw in the Dance to Learn program. Drawing from both my personal observations and my interviews with the teaching artists as well as specific feedback from the classroom teachers, the blueprint provides several suggestions for the design and planning process, as well as specific tips about the actual delivery of the program and subsequent evaluation. Table 5 provides the blueprint in its entirety, while Table 6 frames the pre-program process as specific questions to ask when attempting to establish or modify a program. Ideally, this blueprint will be a starting point to ensure that new programs are inclusive, and that pre-existing programs can be modified to reach all audiences. Thus, applying the key elements of Dance to Learn, it presents a starting point to develop sustainable, adaptive programming in any art form.
3
! 395 Getting3Started:3PreKProgram3Considerations!
Who!will!you!partner!with?!
Community! What!role!will!the!program!fill!for!the!partner?! Partnerships! What!are!the!expectations!of!each!partner!and/or!faculty! member?!
What!is!the!estimated!program!budget?! Support! Structures! Funding! What!funding!sources!are!available?!
How!will!funding!be!sustained!in!the!future?!
How!does!the!program!fit!your!organization's!mission?! Intra8! Organizational! How!will!you!gain!support!from!organizational!leadership?! Support! Who!will!be!involved!in!delivering!the!program,!and!what!training! do!they!need?!
What!are!the!goals!of!the!program?!
What!are!the!goals!of!the!partners?! Program!Goals! What!will!the!curriculum!for!this!particular!program!be!focused! Planning! on?!
Who!will!be!the!primary!recipients!of!the!program?! Information! about! What!kinds!of!modifications!or!accommodations!will!the! Population! participants!need?!
What!kind!of!space!is!necessary!for!the!program?! Site!Visit! What!materials!are!required!for!the!program?!
What!potential!distractions!exist!in!the!space?! Limit! Environment! Distractions! How!can!those!distractions!be!removed!or!lessened?!
Is!the!space!available!for!the!duration!of!the!program?! Consistency! Will!the!faculty!be!consistent!for!the!duration!of!the!program?!
Table 6. Getting Started
! 396 Research Question 3: Classroom Teachers
Though the biggest areas of interest for this study involved the program’s impact on students and its adaptations for inclusion, I was also curious to know how the program impacted the classroom teachers, if at all. Since dance has proven to be helpful within the classroom, I thought that perhaps exposure to a dance program might empower classroom teachers to independently use dance and movement in their own classrooms. The ballet company provided additional pre- and post-surveys to teachers about their perception of dance in the classroom. In addition to demographic information, the pre-survey asked about teachers’ formal training in dance, how frequently they use dance in class, how valuable dance is in the classroom, and how willing and confident the teachers were to use dance in their own classrooms. The post-survey asked the same questions to see if teacher confidence or perception of dance changed over the course of the program.
In the pre-surveys, all lead classroom teachers mentioned that they had only had a little formal dance or movement training. They all also said they use movement in the classroom a moderate amount. In terms of the value, willingness, and confidence in using dance in the classroom, answers ranged from “moderately” to “very” (3-4 on a Likert scale of 1-5).
Fortunately, no answers decreased on the post-survey, meaning that teachers did not become less willing to use dance or feel that dance was less valuable after having the program. One of the teachers’ answers increased in terms of how valuable dance is and how willing she was to use it, but answers only increased by one point. Since all of these teachers had the program before, they already knew what to expect and had previously
! 397 seen a template for using movement in the classroom; thus, I don’t know that the surveys were particularly informative for this group of teachers.
In my interviews with the classroom teachers, they did disclose some ways in which they had either been inspired by the program or adapted things that they saw in the program. For example, one teacher liked the idea of the solo, but rather than using it for dance, she uses it for sharing stories or ideas. She said that a lot of times, students all have something to say or share, so she has a stool that students can come sit on. When one student is on the stool, it is his/her turn to talk and the other students have to slow down and listen. Though it was not movement based, I appreciated that the teacher took the idea of the solo that she had seen in Dance to Learn and applied it in a way that worked for her in the classroom.
Another of the teachers uses the companion book that accompanies the program.
Along with sending the book home to each student participant, the ballet company sends a book for each classroom. One of the classroom teachers was excited about the book, and she read it in class to her students. I thought that was a nice way to sort of maintain the presence of the program in the classroom, even if it was not specifically movement based.
In sum, it appears that the program and its techniques did not greatly impact the classroom teachers in terms of inspiring them to use more movement in the classroom. In the yearly program evaluation, the evaluators found that while classroom teachers find value in dance and movement in the classroom, they said that the teachers may benefit from more explicit reminders about the potential positive impact of dance on socio- emotional development and executive function (Ballet Company Evaluators, 2019). Only
! 398 one of the three teachers at the inclusion center mentioned in the post-survey that the program “supported social emotional development, problem solving skills, listening and following directions” in addition to motor planning and coordination. Thus, perhaps with more direct communication about additional benefits of the program, classroom teachers will be more impacted as well.
Limitations
Though this study was stronger and more robust than the pilot study that I conducted in my Master’s thesis and it uniquely fills a gap in the literature, there are still several limitations to be aware of. I discussed some of the limitations of both quantitative and qualitative analysis procedures in Chapter 6. Those limitations mean that I cannot infer causation – I cannot make the claim that Dance to Learn caused improvements in development. I can only note that the program correlated with such changes, and there may be other mechanisms in place that resulted in the changes I saw. However, applying several theoretical frameworks related to education, development, and autism suggests that it is quite possible that the program did impact elements of socio-emotional development and executive functioning. A randomized experiment with a true control group would be necessary to determine causation, and that was unfortunately beyond the means of this study. Additionally, my observations were not exhaustive; there was more happening in the classroom at any given moment than I could attend to, so it is difficult to say how that affects the trends that I noticed in my study.
Along with weaknesses related to data collection, there were other factors that also created limitations for my study based on variability between the classrooms. The first had to do with the engagement of the classroom teachers. In the first session, one of
! 399 the classroom teachers disclosed that she had back problems that limited her mobility, so she would likely not fully participate with the movement activities. However, she was often in the room helping with specific students. There were some days when the classroom teachers came into the room at the beginning and then left, leaving only the assistant teachers with us. I noticed that behaviors often escalated when the classroom teachers were not in the room, so active teacher engagement on any given day seemed to affect what occurred in the classroom.
The classroom teacher for the winter session also took a slightly different approach than the first two teachers in terms of her involvement with the ballet company.
While I never felt that any of the classroom teachers were totally unsupportive, the third classroom teacher was very open in her communication and intentions. She frequently checked in with the teaching artists and asked if her team should be providing more support or if they should step back even more. During the Dance to Learn classes, she actively encouraged her students to engage with us instead of the classroom teacher team, and she specifically made the effort to step back unless there was a particularly difficult situation that the teaching artists and I were unequipped to handle. That difference in mentality may have led to unquantifiable differences in the Dance to Learn experience for the students.
Specific factors related to the center also introduced variability that may have affected the classes. The first two classes adhered to the same schedule – for the most part, it was consistent from week to week with a scheduled break for Thanksgiving. Thus, there was a consistency in the schedule throughout the ten sessions. With the winter session, the scheduling was supposed to be consistent, but due to inclement weather, the
! 400 first several weeks ended up being every other week. That extended the program several weeks, and even within sessions that ended up being weekly, there were other building factors like tornado drills and observers coming in that introduced issues we did not deal with in the first session. It is difficult to say how the difference in scheduling impacted the program and the students.
Additionally, scheduling within the center introduced differences in the classes that may have affected observations and even teacher perceptions of the program. Having the first class in the fall begin at 9:30am introduced some challenges related to transitions because students needed to come in and eat breakfast before attending dance class. That led to the first class frequently coming in a few minutes late, which gave them less time per class than the other classrooms. There was also one day in the first session where the room normally used for Dance to Learn was in use by another program, so we had to move to a different space. That certainly seemed to affect some of the students and led to more difficult transitions into class that day.
