DRAMA/THEATRE-BASED ACTIVITIES FOR DEVELOPING THE SOCIO-EMOTIONAL COMPETENCE OF AT-RISK YOUTH IN STATE CARE INSTITUTIONS FROM ROMANIA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26758/15.1.27

(1-4) “I.L. Caragiale” National University of Theatre and Film, Bucharest, Romania; email: andreea.jicman@unatc.ro (corresponding author), ada.dobrea@unatc.ro, ioana.lixandroaia@unatc.ro, ana.vicovan@unatc.ro

Address correspondence to: Andreea-Diana JICMAN, Centre for Pedagogical and Didactic Training, “I.L. Caragiale” National University of Theatre and Film, Matei Voievod 75-77, sector 2, Bucharest, Romania. Phone: 0723.296.054; E-mail: andreea.jicman@unatc.ro.

Abstract

Objectives. The objective of this study was to validate an intervention model based on the theatrical methods to increase understanding of the concepts of core emotions, personal boundaries and interpersonal skills associated with reducing stress and abuse encountered by at-risk youth being in state care institutions.

Material and methods. This study involved a group of 85 at-risk young people aged 8-19 years, affiliated with social protection institutions: General Directorate of the Social Assistance and Child Protection [Direcția pentru Asistența Socială și Protecția Copilului – DGASPC] Bucharest, Dolj, Suceava. At each stage of the intervention, i.e. pre-activity, post-performance, and post-activity, a questionnaire was administered, developed by the authors of this study, with 38 questions (open and closed) on socio-emotional factors. Five drama workshops were conducted at each institution, preceded by a performance presenting three types of abuse situations.

Results. The results showed that the drama intervention produced changes in the targeted dimensions among the participants. Post-activity, more than half of the participants were able to correctly name one, two, or three core emotions (joy, fear, sadness, anger) and reported that they developed some skills which made them able to communicate more easily with each other.

Conclusions. This study found that the drama exercises facilitated experiential learning and had beneficial implications for the behavior of at-risk youth. In light of this, the initiation of programs aimed at enhancing the emotional and the personal intelligence among vulnerable youth is both timely and essential to helping them identify emotions and interpersonal boundaries and activate the resilience factors, thereby effectively overcoming the adversities they face.

Keywords: theatre games, drama intervention, social risk, teenagers, Romania.

Suggested citation (APA)

Jicman, A. D., Dobrea, G. A., Lixândroaia, I. M., & Vicovan, A. M. V. (2025). Drama/theatre-based activities for developing the socio-emotional competence of at-risk youth in state care institutions from Romania. Anthropological Researches and Studies, 15, 402-422 https://doi.org/10.26758/15.1.27

Introduction

At-risk youth is a general term which refers to a group of young people likely to develop deviant, self-destructive behaviors and/or physical and mental disorders. At-risk youth originate from family contexts where their safety, both physically and morally, is jeopardized; they may or may not end up in state care (Pescaru, 2014). As a result of exposure to various risk factors and disadvantageous environmental conditions, they fail to develop the skills needed to function optimally within their communities, experiencing physical, cognitive, social, and emotional difficulties (National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, 2023). These circumstances may undermine the smooth transition of at-risk youth into adulthood and impede their capacity to assume responsibilities (LeCroy & Anthony, 2009). The term “at-risk youth” is employed not to discriminate against the target group, but rather to signify those individuals who might require supplementary support or interventions to surmount the challenges they might encounter.

In 21st-century Romanian society, a significant population of young individuals finds themselves in diverse situations of risk, as being subject to various forms of abuse. A record of the National Authority for the Protection of Children’s Rights and Adoption (2025) states that, at the end of June 2024, 10.617 cases of abuse were registered (Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation section), although the real number may be unknown as a result of under-reporting. Some young people manage to benefit from state support through the services provided by the General Directorate for Social Assistance and Child Protection; in severe instances, they may be removed from their familial environment. However, separating a young individual from their familial and social context disrupts their developmental trajectory, particularly if it occurs during early childhood. This “uprooting” process, coupled with the prevalent abuses within the residential care environments, has led to long-term trauma for numerous young individuals (Pescaru, 2014, p. 135; Wilson, Hean, Abebe & Heaslip, 2020, p. 9). Traumatic experiences in childhood may be particularly damaging, especially if they occur during the development of the central nervous system and the cognitive functions, and may cause long-term emotional distress (Van der Kolk, 2015). Children and young people entering the social care system thus encounter substantial challenges, with stress representing a multifaceted and prevalent aspect of their lives.

According to the National Scientific Council on the Developing Child (2005/2014), a young person may be subjected to three types of stress: positive, tolerable and toxic. Positive stress refers to those situations where an individual engages in competitive activities or must meet deadlines. In such scenarios, the emphasis lies on the undertaken process rather than solely on the achieved outcome. Tolerable stress refers to those situations where the individual experiences acute feelings of anxiety or tension, such as the death of a loved one or “uprooting” (mentioned above) and requires some support to overcome the distress. Toxic stress arises when children perceive a loss of autonomy, leading to diminished control over their actions, body, and destiny. Additionally, the adults inhibit their sense of playfulness due to misconceptions that it may hamper disciplined development. The ability to cope with stressful circumstances is closely linked to the level of support received and engagement in activities that enable the expression of emotions that could be potentially disruptive.

Familiarizing adults who are part of children’s social environment with the principles of the child’s development through the engagement in games and play may be a beneficial way to promote the emotional well-being (Brown, 2014). The two terms define different activities, both of which are important to a person’s well-rounded development. Games entail clear rules and pursue specific goals, sometimes dictated by the activity itself, implicitly leading to the participants developing certain skills. Play constitutes an unstructured occupation, “a free activity standing quite consciously outside the ‘ordinary’ life as being ‘not serious’, but at the same time absorbing the player intensely and utterly” (Huizinga, 1980, p. 13). Games were used successfully in the process of the individual learning as they facilitate the experiential learning, allowing the undivided exploration of the environment based on the action-effect principle to occur (Dewey, 1997). At the same time, engaging in playing games may provide a safe space in which human beings may express themselves freely, without feeling constrained, despite the rules they must follow. There is a strong connection between play and socializing, as each of them help to improve one’s self-awareness, physical and social abilities and elevate the self-confidence (Erikson, 1963). Encouraging the manifestation of playfulness enhances the well-being and improves the quality of life (Brown, 2014). These benefits were also highlighted by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child which, on the 1^st February 2013, issued its General Comment, stating:

Play and recreation are essential to the health and well-being of children and promote the development of creativity, imagination, self-confidence, self-efficacy, as well as physical, social, cognitive and emotional strength and skills. […] Play and recreation facilitate children’s capacities to negotiate, regain emotional balance, resolve conflicts and make decisions. (as cited in Brown, 2014, pp. 2-3)

