to ask how you, as a parent, feel about school shows?

[manicinsomniac]

I'm a performing arts teacher. I put on a wide range of shows every year, from informal class plays where they take their scripts on stage to a full scale musical with thousands of pounds worth of hired set and technical equipment.

Today, I have had two extremely vocal complaints.

One regarded the quality of some class plays performed earlier in the week. The parent felt that it was a long evening of very low quality drama that was hard to sit through. These particular shows followed a criteria of having a reasonable number of lines for every child and were cast by me saying 'put your hand up if you want a big part' etc. Everyone got the size of part they wanted. And yes, some of them were eye wateringly bad. But they were having fun, getting involved and learning.

The second complaint was about the big school musical and concerned a child in their last year of school not having a speaking part and never having had one in the past either (in the big musical that is. The child has had parts in smaller shows). The parent complained that it is always the same group of children in the big parts and that others would do just as well if they got the chance. Anyone who auditions for this show can be in it but I am very selective over the named roles. And yes, it is often the same children - because there are a good number of very talented children.

I feel like I can't win. I put everything into both types of shows and the inclusive ones get slated for being poor quality and the very competitive, high quality gets slated for not being inclusive enough!!!

What would you prefer to see as a parent -
a lower quality show that shares the parts around
or
a higher quality show that chooses the best for the parts?

Do you value and enjoy the show itself or just want to see you child on the stage?

I like both. I'm used to amateur shows as I used to be very involved in a youth improvisation club. Some were spectacularly bad because some of the performers were dreadful, but I think that to get up on stage with a million people watching and do your part, is an amazing thing and should be applauded. Most of the children in the am dram club really needed that boost, and would become far more confident the more opportunities they had.

DD's school does more or less what you do. Sadly, we don't ever get to see them as only parents of performers are able to go, due to space.

I do get to go to the concerts though

UniS - we don't have a formal technicians group but we have a back stage crew and children who help with the technical side. They're a bit young to do so unsupervised and be in charge of it though. A couple of years ago we had a boy who was almost capable (certainly far far better than me!!) and he was someone who I would say was genuinely gifted in technical theatre management. But he was still a 12 year old kid so couldn't be left alone. I'd be very interested to know what he's doing now though.

I like to see all children having a go. My son is a laid back child, not loud etc so he would never volunteer for a role but if given the opportunity he always gets up and has a go. I think the quieter ones do want to get up and have a go but they get overshadowed. I can understand if they really don't want to but children should be given a chance to shine. At our infant school the children all get a reading role. At our junior school the same children get the roles and it is wrong, year after year I sit there watching the same children. If I want to see a high quality production I will go to the theatre.

I watched my dcs in their primary Christmas performance and was really disappointed for dc2. He didn't even make it on the stage and he had really wanted a speaking part. He sang in two songs and I could hardly see him both times, despite me being in the front row . It always seems to be the same children getting the main parts and it is very unfair. I would rather see more children having a chance.

I'm a performing arts teacher too, and am aware that it is often the same kids in the lead roles, and sometimes I feel bad.

But then I look at the PE department, picking their netball/football/rugby teams for inter school competitions, and stop worrying. There's no way they'd be picking anyone but the best to represent the school, so why should it be any different for a big school production where members of the public are able to go and see it?

Kids all have their strengths - if it isn't in the arts, you can bet they'll be excelling elsewhere, while last nights Tony and Maria are struggling like mad. No need to include everyone in everything.

I've got secondary in mind here though - primary productions are usually written with 'a job for everyone' in mind.

Exactly Closer My 12 year old daughter (who won't ever be able to have the out and out lead at this school because I'm her mum and it would look awful!) is quite shy, has some MH issues, is hopeless at most sports, bright but not outstanding in the classroom and definitely not in the cool crew. But she is fantastic on stage and sings and dances brilliantly for her age. Performing Arts are pretty much the only area of school where she can shine.

As a person I say give only the most talented child the main parts so it's not as painful to watch.

As a parent, I would want to see my child get a main part at least once if they wanted it. It's grade school, unless the child is a prodigy they're not going to be engaging anyway. It's hardly going to affect if they become an actor or not, but it will affect their comfort level in front of an audience and public speaking is an invaluable skill. So for that reason, I'd rather all children get included for a big part.