Furthermore, differences in classroom teachers’ techniques and procedures themselves introduced some variability as well. For example, two of the three classes very clearly used a buddy system that fostered peer support. In the first class and the third class, students frequently came in holding hands, which also seemed to affect how they approached dance class. Within the classes that used the buddy system, we saw more hand-holding and helping behaviors than in the other class. Therefore, it is difficult to pinpoint how the strategies used by the classroom teachers impacted the Dance to Learn program and any observed growth in the students. Similarly, many of the students with disabilities also had other therapies as needed, so the Dance to Learn program worked in
! 401 conjunction with those; that variability in addition to the various strategies in the classroom makes it difficult to assess the sole impact of the program.
Finally, it is important to note the differences in curriculum that may affect the impact of the program. In the first session, both classes used the book Head to Toe, which is about animal movements and body awareness. The third class in the winter used the book Pete the Cat and the Magic Sunglasses, which is about emotions and how to look at things in a new way to overcome negative emotions like frustration, anger, and sadness.
Though there is a socio-emotional component inherent in movement class, it is possible that the curricula affected socio-emotional development differently due to the explicit focus on specific emotions and emotion management. A more thorough examination of how the curriculum affects development is necessary to fully understand those potential impacts; however, that is beyond the scope of this study.
Future Research Directions
Based on the results and limitations of the current study, there are many possibilities for future research to further understand the impact of dance on students with autism. For example, refining this study further by including a larger sample, a true control group, better parent data, and a consistent curriculum would help to strengthen the internal validity of the current design. Adjusting some of the potentially biased survey questions might also help to get more accurate quantitative data about the impact of the program.
Future studies could also investigate the classroom teachers in more depth.
Though my study only touched briefly on the potential (or lack of) impact on the classroom teachers, another design could focus specifically on how classroom teachers
! 402 perceive a program like Dance to Learn and what supports need to be in place to help the teachers feel more comfortable implementing new teaching methods like dance and movement into their curricula. A similar study could assess the impact of teacher perception and support on a program like Dance to Learn. The teaching artists mentioned that level of teacher involvement and support often determined the success of a class, so it would be interesting to study that phenomenon to better understand the ideal relationship between the classroom teachers and the teaching artists and what needs to be in place for that to work.
I mentioned that the various curricula might have affected the results of the study; doing an in-depth analysis of different lesson plans and their impact on various aspects of development might be beneficial to understand how different curricula influence student growth. By doing a curriculum study, teaching artists can better match teacher goals to the themes of Dance to Learn, and can also understand how to build lesson plans to meet various goals. Having a better understanding of how specific lessons work may also allow the teachers to better adapt lessons to accommodate a variety of audiences.
One of the themes that occurred frequently throughout my data was that the students who had previously had the program “didn’t start at square one” like the other students. That leads me to wonder what kind of impact Dance to Learn has in the long term. With enough resources, it would be helpful and informative to perform a longitudinal study to better understand the long-term outcomes of the program. Having that information might help to further build the case for using dance in preschool and as an early intervention for autism.
! 403 Finally, it would be interesting to apply my methodologies to study different kinds of dance programming. For example, the ballet company used to have versions of
Dance to Learn that lasted 20 and 25 weeks; the 25-week program was a STEM program incorporating various STEM lessons throughout the session. It would be interesting to see how socio-emotional development and executive function progress with a longer program or one focused on a different educational theme.
I would also be interested to learn how the program works in different settings.
For example, rather than going into a pre-existing classroom, what would be different if students went to the ballet company for class? Another question that I had during this study was how the program would change if it were for a self-contained classroom of students diagnosed with disabilities rather than inclusion. While the program itself is inclusive and it is certainly possible to make adaptations to accommodate various needs, what would have to happen to make the program successful for different kinds of classrooms or even different age groups?
Impact of the Current Study
Despite the many directions future research could take, it is important to appreciate what has been established within the current study. Existing literature has already established potential benefits of dance in education, largely in terms of motor development or specific cognitive or social skills. Most existing information about dance and autism comes from a therapeutic standpoint and is not often focused on an inclusive education setting. Furthermore, no known studies examine the structure of a professional ballet company entering an inclusion setting to provide accessible dance instruction. This study provides a more empirically rigorous examination of the impact of dance education
! 404 in early childhood than existing studies; it examines both socio-emotional development and executive function outcomes in addition to the program elements and adaptations.
Dance itself provides an opportunity to synthesize elements of learning and child development. Integrating the mind and body helps students not only to learn curricular concepts more deeply (Koff, 2000), but also provides an avenue for socio-emotional skills like emotion expression and executive function skills like inhibition and working memory. Furthermore, preschool education is often skills-focused, helping students to build specific skills that will help them be successful in kindergarten. Rather than teaching isolated skills, dance allows students an opportunity to apply skills and build higher level functions. For students with disabilities, Vygotsky asserts that students can compensate for impairments by building higher psychological functions. Therefore, dance is not only well positioned to benefit preschool students, but also a significant way to be meaningfully inclusive.
Based on the results of this study, it is likely that dance is uniquely capable of engaging preschoolers and supporting socio-emotional development and executive function, particularly in students with autism. According to the classroom teachers and by my own observations, all of the students loved the program, which also says something about the power of dance to inspire and evoke joy. When we were dancing, it didn’t matter if students were peer models or had been diagnosed with a disability; they were all given the opportunity, and they all became dancers.
! 405
References
Agar, M. (2013). The lively science: Remodeling human social research. Minneapolis, MN: Mill City Press.
Aldemir, G. Y., Ramazanoglu, N., Camliguney, A. F., & Kaya, F. (2011). The effects of dance education on motor performance of children. Educational Research and Reviews, 16(9), 979–982.
American Dance Therapy Association (ADTA). (2016). General questions. Retrieved February 17, 2018, from https://adta.org/faqs/
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Autism spectrum disorder. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC.
Anderson-Hanley, C., Tureck, K., & Schneiderman, R. L. (2011). Autism and exergaming: Effects on repetitive behaviors and cognition. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 4, 129–137. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S24016
Anderson, P. (2002). Assessment and development of executive function (EF) during childhood. Child Neuropsychology, 8(2), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1076/chin.8.2.71.8724
Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN). (2018). About. Retrieved from http://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/
Baglieri, S., & Shapiro, A. (2017). Disability studies and the inclusive classroom: Critical practices for embracing diversity in education (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Ballet Company Evaluators. (2019). Unpublished evaluation report.
Barrouillet, P. (2015). Theories of cognitive development: From Piaget to today. Developmental Review, 38, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.07.004
! 406 Baş, G. (2016). The effect of Multiple Intelligences Theory-based education on academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16(6), 1833–1864. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.6.0015
Behrends, A., Müller, S., & Dziobek, I. (2012). Moving in and out of synchrony: A concept for a new intervention fostering empathy through interactional movement and dance. Arts in Psychotherapy, 39(2), 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2012.02.003
Bennett, E., & Heaton, P. (2012). Is talent in autism spectrum disorders associated with a specific cognitive and behavioural phenotype? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(12), 2739–2753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012- 1533-9
Berkeley, S. L., Zittel, L. L., Pitney, L. V, & Nichols, S. E. (2001). Locomotor and Object Control Skills of Children Diagnosed with Autism. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 18, 405–416.
Berrol, C. F. (2006). Neuroscience meets dance/movement therapy: Mirror neurons, the therapeutic process and empathy. Arts in Psychotherapy, 33(4), 302–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2006.04.001
Bitsko, R. H., Holbrook, J. R., Robinson, L. R., Kaminski, J. W., Ghandour, R., Smith, C., & Peacock, G. (2016). Health care, family, and community factors associated with mental, behavioral, and developmental disorders in early childhood – United States, 2011-2012. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 65(9), 221–226.
