One of the most difficult skills for future teachers is learning how to move away from structured routines and lead disciplined improvisation in education where the students partially guide the direction of the class (Sawyer, 2004, 12). According to Keith Johnstone (1981) “there are people who prefer to say ´Yes´, and there are people who prefer to say ´No´. Those who say ´Yes´ are rewarded by the adventures they have, and those who say ´No` are rewarded by the safety they attain. There are far more ´No´ sayers around than `Yes´ sayers, but you can train one type to behave like the other.” According to Toivonen, Komulainen and Ruismäki (2011) the student teachers find it hard to break out from the scripted teaching. However, through drama work and improvisational exercises also these kinds of interaction skills can be rehearsed (Toivonen et al. 2011).
Improvisation is not just a style or acting technique; it is a dynamic principle operating in many different spheres, an independent and transformative way of being, knowing and doing (Frost & Yarrow 2016, 3). Transactional improvisation helps actors to understand their interactions with others and to break out of habitual patterns (Moseley 2005, 21). Improvisation has been used in various context and is also widely studied in the context of arts like jazz music (Berliner 2009), dance (Carter 2000) and most of all in acting and theatre - but also used as a pedagogical method (Toivonen et al. 2011).
According to Frost and Yarrow (2007) improvisation can be defined “as a skill of using bodies, space, all human resources, to generate a coherent physical expression of an idea, a situation, a character (even, perhaps, a text); to do this spontaneously, in response to the immediate stimuli of one´s environment, and to do it à l´improviste: as through taken by surprise, without preconceptions” (Frost & Yarrow 2007, 1). Frost and Yarrow (2007) describe more detailed the working techniques of improvisation. They divide the working techniques in preparation, working together, moving towards performance and the applied improvisation work.
Working methods of improvisation cause very often spontaneous laughter. According to Mora-Ripoll (2010, 56) “laughter has shown physiological, psychological, social, spiritual, and quality-of-life benefits”. Laughter has said to be therapeutic. There are two types of laughter - the one which is triggered by an external factor and the one which can be caused by will. The human brain is not making any difference between these two and the benefit of laughter is the same in both cases (see Mora-Ripoll 2010).
Thayer and Lane (2009) have suggested that there are connections between the brain and heart which can be direct and indirect. The link between brain and heart is the pneumogastric nerve (vagus nerve). Thayer and Lane propose that there is a relationship HRV (heart rate variability) and physiological, cognitive, and emotional regulation functions. They also emphasize the skill of emotional regulation and its´ effect on individuals´ health (see Thayer & Lane 2009).
The sociocultural perspective implies that the entire classroom is improvising together; and it holds that the most effective learning results when the classroom proceeds in an open, improvisational fashion, as children are allowed to experiment, interact, and participate in the collaborative construction of their own knowledge. In improvisational teaching, learning is a shared social activity, and is collectively managed by all participants, not only the teacher (Baker-Senett & Matusov 1997, 204).
This study is located in the field of drama education and it is part of the doctoral thesis. This study aims to clear out the psychophysiological states that the student is facing while participating the working methods of improvisation.
