1 of 61

2 of 61

3 of 61

​

​

Research in TYA: �Moving the Field Forward

​

with

Elizabeth Coen, PhD + Samora Covington, PsyD;�Gillian McNally + Amanda Rutter, Ed.D;�Jenny Millinger + Dr. Katie Bernstein;�and Joe Gfaller + Brian Kisida�

4 of 61

How can the TYA Community Support Youth Mental Health?

Exploring the Intersections between Theatrical Practices &

Mental Health Interventions

5 of 61

Interdisciplinary Development & Research Team

Phase 1: Theatre-Based Mental Health Intervention

Phase 2: Formalized Research Project

Elizabeth Coen, PhD

Applied Theatre Researcher

University of Houston

​

Samora Covington, PsyD

Clinical Psychologist

Highline College

Jonathan Rizzardi

Curriculum Specialist - Theatre & Education

Pacific Lutheran University

Olivia Atherton, PhD

Research Psychologist

University of Houston

6 of 61

Project Goals:

​

  • Bridge theatre pedagogy and clinical psychology in a programmatic framework to support youth mental health in public school classrooms.

​

  • Conduct a formalized study to determine whether young people who learn emotional regulation skills through theatre’s embodied practices are more confident using them in everyday life.

​

  • Publish our findings to articulate the utility and value of TYA teaching artistry in educational and healthcare sectors.

​

​

​

​

Working with University of Houston students during finals week as part of Mental Health Awareness Month, May 2023

7 of 61

​

A social justice-oriented approach to psychology that aims to promote healing and social change. It recognizes that individuals are affected by the social, political, and economic conditions in which they live, and seeks to address the root causes of psychological distress by empowering people to take action against oppressive

systems.

​

​

“Liberation is a social act, a process of becoming free from ideologies that limit our freedom” -Paulo Freire

Liberation Psychology

8 of 61

Participatory Action Research

  • Participatory Action Research (PAR) is a collaborative and transformative research approach that empowers individuals and communities to actively participate in the research process.

​

  • PAR emphasizes the involvement of participants as co-researchers, aiming to generate knowledge, promote social change, and improve the lives of those involved.

​

  • It combines research, action, and reflection to address real-world problems and foster social justice.

9 of 61

Seeking Partnerships

Philanthropists & Foundations committed to innovative arts-based programs to support youth mental health

​

TYA Theatres & Arts Education Organizations to participate in a formal research study

​

Teaching Artists with expertise and/or an interest in youth mental health interventions

​

University Professors in Education & Theatre Pedagogy seeking connection and collaboration

​

​

​

​

Email Elizabeth Coen at emcoen@uh.edu

10 of 61

11 of 61

Introductions

12 of 61

Land Acknowledgment

13 of 61

Blue Project description

  • Biennial TYA Tour
  • Choose ECE because of testing
  • 2020-2021
  • Diverse ECE schools and daycare centers in Denver, Greeley, Gilcrest

14 of 61

Blue

  • Clip 4:26-5:54

​

https://vimeo.com/530218659/69d75b9bc9

15 of 61

Mixed-methods Study

  • Measuring children through teacher observation

16 of 61

Mixed-methods Study

  • Pre- and post-production survey - teachers and caregivers
    • utilized a combination of 5-point Likert rating scale and open-ended questions.

​

      • The pre-performance survey consisted of 32 questions total, 8 demographic, 11 5-point Likert rating, and 13 open-ended.

​

      • The post-performance survey consisted of 34 questions total, 8 demographic, 10 5-point Likert rating, and 16 open-ended.

17 of 61

Results: Pre-survey

  • Teachers indicated that students:
    • Regulate their emotions decently
    • Share well
    • Have occasional conflicts, yet resolve conflicts poorly needing teacher intervention often
    • Are generally not aggressive yet still touch each other inappropriately (pushing was most cited, along with kicking and hitting)
    • Occasionally say mean or negative comments towards each other

18 of 61

Results: Pre-survey

  • Teachers indicated that students:

​

    • Only somewhat understand the feelings of their classmates

​

    • Somewhat understand concepts like prejudice and inclusion

​

19 of 61

Results: Pre-survey

  • The typical conflicts were regarding:
    • Sharing

​

  • Strategies for conflict resolution included:
    • Expressing feelings
    • Using peacekeeper language
    • When aggressive
      • Calm down space
      • Breathing techniques

20 of 61

Results: Pre-survey

  • Most class conflict comments do not pertain to gender, race, or ethnicity, but occasionally they do

​

    • “Boys don’t wear headbands”
    • “all “Hispanic” people are dumb”

​

  • Students do notice similarities and differences in gender, skin color, language, etc.