Blakeslee, M. (2013). Arts education: Creating student success in school, work, and life. Retrieved from http://www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/pdf/2014/events/AAD/congres sional_handbook/2013 Arts Education Unified Statement.pdf
Bläsing, B., Calvo-Merino, B., Cross, E. S., Jola, C., Honisch, J., & Stevens, C. J. (2012). Neurocognitive control in dance perception and performance. Acta Psychologica, 139(2), 300–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.12.005
Boettinger, J. A. (1978). The study of the autistic child. In M. N. Costonis (Ed.), Therapy in Motion. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Bonbright, J., Bradley, K., & Dooling, S. (2013). Evidence: A report on the impact of dance in the K-12 setting. Retrieved from http://www.ndeo.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=893257&module_id=1532 48
! 407 Boone, R. T., & Cunningham, J. G. (1998). Children’s decoding of emotion in expressive body movement: The development of cue attunement. Developmental Psychology, 34(5), 1007–1016. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.34.5.1007
Boone, R. T., & Cunningham, J. G. (2001). Children’s expression of emotional meaning in music through expressive body movement. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25(1), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006733123708
Borghi, A. M., & Cimatti, F. (2010). Embodied cognition and beyond: Acting and sensing the body. Neuropsychologia, 48(3), 763–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.10.029
Briggs, C. L. (2003). Interviewing, power/knowledge, and social inequality. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Postmodern Interviewing (pp. 243–254). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Brown, E. D., & Sax, K. L. (2013). Arts enrichment and preschool emotions for low- income children at risk. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28(2), 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2012.08.002
Caf, B., Kroflič, B., & Tancig, S. (1997). Activation of hypoactive children with creative movement and dance in primary school. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 24(4), 355–365. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0197-4556(97)00016-6
Carey, S., Zaitchik, D., & Bascandziev, I. (2015). Theories of development: In dialog with Jean Piaget. Developmental Review, 38, 36–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.07.003
Case-Smith, J., Weaver, L. L., & Fristad, M. A. (2015). A systematic review of sensory processing interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 19(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361313517762
CAST. (2014). Universal Design for Learning guidelines. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org/
Catterall, J. S. (2009). Doing well and doing good by doing art: The effects of education in the visual and performing arts on the achievements and values of young adults. Los Angeles/London: Imagination Group Books.
Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., & Hamden-Thompson, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Findings from Four longitudinal studies.
Chang, W. J., & Wyszomirski, M. (2015). What is arts entrepreneurship? Tracking the development of its definition in scholarly journals. Artivate: A Journal of Entrepreneurship in the Arts, 4(2), 11–31. Retrieved from http://artivate.org
! 408
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Chen, W. (2001). Description of an expert teacher’s constructivist-oriented teaching: Engaging students’ critical thinking in learning creative dance. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 72(4), 366–375.
Christensen, D. L., Baio, J., Braun, K. V. N., Bilder, D., Charles, J., Constantino, J. N., … Yeargin-Allsopp, M. (2012). Prevalence and characteristics of Autism Spectrum Disorder among children aged 8 years — Autism and evelopmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) Recommendations and Reports / Surveillance Summaries, 65(13), 1-23.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Cohen, B. B. (2012). An introduction to Body-Mind Centering. In Sensing, Feeling, and Action: The Experiential Anatomy of Body-Mind Centering (3rd Edition). Northampton, MA: Contact Editions.
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00988593
Corsaro, W. A. (2015). The sociology of childhood (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Cosma, G., Dragomir, M., Dumitru, R., Lica, E., & Gheţu, R. (2016). The dance impact on the motor ability in children. Series Physical Education and Sport, 16(2), 382– 386.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Dale, J. A., Hyatt, J., & Hollerman, J. (2007). The neuroscience of dance and the dance of neuroscience: Defining a path of inquiry. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 41(3), 89–110. https://doi.org/10.1353/jae.2007.0024
Davis, J. (1995). Laban Movement Analysis: A key to individualizing children's dance. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 66(2), 31-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.1995.10607039
! 409 DeCaigny, T., Draper, G., Mele, J., Salmond, K., Moses, L. G., Freeman, E. R., … Mayne, S. (2008). The ARISE Project: 2008 AEMDD Grant Evaluation Report.
Denham, S. A. (2006). Social-emotional competence as support for school readiness: What is it and how do we assess it? Early Education and Development, 17(1), 57– 89. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15566935eed1701
Devereaux, C. (2012). Moving into relationship: Dance/movement therapy with children with autism. In L. Gallo-Lopez & L. C. Rubin (Eds.), Play-based interventions for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders (pp. 333–351). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Dewey, J. (1980). Art as experience. New York, NY: Paragon.
Dudley-Marling, C., & Burns, M. B. (2014). Two perspectives on inclusion in the United States. Global Education Review, 1(1), 14–31.
Dziuk, M. A., Larson, J. C. G., Apostu, A., Mahone, E. M., Denckla, M. B., & Mostofsky, S. H. (2007). Dyspraxia in autism: Association with motor, social, and communicative deficits. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 49(10), 734–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2007.00734.x
Eddy, M. H. (2002). Dance as inquiry in studios and community dance programs. Journal of Dance Education, 2(4), 119-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/15290824.2002.10387220
Education Commission of the States, & Arts Education Partnership. (2018). ESSA: Mapping Opportunities for the Arts. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.utexas.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc t=true&db=eric&AN=ED570121&site=ehost-live
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Pub. L. No. 94–142 (1975).
Eigsti, I.-M. (2013). A review of embodiment in autism spectrum disorders. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(April), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00224
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Erfer, T., & Ziv, A. (2006). Moving toward cohesion: Group dance/movement therapy with children in psychiatry. Arts in Psychotherapy, 33(3), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2006.01.001
Every Student Succeeds Act, Pub. L. No. 114–95 (2015).
! 410 Fannin, D. K., & Watson, L. R. (2014). Social communication assessment and intervention for children on the autism spectrum. In D. A. Hwa-Froelich (Ed.), Social Communication Development and Disorders (pp. 171–219). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Fedewa, A. L., & Ahn, S. (2011). The effects of physical activity and physical fitness on children’s achievement and cognitive outcomes:a meta-analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(3), 521–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2011.10599785
Fenici, M. (2012). Embodied social cognition and embedded Theory of Mind. Biolinguistics, 6(1999), 3–4. Retrieved from http://www.biolinguistics.eu
Fombonne, E. (2005). Epidemiology of autistic disorder and other pervasive developmental disorders. The Journal Of Clinical Psychiatry, 66(10), 3–8.
Freeman, L. M. M., Locke, J., Rotheram-Fuller, E., & Mandell, D. (2017). Brief report: Examining executive and social functioning in elementary-aged children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(6), 1890–1895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3079-3
Gardner, H. (1998). A multiplicity of intelligences. Scientific American Presents.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Garon, N., Bryson, S. E., & Smith, I. M. (2008). Executive function in preschoolers: A review using an integrative framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.31
Gerber, L., & Kellman, J. (2010). Understanding students with autism through art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Giguere, M. (2011). Dancing thoughts: An examination of children’s cognition and creative process in dance. Research in Dance Education, 12(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647893.2011.554975
Gilbert, A. G. (1992). Creative dance for all ages. Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance.
Gilbert, A. G. (2006). Brain-compatible dance education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Gindis, B. (1995). The social/cultural implication of disability: Vygotsky’s paradigm for special education. Education Psychologist, 30(2), 77–81.
! 411
Gioia, G. A., Espy, K. A., & Isquith, P. K. (2003). The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function – Preschool Version. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Glass, D., Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (2013). Universal Design for Learning and the arts. Harvard Educational Review, 83(1), 98–119. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.83.1.33102p26478p54pw
Goldman, A., & de Vignemont, F. (2009). Is social cognition embodied? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 154–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.007
Gonzalez, S. S. (2015). A movement and music program for children with autism. Dance Education in Practice, 1(1), 16–22.
Grafton, S. T. (2009). Embodied cognition and the simulation of action to understand others. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1156, 97–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04425.x
Grenier, M., Miller, N., & Black, K. (2017). Applying Universal Design for Learning and the inclusion spectrum for students with severe disabilities in general physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 88(6), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2017.1330167
Groff, J. S. (2013). Expanding our “frames” of mind for education and the arts. Harvard Educational Review, 83(1), 15–40.
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography: Principles in practice (2nd ed.). London: New Yrok, NY: Routledge.
Hartmann, E. (2015). Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and learners with severe support needs. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 11(1), 54–67.
