Does anybody else think that schools are guilty of using the same lead parts in plays too much

[ifeelsleepy]

Hi
I have noticed at my ds's school that the same children tend to get the lead parts in school plays alot.
Although I realise that teachers are likely to pick children they know they can rely on to do the part surely others should be given more of a chance on this.
I have seen many a child who has done a fantastic job with their lines on the rare occasion they have been picked, but they are never chosen again and the same ones seem to be chosen all of the time.
I do not mean to sound like a jealous mom and I know some of you may be htinking that of me but my ds actually got a talking part the once and he delivered his lines beautifully and I couldn,t believe it even the teacher commented how well he did.
I have been disppoitnted ever since that he has not been given the opportunity to show this unexpected part of him again.
Most plays I have been to he has been stuck at the back in a low key role etc.
Just wondering if anybody has had the same thoughts on this sort of thing.

yes, teachers do it deliberately to upset the kids as much as possible and piss off the parents just before the end of term

They have been waiting since Xmas to twist the knife one last time.

I bet they keep lists and go 'Mwahahahahahaha' and rub their wicked hands together.

I'm sure it is the only reason they have briefing sessions before school starts.

mb has hit the nail on the head

Oh crumbs, not this again..

Yes, they probably do. Because they need those children who will be able to learn/remember lines, speak clearly and slowly, not get too nervous etc etc.
Just like those chosen for hte football team can actually play football and those chosen to represent the school at hte swimming gala are good swimmers.

At my dc's school, if you have a lead role for xmas play, then that means that next year you aren't allowed to audition for any major roles, only supporting ones.

DD is crap at sports so doesn't get first pick for sports teams, but she is great at reading so always gets narrator.
I think school plays often show people that you have something that you're best at which is why you get that part. Not everyone is a great actor/ress, some are much better painters and might end up not even in the play but painting scenery for example.
Also, I've seen people moan their child got a rubbish part in the play, but what they forget to add is their little darling is an absolute fucker who never does as the teacher says so save ruining everyone else's efforts they get put in a tiny role.

Sorry but this time I disagree with the teachers. (I was a primary school teacher myself for ten years and I loved putting on assemblies etc) but with ds's' school I have noticed that year on year it has been a limited group of children chosen repeatedly when there is a much wider group of talent available - born out by the fact that the big parts in the infant school were given to a totally different group of children who coped fantastically but have never been seen on stage again in the last 4 years of juniors.

True too in our school, ds was a dancer in Y3, so was not allowed to audition for Y4. So he joined the choir instead All speaking parts always go to Y6, and yes, the lead parts tend to be those children who also get the speaking parts in class assemblies. But I don't see a problem with it so long as it is done relatively fairly. My ds is quite happy to be on stage and do his bit, and luckily he gets the chance. He is a pants footballer and thus never gets picked for the school football team. But I don't complain about it, I understand they have to pick those that are actually able to play.

Part of me detests this 'a fair chance for everyone regardless of how crap you are' it seems that no-one is allowed to be good at something anymore without others whining it is unfair.

Our last primary play had load and loads of scenes, so not just one or two lead parts and every child had a part of some sort. It worked really well but must have been a huge amount of work for the staff.

Sorry changing the subject a little but why do schools insist on doing class colouring/handwriting
competitions then give out prizes such as easter eggs.
Every year I can say that the same 2 children have got the prize.
The same 2 in particular in my ds's class who happen to be one of the 2 brightest in the class.
Its such a obvious result I wonder why they bother when its obvious who will win.
Yes its great that a child does get along like that and excells at things but it becomes a bit too much when you see the same ones winning all of the time so why bother with these sort of competitions.

The premise on the similar thread running a few weeks back was that teachers were choosing "middle class/posh kids" for the main parts, relegating the working class to the back row of the chorus. Dunno how to link, sorry....

I don't find intelligence comes into it.

It's having a LOUD VOICE. And teh ability to show expression in their voice, their face and their movements.

Voices get mumblier and mumblier as the chilren get older.

I never got picked for any speaking part (even a one-liner) in anything at primary school; they'd never heard me do anything and assumed I couldn't.

At the same time, outside school I was winning county-wide verse speaking competitions and was a shoo-in for the lead or narrator role in any production of anything at Brownies. My normal speaking voice is quiet, but I'm quite capable of projecting when performing.

The same few children were always picked for lead roles at school; not, I assume, because of an evil teacher conspiracy but because of the self-fulfilling nature of "oh, we know X can do it" so that X becomes a safe pair of hands. I do think they might have shown a little more imagination in opening up some opportunities for all children, though (I wasn't bothered about not getting big roles in school productions, but I do remember getting upset one year when the whole school was doing a version of Wind In The Willows and I didn't even get a two-word speaking part when it seemed that almost everyone else did).