This expanded further and as it progressed throughout England was mainly made up of amateur theatre groups consisting of largely teachers who aimed to introduce theatre to children. However, the main expansion of TIE came when a number of professional theatre companies began the notion of creating these experiences and took them into schools.
Towards the end of the 1960’s the TIE movement was given a dynamic push in the right direction. This was largely due to the new style of teaching and curriculum delivery that was being implemented across Britain. The ‘Plowden Report’ gave numerous advice on the delivery of the school curriculum and a new style of “problem-solving” to teach the syllabus was adopted throughout many primary schools. This new “problem-solving” style of teaching allowed TIE to flourish, as theatre could be used within schools to give examples of how to successfully problem solve. This largely was done in the style of role play situations and stemmed mainly from the teaching of alternative theatre practitioner Augusto Boal. Boal had many links with the philosophy of TIE. Throughout his career Boal was engrossed with the political oppression in many South American countries. He sought to use theatre as a medium for confronting this oppression. One of the key areas with which Boal concerns himself is the role of the audience in the theatre experience. He strongly believes that the purpose of ‘theatre of the oppressed’ is to change the people (spectators), as passive beings into the subjects, actors and transformers of the action.
For theatre-in-education the role of the audience is central. Based on Boal’s theory the spectator is often used. By using the spectator central to the performance you are effectively giving the audience a voice and are thus stimulating the participants to take charge of their actions and make changes to the piece. In essence, the viewers become the viewed. Another central role is the role of ‘the joker’ who technically acts as a medium for the performance. He/she can stop or start the performance as and when required and can effectively referee the performance.
Further success in the 1950’s-60’s came in TIE, with the work of Joan Littlewood and the Theatre workshop of London. Littlewood’s work provided members of the audience with a channel through which they were able to learn experience and express themselves. By presenting theatre that directly represented the fears, aspirations and hopes of the people who attended her plays, she was able to create a ‘continuous loop with the community. Infact one could argue that this highly shows a dominant argument in the parallels between theatre-in-education and community theatre. However, this is mainly where the similarities end, as unlike community theatre, TIE is not inherently political or serious. Instead it is always underlined with a strong educational undercurrent.
With a strong foothold in education as a result of this initial success TIE as a movement was further allowed to develop. Slowly, particularly as drama emerged onto the curriculum most British schools began to further see the benefits of theatre-in-education and thus this allowed the movement to expand. Many community companies have ventured into TIE and equally TIE companies have taken up community theatre work.
Theatre-In-Education today occurs in many places, not only just schools. It has been known to often take place in senior citizen day centres, prisons, museums and art galleries. More recently it has even been documented to have been effectively used within drug rehabilitation centres.
Furthermore, TIE now benefits a variety of sectors within the community, including, single parents, the homeless, and adults with special needs and learning disabilities.
However, all theatre-in-education activities have one key element that sets them apart from all other types of theatre. Its key role, to inform and instruct a specific audience. Indeed, one could best describe TIE as using theatre for the sole purpose of educating.
There are of course many strengths and weaknesses to theatre-in-education. Its main weakness lies within the unfortunate fact that it is not yet fully recognised by many local education authorities as having true educational value therefore it is increasingly difficult to allow the movements messages to spread to wider audiences. Furthermore funding is not easily accessible so thus limitations are put on the organisations capabilities. Its strength lies within its flexibility. Conventionally the schools drama curriculum has mostly adult drama therefore TIE establishes a new angle which is more likely to be productive as it uses techniques which allow for the children’s imagination to be used to its full potential. Furthermore it often allows for issues to be raised that might not necessarily be easy to cover by traditional teachers. For example, it may highlight racism, homophobia, disability, all issues that traditionally the classroom might shy away from; instead TIE brings it to the forefront and allows for its open debate.