Hartshorn, K., Olds, L., Field, T., Delage, J., Cullen, C., & Escalona, A. (2001). Creative movement therapy benefits children with autism. Early Child Development and Care, 166(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443011660101
Hildebrand, D. L. (2016). The paramount importance of experience and situations in Dewey’s democracy and education. Educational Theory, 66(1–2), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12153
Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2003). Active interviewing. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Postmodern Interviewing (pp. 67–80). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
! 412
Horwitz, E. B., Lennartsson, A.-K., Theorell, T. P. G., & Ullén, F. (2015). Engagement in dance is associated with emotional competence in interplay with others. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01096
Huang, S. Y., Hogg, J., Zandieh, S., & Bostwick, S. B. (2012). A ballroom dance classroom program promotes moderate to vigorous physical activity in elementary school children. American Journal of Health Promotion, 26(3), 160–165. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.090625-QUAN-203
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Pub. L. No. 1400 (2004). 20 U.S.C.
Jansiewicz, E. M., Goldberg, M. C., Newschaffer, C. J., Denckla, M. B., Landa, R., & Mostofsky, S. H. (2006). Motor signs distinguish children with high functioning autism and Asperger’s syndrome from controls. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(5), 613–621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006- 0109-y
Jay, D. (1991). Effect of a dance program on the creativity of preschool handicapped children. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 8(4), 305–316. https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.8.4.305
Johnson, C. P., & Myers, S. M. (2007). Identification and Evaluation of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders. Pediatrics, 120(5), 1183–1215. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2361
Kassin, S., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2008). Social psychology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Kimhi, Y., Shoam-Kugelmas, D., Agam Ben-Artzi, G., Ben-Moshe, I., & Bauminger- Zviely, N. (2014). Theory of mind and executive function in preschoolers with typical development versus intellectually able preschoolers with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(9), 2341–2354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2104-z
Kirschner, S., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Joint drumming: Social context facilitates synchronization in preschool children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102(3), 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.07.005
Kliewer, C. (2006). Disability studies and young children: Finding relevance. In S. Danforth & S. L. Gabel (Eds.), Vital Questions Facing Disability Studies in Young Children (2nd ed., pp. 91–101). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
! 413 Koch, S. C., Mehl, L., Sobanski, E., Sieber, M., & Fuchs, T. (2015). Fixing the mirrors: A feasibility study of the effects of dance movement therapy on young adults with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 19(3), 338–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361314522353
Koff, S. R. (2000). Toward a definition of dance education. Childhood Education, 77(1), 27-32. doi:10.1080/00094056.2000.10522134
Kolb, D. A. (1984). The process of experiential learning. In Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (pp. 20–38). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Laban/Bartenieff Institute of Movement Studies. (2020). Laban Movement Analysis. Laban/Bartenieff Institute of Movement Studies. Retrieved from https://labaninstitute.org/about/laban-movement-analysis/
Lagerlöf, I., & Djerf, M. (2009). Children’s understanding of emotion in dance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 6(4), 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620701438475
Lane, A., Harpster, K., & Heathcock, J. (2012). Motor characteristics of young children referred for possible autism spectrum disorder. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 24(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e31823e071a
Langbein, L. (2012). Public program evaluation: A statistical guide. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
Leitan, N. D., & Chaffey, L. (2014). Embodied cognition and its applications: A brief review. Sensoria: A Journal of Mind, Brain and Culture, 10(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.7790/sa.v10i1.384
Liu, C. H., & Matthews, R. (2005). Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal, 6(3), 386–399.
Lobo, Y. B., & Winsler, A. (2006). The effects of a creative dance and movement program on the social competence of head start preschoolers. Social Development, 15(3), 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2006.00353.x
Lopez, B. R., Lincoln, A. J., Ozonoff, S., & Lai, Z. (2005). Examining the relationship between executive functions and restricted, repetitive symptoms of autistic disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35(4), 445–460.
! 414 Lord, C., Rutter, M., & Le Couteur, A. (1994). Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised: A revised version of a diagnostic interview for caregivers of individuals with possible pervasive developmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24(5), 659–685.
Lourenço, O. (2012). Piaget and Vygotsky: Many resemblances, and a crucial difference. New Ideas in Psychology, 30(3), 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2011.12.006
Lourenço, O. M. (2016). Developmental stages, Piagetian stages in particular: A critical review. New Ideas in Psychology, 40, 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2015.08.002
Martin, M. (2014). Moving on the spectrum: Dance/movement therapy as a potential early intervention tool for children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Arts in Psychotherapy, 41(5), 545–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2014.10.003
Masataka, N. (2017). Implications of the idea of neurodiversity for understanding the origins of developmental disorders. Physics of Life Reviews, 20, 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2016.11.002
Mason, C. Y., Thormann, M. S., & Steedly, K. M. (2004). How students with disabilities learn in and through the arts: An investigation of educator perceptions. Retrieved from https://www.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/arpfinaldraft.pdf
Mateos-Moreno, D., & Atencia-Doña, L. (2013). Effect of a combined dance/movement and music therapy on young adults diagnosed with severe autism. Arts in Psychotherapy, 40(5), 465–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2013.09.004
McCormick, C., Hepburn, S., Young, G. S., & Rogers, S. J. (2016). Sensory symptoms in children with autism spectrum disorder, other developmental disorders and typical development: A longitudinal study. Autism, 20(5), 572–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361315599755
McGarry, L. M., & Russo, F. A. (2011). Mirroring in dance/movement therapy: Potential mechanisms behind empathy enhancement. Arts in Psychotherapy, 38(3), 178–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2011.04.005
McNally, S. A., & Slutsky, R. (2017). Key elements of the Reggio Emilia approach and how they are interconnected to create the highly regarded system of early childhood education. Early Child Development and Care, 187(12), 1925–1937. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1197920
! 415 McPartland, J. C., Coffman, M., & Pelphrey, K. A. (2011). Recent advances in understanding the neural bases of autism spectrum disorder. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 23(6), 628–632. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0b013e32834cb9c9
Mertens, D. M., Sullivan, M., & Stace, H. (2011). Disability communities: Transformative research for social justice. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (4th ed., pp. 227–241). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Miller, L. J., Anzalone, M. E., Lane, S. J., Cermak, S. A., & Osten, E. T. (2007). Concept Evolution In Sensory Integration. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 61(2), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.61.2.135
Mitchell, D. T., & Snyder, S. L. (2015). The biopolitics of disability. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Morgan, S. B. (1986). Autism and Piaget’s theory: Are the two compatible? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 16(4), 441–457.
Moseley, R. L., Shtyrov, Y., Mohr, B., Lombardo, M. V., Baron-Cohen, S., & Pulvermüller, F. (2015). Lost for emotion words: What motor and limbic brain activity reveals about autism and semantic theory. NeuroImage, 104, 413–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.046
Mostofsky, S. H., Dubey, P., Jerath, V. K., & Jansiewicz, E. M. (2006). Developmental dyspraxia is not limited to imitation in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 12(3), 314–326. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617706060437
Mundy, P., Sigman, M., Ungerer, J., & Sherman, T. (1986). Defining Defining the social deficits of autism – the contribution of nonverbal-communication measures. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 27(5), 657–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469- 7610.1986.tb00190.x
Narayan, K., & George, K. M. (2003). Personal and folk narrative as cultural representation. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Postmodern Interviewing (pp. 123–139). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
National Assembly for State Arts Agencies. (2014). Why should government support the arts?
