dramatic conflict: exploring interactive theatre as a pedagogical tool for addressing issues of ...

215 Pages·2011·1.13 MB·English

DRAMATIC CONFLICT: EXPLORING
INTERACTIVE THEATRE AS A PEDAGOGICAL
TOOL FOR ADDRESSING ISSUES OF
HETEROSEXISM IN THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
_________________________________________

A Dissertation

presented to

the Faculty of the Graduate School

at the University of Missouri-Columbia

___________________________________________

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

____________________________________________

By

KEVIN BABBITT

Dr. Suzanne Burgoyne, Dissertation Supervisor

May 2011
© Copyright by Kevin Babbitt 2011
All Rights Reserved
The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined
the dissertation entitled
DRAMATIC CONFLICT: EXPLORING INTERACTIVE THEATRE AS A
PEDAGOGICAL TOOL FOR ADDRESSING ISSUES OF HETEROSEXISM
IN THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

presented by Kevin Babbitt,
a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy,
and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance.

Professor Suzanne Burgoyne
Professor Jennifer L. Hart
Professor M. Heather Carver
Professor Cheryl Black
Professor Peggy Placier
To Vince,
For giving me the support (and occasional push) that I needed to finish.
You are – and will always be – my inspiration.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It is with a deep sense of gratitude that I would like to thank everyone who helped
me with this endeavor. It would not have been possible without the creativity of the
original cast: Whit Loy, Elise Link, Anna Lingo, Lania Knight, and Jessica Giddens. I
also owe a great deal to subsequent performers and facilitators without whose help I
could not have continued this project: CeCe McFarland, Phil Groeschel, Lauren Zima,
Shawna Kelty, and Caroline Ford.
Additionally, I would like to thank all of the participants who generously shared
their insights and experiences with me. I appreciate your faith and trust in me, and I hope
that I have represented your voices to your satisfaction.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I thank my dissertation committee. The
academic guidance of Heather Carver, Cheryl Black, and Peggy Placier was invaluable.
My second reader, Jeni Hart, provided me with an understanding of academic justice and
provided much needed feedback on the methodological approach of grounded theory. I
can never properly thank my advisor on this project, however. Suzanne Burgoyne not
only tirelessly mentored me on this work, she influenced the very core of who I have
become.

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ ii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ vii
ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... viii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1
Purpose ...........................................................................................................................1
Definitions......................................................................................................................3
Justification for the Study ..............................................................................................8
Justification for the Methodology ................................................................................27
Organization of the Study ............................................................................................30
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................31
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................32
Theoretical Perspective ................................................................................................32
Research Design...........................................................................................................37
Procedural Modifications .............................................................................................42
Credibility ....................................................................................................................56
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................62
CHAPTER 3: HETEROSEXUAL STUDENT POPULATION .......................................63
Introduction ..................................................................................................................63
Explanatory Paradigm ..................................................................................................64
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................90

iii
CHAPTER 4: LGB STUDENT POPULATION ...............................................................93
Introduction ..................................................................................................................93
Explanatory Paradigm ..................................................................................................95
Conclusion .................................................................................................................109
CHAPTER 5: ACTOR POPULATION...........................................................................111
Introduction ................................................................................................................111
Explanatory Paradigm ................................................................................................113
Conclusion .................................................................................................................136
CHAPTER 6 ....................................................................................................................138
Summary of the Explanatory Paradigm .....................................................................138
Discussion ..................................................................................................................152
Implications for Practice and Research......................................................................168
Conclusion .................................................................................................................175
APPENDIX
1. Forum Theatre Script ............................................................................................177
2. Consent Form ........................................................................................................181
3. Debriefing Form ....................................................................................................184
4. Focus Group Protocol ...........................................................................................186
5. Actor Protocol .......................................................................................................187
6. Survey Questions ..................................................................................................188
7. Matrix for the Heterosexual Cohort ......................................................................189
8. Matrix for the LGB Cohort ...................................................................................190
9. Matrix for the Actor Cohort ..................................................................................191

iv
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................192
VITA ................................................................................................................................204

v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Visual Representation of the Heterosexual Audience‟s Explanatory Paradigm ......66
2. Visual Representation of the LGB Audience‟s Explanatory Paradigm ...................96
3. Visual Representation of the Actor‟s Explanatory Paradigm ................................114
4. Simplified Model of Impact for All Participants ..................................................139

vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Demographics: Heterosexual Audience Cohort .......................................................64
2. Demographics: Heterosexual Audience Cohort .......................................................65
3. Demographics: LGB Audience Cohort ....................................................................94
4. Demographics: LGB Audience Cohort ....................................................................95
5. Demographics: Actor Cohort .................................................................................112
6. Demographics: Actor Cohort .................................................................................113

vii