To be unimpressed with this drama class script

You need to give it a chance. As others have said, they have had one week to assess her strengths and it could massively harm her confidence if they chuck her in with more than it turns out she can cope with.

I have a DD who sounds similar to yours (ASD, very quiet socially with people she doesn't know, but comes alive on stage). She has confidently sung solo to a packed hall and is a great physical actor, she is committed and will turn up every week, but if you give her reels of lines to learn it will be a disaster. There is no way a new teacher/director would know this after one week and they would be daft to take a wild leap of faith on the off chance or my say so.
I agree with the PPs saying tree -> 3 lines -> main role.

It's her second week!
Obviously she isn't going to get a main part.

My kids do dance and drama and there are very few scripts with big parts for everyone. It's normal to have some people get main parts and some get smaller ones.
It doesn't mean she will be watching every week.

Many ensemble pieces still have a few main characters. Friends is a great example. Many characters, but six main characters - and that's in a long running show, not a one off piece.

Love actually, which feels like it has a huge number of main characters compared to the usual no more than 5/6 - only has eight.

And obviously with theatre, rules are broken - but it should be done for a good reason.

No, rubbish, from y 3-6 there are lots of things you can do. My children's drama club did things where someone plays the young Mary Lennox in India then other kids play the older character once she gets to England and finds the secret garden etc. Or school type plays where there are groups of people like the famous five. There's hundreds of ideas for ensemble pieces.

Well OP, What's you're goal here? As long as your daughter is building confidence and enjoying it, I don't think the 'screen time' matters. A showcase every half term means she'll have plenty of opportunities for bigger roles once she's proven herself.

If she wants to do drama and enjoys it not sure how dance is going to replace it. There's nothing outstanding or confidence building in being part of a team, In fact it can go the other way if you're not the best dancer as the disparity is obvious.

And I never ever suggested trolling.

Sockpuppeting, yes. But not trolling.

I didn't assume I knew everything.

The very fact that I was asking questions is a bit of a giveaway.

Well if you freely admit that you were never involved in such things, there'a no reason to assume that you know everything. Probably because you've written a play or two, you just assumed that other people couldn't possibly know what they were talking about, so they must be trolling.

I think, if encouraged, kids accept that they’re not always the star of the play, genius at maths, amazing at sports etc.

Building resilience is important.

I do wonder how they get anyone to teach this class if every parent micro-analyses the scripts and class components.

I'm not involved in children's drama, or children's drama classes. Where I'm from, the only drama that has been around for children for as long as I can remember has been plays for drama festivals or bigger productions (think Sweeney Todd, Macbeth) for 12-25 year olds.

Maybe you should have mentioned the fact that you have attended showcases like that before. It certainly makes your deductions more feasible.

The reason it's obvious, is because it's a performance purely for parents. And the aim is to showcase what the children have done. As you rightly stated a 'proper' production with lots of main characters etc would be confusing but that's not the point here. The script and audience experience isn't paramount It's giving a 'fair' amount of showcase time to all children so parents keep paying. Parents aren't concerned with the ability of the teachers to 'put on a production' as you assumed at the start. They're only concerned with the visible progress of their own child. Not enjoying a theatre night out.

If they happened to have 10 kids who were committed then they'd have to come up with something giving all 10 equal , substantial time and I don't think any play would have that and fit into a few scenes.

Similar to how, as I mentioned , an audition is to display the acting skills of the actors. It's not for the casting director to enjoy any sort of storyline. It's the same script read by different people.

It's surprising that you don't know this given that you're supposedly a playwright. It's quite common in non-competitive children's drama classes. I've attended a couple of showcases myself.

I'm not angry in the slightest! Why on earth would this make me angry? 🤔😆 Have you seen what is going on in the world? Have you read threads on here about abused women? About the erosion of women's rights, about Ukraine, about Gaza?

A thread about a kids production where one person seems to know what the op means before the op says it, is really not something to get angry about.

I still don't see how you came to that conclusion based on that. Plays can be made up of a 'few short scenes'. In fact many plays for children are exactly that. As are many plays for adults in, for example, amateur drama festivals. The shortest complete play I have written was just four scenes. It's really not a stretch to think a play for children could be eight or nine.

The comparison to school plays and stage performances seems much more in relation to how it is being done, rather than what is being done.

Anyway, thank you for your response. I'm off to work now. But you probably knew that 😉

@NeverEnoughPants I'm not the OP and honestly you're getting really angry about a simple thread on the internet! Posting at the same time as the OP was a coincidence but that's because we were both replying to the same point.

The OP said they do 'a play', yes but went on to clarify a 'quick few scenes'.
She never said an entire play and In fact contrasted this to stage performances, school plays etc. it's very obvious as to what she means.

'Play' here refers to the source material as opposed to , say a film/TV script....

I would wait and see. As a pp said, the practising for the showcase could take up about ten minutes of each session with the majority dedicated to all the kids getting involved in drama games etc. Wait and see how the sessions go, if your daughter is still enjoying them after a few weeks etc. In general though I think it is normal for new children to have smaller parts as they haven't proven that they're reliable and will stick with the class.

My daughter goes to a drama class where the child of the teacher also attends. They're doing Annie this term. Guess who's playing Annie? Yep, the teacher's daughter. I do think that's a bit unfair on the others. Not so much mine as she's one of the youngest so wouldn't expect a big role anyway, but the 9-12 year olds that are the same sort of age as the teacher's daughter must feel a bit miffed when she always gets a big role. She is very talented but I personally would send her to a different group to let her shine there.

This is the reality of theatre groups I'm afraid (I don't like it either). It just seems to be the way of it. We had been going for a few years when I first queried it, and was told we were 'at the beginning of our journey'. Apparently lots of other kids had been waiting longer for speaking parts!!!! We hung in there because of friendships made. (Which have been the highlight-and have become really important. It's been 5 years now. DS has had one lead role in that time. (Btw, he's good. Not the best, but good.) I have a love hate feel about the theatre group but he's 100% committed.

My vague memory of drama classes like these from when I did them way back in the 80s is along the lines of:-

First performance and you play a tree. Second performance and you get about 3 lines. Third performance you get a decent role. And then you are moved up to the next class and play a (more sophisticated) tree again.

Oh I promise I'm not trying to derail the thread. I'm only responding when someone responds to me with a less than satisfactory explanation.

My initial post on this thread was very genuinely intended to aid understanding of how having everyone with a lot of lines wouldn't work. And I haven't suggested anywhere that you are a troll or that this thread isn't genuine.

But when something seems off, and no reasonable explanation is forthcoming (and the person I asked the question to has disappeared), then, well, I'm going to say something seems off.

I don't have any need to 'prove myself'. It's more fun to watch and wait to see if Caligurl ever answers the question, while you attempt to speculate as to what the answer might be, including commenting on her quite remarkable reading comprehension.

You quoted two things, followed by this sentence

"other Tbf could have got from that there isn’t dancing and it isn’t staged"

I'm sure that sentence makes sense to you, but my poor reading comprehension means I'm struggling. To me, the fact that it isn't on a stage is irrelevant - I've seen professional productions that haven't been on a stage - and the fact there's no dancing (umm, ok, most plays don't have dancing) really don't rule out 'a play '.

The fact that you said "The play planned is the whole half term and is only for parents" and mentioned a script, also very strongly suggests a play.

I'm not sure how I ended up here. All I was saying was a play really doesn't do well with more than 5 or 6 main characters. It was only after that, that Caligurl at first, then after that you, that said it wasn't actually a play.