Play governs various human activities, one of which is the theatre. This complex form of art, which combines several kinds of expression: acting, dancing, singing, visual arts, has proven, over the time, to be a means of expression, healing, and social activism (O’Toole, 2005; Jennings, 2009). Theoretically, the art of theatre is not limited to a select few, as anyone with the ability to spontaneously embody a specific character within a given situation and an openness towards experimentation may partake in this creative process (Spolin, 1963/1999). Exercises aimed at bio-psycho-social training of actors for the stage may also be utilized for the individuals who are not actors (professionals). During the latter half of the 20th century, professionals in the UK utilized certain theatrical techniques in the field of education, with the belief that these methods could enhance the cognitive, physical, emotional, and social development (Wooster, 2007). This became an established practice over the time. Drama exercises promote group and collaborative ideas (Spolin, 1963/1999) and allow the self-exploration, in that way activating the emotionality. They also involve the physical movement and the bodily expression, which contribute to the development of the motor skills and the maintenance of an active and healthy lifestyle.

It has been shown that the involvement in arts-based programs (acting, dancing, singing, handcrafts) may help at-risk youth in the resocialization process (Pescaru, 2014) by modelling theirs positive emotional and social behaviors (Menzer, 2015). So, their socio-emotional development has been a factor that favored their improving resilience and overcoming some adverse situations (Jennings, 2011; Masten, 2019; Hatzichristou & Lampropoulou, 2022; Colomeischi et al., 2022). The aforementioned studies indicated that the resilience was closely linked to the human adaptive systems and that it was not synonymous with the invulnerability. Young people at risk who faced the stressful situations managed to overcome them with the help of their support network. They developed some social-emotional skills that helped them cope with the stressful situations and strengthen in that way their own self-esteem (Masten, 2019; Garbarino, Guttmann & Seeley, 1986).

Being given these aspects, there were specialists who supported the young individuals at risk through various theatre and drama-based activities which leaded to an increase in their quality of life by fostering their socio-emotional development – and, in that way the care and education people made the young to understand, recognize and control their own emotions and those of others, reinforcing their healthy personal boundaries and cultivating some positive social connections. In the recent years, various projects based on cultural and artistic expressions have been initiated for the institutionalized children in Romania – so, the “Changing perspective” was a project implemented by Teatrul Senzorial Labirint Association in 2020-2021 (Știri ONG, 2021); “Fără Frică – Povești din lumea noastră” [Without Fear – Stories from our world] by Untold Stories Association in 2022 (Știri ONG, 2022); “POT și iarna” [I CAN also in winter] by Tangent Association in 2022 (Radio România Cultural, 2022); “Pic2Drama” by Alumnus Club Association (Revista Cultura, 2024). A key element of all these practices is the psycho-emotional development favored by the involvement in the artistic activities, as proven by the empirical data collected by the initiators of the projects. For example, the “Changing perspective” project aimed to develop self-awareness, social skills and the ability to pursue their dreams for a group of 30 children and teenagers in Timiș County, Romania, through the use of the classical and sensory theater methods (Știri ONG, 2021). Another practice was offered by the “POT și iarna” project, in which interdisciplinary artistic means were used with the aim of facilitating the psycho-emotional development of over 100 institutionalized children and teenagers from Olt County, Romania, in order to overcome their difficulties related to the trauma of abandonment, various forms of abuse and the social exclusion with they faced (Radio România Cultural, 2022).

Material and methods

The objective of the study was to validate as a best practice model the use of drama-based intervention in order to increase the understanding of the core emotions, personal boundaries and coping skills, aspects associated with reducing stress and abuse for young people at risk in state care institutions. The primary research question was: “Might taking part in drama-based activities help improve the socio-emotional competence of young individuals who are at a social disadvantage?”. Consequently, a subsequent inquiry was launched: “Is it possible for drama-based activities to facilitate the development of resilience factors among at-risk youth by enhancing their emotional vocabulary and boundary awareness?”.

Changes in the socio-emotional factors explored during the intervention consisting of the performance of the show “Beyond Me” and the facilitation of theatre games workshops were evaluated through a quantitative research. A questionnaire with both closed and open-ended questions was distributed among the attendees of the performance and workshops. Open-ended items provided a complementary qualitative data interpretation. The qualitative interpretation was based on a categorical analysis grid consistent with the pursued objectives, specifically focusing on enhancing emotional awareness, optimizing the emotional responses and fostering the pro-social dimension of participants’ behaviors. The participants engaged in a 7-day period of activity, during which the trainers employed the technique of observing the behaviors exhibited during the workshops.

Each stage of the intervention: before the start of the activity, after the viewing of the performance and following the completion of the workshops, was delineated by the administration of the questionnaire so as to investigate the occurrence of changes in each phase. In administering the questionnaire, the classical method of completion was preferred, after which the online tool Google Forms was used to process the data from the closed items.

The questionnaire was developed by the authors of the study, including the items that measured the objectives pursued during the intervention, namely the exploration of core emotions, personal boundaries and interpersonal skills, aspects related to resilience. The questionnaire consisted of two sections with 38 items, which captured aspects related to the emotional and social dimensions. The emotional dimension was represented by items 3-8 (identification of the basic emotions in oneself and others, and ways to manage them); items 29-30 pertained to matters related to self-esteem; 17 – acceptance and 31 – enjoyment of life. The social dimension included items 1-2 (ability to communicate honestly); 9, 13-16, 18-26 (ability to establish harmonious relationships with others); 10-12 (behavioral tendencies in conflict situations); 27-28, 32-37 (awareness of personal limits, identification of abusive situations and behaviors).

To begin with, the initial segment encompassed 31 general questions concerning the management of the interpersonal connection individuals establish with both themselves and with the others. Of these, there were 23 closed-ended questions, wherein respondents indicated their preferences on a five-point Likert scale (ranging from the lowest value 1 – never/very little important, and the highest value 5 – always/very important); one closed-ended question offered a choice between Yes and No; and 16 open-ended (sub)questions allowed to the participants to elaborate upon the closed-ended responses.

Seven questions were included in the second section. The first six were closed-ended questions, requiring respondents to choose between Yes and No. These questions were aligned with the perception of various forms of abuse as portrayed in the performance titled “Beyond Myself”. The questionnaire concluded with an open-ended query, inviting participants to articulate the modifications they aspire to implement in pursuit of an improved quality of life.

