School plays - same old same old...

[pooodle]

Urgh. I have just come back from my sons school play and yet again it is the same "posh" children with the lead parts, and the more working class relegated to bit parts. Is it just me, or do schools just pander to these mums who have nothing better to do all day than secretly watch Jeremy Kyle while brown nosing being on the parent governing body or running hot dogs for school fetes? Sorry, just had to have a rant, and I am a teacher!

In general though, don't most schools - wanting to put on the best show possible for parents and therefore give a good impression - choose a child who is 'reliable' on stage irrespective of class. So they play it safe.

That's what I meant in my earlier post really; it's good when a school takes a risk and makes the effort to do the reverse of this and gives a child who is not so gifted the chance to perform. Not to land them in it and give them a role that's unrealistic but to let them shine in their own way. The show should be about the children's experience first and foremost; the spectators/parents should be a secondary consideration really - imo anyway.

So, poodle, am I the only one to notice the irony of you pushing to get your son into "the best school in your county", but now complaining about the elitist practices going on in the drama department?

clam to be honest i find your posts quite aggressive so wont be replying to your responses, thanks for them anyway.

countyingthegreyhairs, "The show should be about the children's experience first and foremost; the spectators/parents should be a secondary consideration really " - exactly my feelings.

I quote: "thats your view, i have expressed mine, as far as i know this is a public forum and exactly what it was created for. if you dont like it dont read it! jeez"

yes clam but in context that was in response to your aggressive replies, i havent been aggressive to you once. you continue to insult me but i wont rise to it so i will just ignore future posts if its all the same.

Sorry if my last post came across as harsh.
I agree that I am probably one of the exceptions and I accept that for many kids theeir parents will either not identify bias or if they do fail to have enough confidence to tackle it.
I suppose what I was trying to say was that it had obviously pissed you off enough to highlight it and if so you must do something about it.

I also have noted the irony of you pushing to get your son into "the best school in your county", but now complaining about the elitist practices going on in the drama department? Are you going to ignore me too?

I don't understand why you are ranting against teachers when you are one yourself.

I also resent the comment in your OP which implies that PTA parents are secret Jeremy Kyle watchers. I am a WOHM so don't watch JK (not that I would want to) and the time I give to the PTA is precious. Luckily, our school appreciates our efforts.

depends if you are going to insult me fembear. My pushing my son for a good school place is my own ambition for my son as a parent, i am entitled to want him to have a good education.

the school is different. their priority is to equal opportunities for all - not something they are doing if they keep using the same kids for lead roles which puts the schools desire to look good above that of reason they are there - for the kids. others seem to see my point, not sure why you dont.

i have already apologized for the baking cake pta thing, i accept it was harsh, not sure how many times you want me to say this.

I think this thread has run its course. Am mildly curious, however, to know if any other people can find any posts where I have insulted the OP...... However, I can see plenty where she has insulted teachers, PTA members, school governors, "brown-nosing" middle class parents, "posh" kids, MNers etc...
I think I (and others) have raised some reasonable and legitimate points on this question. Why is that perceived as aggressive? I think if you start up a thread that comes across as a rant, you ought to expect to people to question it.

I think we need to widen the argument.
If the only expressive art is a drama production to parents and the same children get picked every time, then I accept that this is not ideal. However, we need to know what else the school is doing. For example, if they have opportunities within the class during the term (so the kids give presentations, do recitals, perform ensemble music etc to their classmates and/or others in the school) and thereby have experience of performing and then the best talent (or those most comfortable with performing) is then picked for lead parts to represent the school to parents, then that seems quite reasonable.
As you say, equality of opportunity is the answer, not the 'all shall have prizes' mentality.

Do you also want the school to share out academic prizes so that everyone gets a go? What happens on sports day: does everyone come joint first?

clam- I also noted the very amusing irony of that point too - that poodle is happy to castigate kids for being 'posh' or parents for being pushy whilst simultaneously stating she pushed her own son to get into the 'best school in the county'.

Diane Abbot eat yer heart out!!

I have just come back from weekend camping, took my sons friend (very w/c, council background, broken home etc) who had a small speaking part in the role. I told him how good I thought he was and asked if he enjoyed it. He said he did but didnt like his part. When i asked why not, he said it was boring as he didnt have much to say. I asked if he would have liked more and he said yes, when I asked why he didnt get more lines, he said he didnt get chosen. I asked how you got chosen, he said the teacher picked the chidren for the big parts - apparantly no audition - it was already signed and sealed. My son then said it wasnt fair that "all the boffs" always got the good parts.

