Improvisation in teaching and education—roots and applications

Teachers’ Conceptions of Improvisation in Teaching: Inherent Human Quality or a Professional Teaching Skill?

“…After the in-service MA students had completed their course, we analysed their texts, looking specifically for descriptions of improvisatory teaching practices that could confirm, contradict or supplement our theoretical understanding of improvisation in teaching, building on the four analytical dimensions and on a comprehensive literature review of improvisation (Holdhus et al, 2016). The texts were coded and analysed by means of hyper research in an abductive process, going from theoretical perspectives to a more grounded approach, and vice versa, to ensure a critical eye (Charmaz, 2014;Glaser & Strauss, 1967;Glaser, 1992;Strauss & Corbin, 1998;Yin, 1994).…”

“…The concept of improvisation is applicable to several professions and traditions (Holdhus et al, 2016). In education, however, there has been little focus on the different characteristics of improvisation (DeZutter, 2011;Jarning, 2006, p. 217).…”

“…She argues that it is time to alter this on the basis of a constructivist theory of learning. Improvisation in education is seen as a required skill for such a development (Lobman, 2011, p. 73;Sawyer, 2011b) and can be inspired by what Holdhus et al (2016) have labelled as the three root traditions of improvisation as a professional skill: the rhetoric, the music and the theatre tradition. Improvisational practices in the music and theatre traditions have strongly influenced educational theory and practice.…”

“…As part of the main IMTE project referred to earlier, the research project group, in which the authors of this article were participants, described what we listed as four dimensions or aspects of improvisation: 1) structure and design: a dimension characterised by teachers' handling, altering and carrying out sequences of lessons on the basis of spontaneous input from students or contexts; 2) communication and dialogues: a dimension characterised by how teachers develop and carry out learning-focused dialogue with students on the basis of spontaneous input; 3) repertoire: a dimension characterised by teachers making contextual and learning-focused choices of examples and activities in lessons on the basis of their professional subject-oriented and didactical knowledge/orientation and 4) context: a dimension characterised by teachers establishing an improvisational practice in a certain domain, theme or context (Holdhus et al, 2016). Three of these dimensions -structure and design, communication and dialogues and repertoire -can also be understood as descriptions of individual teaching skills, whereas the fourth aspect -context -describes the significance of specific environments for the enactment of such skills.…”

Improvisational approaches to supervision dialogue

“…The roles and functions of improvisation in educational contexts have been the subject of several studies, e.g., an extensive ongoing Norwegian project (Holdhus et al, 2016). Mature academic work may be seen as "a creative process of trial and error, […] of clarity and confusion" (Grant, 2010, p. 283).…”