The Interpersonal Conflict in Group Scene Work
A high school theatre teacher is directing a 9th-grade scene-study unit. Two students, assigned to the same scene as scene partners, had a falling-out outside class; in rehearsal one student refuses to make eye contact and delivers lines flatly, while the partner overcompensates by projecting and stepping into the other's space. The teacher has 12 class days before a public showcase. The scene is a two-person dramatic excerpt in which the characters are supposed to be in a tense but caring relationship. The teacher wants to preserve the artistic integrity of the scene, keep both students safe and engaged, and avoid turning the classroom into a mediation session. The teacher also has a rubric that weights listening and responsiveness heavily.
1. Identify the core pedagogical tension and propose a first intervention that addresses both the artistic and interpersonal dimensions.
Read the worked answer
The tension is between artistic fidelity (the scene needs reciprocal listening and physical comfort) and relational safety (the partners are not currently able to offer that). A first move should lower the interpersonal stakes while keeping the scene's objectives intact.
- Reframe the task, not the relationship. Switch from "rehearse the scene" to a structured listening exercise: partners stand six feet apart, speak only the objective (what each character wants in the beat), and respond with a single line. This removes physical proximity and eye-contact pressure while training the rubric's listening criterion.
- Separate process from product. Tell students the goal today is not performance but gathering information about the scene's wants. This depersonalizes flat delivery.
- Set a behavioral boundary, not a therapy goal. State the classroom norm: "We work with the partner in front of us; we don't require friendship." This protects both students without forcing reconciliation.
- Document and monitor. Note the specific behaviors (no eye contact, space invasion) so later decisions-partner reassignment if needed-are evidence-based rather than punitive.
2. If the behavior persists after two rehearsals, what decision-making criteria should guide whether to reassign partners, and what are the tradeoffs?
Read the worked answer
Reassignment is a last resort with real artistic costs, so the teacher should apply explicit criteria rather than reacting to discomfort.
Criteria for reassigning:
- Safety: persistent space invasion or intimidation that violates classroom norms.
- Learning access: one or both students cannot engage with the rubric's listening standard despite scaffolding.
- Non-improvement: two structured interventions have produced no measurable change.
Tradeoffs:
- For reassignment: restores safety and lets both students learn; protects the showcase.
- Against: teaches that conflict is avoided rather than managed; costs rehearsal time (12 days is tight); may stigmatize one student; the new pairing also needs time to build trust.
Middle path: keep the scene but restage it-chairs, distance, or a third silent observer role-so the rubric can still be assessed without forcing proximity. If reassignment happens, frame it as a casting/blocking decision, not a verdict on either student, and pair each with a partner who can model responsive listening.