Leave the competition for high school where children are really starting to tap into their passions for career potential.

^^
The thing is, Bulbasaur some of ours are 'starting to tap into their passions for career potential' already. If they want a serious shot at a drama, music or dance scholarship to a senior school (which 4-10 Yr8 children attempt each year) then they have to have an impressive looking portfolio which shows evidence of heavy involvement in school theatre as well as outside school if possible. One large role because it was 'their turn' isn't going to cut it. In the last few years I have had a couple of film agents come in to do screen tests with some children (one ex pupil has now been in several films and is only 15 and a couple have been down to final rounds for some major British films) and children often go to auditions for professional productions. A few have been in things like Oliver, Matilda and Sound of Music. Directors and casting agents aren't only interested in children from stage schools.

Part of my job is getting everyone involved in productions (which I do) but another part of it is surely to cultivate and encourage the talent of the few who genuinely have a shot in the future.

Yes, I RTFT and saw that this is past primary schooling. :)

I agree that the most talented should be cast at this age group, especially if bigger things are at stake. You put the star player on the field with talent scouts at sports, you should do the same for theater.

Tbh for theatre roles in particular (including West End) you don't usually need to have been the lead in a school production- they do go all on the audition - but you do have to have the confidence to put yourself forward for the audition. And you have to have discovered you can perform. There may be some pre-audition sifting (in which case I guess it may help) but for a lot of theatre they will see anyone.

Although ime the west end child performers usually aren't in school productions - when they're on a show anyway - because they're too busy doing the shows (the rest of life tends to stop and it's impossible to commit to anything else, even when you're not performing you're on standby as a cover).

I definitely think school can play a part in giving a child the confidence to audition for those big roles, but only if there is some opportunity for a child to realise they're actually good & not just taking a turn in a role (although yes there should be room for that as well).

I went to DS's school show last week. It had a part for every child in the school (small primary school), as each class had a musical number to perform. The primary speaking parts were performed by the year 6 children, not all of them brilliantly, I have to say! But they all tried and, to me, it was more important that they were all included than that they were all amazing actors.

Secondary school, I'd probably expect a bit more selectivity in the actors/participants!

I love them. People will complain whatever you do so you may as well do as you wish. I like the overall show so would prefer to have the best child in the part than ramble on with being 'fair' with it too long and children you can't hear. I say this having had children who were never in main parts they were too quiet and self conscious. I was never in a main part and back row of the chorus was my preferred placement. I think there is a mismatch of parents who want their child centre stage and their child who wants to be in the background!
Hold auditions and give any who want it a chance, take the best for that part.

Many parents have no interest at all in the show , only their child. If they dressed up, stood in a row,had the same number of lines they would be happy!

Another comment on school shows is the Christmas one has taken on much more importance because ime they get much fewer experiences.

When I was at primary we had:
2x class assemblies a year (may even have been 3x)
Christmas show infants all together, year 3, 4 separately, years 5/6 together
"Eistedford" (reciting poems)
Year 5 and 6 each did a play in Easter Term and Summer term

Now mine do:
1x class assembly
1x Christmas show across the year (5 classes)
1x year 6 play

And the class assemblies are often much more about giving facts in bite sized chunks than any acting.
Yes, at my school it tended to be similar ones who had good speaking parts, but in the assemblies it could just as likely be the main part was a dance, or a mime etc, and everyone would have something to say or do.

The assemblies were a safe time for a teacher to try out a child who might be some good, but not with the risk of a longer play. Also when there are few opportunities if the ones who are good don't get it when it comes, then they don't get it at all.

In dd1's secondary, they've just announced the school production. (Bugsy) and have said that those who have attended choir and appeared in the music concerts (more often cancelled through lack of interest than ever turning anyone away) will get some preferential treatment (no guarantee, but will be a bonus mark-I suspect that means they'll try and get them a chorus part at least). I think that is perfectly fair enough. The group of about 20 of them give up their lunchtimes, after school etc. and get nothing really for it except some teasing. Suddenly choir and the music concert has become popular!

You feel like you can't win because you can't! It will be impossible to please everyone.

I think the age of the children matters. The younger the children, the more the emphasis should be on giving everyone the chance to have a go. As they get older and begin to develop their interests and talents, I think something more challenging with an element of selection is appropriate.

