The Circle Of Life

Gosh what a dramatic title. I feel like I am about to present a David Attenborough style program. I'm not, but I thought the title summed up the feel of this blog.

A friend of mine has just signed up to do this course and he will be starting the year and a half just as we all finish. Here is his blog if you are interested http://mrahmet.blogspot.com/. He called me the other day in a mild panic about the course asking what he was supposed to be doing. Do you all remember that? That question in your head at the beginning of the course when after talking to your adviser you would go "Yes, but what do I actually need to do?"

How far we have all come. We have spent a year and half learning new skills and developing a personal work ethic and we should be proud of ourselves. I for one feel that this course has changed me and not only have I heard others say the same but I have visibly seen the change in them.

I went and met with my friend to talk him through some of the early steps like setting up a blog and linking it to Google Reader and talking him through it made realise that it was the perfect time to take stock of exactly what I think I have learnt.

I have learnt to use so many new tools, such as blogs, flickr, reader as well as realising the importance of tools I already used such as facebook. I have become aware of the importance of my community of practice and no longer think of networking as a dirty word but as a way of increasing my professional understanding. I have a deeper knowledge of learning styles which has helped me as a learner and a teacher. I have learnt through journal writing to reflect on every situation in a critical way. To use my mistakes and my triumphs as the building blocks of my professional practice. I have learnt about ethics and the importance of considering how your actions could cause harm to others. Most importantly through the combination of all of these things I have learnt how to take charge of my career and move in the direction that I want. By understanding myself and my profession more I have had the confidence to fight for the things I want.

There is still a lot to do before I am ready to hand my critical review and artefact in but the end is now in sight so I feel it is a good time to look back at the last year and a half of learning and also to wish luck to all those who are about to start the journey.

A Crisis Of Confidence

I went out to dinner the other night for my work Christmas party. The group consisted of mainly the younger teaching staff of the performing arts college at which I teach. For some reason we ended up discussing my research inquiry and the conversation got extremely heated. Everyone at the table was arguing the importance of giving the students a versatile training, except for me. I was suggesting that a more specialised training might be more appropriate for some students who don't have a natural ability in a certain discipline. I was really trying to get my point across and to say that my inquiry did support my suggestion. Unfortunately I was shouted down and made to feel quite small and stupid to even suggest something that went so wholeheartedly against the way they felt.

I left the party feeling really despondent and really questioning the validity of my opinion. I tried to tell myself that it wasn't just my opinion but the analysis of my results, but then that made me question whether I had interpreted the data fairly and properly. I had a complete crisis of confidence, something which doesn't happen to me that often.

One of the things which affected me most was the suggestion from one of the teachers that by denying the student a versatile training I would be depriving them for my own end. My intention was only ever to discover what was best for the student. What would enable every student to achieve the most they could possibly achieve in the work place. The suggestion that I was trying to do anything else really upset me.

It has now been a few days since the incident and I have had time to step back and look at it calmly. I wanted to try and find the positives in what had happened because I considered that even within a situation like this there is still the opportunity to learn from the opinions of other professionals.

One of the main positives is that people were so passionate about the subject I have based my inquiry on. This is not only good news for me because it clearly means it is important but it is also good for the students because it means that their teachers really care about the level of training they are receiving. We may not agree on everything but we do agree that the students deserve the best training available.

Another positive is that I realised something new. My colleagues made an extremely interesting point when defending versatile training. They said that it is not just the responsibility of a college like ours to look after the interests of the students but also the interests of the industry. In other words they think that  you should train your students towards the ideal because this will enable the continuing growth of the industry. The ideal in musical theatre is for people to act sing and dance to a high standard so that is what we need our students to aspire to.

I still don't know whether I agree with this, it seems to me that this could be a conflict of interests, but I also don't know whether I disagree with it. What the evening reminded me to do was to keep listening. My inquiry might be finished but my professional practice isn't. The skills we have learnt on this course can be used again and again and again as long as we remember to carry on questioning and carry on listening.

So my crisis of confidence is over for now, not because I am sure I am right, but because I have remembered that it is ok to be wrong because everything we are doing is a constantly changing, constantly adapting work in progress.

Data Analysis

I finished my final interview today and closed my survey. I am really pleased with all the information I have gathered, but with that now comes the responsibility of doing something with it. The problem I am having is that social science is messy. Nothing is actually 'answered' because you are dealing with so many interesting, varied and equally valid opinions. How then do approach bringing everything to some kind of cohesive conclusion?

At the final campus session :( last Thursday (I will genuinely be sad not to see some of you guys again) this is exactly what we talked about so I thought I'd mention some of the things that were said in the hope that it helps you and, by reiterating it, helps me too.

When analysing interviews, which constitute the main part of my inquiry, Paula talked about two things. Firstly, it is important to mention common responses or information that typifies what has been said. If lots of people have mentioned it and agreed on it then it must be important. Secondly, it is important to mention things that are significant. It may only have been said by one person but if you think it is crucial information then include it. I think probably a word of warning here would be to make sure you are not including something that goes against the general trend just because it proves your point. Don't cherry pick your information.

I think it would also be interesting to compare and contrast your findings, not only with each other but also with your literature. Does what you have found out support what you've read or contradict it. For me personally my gathered data does a bit of both but then that is also important to highlight.

I feel one of the most important things that Paula said is that in your analysis make sure you are giving an interpretation of the data not your opinion. Obviously you will have thoughts about what you have researched but support these thoughts with quotes and statistics that give it weight and context.

