[Adta] Ramblings!

[Cynthia BERROL]

Beth,

I appreciate your comments and agree entirely.  And,
the Feder and Feder reference is a choice one—clearly
dedicated to dance/movement therapists and very
readable.

As a member of the ADTA Research Subcommittee and
having been involved in different aspects of research
and its process over the years, I want to emphasize
that there is more than one approach to  good
evidenced based research. I don't believe that it
should be perceived as impeding or compromising (et
cetera) the therapeutic process, but rather
augmenting, enhancing and validating it. I think the
more we know and understand research options, the
better we will be able to apply them in the clinical
arena and to appreciate their value.

A point of information: the Research  Subcommittee is
planning a special session for the coming conference
that should be of interest to all. Watch for it.

Best,
Cynthia

--- "Beth Kalish-Weiss,PhD"
<bkalishweiss at mindspring.com> wrote:


---------------------------------
Dear Susan et al:
 
This correspondance is so interesting to me. First of
all why do we keep re-inventing the wheel?  There are
many studies in our field that are truly evidence
based. If I may toot my own horn abit, my dissertation
is one: A body movement scale for autistic and other
atypical children ( Kalish, Bryn Mawr,1976). This is a
developmental scale (supported by the observational
research of both normal and atypical children in many
child-care centers over the period of 1 year by 4
trained objective raters). Observational evidence was
supported by the statistical data produced in each
observation. It is a scale that has proven itself over
time to assess progress as well as regression during
treatment in several diagnostic catagories such as: 1)
autism 2) visually impaired 3) retarded individuals
regardless of chronological ages. Why isn't it used
and referred to more????
Also, it comes to mind that Bernie and Elaine Feders'
book is a gold mine for research-interested people in
our field. In my opinion this is a fine resouce and
truly undervalued in our field.  Here is the
reference:  Feder,B & Feder, E.(1998) , `The art and
science of evaluation in the arts therapies',
Springfield,Charles C. Thomas.
 
By the way, in the field of psychoanalysis there are
also state,national, even international pressure from
insurance co's. and gov't agencies to produce what is
generally called `evidence-based' studies. This has
been a huge problem in the profession, due to issues
of confidentiality and to the difficulties of testing
variables ACROSS individuals in treatment.  I refer
you to the ongoing work of Robert Wallerstein at
Menningers and the problems that insued there even in
a setting like Menningers. Peter Fonagy a
psychologist-psychoanalyst in England has produced a
volume on Outcome Studies in Psychanalysis from around
the world, they are interesting to read, but once
again do not truly answer the questions gov't agencies
want. One has to be cautious to not bend to the
requests of government agencies when doing research as

 it is highly important to be ethical with any
research design and as " objective as possible" (
which of course there is truly no such thing as
absolutely objective)... Even the idea of "
evidence-based" studies needs to be questioned
closely.
 
O.K. those are some thoughts, hope they are helpful...
 
Regards,
Beth



 
-----Original Message----- 
From: skdmt2 
Sent: Feb 17, 2007 5:20 AM 
To: 'Heather Hill' , 'Adta listserve' 
Subject: RE: [Adta] Ramblings! 

v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}o\:*
{behavior:url(#default#VML);}w\:*
{behavior:url(#default#VML);}.shape
{behavior:url(#default#VML);}     
Hi Heather

Thanks for taking me up on talking about evidence
based d/mt, which, of course, means developing & using
research to backup the importance of using our method
w/ various populations & in various ways ( my
interpretation anyway). 

 

You said; “The idea of "evidence-based" practice has
been and still is the buzz word in the health field
particularly and it is clear that for survival if
nothing else, we have to address the need for research
to underwrite our practice, if we are to maintain and
increase the practice of dance therapy - if we are to
find jobs, in fact!  “

 

Susan: I think we can’t say this too many ways,
its’ that important.

 

Heather: Re “So the question for me is how do we
deal with this.  Do we focus on developing evidence in
scientific terms, or can we develop other methods
which can capture what dance therapy actually achieves
but still serve to "prove" to the relevant authorities
that dance therapy is a bona fide therapy.  Also, I
would like to think that we do not focus our entire
research efforts on supplying evidence, but also
explore our work more fully and seek understanding
within this very rich field that we work in.�

 

Susan: Good questions.  I’d like to add, it’s not
just having the research, but using it specifically &
intentionally to promote our work- We have begun to 
lead others into understanding that there IS evidence
that what we do is beneficial ( thanks to our leaders
in this arena),  but then I think we also have to get
ourselves AND others to take it in� – to “decode
it  � so that we, the general public AND allied
professional can all see how it’s beneficial. 