The intervention involved travelling to four locations that provide social assistance services, overseen by the General Directorate for Social Assistance and Child Protection (Direcția pentru Asistența Socială și Protecția Copilului – DGASPC) in Romania, to work with young people at risk for 7 days, namely: Bucharest sector 6 (20-26 June 2022), Dolj – Craiova (18-24 July 2022), Suceava – Suceava (15-21 August 2022) and Suceava – Gura Humorului (22-28 August 2022). Three working groups were organized at each center: two consisting of children/(pre)adolescents and one of social workers/maternal assistants and/or educators.

During the first day the initial intervention phase took place, which consisted of the participants viewing the theatrical performance titled “Beyond Myself”. The production, created by employing the devised theatre method, featured three types of dysfunctional, abusive relationships – portrayals constructed by using narratives shared by young individuals at risk. The performance was followed by a forum-style discussion session, where young people were invited to analyze the issues presented on stage and find correlations with their personal life experiences. The performance was preceded and followed by the administration of the questionnaire.

Over the next five consecutive days, a 3-hour workshop module based on theatrical games and art therapy exercises took place. Each workshop had distinct objectives, namely: group cohesion, boundaries and desires, emotions and conflict, youth-adult connection and communication, and demonstration workshop preparation. An activity framework was designed for each partner institution, given that the intention was to investigate changes occurring as a result of the target group’s involvement in the drama-based activities. The set of exercises was tailored to a target group aged 11 to 19 years. In one of the institutions, where the assembly of an exclusive group of (pre)teenagers was unattainable, the activities underwent slight modifications which involved a reduction of the complexity level, rendering them appropriate for participants aged 8 to 11 years. Exercises were selected from the field of theatre and art therapy, aligning with the designated objectives, and aimed at facilitating the exploration and cultivation of socio-emotional skills.

One innovative aspect of the intervention was the format of the fourth workshop, which provided a unique environment for re-establishing the meaningful connections between at-risk youth and their caregivers or educators. This setting facilitated the exploration of some constructive modes to interact, communicate and relate through the medium of play.

Some short demonstration workshops concluded the module, spotlighting the young individuals at risk as they showcased an assortment of games they had experienced in the preceding days. Initially, the interventions were intended to conclude with the short theatrical segments where the young participants would assume the roles of actors. These segments would involve the portrayal of brief scenic episodes, depicting narratives inspired by various challenges they were facing. The audience for these performances would consist of their peers from the center to which they were affiliated. However, this activity was replaced by the demonstration workshop version due to the resistance encountered from a substantial portion of the youth, impeding the preparation process for the intended theatrical scenes. At the end of the module (including the demonstration workshop) the participants were once again administered the questionnaire.

Results

106 children and adolescents from the DGASPC participated in the drama-based activities: 26 young people in Bucharest sector 6; 25 young people in Craiova; 25 young people in Suceava and 30 young people in Gura Humorului. In addition, 50 adults (social workers/maternity nurses or educators) were worked with, in order to familiarize them with the principles of the education through the theatre approach and thus ensure the continuity of the intervention, in the medium and long term, as an example of good practice in social intervention for vulnerable groups. However, the adult group was not the focus of this study.

As many as 106 young people between the ages of 8 and 19 were surveyed. Only 85 questionnaires were validated for the three stages (pre-activity, post-performance, post-activity). The remaining 21 questionnaires were cancelled due to the missing or the incomplete questionnaire sets. Additionally, the questionnaire was administered, in one stage, to a control group of 14 individuals with similar characteristics to the active participant group, who did not participate in the activities included in the intervention.

The analysis of the questionnaire responses revealed several aspects regarding the structuring of emotions and the psycho-social relationships in vulnerable youth groups. Thus, in the item 1, “Do you easily communicate what you think and feel?”, in the pre-activity stage there was a percentage of 5.9% for never, followed by 29.4% for seldom and 14.1% for often and 15.3% for always. Following the intervention, there was an increase in the often and always values to 25.9% and 18.8% respectively. In the control group, the percentage was much higher for the often and the always responses, cumulatively 57.1%, although there were a few who said they only manage to communicate honestly sometimes (28.6%).

In question 2, “If you disagree with something, do you communicate this to others?”, the respondents in the pre-activity stage said 4.7% never, 18.8% rarely and 30.6% often, followed by always with 15.3%, compared to the post-activity stage, where the percentages of the last two options increased. The option for never decreased to 2.4% and that for always increased to 24.7%. A change in values may still be seen in the post-performance stage. In the control group, the answers often 42.9% and never 21.4% were evident.

In terms of emotional awareness, item 3, “Of the four basic emotions, name the ones you recognize in yourself.”, revealed that, in pre-activity, 27.06% of subjects failed to name one of the basic emotions (joy, anger, sadness and fear), 56.47% named one or two emotions, 12.94% noted three emotions, and 3.53% of respondents named four emotions. In the post-performance stage, the responses were approximately the same, except that the number of those who did not mention any emotion increased to 31.76% and the percentage of those who identified three emotions decreased to 11.76%, and those who mentioned four emotions to 0%. In the post-activity, 15.29% of respondents indicated no emotions, 50.59% mentioned one or two emotions, 11.76% named three emotions, and 22.35% listed all of them. The most frequently named emotion was “joy”, followed by “sadness” and “anger”. As for the control group, half of the respondents failed to name one emotion, 35.71% named one or two emotions, and 14.29% named all four.

Item 4 “Do you feel comfortable when emotions arise?” recorded, in the pre-activity stage, 8.2% of respondents as never, 24.7% as rarely, 40% as sometimes, 12.9% as often and 14.1% as always. In the post-activity stage, the percentage for never increased by 4.7%, compared to rarely, which decreased by 12.9%. At the same time, the values for the often and always options increased by 1.2% and 7.1% respectively. In the control group, 42.9% of the respondents indicated that they sometimes feel comfortable with the emotions that arise, and 28.6% only often.

Item 5, “What do you do in situations where you feel the above emotions?”, tracked how beneficiaries react to the occurrence of their own underlying emotions. Their responses reflected some passivity and avoidance in confronting them in 30.59% of young people in pre-activity, 47.06% in post-performance and 42.35% in post-activity. A few of them showed a desire to control their emotions and not allow them to express, namely 8.24% in pre-activity, 5.88% in post-performance and 7.06% in post-activity. The others described actions and behaviors associated with certain emotions, such as the desire to dance, to smile, to jump up and down, to argue (31.76% pre-activity, 17.65% post-performance, 14.12% post-activity) or even actions they would engage in for emotional management, including asking for support from people close to them (29.41% pre-activity, 29.41% post-performance, 36.47% post-activity). In the control group, responses indicated that 35.71% of young people treated confronting emotions with indifference or passivity, 28.57% described behaviors associated with emotions, and 35.71% mentioned ways to manage the occurrence of certain emotions.