Children are very perceptive and judge their sense of self worth on these kinds of things. There was no prompting on my part and I didnt tell them what I have posted on here. Obviously the message to this boy was that you're not good enough, even though he WANTED to show what he could do.

Children are not always perceptive - they have very fixed perceptions but often don't see the bigger picture.

I haven't read all of this thread but I have to say that I think that part of the reason we have a 'pop idol' generation who's only goal in life is to be famous, is because they're told they are great at everything. Yes I find my son's off tune singing great but there will come a time where, maybe, he will discover that this is not a particular talent of his!

I am all for being inclusive but some children are rubbish at performances, some are brilliant - I don't see a problem with a school choosing the more talented performers. Other children can get involved in painting sets, lighting, music etc.

no squiffy, but it was exactly the same kids in the main parts as at xmas and i think the play before. that is my argument. they should give others a look in.

Drama productions = shop window stuff, so teachers audition their most talented actors (for the main parts, but minor roles might perhaps be allocated, who knows?). Good performance given to the community, school's profile and reputation raised. School becomes over-subscribed, usually by "supportive" parents, who might push to get their child in, one way or another. With an increased proportion of those likely-to-be-high-achieving kids, the school becomes the best in the county.

what consolation is that to the kids at the school now? they wont benefit, will be long gone. and schools dont go up the league tables just because they put on good plays! they go up because of ks1 and ks2 results - lower ability hardly going to improve much if schools not even pushing them for decent parts in play. the more able will get level 4-5 all day long, its the borderline 3/4 they should be concentrating on, what more incentive to get kids reading/literate than giving them some decent lines!

I can't understand why you are getting so upset about this, pooodle. You've really got a bee under your bonnet about it. You are making it sound as though it's the end of the world if a child doesn't get a star part in the school play. The children at our school all get to take part in the plays. The teachers do take care who they pick. They wouldn't put someone at the front with a long speaking part if they knew that child might freeze and possibly be laughed at or pitied. I think they do sometimes pick the same child as last time because it's easier to do so and they know that child will be able to cope with the part.
It's a school play. Most of the children find them fun to prepare for and it's very hard work for teachers co-ordinating it all.
Some children find them boring and would rather do something else.
As someone else has said not everyone can be a star on stage just as not everyone can be an A* student. Let children be good at what they are good at. That's not to say that teachers don't encourage other children to try, just as they would encourage someone to try more in other subjects.
You also come across as rather bitter and prejudiced against parents and others who help out at school. Are you a member of the pta. Perhaps if you helped out and got talking to other helpers and teachers you might get a better idea of what is actually going on rather than surmising as you seem to be doing. You might also be in a better position to have some say and input into what goes on in future productions, too.

And fwiw some of my children didn't get main parts in school plays but... they still got all level 5s at the end of y6.

juuule, actually other parents were grumbling it was the same kids again, i am not bitter, just find it sad that teachers dont have more vision than using their tried and tested stars when other kids obviously chomping at the bit to have a go. What is the philosphy in class if they can't even see this?

I would imagine it's fairly standard practice when auditioning for a play, to invite all those interested to come and try out. I mean, teachers are going to want the biggest pool of talent to choose from as they can get. And when they select people for the main parts, it will be based on that talent, not on their social class. Sure, it may be that the same faces pop up regularly, in the same way that they do in sports teams, but that is probably because they are interested in drama/music. It may well be that the lad you were talking to at the weekend wasn't a particularly strong actor. So the teachers included him by giving him a speaking part, but he was perhaps not judged to be up to taking a lead. Again, nothing to do with his social class. And as many have said on this thread, there are many opportunities, particularly in primary schools for all children to get a turn in a range of performances.
And, although looking at my Year 6 to gauge their perceived social class is not something I find relevant to much of what we do in school, I couldn't help casting an eye down the cast list of our current play today. 3 of the most wooden and unnatural actors of the lot would probably tick your box as "posh." And 3 of the 5 main parts (absolute naturals on stage, needing hardly any direction and learning stacks of lines with ease because they are living and breathing the play) are what you might call "ordinary."

And, actually, I think that the standard of production that a school puts on is very often an indicator of attitudes and standards across the school. If there is a striving for excellence, and enthusiasm and slick attention to detail, then it's fair to say that those things will be evident elsewhere in the curriculum.
At KS1, there is always the cute factor, so parents are pretty much going to love whatever they see on stage, so all the kids get parts, regardless of talent. By secondary level, however, when parents (and the wider community) go to the school to watch a play, cute doesn't count. They want a good standard of drama, performed by kids who can carry it off well.