The effectiveness of a local wisdom-based learning model in drama script writing: a mixed-methods study

Jurnal Konseling dan Pendidikan December 30, 2025 Volume 13, Number 4 2 authors

Abstract

Drama script writing in higher education often emphasizes technical structure while underutilizing students’ cultural knowledge as a creative resource. Integrating local wisdom into writing instruction may strengthen both dramaturgical competence and cultural literacy. This study investigates the effectiveness of a local wisdom based learning model in improving drama script writing among language education students. A mixed methods approach using a sequential explanatory design was employed with 35 undergraduate students. Quantitative data were collected through document analysis, engagement observation, questionnaires, and pre and post script assessment. Qualitative data from interviews and script analysis were used to explain quantitative patterns. Instructional planning demonstrated substantial integration of local wisdom, and students showed high engagement during culturally grounded activities. Script scores improved significantly from a mean of 68 to 82, indicating measurable gains in conflict development, characterization, and structural coherence. Qualitative findings revealed that cultural values functioned as structural drivers of dramatic conflict rather than decorative themes. The findings suggest that structured integration of local wisdom can enhance drama writing competence while deepening students’ cultural literacy within a specific higher education context. The study contributes to culturally sustaining pedagogy by clarifying how local cultural knowledge may operate as a pedagogical resource in creative writing instruction.

Authors

  1. Eggie Nugraha Eggie

    Universitas Pasundan

  2. Lili Sadeli

    Universitas Pasundan

Keywords

Local wisdom based learningDrama script writing in higher educationCulturally sustaining pedagogyCreative writing pedagogyMixed methods sequential explanatory design

References

  1. Alford, B. L. (2020). Culturally responsive teaching: Its application in higher education environments. Education Sciences, 10(5), 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10050124
  2. Anyichie, A. C. (2025). Developing and implementing a culturally responsive self regulated learning framework in higher education. SAGE Open, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251367830
  3. Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  5. Brown, R., & Leb, L. (2025). Across pedagogies of failure: Teaching students how to fail and failing in the process. New Writing. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790726.2025.2458163
  6. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  7. Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs: Principles and practices. Annals of Family Medicine, 11(2), 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1472
  8. Fetters, M. D., & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2017). The Journal of Mixed Methods Research starts a new decade. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(3), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817714066
  9. Gans, H., McDonald, J., & Nguyen, T. (2025). Cultural responsiveness and student engagement in higher education classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 132, 104345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2025.104345
  10. Guetterman, T. C., Fetters, M. D., & Creswell, J. W. (2015). Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research. Annals of Family Medicine, 13(6), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1865
  11. Harper, G., & Kroll, J. (2018). Creative writing studies: Practice, research and pedagogy. Multilingual Matters.
  12. Lang, E. H., Munsey, B., Murray, F., Manning, L., & Wigington, T. (2024). Culturally responsive learning environments within higher education. Learning Environments Research, 27, 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-023-09481-x
  13. Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson, R., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary research. American Psychologist, 73(1), 26–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000151
  14. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
  15. Luo, S., Ismail, L., Ahmad, N. K., & Guo, Q. (2024). Using process drama in education: A systematic review. Heliyon, 10(11), e31936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31936
  16. McCrudden, M. T., Marchand, G., & Schutz, P. A. (2021). Joint displays for mixed methods research. Methods in Psychology, 5, 100067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2021.100067
  17. Neelands, J., & Goode, T. (2019). Structuring drama work: A handbook of available forms in theatre and drama. Cambridge University Press.
  18. Nicholson, H. (2011). Theatre, education and performance: The map and the story. Palgrave Macmillan.
  19. O’Cathain, A. (2019). Mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.
  20. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2017). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 48–63.
  21. Paris, D. (2021). Culturally sustaining pedagogies and our futures. The Educational Forum, 85(4), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2021.1957634
  22. Prendergast, M., & Saxton, J. (2016). Applied theatre in education and community. In P. Taylor & C. Warner (Eds.), Structure and spontaneity in applied theatre (pp. 15–30). Palgrave Macmillan.
  23. Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018). Developing evaluative judgement: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76(3), 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3
  24. Topping, K. J. (2017). Peer assessment: Learning by judging and discussing the work of other learners. Interdisciplinary Education and Psychology, 1(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.31532/InterdiscipEducPsychol.1.1.007
  25. Volman, M., & ’t Gilde, J. (2020). The effects of using students’ funds of knowledge on educational outcomes in the social and personal domain. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 28, 100472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100472.