Working from Scratch: The Pedagogic Value of Undergraduate Devising

In 2013 MIT unveiled a software program that allows kids to create interactive stories, games, animation, and music by assembling blocks of code online, much like creating a Lego construction (Choi). This program, called Scratch, is used in classrooms and online communities to encourage logical and creative development, as well as learning to work collaboratively. Problem-solving is at the heart of Scratch: if something does not work, kids can go back, take the blocks of code apart and try again, learning how to fix a problem rather than throwing away what they have done and starting over. The name Scratch alludes to the remix of sounds created by DJs “scratching” vinyl records to make “new” sounds (Schorow). What Scratch suggests, therefore, is the act of invention, such as exploring the interplay between music and the materiality of noise to create something new (Carter 2007, 15).

The principles of Scratch may serve as a metaphor for the pedagogic purposes of what has come to be known as devising, or collaborative creation, in undergraduate theatre programs.¹ The devising process uses many of the same principles as Scratch: experimenting with new ideas, learning how to take complex concepts and break them down into simpler parts, developing collaborative relationships with others on a shared project, and discovering the value of persistence and perseverance in the face of frustration when things are not working well (Resnick). Unlike traditional hierarchical theatre production, which begins with the playwright’s script as “interpreted” by the director, design team, and actors, devising begins “from scratch”—no existing text but a will to invent—with members of an ensemble; instead of a single playwright’s vision, there is a collective effort to create the authorial voice. Devising emphasizes both problem-solving—taking blocks of “code” (narrative, gesture, movement), which become the building materials for developing meaning in rehearsal—and invention— the interplay of collaborators, material, imagination, and the language or discourse that develops—as the key elements of process (Carter 2007, 19). By affording students an opportunity to play a pivotal role in the shaping of performance, devising gives them greater agency in the creative process than their participation as mere actors could ever allow.

As a teacher of undergraduates I am drawn to the devising process because of the challenge of developing a collaborative ensemble as a mode of teaching, as well as the idea of empowering students by encouraging them to draw on the interdisciplinary research training of a liberal arts curriculum. John Schmor claims that “[f ]or the small liberal arts generalist program, especially, student devising can actually test the promise of the ‘well-rounded’ theatre student” (262). Interdisciplinary practice is crucial in devising: the remixing of theatre “codes” with disciplinary research “blocks” results in an inventive new form of performance and reinforces interdisciplinary connections made in academic work. Pedagogically, devising is a “connecting the dots” example of liberal arts training in action, and the Scratch principles reflected in the devising process translate directly to students’ interdisciplinary education across the curriculum. More importantly, the benefits of devising (discovery, problem-solving, embracing uncertainty, self-empowerment) explored in this essay mirror the benefits of a liberal arts education.

Students are invited to claim ownership of a devising project through their invention and problem-solving. Alison Oddey argues that “[t]he process of devising is about the fragmentary experience of understanding ourselves, our culture, and the world we inhabit” (1). What students bring to the project is energy and intellectual curiosity, a willingness to explore and articulate ideas and familiarity with technological resources that have conditioned them to contradictory information and cultural fragmentation. Social media and communications have already introduced them to concepts like juxtaposition and assemblage.² The “scratchiness” of assemblage is something that students respond to quite readily, both in the classroom and in rehearsal, and Bruce Barton’s assertion that devising can be understood as “a montage-based hybrid process of authorship through direction” articulates the messy but fruitful collaboration between performer/creators and a director/creator (137; emphasis in original).

If students bring considerable abilities to the devising process...