ABSTRACT
The heart of the problem of declining or sporadic curricular and resource provision for drama in secondary schools is its low status. The author argues that prevailing negative attitudes towards drama are largely the result of its association with a perceived progressive, laissez-faire approach to education (no longer acceptable in today’s world which has increasingly moved to the political right); its internal divisions – the drama versus theatre arguments that have bedevilled drama over the years; and an increasingly instrumental view of education which has already affected all arts activities. He challenges the increasing moves by many drama teachers towards examinations and separate departments as a means of acquiring more resources and status. He argues that, in doing this, drama is in effect supporting the undue emphasis on vocational preparation through academic work rather than fulfilling its natural function which is to promote social, perceptive, intuitive, aesthetic and creative learning. It is the practice and communication of these kinds of learning which arts teachers need to be pursuing in order that they be better understood and valued. Curriculum strategy in drama should be related to the development within the context of each school of a general policy for the arts.
In placing drama in a well-defined political and social context, Robinson raises general issues of clarity of purpose and practice which are developed in detail in later chapters.