Regarding the emotions identified in others, in the item 6, “Of the four basic emotions, name the ones you recognize in those around you.”, in pre-activity 32.94% of respondents did not name any emotion, 44.71% named one or two emotions, 9.41% named three emotions, and only 1.18% named all four. In the post-performance stage, the changes were insignificant, with a slight increase in the number of the young people who did not mention any emotion (36.47%), those who mentioned four emotions (3.53%) and a decrease in those who indicated three emotions (4.71%). In the post-activity stage, 18.82% of young people did not mention any emotion, 58.82% indicated one or two emotions, 10.59% indicated three emotions and 11.76% named four emotions. Joy, also referred to in other terms (e.g. “happiness”, “cheerfulness”), was mentioned most frequently in the pre-activity stage, while sadness was frequently mentioned in the post-performance and post-activity stages. In the control group, 42.86% of respondents indicated no emotion, and 57.14% mentioned one or two emotions. Joy was the most frequently identified, although occasionally denoted by alternative wording such as “happiness” or “enthusiasm”, followed by anger and fear.

On the item 7, “Do you feel comfortable when you notice basic emotions in those around you?”, there were 8.2% of respondents who answered never in the pre-activity stage, 24.7% who answered rarely, 40% who said sometimes, 12.9% who said often, and 14.1% who answered always. In the post-activity stage, the percentage for the never option increased by 1.2%, as opposed to rarely which had an increase of 3.6%, sometimes which decreased by 2.3%, rarely which had an increase of 1.1% and always which had a decrease of 3.5%. In the control group, 35.7% for seldom and 21.4% for never were identified.

Responses recorded for the item 8, “What do you do when you notice the above emotions in others?”, revealed different patterns of reacting when emotions occur in others: passivity or avoidance (47.06% in pre-activity, 50.59% in post-performance; 56.47% in post-activity); the understanding, empathetic and supportive behaviors towards the interlocutor or the managing one’s own emotions (52.94% in pre-activity, 49.41% in post-performance; 42.35% in post-activity) and a tendency to keep one’s own emotions under control (1.18% in post-activity). According to the post-activity responses, it was revealed that the young people were more attentive and aware of the need to be with others, describing specific ways of providing the emotional support (“I enjoy being with them”, “I don’t infringe on their space”, “fear – I want to help”). In the control group, half of the respondents described passive or avoidant behavior, and the others described some understanding and supportive behavior towards the others’ emotions.

The values for the item 9, “Do you cooperate with those around you?”, showed that, in pre-activity, 1.2% of the respondents chose never, 15.3% rarely, 28.2% sometimes, 25.9% often and 29.4% always. In the post-activity, there was only a slight increase of 3.6% for the sometimes option, a decrease of 2.3% for the always option, the never and often options remained unchanged. In the control group, the option for often was higher with 42.9% of respondents and also for always with 28.6%.

For the item 10, “If you get involved in a conflict situation, what do you do?”, which presented respondents with two options: I act and I don’t act, 65.9% of young people responded with I act and 34.1% with I don’t act, in the pre-activity stage, as opposed to the post-performance stage, where 67.1% chose I act and 32.9% chose I don’t act. In post-activity, the percentage of those who selected I act decreased to 64.7% and I don’t act increased to 35.3%. In the control group, 57.1% chose I act and 42.9% chose I don’t act.

On the item 11, “If you act in a conflict situation, why and how do you do so?”, in the pre-activity and post-performance phases, participants mentioned the conflict resolution and by calming the situation as reasons for acting, often trying to understand both sides. In the post-activity phase, the reasons were defending friends and/or preventing physical aggression. Approaches ranged from verbal intervention to physical separation, depending on the situation. In the control group, the reasons for taking action were to resolve the conflict so that it did not escalate to violence, especially if close people (friends or family) were involved.

The control group responses to the item 12, “If you don’t act in a conflict situation, why don’t you do that?”, were either that they don’t want to get involved, that it does not concern them, or that they prefer to remain passive observers. Similarly, the target group members justified not acting, in all three stages of questioning, because they wanted to avoid escalating a tense situation, the possibility of being hurt, or even that they did not intend to intervene in other people’s conflicts.

The responses of the target and control group participants to the item 15, “How many friends do you have?”, varied at all stages of the study, ranging from a few to many friends.

In item 16, “Do you feel safe in the company of your friends?”, 2.4% of respondents chose never, 8.2% rarely, 25.9% sometimes, 17.6% often, and 45.9% always in the pre-activity stage. In post-activity, the never option increased by 1.1%, while rarely decreased by 4.7%, followed by sometimes, also decreasing, by 2.4%. There was a considerable increase of 7.1% for the often option and a decrease of 1.2% for always. In the control group, 42.9% of respondents said they felt safe often and 21.4% sometimes and rarely, followed by 14.3% always.

With regard to the relationship with the educator/maternal assistant/social worker, responses to item 21.a), “Do you feel safe in the presence of your educator/maternal assistant/social worker?”, the recorded responses in the pre-activity stage were: never 2.4%, rarely 7.1%, sometimes 18.8%, often 18.8% and always 52.9%. In the post-performance stage, there was a slight increase in value for never 3.5%, rarely 9.4% and always 54.1% and a decrease in value for sometimes 17.6% and often 15.3%. In the post-activity stage, the answer never showed a remaining growth rate, at 4.7%, with the others decreasing or remaining unchanged, such as rarely. A change in values was observed in the post-activity stage for sometimes, decreasing to 15.3%, followed by always at 51.8%, the percentages for often remaining equal to those in the pre-activity stage, i.e. 18.8%. In the control group, the choices for often and always stood out at 35.7%.

In the item 21.b), “Why do you feel safe in the presence of your educator/maternal assistant/social worker?”, various factors contributing to the establishment of a secure climate in the presence of educators, maternal assistants or social workers were emphasized for both the target and control groups. Significant issues included perceptions of the authority and the responsibility associated with the adults, and they remembered as well as some positive personal experiences with particular caregivers characterized by caring, understanding and support, and the family-like atmosphere fostered by educators. Furthermore, some subjects indicated that caregivers would protect them from potential harm or conflict involving other youth. On the other hand, some participants expressed uncertainty or reluctance in giving a clear answer, and a few indicated that they did not feel understood and supported as they would like.

To the item 23.b), “In what ways do your educators/maternal assistants/social workers support you in your initiatives and needs?”, the respondents highlighted the emotional support, such as being listened to, trusted and cared for. Financial assistance was also mentioned as a form of support. In addition, the participants valued the guidance and the advice offered by the educators, from academic support to advice on personal life, as well as the encouragement to pursue their interests and dreams.

