This thesis investigates the influence of hybrid theatre practices, media and technology on contemporary dance performance and questions if dance is endangered by developments in hybrid cultures. Through a consideration of dance genealogies, the thesis suggests that notions of identity play a significant role in power structures within interdisciplinary relationships. / Contemporary dance has gone through many changes in the last century. In particular, contemporary aspects of performance have demonstrated that the body is not the only site for dance. Why dance, is a culmination of questions that surfaced during the course of my own practice. It refers to questions that many dancers have asked themselves in the years following the arrival of postmodernism, when notions of body identity confronted conceptual possibilities in the terrain of interdisciplinary and mediated spaces. / Incorporating my own experience as a practitioner and observer with theoretical perspectives in the field, I have attempted to give voice to some of the ambiguities and paradoxes that inhabit dance and its hybrid postmodern affiliates. I make use of various genealogies that have led to hybrid and interdisciplinary interactions as a means to define relationships of power that exist within interdisciplinarity. The use of case studies and examples of performances from Europe and Australia provide material through which to examine performance methodologies that have arisen out of interdisciplinary practice. My reading and suggestions express the concern that disciplines outside of the body may have become more important as defining element in dance. Through an examination of new ways that dancers now speak through media other than their bodies, the thesis examines what affects this has on the discipline of dance and questions if notions of disciplinarity are still relevant. While it has become necessary to reconstruct, reinterpret and demystify the body, the outcome suggests that autonomy rests with recognition of the body as the site for further development within negotiated spaces.

Teamwork is essential to provide quality services to individuals with disabilities (Morrison & Gleddie, 2019). Deficits across a variety of domains make interprofessional practice even more crucial (Dobbs-Oates & Morris, 2016). Interprofessional education (IPE) provides preprofessionals the opportunity to gain experience collaborating with various disciplines, better preparing them for interprofessional practice (Anderson et al., 2011; Ruebling, et al., 2014). Most IPE research has been completed with preprofessionals engaged in medical cases. The existing evidence for IPE in school-based settings is limited, which creates a gap for speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who are pursuing work in school-based settings. The first purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions and attitudes of participants following an IPE experience of a medical case with both quantitative and qualitative data. The second purpose of this study was to determine if a case could be adapted to a school-based setting. Seventy-one participants completed a survey following an IPE experience with eight later participating in a focus group. Preprofessionals self-reported interprofessional learning from the experience and recognized the importance of team interactions. The IPE experience was successfully adapted to a school-based case and in an initial program evaluation, perception of teamwork and interactions were also important. In both settings, preprofessionals rated themselves as having less bias towards others than others have towards their own disciplines. This study provides essential information regarding IPE for school-based settings that will ultimately benefit children with disabilities by encouraging interprofessional practice.