Arts Research Case Study: Interactive Exercise (Part 1) Presented by Katherine Lee, EdD, Director, The Center for Creative Expression at the Riddle Institute In collaboration with Joseph Deacon, PhD, Associate Director, Human Development Research and Training Institute, Western Carolina Center Assisted by Doris Levy, MFA, DTR, Dance Therapist Negative Factors identified by the Group The work with materials Prior condition of an upset stomach Frustration/awareness of body limitations Wanted more comfortable clothes Dizzy as the result of some movements The process of creation - none listed The relationship with the artist/teacher/leader – none listed Context – again, except for the one reference to the space, the context is psychological and social Uncomfortable in beginning - shyness Uncomfortable with partnering Fear of being left out Sensitive to others' discomfort Touching Embarrassed Feeling "on the spot" Baggage of personal history Apprehension Felt awkward Space could be larger Please note that the categorization of the above factors identified by the group was carried out after the session. The time allowed was insufficient to pursue this in much detail. The group did, however, grasp the point of it all. The discussion was lively and it was abundantly clear that this dance experience had been a great success. Even the negative factors identified did not mar the overall success of the experience for individuals. Doris gently guided most people through their initial or occasional difficulties. Dance was a good vehicle for this “art experience” because, as mentioned above, many people feel particularly vulnerable in this situation and tend not to know much about the art of dance. 6. Two visitors to this session demonstrated another point. They were asked to be “observers” of the session and were given the following instructions: Rate one person’s response at 5 minute intervals during the activity on the following chart (indicate your grounds for making the rating. How did you “know?” Note what was going on at the time). Afterwards, the observer and observed discussed their individual interpretations of the same data. They demonstrated that there was almost total agreement. The observers “saw” more than most of the group expected. We all observe, interpret, and act on the “data” we perceive all the time. In the context of evaluation and research we become conscious of what we “observe” as we document it. It is through knowing what we know and making it explicit that we can share our knowledge with others as well as put it to use in our own environment and profession. 7. The final questions for this session were: What do you want to know and who wants to know what? The specific factors to be evaluated will, of course, depend on the purpose of the evaluation and who will benefit from the result, such as: Clients The reflective practitioner (artist/teacher/leader) Providers of services Funding body In this brief case study our focus was on ourselves as the “client.” It also became apparent that these detailed factors would be of great interest and help to the “reflective practitioner.” In this case to Doris who led the session and for others who also conduct arts sessions with clients. The overall success of an arts in health experience is the concern of administrators and the funding source of such programs. By the end of this session, it was hoped that everyone would have a deeper understanding of the kinds of factors that count for or against the success of an arts in health experience and feel more comfortable about approaching a more formal evaluation. That, in fact, it is only doing what they do all the time, but approaching it systematically, and then documenting the results as Dr. Jody Deacon would demonstrate in the next session. In this way, information can be shared and also replicated by others. It was also important to understand that relatively simple evaluations can be extremely useful. Reference: McNiff, Shaun. Art-Based Research. London and Philadelphia Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 1998 Outcome of #2 - Positive Factors for Individual | Outcome of #3 - Visible Factors identified as Common to the Group | Negative Factors identified by the Group | Back to Agenda | NC Arts For Health