Responses to the item 24.a), “Have you ever felt respected?”, highlighted the importance of relationships based on respect. In the pre-activity stage, respondents mentioned that 2.4% never feel respected, 9.4% only rarely, 23.5% sometimes, 31.8% often, and a majority of 32.9% always feel respected. In the post-performance stage, the values changed slightly, with three responses decreasing (rarely, sometimes and often), one response with equal values (never) and one response increasing (always). In the post-activity, the choice for never increased to 7.1% and for always to 43.5%. The other options saw a notable decrease, thus the percentage for the response rarely decreased by 3.5%, sometimes by 8.2% and often by 1.2%. In the control group, the options for always (35.7%), often and sometimes (21.4%) stood out in decreasing order.

Responses to the item 24.b), “Who have you felt respected by?”, for both the control group and the target group, in all stages, the respondents were focused on the connection with family members, friends and colleagues. The participants indicated that they felt respected by people in their immediate circle and by those who provided the emotional support. It should be noted that some respondents chose not to provide specific answers or preferred not to reveal by whom they felt respected.

Responses to the item 24.c), “In what ways have you felt as to be respected?”, showed that subjects in both groups and in all stages of the study felt that respect was expressed through acts of love, care and attention. Respondents felt respected when they were listened to, treated with kindness and when their opinions and decisions were taken into account. Respect was perceived when certain people played and spent time with them, offered encouragement and supported their achievements. Participants also mentioned that respect was demonstrated through language that denoted understanding and acceptance of their needs and wishes. Some also felt respected when their boundaries were honored, and they were exempt from judgement or criticism.

In response to the item 25.b) “Who have you felt disrespected by?”, participants in both groups, at all stages of the study, mentioned feeling disrespected by various people/social groups. Disrespect was predominantly felt from friends, family members (e.g. siblings, parents), colleagues or strangers. Others felt disrespect from former friends (girlfriends/boyfriends) or false friends. Some participants stated that they never felt disrespected, while others did not give a concrete answer as to who disrespected them.

Item 25.c), “In what ways have you felt disrespected?”, revealed that some of the ways in which respondents in both the target and the control groups felt disrespected were: verbal insults, physical aggression, teasing and name-calling. Others said they felt disrespected when they were not treated justly, when their views were not taken into account or when they were shown indifference. Disrespect was also associated with being ignored, mocked or ridiculed.

From the responses to the item 26.b), “Who have you felt humiliated by?”, it was noted that both groups felt humiliated by different people or groups. The control group responses revealed that the respondents felt humiliated by some children at school or friends of older siblings. In the pre-activity stage, the target group participants indicated that they had been humiliated by former friends, by specific individuals (mentioning them by name) and even by themselves, with one participant mentioning self-humiliation. In the post-performance and post-activity stages, no change in responses may be observed.

Responses to the item 26.c), “In what ways have you felt humiliated?”, indicated that feelings of humiliation may occur as a result of numerous situations and actions. The most frequently described situations included: derogatory laughter and taunting on grounds of physical appearance. In both the control group and the intervention participants’ group (in pre-activity as well as in the other stages of the study), the incidents involving humiliation by using insults, lack of privacy and lack of respect for personal values were described.

In terms of care oriented towards the physical body, the responses collected from both groups to question 30.b), “In what way do you respect your body?”, indicated that respondents tended to respect their bodies by practicing good hygiene, such as regular washing, teeth brushing and wearing clean clothes. In addition, many subjects mentioned that they take care of their bodies by exercising regularly and eating a balanced diet. Some also stressed the importance of avoiding the harmful substances and treating their bodies with kindness and self-acceptance.

Aspects of how at-risk youth relate to their wellbeing were highlighted by responses to question 31, “Are you enjoying life?”. There was an increase in values for both the never and the always options. In the first stage of the study, the never option recorded 2.4%, rarely 8.2%, sometimes 15.3%, often 23.5% and always 50.6%. The percentages started to increase on all levels of the scale (except for often) from the post-performance stage, reaching 3.5% in post-activity for never, 4.7% for rarely, 17.6% for sometimes, decreasing to 17.6% for often and increasing to 56.5% for always. In the control group, the option always stood out with 42.9%, followed by often, sometimes, rarely, and never, in equal values (14.3%).

In the items related to some hypothetical situations of abuse, starting with question 32, “Is it an abuse to use images or other information about a person for your benefit?”, in the pre-activity stage, 77.6% of participants answered Yes and 22.4% No. In post-activity, there was an increase of 10.6% to Yes. In the control group, 85.7% of respondents chose Yes and 14.3% No.

On the item 33, “Is it an abuse to threaten someone with disclosure?”, 87.1% of respondents chose Yes, and 12.9% No, in the pre-activity stage. In post-performance, the Yes option increased by 5.8%, which was maintained even in the post-activity stage. In the control group, 85.7% of respondents chose Yes and 14.3% No.

The item 37, “If someone doesn’t give you peace of mind, becomes stressful and generally has a bossy attitude towards you, do you react or not?”, recorded 87.1% Yes and 12.9% No answers in the pre-activity stage. In post-activity, the Yes response had a decrease of 4.7%. In the control group, 71.4% of respondents chose Yes, and 28.6% selected No.

The themes identified in participants’ responses to item 38, “If you had a magic wand, what would you change in your life to make it better?”, described a wide range of desires and aspirations. Within the designated target group, approximately fifty percent articulated ambitions for self-enhancement at an individual level, encompassing the development of their personal strength, a heightened self-assurance or improved proficiency in specific aptitudes (e.g., mastering a particular sport). A quarter of participants indicated intentions to effect changes in the external circumstances, ranging from acquiring larger accommodations to mitigating familial conflicts or expanding their social circle. The remainder expressed desires for broader societal transformations, including world peace or the eradication of racial discrimination. Approximately 3.2% indicated some kind of contentment with their existing circumstances and expressed a lack of desire for change. The aspirations of the youth displayed a notable degree of constancy, with only 8.24% experiencing shifts in their wishes, marked by increased complexity and elaboration. Significantly, a considerable portion of their aspirations was directed towards altruistic societal improvements (“I want to have a clean city, without thieves or bad people”; “world peace”, “I think I would help people in need, make people feel better”). In the control group, a minority of respondents expressed disinterest in change, while others articulated a strong desire for transformation, encompassing their entire life. Certain individuals even conveyed a sentiment of wishing they had never been born. Some of the young people’s desires concerned financial aspects (“I wish I had a lot of money”, “I would make it so that my parents had more money”), while others were concerned with changing people in their close circle, i.e. fulfilling certain personal and professional aspirations (“I would not be so weak”; “I would wish to be a football player”).