21 of 61

Results: Pre-survey

  • Classroom activities related to prejudice and inclusion included:
    • Diverse songs
    • Diverse literature
    • Wrinkled Heart activity
    • Black history month
    • Talking about MLK
    • Discussions about everyone is equal/same

22 of 61

Results: Post-survey

  • Instances of redirecting students behavior was noted to still be roughly the same

​

  • But it was noted that students were sharing better, and demonstrating more empathy with their words and expression of feelings

​

  • Also less instances of aggression (gentler hands) and quicker to ask for help from the teacher

​

  • Yet one teacher remarked that touching increased

​

23 of 61

Results: Post-survey

  • Students did incorporate Blue into the classroom through classroom discussions and “sock” monster play

​

  • One teacher related Blue back to MLK

​

  • It was noted by teachers that the concepts from Blue pair with Black History Month

24 of 61

Results: Pre vs. Post-survey

Questions

Pre-survey Response

Post-survey Response

How well do the children in your class regulate their social-emotional skills? / Following the performance...

Occasionally/Decently (3.20)

Occasionally/Decently (3.50)

How well do the children in your classroom work/play and share with their classmates? / Following the performance...

Occasionally/Decently (3.70)

Occasionally/Decently (3.50)

How often do conflicts arise between children in your classroom? / Following the performance...

Occasionally/Decently (3.20)

Occasionally/Decently (3.00)

How well do the children in your classroom resolve conflicts with their classmates? / Following the performance...

Occasionally/Decently (3.00)

Occasionally/Decently (3.25)

How often do conflicts within the classroom require teacher intervention? / Following the performance...

Occasionally/Decently (3.30)

Occasionally/Decently (3.00)

25 of 61

Results: Pre vs. Post-survey

Questions

Pre-survey Response

Post-survey Response

How often do the children in your classroom resolve problems with their peers without becoming aggressive? / Following the performance...

Occasionally/Decently (3.60)

Occasionally/Decently (3.75)

How often do children in your class touch classmates in a manner that is inappropriate?

/ Following the performance…

Rarely/Poorly (2.00)

Rarely/Poorly (2.50)

​

How often do children in your classroom say mean or negative comments towards each other? / Following the performance...

Rarely/Poorly (2.70)

Rarely/Poorly (2.50)

How well do the children in your classroom understand the concepts of prejudice and inclusion? / Following the performance...

Rarely/Poorly (2.70)

Occasionally/Decently (3.25)

26 of 61

Concluding Thoughts

  • ECE teachers need professional development in EDI issues

​

  • Can TYA companies partner with ECE specialists to create more courageous, thought-provoking plays?

​

27 of 61

Published Study

​

​

28 of 61

29 of 61

Dr. Katie Bernstein

Dr. Scott Marley

Dr. Maria Restrepo

Dr. Michael Kelley

Dr. Lauren van Huisstede

Dr. Erin Rotheram-Fuller

Dr. Yuchan (Blanche) Gao

Dr. Melissa Pierce

​

​

​

​

​

Jenny Millinger

Kathryn Brantley

Jen Gantwerker

Theatre Company

30 of 61

Childsplay Professional Development

  • Arts integration = “Drama-Based Instruction”/”DBI”

​

  • Job-embedded PD that pairs Childsplay teaching artists with classroom teachers to build spaces for shared learning

​

  • “I Do, We Do, You Do” model of skill development

​

31 of 61

32 of 61

33 of 61

Randomized Controlled Trial

  • 5 school districts
  • 92 classrooms
  • Each classroom randomly selected to one group:

Intervention

​

56 classrooms over 4 years

767 total children

​

Participated in full year- long EYEPlay professional development program

Control

​

36 classrooms over 4 years

541 total children

​

Got all the same books, puppets, and props, but no professional development

OR

34 of 61

Bilingual English-Spanish Assessment (BESA): How does EYEPlay shape children’s language development?