National Austism Center (NAC). (2009). National Standards Report. National Austism Center. Randolph, MA. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-197003000-00021
! 416 Nevanen, S., Juvonen, A., & Ruismäki, H. (2014). Does arts education develop school readiness? Teachers“ and artists” points of view on an Art Education project. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(3), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2014.913970
Newschaffer, C. J., Croen, L. A., Daniels, J., Giarelli, E., Grether, J. K., Levy, S. E., … Windham, G. C. (2007). The Epidemiology of Autism Spectrum. Annual Review of Public Health, 28, 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144007
Nilsen, E. S., Huyder, V., McAuley, T., & Liebermann, D. (2017). Ratings of Everyday Executive Functioning (REEF): A parent-report measure of preschoolers’ executive functioning skills. Psychological Assessment, 29(1), 50–64. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000308
Ohio Alliance for Arts Education, Ohio Arts Council, & Ohio Department of Education. (2013). The Status of Arts Education in Ohio’s Public Schools. Retrieved from https://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Ohio-s-New-Learning- Standards/Fine-Arts/Division-of-Arts-Education-News-and-Documents/Status-of- Arts-Education-in-Ohio-s-Public-Schools-Final-March-2013.pdf.aspx
Ozonoff, S., Goodlin-Jones, B. L., & Solomon, M. (2005). Evidence-Based Assessment of Autism Spectrum Disorders in Children and Adolescents. Joumal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34(3), 523–540. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp3403_8
Parsad, B., Spiegelman, M., & Coopersmith, J. (2012). Arts Education In Public Elementary and Secondary Schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–10. Washington, DC.
Paulson, P. (2002). The Brain and Learning. Journal of Dance Education, 2(3), 81–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/15290824.2002.10387213
Pereira, N. S., & Marques-Pinto, A. (2017). Including dance instruction in an after-school socio-emotional learning program significantly improved students’ self-management and relationship skills: A quasi experimental study. Arts in Psychotherapy, 53, 36– 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2017.01.004
Phillips, R. D., Gorton, R. L., Pinciotti, P., & Sachdev, A. (2010). Promising findings on preschoolers’ emergent literacy and school readiness in arts-integrated early childhood settings. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(2), 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0397-x
Pierman, E. (2016). Wiggle room: The impact of dance on pre-k students with special needs (Master's thesis). The Ohio State University.
! 417 Raver, C. C., & Zigler, E. F. (1997). Social competence: An untapped dimension in evaluating head start’s success. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12(4), 363– 385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2006(97)90017-X
Reichow, B., Barton, E. E., Boyd, B. A., & Hume, K. (2014). Early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) for young children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Cambell Systematic Reviews, 9, 1–116. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2014.9
Rettig, M. (2005). Using the multiple intelligences to enhance instruction for young children and young children with disabilities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32(4), 255–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-004-0865-2
Risi, S., Lord, C., Gotham, K., Corsello, C., Chrysler, C., Szatmari, P., … Pickles, A. (2006). Combining information from multiple sources in the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 45(9), 1094–1103. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.chi.0000227880.42780.0e
Ritter, M., & Low, K. G. (1996). Effects of Dance/Movement Therapy: A meta-analysis. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 23(3), 249–260.
Robinson, A. H. (2013). Arts integration and the success of disadvantaged students: A research evaluation. Arts Education Policy Review, 114(4), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2013.826050
Rogers, S. J. (1996). Brief Report: Early Intervention in Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26(2), 243–246.
Rönkkö, M. L., Aerila, J. A., & Grönman, S. (2016). Creative inspiration for preschoolers from museums. International Journal of Early Childhood, 48(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-016-0159-z
Rosenblatt, L. E., Gorantla, S., Torres, J. A., Yarmush, R. S., Rao, S., Park, E. R., … Levine, J. B. (2011). Relaxation response–based yoga improves functioning in young children with autism: A pilot study. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 17(11), 1029–1035. https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2010.0834
Rosenblatt, P. C. (2003). Interviewing at the border of fact and fiction. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Postmodern Interviewing (pp. 225–241). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Schaefer, G. B., & Mendelsohn, N. J. (2013). Clinical genetics evaluation in identifying the etiology of autism spectrum disorders&: 2013 guideline revisions. Genetics in Medicine, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.32
! 418 Scharoun, S. M., Reinders, N. J., Bryden, P. J., & Fletcher, P. C. (2014). Dance/Movement Therapy as an Intervention for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. American Journal of Dance Therapy, 36(2), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10465-014-9179-0
Schreibman, L., Dawson, G., Stahmer, A. C., Landa, R., Rogers, S. J., McGee, G. G., … Halladay, A. (2015). Naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions: Empirically validated treatments for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(8), 2411–2428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803- 015-2407-8
Shakespeare, T. (2006). The social model of disability. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The Disability Studies Reader (2nd ed., pp. 197–204). New York, NY: Routledge.
Shattuck, P. (2006). The contribution of diagnostic substitution to the growing administrative prevalence of autism in US special education. Pediatrics, 117(4), 1028–1037.
Siebers, T. (2008). Disability theory. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Siegel, E. V. (1973). Movement therapy with autistic children. Psychoanalytic Review, 60(1), 141–149.
Silberman, S. (2015). NeuroTribes: The legacy of autism and the future of neurodiversity. New York, NY: Avery.
Smagorinsky, P. (2012). Vygotsky, “defectology,” and the inclusion of people of difference in the broader cultural stream. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 8(1), 1–25.
Squires, J., Bricker, D., Waddell, M., Funk, K., Clifford, J., & Hoselton, R. (2009). Technical Report. In Social-Emotional Assessment/Evaluation Measure (SEAM), Research Edition (pp. 23–32). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)90004-9
Stinson, S. (2005). Why are we doing this? Journal of Dance Education, 5(3), 82–89.
Stock, R., Mirenda, P., & Smith, I. M. (2013). Comparison of community-based verbal behavior and pivotal response treatment programs for young children with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7(9), 1168–1181.
Stringer, E. T. (2014). Action research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
! 419 Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2011). Mixed methods research: Contermporary issues in an emerging field. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (4th ed., pp. 285–300). Thousand Oaks, CA.
Thom, L. (2010). From simple line to expressive movement: The use of creative movement to enhance socio-emotional development in the preschool curriculum. American Journal of Dance Therapy, 32(2), 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10465-010-9090-2
Torrance, J. (2003). Autism, aggression, and developing a therapeutic contract. American Journal of Dance Therapy, 25(2), 97–109.
Tsouvala, M., & Magos, K. (2016). The dance of the magic dragon: Embodied knowledge in the context of transformative learning theory. Research in Dance Education, 17(1), 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647893.2016.1139077
Udvari-Solner, A. (1996). Theoretical influences on the establishment of inclusive practices. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), 101–119. van Meel, J., Verburgh, H., & de Meijer, M. (1993). Children’s interpretations of dance expressions. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 11(2), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.2190/V69N-VB0T-A9Q3-TJ04
Vandenbroucke, L., Seghers, J., Verschueren, K., Wijtzes, A. I., & Baeyens, D. (2016). Longitudinal associations between objectively measured physical activity and development of executive functioning across the transition to first grade. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 13(8), 895–902. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2015-0708
Vincent, S. R., Tortora, S., Shaw, J., Basiner, J., Devereaux, C., Mulcahy, S., & Ponsini, M. C. (2007). Collaborating with a mission: The Andréa Rizzo Foundation spreads the gift of dance/movement therapy. American Journal of Dance Therapy, 29(1), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10465-007-9028-5 von Rossberg-Gempton, I. E. von, Dickinson, J., & Poole, G. (1999). Creative dance: Potentiality for enhancing social functioning in frail seniors and young children. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 26(5), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197- 4556(99)00036-2
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wallis, C. (2009, November). “I Am Autism”: An advocacy video sparks protest. Time. Retrieved from http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1935959,00.html
! 420 Wilson, K., Mills, E., Ross, C., McGowan, J., & Jadad, A. (2003). Association of Autistic Spectrum Disorder and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 157(7), 628. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.157.7.628
Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322
Winner, E., & Cooper, M. (2000). Mute those claims: No evidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study and academic achievement. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3/4), 11–75.
Wu, C. C., & Chiang, C. H. (2014). The developmental sequence of social- communicative skills in young children with autism: A longitudinal study. Autism, 18(4), 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361313479832
Yilmaz, I., Yanardaǧ, M., Birkan, B., & Bumin, G. (2004). Effects of swimming training on physical fitness and water orientation in autism. Pediatrics International, 46(5), 624–626. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-200x.2004.01938.x
Ylönen, M. E., & Cantell, M. H. (2009). Kinaesthetic narratives: Interpretations for children’s dance movement therapy process. Body, Movement and Dance in Psychotherapy, 4(3), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/17432970903259683
Yorke-Viney, S. (2007). An examination of the effectiveness of arts integration in education on student achievement, creativity, and self perception (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Marywood University.