Discussions

The present study identified that the participation of at-risk youth in theatre-specific activities positively influences their development of socio-emotional competencies, a finding that was aligned with results presented by other studies (Usakli, 2018; Jennings, 2011; Batdi & Elaldi, 2020). The knowledge of the basic emotions, establishing, – in that way, – some personal boundaries and enhancing interpersonal skills constitute a competence set that plays an important role in equipping at-risk youth with the tools required for the successful integration into the community. According to the researches conducted by Masten (2019) and Colomeischi et al. (2022), the emotional and the interpersonal relationship management were the resilience factors which ensured the relaxed functioning of the individuals in the social sphere, aiding them to efficiently navigate the challenges they may face. The results of the study reveal that beneficiaries of the protection services undergo a range of the emotional experiences, an aspect also noted by other authors (Wilson et al., 2020). This was also the reason why this study involved the practical ways of recognizing and managing emotions, as it gives to the young people a deeper insight into their emotional experiences and the ways in which emotions shape their behavior and the general well-being. By learning to become aware of their emotions, young people may identify and understand the sources of stress in their lives and effectively apply appropriate stress management methods that prevent disruptive emotional outbursts.

Following the intervention through the drama-based methods, the targeted competencies showed some positive improvements. Regarding the recognition of emotions, in the pre-activity phase, more than one third of the participants failed to state an emotion, in contrast to the post-activity phase, where more than two thirds indicated one, two or three basic emotions. Passivity towards emotions expressed by responses of the type (“nothing”, “I don’t know”, “I sit and do nothing”), the avoidance of emotions (“I think about something else”) or confusion about the concept of emotion (“curious”, “sleepy”) may suggest both a certain emotional destitution of the young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and lapses in the process of learning primary and higher functioning emotions. Some of the participants mentioned “loneliness”, which may be symptomatic of mental health impairment in the sense of the depressive loneliness, as well as several cognitive (curiosity, confusion) and personality (ambition) factors which were strongly emotionally charged. A considerable percentage of participants expressed an increased degree of passivity in the post-activity contrasted with pre-activity regarding how they feel when the emotions arise, indicating the need to a further development of the emotional intelligence in this group of disadvantaged youth. Alternatively, some participants noted the act of acknowledging and recognizing emotions, as well as partaking in activities like playing or listening to music, seeking support from individuals in their proximity and adopting reflective methods to comprehend the underlying reasons for their emotional state when these emotions arise. Some participants described the emotional calming techniques such as deep breathing, while others mentioned smoking. In addition to the questionnaire responses, behaviors observed during the workshops indicated the implementation of specific emotional management strategies after the completion of exercises focused on emotions. Tendencies were thus identified to recognize, integrate and understand the emotional management mechanisms, which may be employed when confronting disruptive behavioral emotions, excluding those which were socially inappropriate or detrimental to their physical health. The well-being and the resilience levels exhibit a strong correlation with the emotional management capacity, a consistency observed by other scholars (Artuch-Garde et al., 2017; Rapp-Pagliaci, Stewart & Rowe, 2011).

It is therefore pertinent to affirm that the implementation of the emotional literacy programs by means of theatre-specific methods may help young people to accept their emotions and be engaged in emotional management actions, as other studies have shown (Mavroudis & Bournelli, 2016; Moneta & Rousseau, 2008). Although, the percentage of those who expressed passivity or avoidance towards emotions increased in the post-performance and post-activity phases, an increase in the number of those who described the emotion-related behaviors, i.e. ways of emotional management, was also observed. The progress in the recognition and regulation of emotions was also evident in the post-activity phase, as responses became more intricate and detailed (“happy – I cry, sad – I cry, angry – I talk”; “happy – I dance, angry – I argue”; “I try to accept them”). There was therefore a consistent progress, quantifiable at the end of the intervention, in terms of self-emotional regulation. The array of the diverse emotional coping mechanisms, along with the multifaceted nature of participants’ emotional responses, underscored the necessity for the personalized approaches in research of this nature, which seeks to provide the emotional education to the vulnerable demographic groups.

Regarding the emotional management which is related to the interpersonal interactions, the gathered responses revealed diverse inclinations in recognizing the emotions of the others. Joy was the most frequently evoked emotion, including under its synonym of “enthusiasm”, in the pre-activity stage. Sadness was the most common response in the pre-activity and post-performance stages, fear was mentioned especially in the post-performance and post-activity stages, and anger and its synonyms were indicated in the post-performance stage. Shame, a socially relevant emotion according to Goleman (2017) and Chelcea (2020), was also mentioned in all the three stages with a lower frequency, although it is not defined as a core emotion, according to Turner’s (2007) theory.

Despite the improvements in the post-activity stage versus the pre-activity and the post-performance, with respect to name the basic emotions, some participants reported not recognizing the emotions of the others. In the post-performance and the post-activity stages, there was an increase in the number of those who reported feeling uncomfortable when emotions arise in others, correlated with the number of those who reported a passive behavior when they were asked to indicate what they could have done in these situations. One potential explanation was that, following the workshops, that the participants may have realized that the instances where they felt at ease and acted freely were infrequent, or they showed a reluctance to honestly indicate their behavioral pattern.

The development of the emotional intelligence was essential in the process of young people’s evolution towards a harmonious and a healthy maturity. This skill facilitates the comprehension of one’s own emotions as well as those of the others, encompassing the recognition of cues and sensations linked to the various emotional states. Emotional awareness contributes to an effective orientation in relationships with the others, including the detection of some beneficial situations (joy) or those that endangered the integrity of the human being (fear or anger), as well as the building of the strong interpersonal relationships and improving the quality of life (Kindlon & Thompson, 2000). The participation in the drama-based educational programs contributes to the enhancement of the empathic proficiency (Lewandowska & Węziak-Białowolska, 2022).

In relation with a prosocial behavior, the post-activity responses consistently demonstrated some alterations. Participants indicated an increased comfort in communicating with others, a phenomenon also underscored by prior research (Development Services Group, 2021; Fernandez-Aguayo & Pino-Juste, 2018; Dobrea & Jicman, 2022). Shifts have also been observed in the perception of the personal space. It is plausible that the engagement in project activities has prompted participants to recognize the significance of the social-relational boundaries, along with an individual autonomy. However, the contradictory results recorded in the items on some hypothetical situations of abuse indicated that the young people found it difficult to discern the meaning of the healthy boundaries in relation to the others. One of the illustrative examples witnessed during the activities relates to the personal boundaries. Given the theory of the development through play – a means of exploring and evaluating limits, as well as establishing the social group hierarchies – some children may engage in what seems like “playful fighting”, a behavior observed among the participants engaged in the drama workshops. This behavior, which helps young people experience boundaries, need not be discouraged as long as it is carried out in a non-literal way, without malicious intent or consequences (Brown, 2014).