34

35 of 61

Emotion IQ Measure: How does EYEPlay shape children’s emotion knowledge?�

35

36 of 61

Narrative Language Measure (NLM): How does EYEPlay shape children’s ability to understand and retell stories?��

36

37 of 61

Story Retell Measure (SRM): How does EYEPlay shape children’s ability to understand and retell stories?

37

38 of 61

Quick focus on this last question

How does EYEPlay shape children’s ability to understand and retell stories?

39 of 61

Methods

Compared Intervention vs. Control

​

40 of 61

Measure 1: Story Recall Measure (SRM)

41 of 61

Measure 2: Embodiment Coding System

Behavior Dimension

Definition

Gesture

use of hands and arms to represent concept or action.

Facial Expression

use of face to show emotions, or (re)action

Full Body Movement

use of part or whole body (beyond hands and arms) to act out (embody) the story or character actions.

Vocal Change

change of voice for rhetorical effect (e.g., mimic a character; add emphasis; show emotion)

42 of 61

Measures: Vosaic Coding Software

43 of 61

Results: RQ 1

Do preschool students who experienced a story through drama use more embodiment in their recalls than students who heard the same story through a typical reading?

​

Control

Intervention

Independent samples t-test

​

​

Cohen's d

M

SD

M

SD

t

df

p-value

Total Embodiment Frequency

3.41

5.23

6.38

7.61

-2.46

111

.01

.40

Total Embodiment Duration

4.86

7.69

9.64

11.39

-2.66

111

.00

.23

Gesture

1.67

2.75

3.19

3.77

-2.49

111

.01

.48

Facial Expression

.53

1.17

.77

1.37

-0.98

111

.16

.21

Full Body Movement

.52

1.37

.77

1.55

-0.91

111

.18

.01

Vocal Change

.64

1.57

1.11

1.71

-1.51

111

.07

.12

44 of 61

Results: RQ 1

Do preschool students who experienced a story through drama use more embodiment in their recalls than students who heard the same story through a typical reading?

​

Control

Intervention

Independent samples t-test

​

​

Cohen's d

M

SD

M

SD

t

df

p-value

Total Embodiment Frequency

3.41

5.23

6.38

7.61

-2.46

111

.01

.40

Total Embodiment Duration

4.86

7.69

9.64

11.39

-2.66

111

.00

.23

Gesture

1.67

2.75

3.19

3.77

-2.49

111

.01

.48

Facial Expression

.53

1.17

.77

1.37

-0.98

111

.16

.21

Full Body Movement

.52

1.37

.77

1.55

-0.91

111

.18

.01

Vocal Change

.64

1.57

1.11

1.71

-1.51

111

.07

.12

45 of 61

Results: RQ 1

Do preschool students who experienced a story through drama use more embodiment in their recalls than students who heard the same story through a typical reading?

​

Control

Intervention

Independent samples t-test

​

​

Cohen's d

M

SD

M

SD

t

df

p-value

Total Embodiment Frequency

3.41

5.23

6.38

7.61

-2.46

111

.01

.40

Total Embodiment Duration

4.86

7.69

9.64

11.39

-2.66

111

.00

.23

Gesture

1.67

2.75

3.19

3.77

-2.49

111

.01

.48

Facial Expression

.53

1.17

.77

1.37

-0.98

111

.16

.21

Full Body Movement

.52

1.37

.77

1.55

-0.91

111

.18

.01

Vocal Change

.64

1.57

1.11

1.71

-1.51

111

.07

.12

46 of 61

Results: RQ 2

Do students who use more embodiment while retelling the story have better story comprehension and recall?

​

Model Fit: χ2(N = 196; df = 7) = 9.26, p = .23; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .04, 90% CI[.00, .10]; SRMR = .04.

47 of 61

www.literacyatplay.org

48 of 61

49 of 61

Say Something, Do Something:��The Impact of Participatory Theater on Preventing and Reducing Violence and Bullying�

49

50 of 61

What is �Say Something Do Something

Three parts:� 1) Exploration of body language and non-verbal communication� 2) Short play with “hot seating actors” after� 3) “Rehearsal for life” through improvisation

�Goals:� 1) Increase upstander efficacy� 2) Change attitudes and behaviors around conflict resolution� 3) Transform school culture over time

50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zIhYGMhOtE

51 of 61

Early Research

  • HUD designated a “Promise Zone” in St. Louis in 2015 including 7 school districts.
  • In 2017, the ReCAST (Resiliency in Communities after Stress and Trauma) funded MTC to bring SSDS to 2,958 students in select Promise Zone schools.
  • Interested in the outcomes of MTC’s efforts in the Promise Zone, St. Louis University College for Public Health and Social Justice developed a small-scale study of representative classrooms in 2018 & 2019.