As another poster pointed out, there is selection on sports teams, orchestras, etc. It can be painful for a child to discover that they aren't as talented as they thought, but self-awareness is part of growing up. Dealing with unreasonable parents is part of being a teacher!

It sounds to me as if you're getting the balance spot on, and I say that having been a teenager who loved drama but never got the big roles.

It was a bit of a bummer at the time but even at 14 I could see that the result of the most talented being picked was that we put on fabulous shows which gave our school a great reputation for drama.

As a parent, obviously it's lovely to see your child enjoying themselves in a lead role, but there comes a point (& personally I think KS3 is definitely it) where talent has to come before fairness.

DD, like me back in the day, has been cursed to a life of 'narrator' in everything going since Yr1 because she's a great reader, reliable & has a fantastic memory. I'm sure she'd much rather be singing & dancing across the stage in a fancy costume but that's not where her talents lie!

When she came home from school a couple of months ago having 'failed' her audition for Glee Club, I was heartbroken for her, but the truth is her singing isn't all that & they probably made the right call.

All kids have different strengths, I see no reason why those with visible talents, such as drama, singing & sports should be held back in the name of fairness. There are no doubt others that get more than average praise for their artistic or intellectual abilities, but because this isn't in the public arena no one kicks up a fuss.

Drama schools like to see their students (and potential students) willing to work backstage as well as onstage. Both are important, and realistically, most students leaving drama school will get rep type jobs, and as the most junior member of a company will be expected to do a lot of backstage stuff before they get good parts.

It should be exactly the same for sports. Do you really think it matters if the primary school football team is the bestest, greatest ever and they lost a game because of little not-so-talented Johnny? I'd much rather all kids who wanted to were given a chance to kick a ball around and learn what it's like to play in a team. Primary school activities are for learning and having fun

Our primary school felt exactly the same as you and would make up teams with children who weren't specifically talented in the competition they were entering. However, the children had different ideas - they were totally demoralised losing all the sports events because they were letting "everyone have a go". Once they started including the children who were actually talented in the specific sport, everyone (including the ones not taking part) were much happier because they wanted their school to do well.

OP whatever you do someone is going to be miffed. Sounds to me like you have a good balance. I am in total awe of any teacher who can put on a full production with children of any age after they have done a full days work.

Possibly xing posts here, but haven't the time to read through and would like to contribute.
I love watching dd school performances. Whether low quality/inclusive/west-end quality etc I think this is because 'school' performances to me, are a chance for the children to be untied and having fun.
However, I do hear of parents that think their dc are given 'small' parts and complain loudly. My answer is that you see Hollywood stars take smaller parts in films, they are still part of the film!
Have you considered you probably have as a performing arts teacher running a drama class and doing the higher quality performances using those children who attend, and allowing other children that would like to be a part of the performance, to form a kind of 'off-side choir'?
Maybe it would solve the 'my fabulous dc didn't get a speaking part' as the major parts go to those who are truly dedicated.
I really feel for you, my dd loves to sing sounds like a castrated cat but understands that others are better, and is genuinely happy to just be taking part drowned out by the other members of the aforementioned 'off side choir'
The low quality, inclusive shows can still go ahead, therefore parents wouldn't have grounds to complain. If they are insistent on dc being part of the bigger performances, they will gladly send them along to drama club and allow their dc to become better quality performers.
I know this sounds horrid to some, but I firmly believe parents shouldn't always expect their dc to be the best at everything and encourage them to work harder at what they want to achieve

^ united not untied... poor children

Having just come back from Christmas shows these are my thoughts:
I've been watching year 6, large year, 4 form entry, so about 130-135 pupils.

1. The main parts, indeed most of the speaking parts were taken by the children who have had them every year in the juniors... this leads me to also comment:

a) They say the parts like little girls at elocution lessons. They were a little better this year, but they have had 3 years of practice. Every line is said with emphasis on 1-2 words to try and give some tone, the rest of the line is clearly and sweetly pronunciated, but not really acted. b) There were three soloists, two of whom were flat during a good proportion of the song, the third couldn't get up to the top notes in their song (which wasn't particularly high, B/C) If they were different people in the parts I would find this perfectly reasonable. As they're the same ones who always have it, I feel others would have done it as well if not better, and why couldn't they have the chance.