In conjunction with the observed improvements in the direction of prosocial behavior, the wishes expressed by participants in each city for the transformative changes aimed at improving their lives are also relevant. These aspirations predominantly remained consistent due to the influence of the theatre education program, except for the group from Suceava, which exhibited a notable difference. In this case, young people’s desires increased in complexity and diversity, ranging from the modest wishes related to the personal and familial welfare to aspirations carrying the substantial axiological significance, including the societal well-being.

In light of these considerations, the current study has produced the expected encouraging results, which were justified by utilizing the designed methodology with the other vulnerable or at-risk groups. Nonetheless, the study does have certain limitations which necessitate a thorough consideration in the future social interventions centered on the theater-based education for enhancing the social-emotional competencies. Hence, the resistance was encountered from participants both during the workshops and the performance, which proved to be an interesting challenge for the instructors to overcome in order to engage the youngsters’ interest. The reluctance of the young individuals was influenced, firstly, by their skepticism toward those typically conducting informational sessions, as these individuals struggle to win their trust and garner interest. Secondly, the hesitancy stemmed from their unfamiliarity with this new challenge to participate in educational endeavors, a result of the COVID-19 pandemic’s enforced isolation that led to the closure of the centers they frequented, establishing a barrier between them and the external environment. This resistance constituted an initial limitation of the research. So, it was therefore important for all those engaged to be dedicated at work with at-risk young individuals to recognize that they do not conform to a conventional, adaptable educational demographic. Instead, they represent a distinctive group with particular requirements, occasionally harboring skepticism and disinterest. Overcoming the barrier separating them from the external environment may pose a notable challenge.

Furthermore, in this context it is essential to note that assembling the target group posed greater challenges than initially was anticipated. The intervention demanded a rigorous seven-day commitment, which placed a significant burden on the trainers. Young people at social risk were more reluctant to report to the proposed activities, some only attending on the first or the final day of the workshop, resulting in diminished numbers for both the intervention and the control groups, thus invalidating the incomplete questionnaires.

Timewise, the activity schedule was designed for those groups of approximately 12-13 participants; however, for the future researches, some adjustments might be necessary based on the group’s size. Additionally, the workshop duration could potentially be condensed to 1-2 hours per session, thereby extending the module across 7 days in order to enhance the learning reinforcement.

Another limitation pertained to the research design. The requirement for employing some more comprehensive qualitative methodologies in this genre of research has become evident. Various approaches such as the biographical method, the case study analysis and the systematic observation could offer enhanced insights into the studied population.

Conclusions

This research highlights the developmental parameters of the educationally facilitated emotional development, which may lead to the design of similar programs involving young people at risk from Romanian regions. Children and youth under the protective services, who lack parental guidance and the nurturing ambience of a harmonious home, often exhibit limitations in their emotional structuring and expression, an emotional deficiency that may be corrected. The gap in the emotional development between them and the children growing up in non-conflictual family environments may be narrowed through programs aimed at encouraging their emotional expression and emotional growth. The emotional awareness, the recognition of the abusive situations and an improved vocabulary regarding emotions were therefore of an extremely importance for the young people in child protection services, even decisively influencing their life success.

Without intending to offer at-risk youth an escape from having emotions, even the discomforting ones that might emerge during the workshops or the daily life, the purpose of the intervention was to establish a secure setting enabling the communication, the cooperation and the self-awareness development in relation to the others. This was facilitated through structured games and exercises fostering assertive and prosocial behavior.

As demonstrated by the study conducted, the supportive drama-based education programs may play an important role in helping at-risk young individuals develop resilience to stress, emotion management, and interpersonal skills to enhance their future prospects, offering a holistic approach to education. Supporting the young people at-risk through drama and art activities is a significant aspect for their wellbeing, as it helps to increase the quality of their social life by showcasing various ways to create harmonious relationships in social environments through collaboration and pro-social behaviors. Additionally, the focus on emotional literacy and self-awareness through creative methods, such as drama, aligns the present study with the contemporary European educational tendencies that promote the arts education for a holistic development (UNESCO, 2024).

Based on the encouraging results of this research, it is possible to design the emotional development and the emotional literacy programs for at-risk youth with the objective of facilitating their successful social integration. The study’s findings not only validated the use of the drama-based interventions in Romania, but it may also contribute to broader the European discourse on the emotional development in youth. The model outlined in this research may be adapted across the various European countries, particularly those with the similar child protection services, in order to support at-risk youth in building the emotional and social resilience.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Consent to participate

Informed written consent was obtained from each participant at the time of recruitment.

Acknowledgement

A summary of this paper was presented at online international conference: Individual, family, society – contemporary challenges, fifth edition, 4 to 5 October 2023, Bucharest, Romania and published in the journal Anthropological Researches and Studies, No. 8/2023.

The work of Andreea-Diana Jicman and Georgiana-Adelina Dobrea was supported by the project “PROINVENT”, Contract no. 62487/03.06.2022 – POCU/993/6/13 – Code 153299, financed by The Human Capital Operational Programme 2014-2020 (POCU), Romania.