 

So, it’s also knowing what to do with what we have-
how to utilize it- make the most of it- facilitate it
reaching the masses. I think this part is the
promotional area- kind of like taking the seed- one
piece of evidence ( in research format) & translating
& promoting it in many ways to the public.

 

I think that’s where I need to focus. So, I’m
thinking there are 2 parts- maybe there are more, but
that one part is the one the researchers do- the
studies & projects, etc. Then I think it has to move
into other hands- like  GAC to understand what is
needed legislatively & to fit into laws,  & then on to
Marketing/PR to develop the evidence into promotional
materials. Our PR people have done a great job of
promoting d/mt but now I think we also need to move
also in this direction.

 

Christina, what do you think re this?  How about our
researchers?  Others?

 

Also, I think we ALL have to make it our business to
do this- I know our research leaders have been saying
this for years & that they tell us we can ALL do
research & I think we DO it in some form each time we
try something out w/ a pt- each time we’re creative-
each time we develop a skill based on an idea, but we
all don’t take it further into a study, w/ findings,
etc. I am one of those people- I DO think, however, I
can let others, who are so inclined,  do that part & I
, & others like me, can develop on this other part of
working w/ the more research inclined to translate the
findings into evidence based promotion. I guess
that’s why I’m on the PR committee !

 

Readers, What do you all think? Where do you fit? How
would you like to get involved? How does it help you
to talk about this subject/ Does it help you? How
would it help you in your work? Might it give you a
focus-Do you like it when you can use research focuses
in your presentations? In your work? 

 

Please respond to these issues & other that may be
triggered for you by the conversation Heather & I have
begun to articulate.

 

 

Susan

 

Susan Kleinman, MA, ADTR, NCC

 

 

 

 

---------------------------------


From: adta-bounces at adta.org
[mailto:adta-bounces at adta.org] On Behalf Of Heather
Hill
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 3:08 AM
To: Adta listserve
Subject: [Adta] Ramblings!


 

Hi Susan!


I thought I would accept your invitation to do some
rambling on the subject of research, specifically the
notion of evidence-based practice.  I guess I just
want to raise some issues/questions which I think are
important for dance therapy.


 


The idea of "evidence-based" practice has been and
still is the buzz word in the health field
particularly and it is clear that for survival if
nothing else, we have to address the need for research
to underwrite our practice, if we are to maintain and
increase the practice of dance therapy - if we are to
find jobs, in fact!  


 


I support strongly the idea of research in our field -
we need have no fear that questioning our work will
result in negative findings!  However, the problem for
dance therapy, as I see it, is that the "evidence"
talked about generally signifies evidence on someone
else's terms, invariably a biomedical/natural sciences
standard of measurement.  This is always going to make
it difficult for us, since applying "pill"
methodologies to dance therapy (ie trying to isolate
the "treatment", talking in terms of cause and effect,
requiring large numbers to show "significance", etc)
is bound to disadvantage us.   - indeed you can be
sure that the standards of proof for something as
"alternative" as dance therapy is likely to be higher
than for traditional, accepted practice. Yet for
pragmatic reasons, we do need to find ways to
demonstrate the effectiveness of the work - for our
employers, for funding bodies and so on.  That's part
of the current reality.


 


So the question for me is how do we deal with this. 
Do we focus on developing evidence in scientific
terms, or can we develop other methods which can
capture what dance therapy actually achieves but still
serve to "prove" to the relevant authorities that
dance therapy is a bona fide therapy.  Also, I would
like to think that we do not focus our entire research
efforts on supplying evidence, but also explore our
work more fully and seek understanding within this
very rich field that we work in.


 


Anyway, those are just some thoughts and I welcome
further "ramblings" from others.  This is very much a
work in progress.


 


Kind regards,


Heather


> _______________________________________________
> Adta mailing list
> Adta at adta.org
> http://lists.adta.org/mailman/listinfo/adta
> 


Cynthia Berrol, Ph.D., ADTR, Professor Emerita
California State University, East Bay