1. I actually saw some of the children audition. They used a page of the script. Of those I saw audition 3 or 4 were at least as good as the child who got the lead doing that bit, and I know they can sing better. However those children had no part/non-speaking part. So how on eath can they get a good part if that's the case?
2. If you have a show in which 75% are just chorus then standing up at the end and raving about the acting (which, as I said wasn't noteable) is very rude to most of the children. Singing, which was most of it, wasn't mentioned at all.
3. Why can't the chorus have a costume rather than staying in school uniform, please? You can make it simple (eg black and white) or just say wear your own clothes. It would be so much nicer for those, and I'm sure they'd feel more involved.
4. When you decide (as they always do) to re-sing one of the songs, why pick one which is mostly solo? They've had their chance to sing it, repeat one they can all sing-or say they'll all sing the lines. It was flat the first time, flatter the second too.

It would also have been nice if they could have got the chorus on stage and the main characters sitting down for that bit.

1. Train them what to do with applause. Please get them used to waiting before speaking.
2. And train them to hold the microphones away from their face. And not fiddle with them. Wince.
3. If you have 130 pupils, of whom round about 80-100 audition for parts. then choosing a play with basically 15 main parts with lots to say isn't the play for you. Or mulitply cast the parts. I would be quite happy for each part to be split in two.
4. And see if you can get more of the chorus doing things. The chorus had to stand up and sing... and sit down again. Invent some things for them to do... use your imagination. Maybe some of the songs could have been sung by small groups of chorus rather than the whole. Or use dancers rather than the main cast doing actions on the stage.

10. Please don't gush at the end. You enjoyed it. Fine. You don't have to say you're speechless with wonder at the amazement of what they've produced. Particularly when you say this every year, even the year when no one was audible. 11.Thank the teachers, fine. We don't need to applaud each teacher/TA separately, mentioning in different words how much each has contributed. Nor do the children need to applaud the audience for being such a great audience. 12. It would have been nice if they'd had applause for the sound/light/backstage children. They were quite pleased to be plucked from the chorus lines to do it, but they would have rather had a part. And invite them up-preferably at the front to sing the repeated song. There was some lovely singing from the sound desk, probably better than any of the soloists.

Just to note: I've been doing school plays now for about 11 years, and I think I get more cynical every time.

Ah, but, DeWee, some of the sound desk children sing beautifully when they think there's no one looking, and dry up if people can see them (I'm looking at you, pitch-perfect DS1...).

I love school shows

Warns the cockles to see the children up there doing their thing on stage. And I am impressed with their confidence and ability to do it.

I don't mind how good or bad they are, I just enjoy them. I am normally and old cynic, and hate almost everything to do with schools, but the show I love.

As a governor, I would say the important thing is to set expectations (and I'm talking about productions in a secondary here) - if you are having a showcase of class work, then letting everyone who wants to have a go is fine (and proper). The programme should reflect how the pieces were put together and cast - it's great to showcase how students progress as they learn skills on their journey through school. For a big, main, headline school drama production - auditions every time. The Rugby First XI analogy is spot on - the school is being represented, so the best players should be on stage, and having competition for the places is healthy.

Worst of all? Endless untrained voices performing sub-karaoke versions of the latest chart sensations. It's not a 'music showcase' and is painful to sit through.

If you do not show that quality, skill and talent are necessary to perform (in sport or performing arts) then you are doing a disservice to the students - they will never learn that you need to practice and work on your skills to shine.

I think you have the right balance. In secondary school you should audition for shows and be given a role based on your audition and also your committment.

I have just attended the P1 Nativity where my 4 year old DD had the lead role and knew all her lines, sang her heart out and danced non-stop but she is very outgoing and was in her element. However all 60 children came on stage at some point and i loved watching them all - they definitely have the 'cute' factor at that age.

However, I then sat through my DS concert - he hates anything like that - just not interested - sport is his thing - he stood at back and basically did nothing - the show was tortuous - bad singing, piano playing, violins - all because the school feels every child should be included whether they want to be or not. If DS had the choice he wouldn't have been in it and I wouldn't have gone to see it

You will never please everyone - sounds to me like you are a committed and enthusiastic teacher and have it just right x