References

1. Artuch-Garde, R., González-Torres, MdC., de la Fuente, J., Vera, MM., Fernández-Cabezas, M., & López-García, M. (2017). Relationship between Resilience and Self-regulation: A Study of Spanish Youth at Risk of Social Exclusion. Psychol, 8(612). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00612
2. Batdi, V., & Elaldi, S. (2020). Effects of drama method on social communication skills: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 6(3), 435–457.
3. Brown, F. (2014). Play and playwork: 101 stories of children playing. Buckingham: Open University.
4. Chelcea, S. (2020). Emoțiile sociale. Despre rușine, vinovăție, regret și dezamăgire [Social emotions. On shame, guilt, regret and disappointment]. București: Tritonic.
5. Colomeischi, A. A., Ursu, A., Bogdan, I., Ionescu-Corbu, A., Bondor, R. & Conte, E. (2022). Social and Emotional Learning and Internalizing Problems among Adolescents: The Mediating Role of Resilience. Children, 9(9), 1326. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9091326
6. Dewey, J. (1997). Democracy and education. New York: Free Press.
7. Dobrea, A. G., & Jicman, A. D. (2022). Optimizarea abilităților socio-emoționale și de comunicare ale adolescenților în context pandemic prin intermediul jocurilor teatrale [Optimizing teenagers’ social-emotional and communication skills in a pandemic context supported by theatre games]. Revista de Psihologie [Journal of Psychology], 68(2), 133–150. Bucureşti. Retrieved from https://www.journalofpsychology.ro/index.php/RP/article/view/74
8. Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and Society (2nd edition). New York: Norton.
9. Fernandez-Aguayo, S., & Pino-Juste, M. (2018). Drama Therapy and Theater as an Intervention Tool: Bibliometric Analysis of Programs Based on Drama Therapy and Theater. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 59, 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2018.04.001
10. Garbarino, J., Guttman, E., & Seeley, J. W. (1986). The psychologically battered child. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
11. Goleman, D. (2017). Inteligența emoțională [Emotional Intelligence]. București: Curtea veche.
12. Hatzichristou, C., & Lampropoulou, A. (2022). Opinion: The pivotal role in promoting well-being and resilience in times of adversity. UNESCO. Retrieved from https://mgiep.unesco.org/article/opinion-the-pivotal-role-in-promoting-well-being-and-resilience-in-times-of-adversity
13. Huizinga, J. (1980). Homo ludens: A study of the play-element in culture (Reprint). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
14. Jennings, S. (2011). Neuro-dramatic-play and healthy attachments. London; Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
15. Jennings, S. (Ed.). (2009). Dramatherapy and Social Theatre: Necessary Dialogues. London; New York: Routledge.
16. Kindlon, D., & Thompson, M. (2000). Crescându-l pe Cain. Să ocrotim viața emoțională a băieților [Raising Cain. Protecting the emotional life of boys]. București: Editura Herald.
17. LeCroy, C. W., & Anthony, E. K. (2009). Youth at Risk. obo in Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780195389678-0112
18. Lewandowska, K., & Węziak-Białowolska, D. (2022). The impact of theatre on social competencies: A meta-analytic evaluation. Arts & Health, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/17533015.2022.2130947
19. Masten, A. E. (2019). Resilience from a developmental systems perspective. World Psychiatry, 18(1), 101-102. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20591
20. Mavroudis, N. & Bournelli, P. (2016). The role of drama in education in counteracting bullying in schools. Cogent Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1233843
21. Menzer, M. (2015). The arts in early childhood: social and emotional benefits of arts participation: a literature review and gap-analysis (2000-2015), Washington: NEA Office of Research & Analysis.
22. Moneta, I., & Rousseau, C. (2008). Emotional expression and regulation in a school-based drama workshop for immigrant adolescents with behavioral and learning difficulties. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 35, 329-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aip.2008.07.001
23. O’Toole, J. (2005). The Process of Drama. Negotiating Art and Meaning. London; New York: Routledge.
24. Pescaru, M. (2014). Asistenţa şi protecţia socială a familiei şi copilului [Family and child assistance and social protection]. Revised and expanded edition. Craiova: Sitech.
25. Rapp-Paglicci, L., Stewart, C., & Rowe, W. (2011). Can a Self-Regulation Skills and Cultural Arts Program Promote Positive Outcomes in Mental Health Symptoms and Academic Achievement for At-Risk Youth?. Journal of Social Service Research, 37(3), 309–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2011.564067
26. Spolin, V. (1963; 1999). Improvisation for the Theater. Northwestern University Press.
27. Turner, J. H. (2007). Human emotions: A sociological theory. London: Routledge.
28. Usakli, H. (2018). Drama Based Social Emotional Learning. Global Research in Higher Education, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v1n1p1
29. Van der Kolk, B. (2015). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. New York: Penguin Books.
30. Wilson, S., Hean, S., Abebe, T., & Heaslip, V. (2020). Children’s experiences with Child Protection Services: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Children and Youth Services Review, 113, 104974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104974
31. Wooster, R. (2007). Contemporary Theatre in Education. Bristol; Chicago: Intellect.
32. ***Development Services Group, Inc. (2021). Arts-Based Programs and Arts Therapies for At-Risk, Justice-Involved, and Traumatized Youths. Literature review. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved from https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh176/files/media/document/arts-based-programs-for-youth.pdf
33. ***National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. (2005/2014). Excessive stress disrupts the architecture of the developing brain: Working Paper No. 3. Updated Edition. Retrieved from http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu
34. ***National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. (2023). Place Matters: The Environment We Create Shapes the Foundations of Healthy Development: Working Paper No. 16. Retrieved from https://developingchild.harvard.edu/
35. ***Radio România Cultural [Cultural Romania Radio]. (2022). POT și iarna, POT mereu Art-terapie și educație prin cultură pentru copii și tineri instituționalizați [I CAN also in winter, I CAN always | Art therapy and education through culture for institutionalized children and young people]. Retrieved February 2, 2025, from https://www.radioromaniacultural.ro/sectiuni-articole/muzica-dans-arte/pot-si-iarna-pot-mereu-art-terapie-si-educatie-prin-cultura-pentru-copii-si-tineri-institutionalizati-id34867.html
36. ***Revista Cultura [Culture Magazine]. (2024). Pic2Drama. Un proiect dezvoltat de Asociația Alumnus Club [Pic2Drama. A project developed by the Alumnus Club Association]. Retrieved February 2, 2025, from https://revistacultura.ro/pic2drama/
37. ***Statistici Abuz, Neglijare, Exploatare [Statistics Abuse, Neglect, Exploitation]. (2025). Date statistice copii și adopții – Autoritatea Națională pentru Protecția Drepturilor Copilului și Adopție România [Statistics on children and adoptions – National Authority for the Protection of Children’s Rights and Adoption Romania]. Retrieved January 31, 2025, from https://copii.gov.ro/1/date-statistice-copii-si-adoptii/
38. ***Știri ONG [ONG News]. (2022). Alina Șerban lansează proiectul Fără Frică – Povești din lumea noastră, cu un eveniment dedicat Zilei Internaționale a Drepturilor Copilului [Alina Șerban launches the project Without Fear – Stories from our world with an event dedicated to International Children’s Rights Day]. Retrieved February 2, 2025, from https://www.stiri.ong/ong/cultura-si-it/alina-serban-lanseaza-proiectul-fara-frica–povesti-din-lumea-noastra-cu-un-eveniment-dedicat-zilei-internationale-a-drepturilor-copilului
39. ***Știri ONG [ONG News]. (2021). Cum se dezvoltă copiii din două centre de plasament (din Timiș) prin art-terapie și teatru senzorial [How children from two foster homes (in Timiș) develop through art therapy and sensory theatre]. Retrieved February 2, 2025, from https://www.stiri.ong/ong/cultura-si-it/cum-se-dezvolta-copiii-din-doua-centre-de-plasament-din-timis-prin-art-terapie-si-teatru-senzorial
40. ***UNESCO. (2024). UNESCO Framework for Culture and Arts Education. Retrieved from https://www.unesco.org/sites/default/files/medias/fichiers/2024/02/WCCAE_UNESCO%20Framework_EN_0.pdf

Annex (to see the Annex, please click here)