Zach, S., Inglis, V., Fox, O., Berger, I., & Stahl, A. (2015). The effect of physical activity on spatial perception and attention in early childhood. Cognitive Development, 36, 31–39.
Zeitner, D., Rowe, N., & Jackson, B. (2016). Embodied and Embodiary Leadership: Experiential Learning in Dance and Leadership Education. Organizational Aesthetics, 5(1), 167–187.
! 421
Appendix A: Recruitment Flyers
3 3
! 422 The3Ohio3State3University! Dear!Potential!Research!Participant,!! ! My!name!is!Elle!Pierman,!and!I!am!inviting!you!to!participate!in!my!doctoral!research! study.!The!title!of!this!study!is!Dance!and!Development!in!Preschool!Students!with! Disabilities.!I!am!currently!working!toward!my!PhD,!and!I!seek!a!better!understanding!of! how!Dance'to'Learn!program!influences!child!development!in!early!childhood! education.!I!strongly!believe!that!dance!education!is!highly!valuable,!and!I!hope!to!learn! more!about!the!potential!benefits!of!dance!in!early!childhood!education,!specifically!for! students!with!disabilities.!Evaluations!of'Dance'to'Learn!program!show!that!children! who!participated!had!experienced!gains!in!motor!development,!math!skills,!science! skills,!and!cognition!(thinking)!skills.!By!participating!in!Dance'to'Learn,!you!will!have!the! opportunity!to!benefit!from!those!gains!as!well.!My!study!will!help!me!to!better! understand!how!those!results!occur.!If!I!find!that!there!are!differences!between!the! inclusion!setting!and!a!“typical”!classroom,!then![the!ballet!company]!will!be!able!to! adjust!how!they!teach!the!program!for!different!kinds!of!classrooms,!and!Teaching! Artists!will!be!able!to!adapt!their!techniques!to!ensure!the!maximum!benefit!for!all! students.!Your!participation!in!my!study!will!help!provide!insight!into!how!Dance'to' Learn!can!best!be!adapted!to!the!needs!of!all!students.!! ! In!addition!to!simply!teaching!or!hosting!Dance'to'Learn,'your!participation!in!this!study! will!involve!no!more!than!three!interviews!with!me.!Speaking!with!you!outside!of!the! program!will!help!me!to!gain!a!better!understanding!of!your!experience.!Each!interview! will!last!no!more!than!one!hour.! ! The!risks!to!you!as!a!participant!are!minimal.!!These!include!potential!discomfort'sharing! information!about!your!experience.!To!minimize!risk!and!protect!your!privacy,!I!will!not! publish!any!names!or!identifying!factors!about!you,!your!students,!the!school,!or!Dance' to'Learn.!Your!privacy!is!of!the!utmost!importance,!and!thus!I!will!make!sure!that!it!is! protected.!Any!data!or!interview!transcripts!will!be!stored!in!a!password8protected! computer!and!will!not!be!shared!with!anyone!other!than!myself!and!my!research! advisor,!Dr.!Shari!Savage.! ! You!can!choose!not!to!participate.!!If!you!decide!not!to!participate,!there!will!not!be!a! penalty!to!you!or!loss!of!any!benefits!to!which!you!are!otherwise!entitled.!!You!may! withdraw!from!this!study!at!any!time.! ! If!you!have!questions!about!this!research!study,!you!can!call!Elle!Pierman!at![phone! number].!! ! Thank!you!for!your!consideration,! Elle!Pierman!
! 423 Dance&to&Learn3Doctoral3Research3Study3Information3 Sheet! ! Who3is3conducting3this3study?3 My!name!is!Elle!Pierman,!and!I!am!a!graduate!student!in!the!Arts!Administration,! Education!and!Policy!program!at!The!Ohio!State!University.!I!am!very!passionate!about! dance!education!and!equal!opportunities!for!all!students!to!experience!dance!and! creative!movement.!I!hope!to!observe!your!child’s!classroom!during![the!ballet! company’s!Dance'to'Learn!program!so!that!I!can!better!understand!the!program!in! different!educational!settings.! ! Why3is3this3study3being3conducted?! I!am!currently!working!toward!my!PhD,!and!I!seek!a!better!understanding!of!how!Dance' to'Learn!program!influences!child!development!in!early!childhood!education.!I!strongly! believe!that!dance!education!is!highly!valuable,!and!I!hope!to!learn!more!about!the! potential!benefits!of!dance!in!early!childhood!education,!specifically!for!students!with! disabilities.! ! Why3should3I3let3my3child3participate3in3the3thesis3research?! Evaluations!of'Dance'to'Learn!program!show!that!children!who!participated!had! experienced!gains!in!motor!development,!math!skills,!science!skills,!and!cognition! (thinking)!skills.!By!participating!in!Dance'to'Learn,!your!child!will!have!the!opportunity! to!benefit!from!those!gains!as!well.!My!study!will!help!me!to!better!understand!how! those!results!occur,!and!whether!or!not!your!child’s!classroom!experiences!similar! results!to!the!“average”!class.!If!I!find!that!there!are!differences!between!the!inclusion! setting!and!a!“typical”!classroom,!then![the!ballet!company]!will!be!able!to!adjust!how! they!teach!the!program!for!different!kinds!of!classrooms,!and!Teaching!Artists!will!be! able!to!adapt!their!techniques!to!ensure!the!maximum!benefit!for!all!students.!Your! child’s!participation!in!my!study!(which!is!independent!of!your!child’s!participation!in! Dance'to'Learn!program)!will!help!provide!insight!into!how!Dance'to'Learn!can!best!be! adapted!to!the!needs!of!all!students.!! 3 What3will3be3required3of3my3child3if3I3consent3for3my3child3to3participate?! Other!than!participating!in!Dance'to'Learn,!nothing.!I!will!observe!the!class!and!take! notes!about!what!I!see.!I!will!not!record!names.! ! What3will3be3required3of3me3if3I3consent3for3my3child3to3participate?! [The!ballet!company]!sends!home!surveys!in!order!to!perform!a!yearly!evaluation!of!the! program.!Since!you!will!already!be!asked!to!fill!out!pre8!and!post8surveys!by![the!ballet! company],!I!will!only!ask!that!you!consider!sitting!for!an!interview!with!me!about!your!
! 424 child’s!dance!experience.!If!you!are!willing!to!speak!with!me!about!your!child’s! experience!in!the!program,!please!contact!me!at![phone!number].! 3 Will3my3child3be3identified3in3the3study?! No.!I!will!not!publish!any!names!or!identifying!factors!about!your!child,!the!school,!or! Dance'to'Learn.!Your!privacy!is!of!the!utmost!importance,!and!thus!I!will!make!sure!that! it!is!protected.! 3 If3I3don’t3want3to3participate,3will3my3child3still3be3able3to3participate3in3Dance&to& Learn?! Yes.!If!you!do!not!want!your!child!to!participate!in!my!thesis!study,!it!will!not!prevent! your!child!from!participating!in!Dance'to'Learn.!! ! ! !
! 425 !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Appendix B: Consent Forms
! !
! 426
The Ohio State University Parental Permission For Child’s Participation in Research
Study Title: Dance and Development in Preschool Students with Disabilities Principal Investigator: Dr. Shari Savage Co-Investigator: Elle Pierman
This is a consent form for research. It contains important information about this study and what to expect if you agree to participate and allow your child to participate.
Your and your child’s participation is voluntary. Please consider the information carefully. Feel free to ask questions before making your decision whether or not to participate. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to sign this form and will receive a copy of the form.
Purpose: I am a doctoral student in Arts Administration, Education and Policy at The Ohio State University. Dance education has always been my passion, and so for my dissertation, I want to study how early childhood education programs such as [the ballet company]’s Dance to Learn influence child development in special needs and inclusion classrooms. It is my strong conviction that dance education programs are highly valuable in education, and my dissertation will hopefully provide me with further information about some of those benefits.