​

​

51

‘By participating in SSDS, students enhanced their ability to recognize potential conflict situations and to resolve or avoid them without the use of violence. They learned a common vocabulary and strategies to help to support a culture of nonviolence.’ - SLU Research Report

52 of 61

NEA Research in the Arts Study

  • We administered surveys to participating classes both before and after the SSDS performance.
  • At the time of the pre-survey, students were randomly assigned to receive either 1) a survey on their perspectives on bullying or 2) a demographic survey. These assignments were based upon the student’s birth month – with odd birth months receiving the opposite survey of the even-month students.
  • Pre-surveys were administered around two weeks prior to the performance. Post-surveying was usually within two-weeks following the performance.

​

​

​

​

53 of 61

NEA Research in the Arts Study

​

  • Outcome measures were largely based on the Bystander Intervention Model (Latané and Darley,1970), assessing students’ ability to:

​

1) Notice the event

2) Interpret the event as an emergency that requires help

3) Accept responsibility for intervening,

4) Know how to intervene/provide help, and

5) Implement intervention decisions.

6) An additional component measured upstander efficacy.

​

​

​

54 of 61

Outcomes Overview

​

  • Using a randomized design, the investigation measured changes in attitude and behavior as a result of the program intervention.
  • Sample size was compromised by the timing of the study and school rules around the pandemic in 2021 & 2022. A large sample could provide more definitive results.
  • Analysis subgroups by gender showed promising patterns.
    • Female students showed gains in knowledge of interventions and upstander efficacy.
    • Male students demonstrated gains in noticing the event, accepting responsibility for intervening, and knowledge of interventions.
  • Reflective feedback from students showed significant growth in understanding of key topics as a result of the program.

​

​

​

55 of 61

Outcomes – Female Subgroup

  • Female students showed gains in knowledge of interventions and upstander efficacy.
  • Compared to control group female students attending the same schools, female students who participated in SSDS were significantly more likely to agree with the statements:
    • “I can help someone get out of a situation where they are being bullied”
    • “I can make a difference in helping to prevent people from being hurt.”
    • These items fall under the domains of knowledge of interventions and upstander efficacy.

​

​

​

​

56 of 61

Outcomes – Male Subgroup

  • Male students demonstrated gains in noticing the event, accepting responsibility for intervening, and knowledge of interventions.
  • Compared to control group male students attending the same schools, male students who participated in SSDS were statistically significantly more likely to agree with the statements:
    • “Bullying is a problem at my school,”
    • “I think it’s up to me to try to stop bullying,”
    • “I know what to say to get someone out of a situation where they are being bullied.”
    • These items fall under the domains of noticing the event, accepting responsibility for intervening, and knowledge of interventions.

​

​

​

​

57 of 61

Reflective Feedback

57

58 of 61

Takeaways / Results

  • It is likely that with a larger sample size the study would have sufficient power to detect a larger number of significant effects.
  • Effects may have been stunted by both pandemic-related circumstances for young people, who were just returning to in-person instruction and by the 2021 script, which examined “frenemy bullying” – a less clear-cut model for identifying perpetrator, target, collaborator, and bystander.
  • The study provided a unique opportunity to pilot data collection instruments, and the findings provide a window into the kinds of attitudinal changes that can occur.
  • Since this study, MTC has rolled SSDS into a larger 6-week program, Building Community Through Drama, to strengthen program impact.
  • Thanks to this research, SSDS/BCTD will expand through a 3 year contract with St. Louis County Children’s Services Fund between 2023 and 2026 to reach every 4th grader in 3 key Promise Zone districts.

​

​

​

59 of 61

60 of 61

NEXT SESSION:

�

​

TYA Advocacy �in the Time of Book Banning

Thursday, June 15 @ 1-2:00pm ET

​

61 of 61