Procedures/Tasks: Your child will have the opportunity to participate in Dance to Learn program at [the inclusion center], and I would like to observe your child’s class to gain information about how Dance to Learn works in different classroom settings. Though [the ballet company] collects data and performs an evaluation of the program every year, my interest is in observing a special needs/inclusion class to learn more about how the program works in that kind of environment. To collect information, I will observe the program that your child will already be participating in. I will be video-recording the classes, but I am the only one who will see the footage, and all video will be kept on a password-protected encrypted computer to ensure confidentiality. If you do not want your child to be videotaped, I will angle the camera away from him/her during the dance session. I will also conduct interviews with the Teaching Artists from [the ballet company] who will teach the program, as well as your child’s classroom teacher to discuss their perceptions of the program. Additionally, the surveys you are asked to fill out as part of the normal Dance to Learn program will also be collected for research purposes.
! 427 Duration: Since Dance to Learn program will last for ten weeks, I will be observing your child’s class for those ten sessions. I will also observe class a maximum of three times outside of the dance program. Your child will not be asked to commit any time to this research outside of your child’s participation in the program itself. If possible, I would also like to take some time to speak to you about your child’s experience in the program – if you agree, this would include a maximum of two hours of your time: one hour at some point during the beginning of the program, and one hour after the program has concluded.
You may leave the study at any time. If you decide to stop participating in the study, there will be no penalty to you, and you will not lose any benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. Your decision will not affect your future relationship with The Ohio State University.
Risks and Benefits: Some of the potential benefits of my study include practical insight into Dance to Learn program and on dance education in early childhood education. At the very least, my study will be able to compare a specific inclusion classroom to other “typical” educational settings. I can investigate whether or not the results I see from the inclusion class are comparable to those in traditional classrooms, and discover whether the children in your child’s class benefit in the same ways as the rest of Dance to Learn participants. The results will help [the ballet company] to adapt the program so it becomes more effective in various settings, and will help ensure that your child gains the maximum benefit from participating in the program.
Confidentiality: In order to protect your privacy and the privacy of your child, I will not publish the names of the school, the classroom teacher, the children who participate in Dance to Learn, the [the ballet company] Teaching Artists, or [the ballet company]. My field notes and video recordings will be stored in a secure place and will not be used for purposes other than the current study. All names will be kept confidential. If you wish your child to withdraw from the study at any time you are free to do so, and all information you have will be shredded or returned.
Efforts will be made to keep your study-related information confidential. However, there may be circumstances where this information must be released. For example, personal information regarding your participation in this study may be disclosed if required by state law. Also, your records may be reviewed by the following groups (as applicable to the research): •! Office for Human Research Protections or other federal, state, or international regulatory agencies; •! The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board or Office of Responsible Research Practices; •! The sponsor, if any, or agency (including the Food and Drug Administration for FDA-regulated research) supporting the study.
! 428 Incentives: No incentive (compensation, prizes, gifts, etc.) is being offered for participation in this research study.
Participant Rights: You or your child may refuse to participate in this study without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you or your child is a student or employee at Ohio State, your decision will not affect your grades or employment status.
If you and your child choose to participate in the study, you may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits. By signing this form, you do not give up any personal legal rights your child may have as a participant in this study.
An Institutional Review Board responsible for human subjects research at The Ohio State University reviewed this research project and found it to be acceptable, according to applicable state and federal regulations and University policies designed to protect the rights and welfare of participants in research.
Contacts and Questions: For questions, concerns, or complaints about the study, if you feel you or your child have been harmed as a result of study participation, you may contact Elle Pierman: [email protected] or phone: [phone number].
For questions about your child’s rights as a participant in this study or to discuss other study-related concerns or complaints with someone who is not part of the research team, you may contact Ms. Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1-800-678-6251.
! 429 Signing the parental permission form
I have read (or someone has read to me) this form and I am aware that I am being asked to provide permission for my child to participate in a research study. I have had the opportunity to ask questions and have had them answered to my satisfaction. I voluntarily agree to permit my child to participate in this study.
I am not giving up any legal rights by signing this form. I will be given a copy of this form.
Printed name of subject
Printed name of person authorized to provide Signature of person authorized to provide permission for subject permission for subject
AM/PM Relationship to the subject Date and time
Investigator/Research Staff
I have explained the research to the participant or his/her representative before requesting the signature(s) above. There are no blanks in this document. A copy of this form has been given to the participant or his/her representative.
Printed name of person obtaining consent Signature of person obtaining consent
AM/PM Date and time
! ! ! !
! 430 The Ohio State University Consent to Participate in Research
Study Title: Dance and Development in Preschool Students with Disabilities Principal Investigator: Dr. Shari Savage Co-Investigator: Elle Pierman
This is a consent form for research participation. It contains important information about this study and what to expect if you decide to participate. Your participation is voluntary. Please consider the information carefully. Feel free to ask questions before making your decision whether or not to participate. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to sign this form and will receive a copy of the form. Purpose: I am a doctoral student in Arts Administration, Education and Policy at The Ohio State University. Dance education has always been my passion, and so for my dissertation, I want to study how early childhood education programs such as [the ballet company]’s Dance to Learn influence child development in special needs and inclusion classrooms. It is my strong conviction that dance education programs are highly valuable in education, and my dissertation will hopefully provide me with further information about some of those benefits.
Procedures/Tasks: Your classroom will have the opportunity to participate in Dance to Learn program at [the inclusion center], and I would like to observe your class to gain information about how Dance to Learn works in different classroom settings. Though [the ballet company] collects data and performs an evaluation of the program every year, my interest is in observing a special needs/inclusion class to learn more about how the program works in that kind of environment. To collect information, I will observe the program that your classroom will already be participating in. I will be video-recording the classes, but I am the only one who will see the footage, and all video will be kept on a password-protected encrypted computer to ensure confidentiality. If you do not want to be videotaped, I will angle the camera away from you during the dance session. I also hope to conduct interviews with you, the classroom teacher, in order to gain some extra information about your perceptions of the program.
Duration: Since Dance to Learn program will last for ten weeks, I will only be observing your child’s class for those ten sessions. I would also like to observe your classroom at three different points throughout the program during a time outside of the program itself. I will also ask that you sit for three interviews: one before the program begins, one at some point during the time that the program is taking place, and one after the program has ended, for no longer than one hour per interview. The three one-hour interviews will be the only time requested of you outside of Dance to Learn program itself.
! 431 You may leave the study at any time. If you decide to stop participating in the study, there will be no penalty to you, and you will not lose any benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. Your decision will not affect your future relationship with The Ohio State University.
Risks and Benefits: Some of the potential benefits of my study include practical insight into Dance to Learn program and on dance education in early childhood education. At the very least, my study will be able to help me better understand the functions or influences of dance in special needs/inclusion classrooms. I can investigate whether or not dance appears to influence development and discover whether the children in your class benefit from a creative movement program. The results will help [the ballet company] to adapt the program so it becomes more effective in alternative settings, and will help ensure that your child and future participants in Dance to Learn gain the maximum benefit from participating in the program. Because your classroom will already be participating in Dance to Learn program, participating in this study will involve no more than minimal risk to you or your students.
Confidentiality: In order to protect your privacy and the privacy of your students, I will not publish the names of the school, the classroom teachers, the children who participate in Dance to Learn, the [the ballet company] Teaching Artists, or [the ballet company]. My field notes and video recordings will be stored in a secure place and will not be used for purposes other than the current study. All names will be kept confidential. If you wish to withdraw from the study at any time you are free to do so, and all information you have will be shredded or returned.
Efforts will be made to keep your study-related information confidential. However, there may be circumstances where this information must be released. For example, personal information regarding your participation in this study may be disclosed if required by state law. Also, your records may be reviewed by the following groups (as applicable to the research): •! Office for Human Research Protections or other federal, state, or international regulatory agencies; •! The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board or Office of Responsible Research Practices; •! The sponsor, if any, or agency (including the Food and Drug Administration for FDA-regulated research) supporting the study.
Incentives: No incentive (compensation, prizes, gifts, etc.) is being offered for participation in this research study.
Participant Rights: You may refuse to participate in this study without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you are a student or employee at Ohio State, your decision will not affect your grades or employment status.
! 432 If you choose to participate in the study, you may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits. By signing this form, you do not give up any personal legal rights you may have as a participant in this study.
An Institutional Review Board responsible for human subjects research at The Ohio State University reviewed this research project and found it to be acceptable, according to applicable state and federal regulations and University policies designed to protect the rights and welfare of participants in research.
Contacts and Questions: For questions, concerns, or complaints about the study, or you feel you have been harmed as a result of study participation, you may contact Elle Pierman: [email protected] or phone: [phone number].
For questions about your rights as a participant in this study or to discuss other study- related concerns or complaints with someone who is not part of the research team, you may contact Ms. Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1- 800-678-6251.
Signing the consent form
I have read (or someone has read to me) this form and I am aware that I am being asked to participate in a research study. I have had the opportunity to ask questions and have had them answered to my satisfaction. I voluntarily agree to participate in this study.
I am not giving up any legal rights by signing this form. I will be given a copy of this form.
Printed name of subject Signature of subject
AM/PM Date and time
Printed name of person authorized to consent for Signature of person authorized to consent for subject subject (when applicable) (when applicable)
AM/PM Relationship to the subject Date and time
! 433 Investigator/Research Staff
I have explained the research to the participant or his/her representative before requesting the signature(s) above. There are no blanks in this document. A copy of this form has been given to the participant or his/her representative.
Printed name of person obtaining consent Signature of person obtaining consent
AM/PM Date and time
! ! !
! 434 The Ohio State University Consent to Participate in Research
Study Title: Dance and Development in Preschool Students with Disabilities Principal Investigator: Dr. Shari Savage Co-Investigator: Elle Pierman
This is a consent form for research participation. It contains important information about this study and what to expect if you decide to participate. Your participation is voluntary. Please consider the information carefully. Feel free to ask questions before making your decision whether or not to participate. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to sign this form and will receive a copy of the form.
Purpose: I am a doctoral student in Arts Policy and Administration at The Ohio State University. Dance education has always been my passion, and so for my dissertation, I want to study how early childhood education programs such as [the ballet company]’s Dance to Learn influence child development in special needs and inclusion classrooms. It is my strong conviction that dance education programs are highly valuable in education, and my dissertation will hopefully provide me with further information about some of those benefits.
Procedures/Tasks: You will have the opportunity to teach Dance to Learn program at [the inclusion center], and I would like to observe your class to gain information about how Dance to Learn works in different classroom settings. Though [the ballet company] collects data and performs an evaluation of the program every year, my interest is in observing a special needs class/inclusion to learn more about how the program works in that kind of environment. To collect information, I will observe the program that you will already be teaching. I will be video-recording the classes, but I am the only one who will see the footage, and all video will be kept on a password-protected encrypted computer to ensure confidentiality. If you do not want to be videotaped, I will angle the camera away from you during the dance session. I also hope to conduct interviews with you, the teaching artist, in order to gain some extra information about your perceptions of the program.
Duration: Since Dance to Learn program will last for ten weeks, I will only be observing your child’s class for those ten sessions. I will also ask that you sit for three interviews – one before the program begins, one halfway through the program, and one after the program has ended – for no longer than one hour each. The three one-hour interviews will be the only time requested of you outside of Dance to Learn program itself.
You may leave the study at any time. If you decide to stop participating in the study, there will be no penalty to you, and you will not lose any benefits to which you are
! 435 otherwise entitled. Your decision will not affect your future relationship with The Ohio State University.
Risks and Benefits: Some of the potential benefits of my study include practical insight into Dance to Learn program and on dance education in early childhood education. At the very least, my study will be able to help me better understand the functions or influences of dance in special needs/inclusion classrooms. I can investigate whether or not dance appears to influence development and discover whether the children in your class benefit from a creative movement program. The results will help [the ballet company] to adapt the program so it becomes more effective in alternative settings, and will help ensure that your child and future participants in Dance to Learn gain the maximum benefit from participating in the program. Because your classroom will already be participating in Dance to Learn program, participating in this study will involve no more than minimal risk to you or your students.
Confidentiality: In order to protect your privacy and the privacy of your students, I will not publish the names of the school, the classroom teachers, the children who participate in Dance to Learn, the [the ballet company] Teaching Artists, or [the ballet company]. My field notes and video recordings will be stored in a secure place and will not be used for purposes other than the current study. All names will be kept confidential. If you wish to withdraw from the study at any time you are free to do so, and all information you have will be shredded or returned.
Efforts will be made to keep your study-related information confidential. However, there may be circumstances where this information must be released. For example, personal information regarding your participation in this study may be disclosed if required by state law. Also, your records may be reviewed by the following groups (as applicable to the research): •! Office for Human Research Protections or other federal, state, or international regulatory agencies; •! The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board or Office of Responsible Research Practices; •! The sponsor, if any, or agency (including the Food and Drug Administration for FDA-regulated research) supporting the study.
Incentives: No incentive (compensation, prizes, gifts, etc.) is being offered for participation in this research study.
Participant Rights: You may refuse to participate in this study without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you are a student or employee at Ohio State, your decision will not affect your grades or employment status.
If you choose to participate in the study, you may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits. By signing this form, you do not give up any personal legal rights you may have as a participant in this study.
! 436
An Institutional Review Board responsible for human subjects research at The Ohio State University reviewed this research project and found it to be acceptable, according to applicable state and federal regulations and University policies designed to protect the rights and welfare of participants in research.
Contacts and Questions: For questions, concerns, or complaints about the study, or you feel you have been harmed as a result of study participation, you may contact Elle Pierman: [email protected] or phone: [phone number].
For questions about your rights as a participant in this study or to discuss other study- related concerns or complaints with someone who is not part of the research team, you may contact Ms. Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1- 800-678-6251.
Signing the consent form
I have read (or someone has read to me) this form and I am aware that I am being asked to participate in a research study. I have had the opportunity to ask questions and have had them answered to my satisfaction. I voluntarily agree to participate in this study.
I am not giving up any legal rights by signing this form. I will be given a copy of this form.
Printed name of subject Signature of subject
AM/PM Date and time
Printed name of person authorized to consent for Signature of person authorized to consent for subject subject (when applicable) (when applicable)
AM/PM Relationship to the subject Date and time
! 437 Investigator/Research Staff
I have explained the research to the participant or his/her representative before requesting the signature(s) above. There are no blanks in this document. A copy of this form has been given to the participant or his/her representative.
Printed name of person obtaining consent Signature of person obtaining consent
AM/PM Date and time
! !
! 438
Appendix C: IRB Approval
! !
! 439
! 440
Appendix D: Indicators Cheat Sheet
Socio%Emotional,Development! Emotional,Expressiveness! Emotion,Regulation! ●! Positive!affect! ●! Controlling!response!to!strong! ●! Smiling! emotion! ●! Laughing! ●! Calming!self!down! ●! Initiating!hugs! ●! Patience/turn=taking!–!hand!in! ●! Purposefully!imitating!emotions! hand!with!inhibition! ●! Crying/upset! ! ! Emotion,Understanding! Social,Relationships, ●! Comforting!others! ●! Cooperation! ●! Helping!others!(or!knowing!when! ●! Greetings! not!to)! ●! Helping! ●! Identifying!others’!emotions! ●! Body!awareness!in!space!in! ! relation!to!others! ●! Imitation! Identifying,Feelings,about,Oneself, ! ●! “I’m!tired”!–!expression!of!emotion! ●! I!did!it!!–!taking!pride!in!self! ! 3 Executive,Function, Inhibit! Plan/Organize! ●! Withholding!response! ●! Organizing!information!–!telling! ○! Raising!a!hand!instead!of! stories! shouting!out!an!answer! ●! Remembering!and!applying! ●! Waiting!to!take!a!turn! information!from!previous!weeks! ●! Stillness!vs.!running!around! ●! Motor!planning!and!coordination! , ●! Correctly!answering!questions! , Shift! Working,Memory! ●! Transitions! ●! Remembering!2=step!directions! ●! Self=correction! ●! Following!directions! , ●! Ignoring!distractions! Other! , ●! Attention/engagement! ●! Independence! ●! Comprehension! ●! Following!along!
! 441