Another important thing is that we have been collecting evidence around certain ideas, not proof. Particularly when talking about information gathered in surveys it is important to say that data is indicative rather than proof of certain things. For a survey to be statistically accurate you are supposed to have at least a thousand respondents. I don't know if anyone has managed that but I personally only managed to get ninety-one back. I am very pleased with this number and I think it is enough people to give an indication of trends and ideas but not enough to prove anything for certain.

Finally, I would say that everyone should look to their journals for things they have learnt and things that have changed. Journal entries do count as evidence of changed behaviour in yourself and others.

I hope some of this has helped. It strangely enough has clarified things for me. Keep up the good work everyone. It's not long now.

Professional Peer Interview 3

This is the third of my professional peer interviews. The filming is unfortunately bad but some of the information is interesting because Kate is a teacher as well as a performer.

Professional Performers Survey

Recently I have been working on my survey for my inquiry. I created it and then sent it to a select number of people. I then spoke to them about their answers making sure they all understood the questions to mean the same thing. In some cases they didn't, so we worked on the phrasing of the questions together to make it clearer. We also talked about the relevance of the questions and I realised that some could be removed and others should be added to give me the information I want. I found this a really useful process and now think I have a survey that will give me some really interesting information.

This is where you come in! The survey is for musical theatre performers or for people who trained in musical theatre. I would be really grateful if any of you who are in that group could fill in the survey and also, if you have time, forward it on to any other people who apply. Feel free to put the link on your Facebook etc. If you don't fit the criteria yourself but know people who do then please pass it on as well. I want to try and get as many responses as possible. Thank you so much. 

Here is the link: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/markiles

Versatility or Specialisation?

As a musical theatre performer it is often assumed that one needs to be a 'triple threat'. It is the performance buzz word of the last ten years and the idea that a performer working in a integrated medium should have integrated skills seems an obvious one. However, the more I look around at working professionals and what is required of people in the industry the less I am convinced that being a 'triple threat' is always relevant.

I know many successful musical theatre performers who can't dance, can't act, or can't sing. In fact I know some who can't do any of the above but that's another story. My point is that if it is possible to work without being a triple threat then why is it so desirable?

The answer that I seem to keep coming back to is that the more skills you have the more chance you have of getting a job doing something. This seems to be the logic that the majority of training institutions are using when creating their courses. If they give their students a wide enough variety of skills those students will have the ability to fit more brackets and therefore get more work.

I'm starting to believe that this approach could be fundamentally wrong. If this is the way we train our students what we end up with is a lot of generalists. In other words, performers who are quite good at everything but who excel at nothing. In such a competitive industry it is the things we excel at that get us the jobs. Who cares if you are a good singer and actor if you have been cut after the first round of auditions because you didn't stand out next to a group of phenomenal dancers?

There will always be some people who are 'triple threats' and who have talent and skill in all three disciplines in equal measure. It is therefore appropriate that there are some training institutions that cater to this type of performer. I do think, however, that we shouldn't be blinded into thinking that the triple threat mould is attainable or even desirable for every performer.

There are some people who cannot dance. They will never be able to dance and nor should they have to. There is enough musical theatre work out there for them without them having that skill. So why then should we waste their valuable time trying to turn them into a dancer during their all too short training? The answer I am starting to believe is that we shouldn't. Their time would be much better spent perfecting their natural talents of singing and acting.

My conclusion is that although being a triple threat performer seems most desirable it is by no means essential and training institutions should not feel bound to create versatile performers when specialised ones are just as likely to work.

Professional Peer Interview 2

Here is the second video in my series of professional peer interviews. I think this one is particularly interesting because the opinion of the participant is very different from the opinion of the last interviewee. Here the participant comments that their career has not suffered at all by not being a "triple threat". In fact they think being specialised may well have enhanced their success.

As a word of warning to others I had to re-film this interview because the file of the first interview was corrupted. In future I will always be using two recording devices for every interview I do. I suggest you all do the same to avoid an evening of stress.

Professional Artefact

At the campus session yesterday we were talking about the professional artefact that we have to create as part of our final module and I thought I'd share some of the things that were said that I found most useful.

First thing to mention is that, unlike the critical review, the artefact doesn't have to have a specific form. In other words it doesn't have to be a piece of academic writing, although it can be. I think Jo Gunnel's artefact is a good example of this. She is doing her inquiry on singing and so her artefact is going to involve her actually singing. What better way to show your discoveries about singing than by actually giving sung examples?

I think the most important things that was said was that your artefact needs to be directly connected to your question. It is not and 'add on' and is not the next step. Make sure your artefact is the natural culmination of what you wanted to know. Don't get carried away using your artefact to pose new questions.

I think it is also important to say that your artefact should be useful within your field of work. Whereas the critical review academically describes your process and findings your artefact should be something that reveals your new knowledge in a format that is useful and understood within your professional environment.

I think with the artefact we have licence to be more imaginative and creative. Start thinking about it now though rather than leaving it until the last minute. Obviously we don't know everything we are going to find out yet but don't let your artefact end up being something you throw together at the last minute. I hope some of this is useful.

Professional Peer Interview 1 (part 2)

Professional Peer Interview 1 (part 1)

As part of my professional inquiry, or rather as a lead up to my professional inquiry I have decided to do a collection of short filmed interviews with professional musical theatre performers. I thought this would be an interesting way to talk over ideas and gain insight about my topic from other people who have first hand experience of the industry and its training. Also, I will eventually be carrying out a survey of professional musical theatre performers and I thought these interviews would help me evaluate which questions would provide useful answers when put in that survey. Below is the first interview with Suzy and some really interesting points are discussed. In fact there were times during this interview that I found my opinions completely changing from one end of the spectrum to the other. Maybe that is what happens when you are trying to be as impartial as possible? I hope you find these interviews interesting, and please feel free to comment with any of you own ideas and insights.

Inquiry Aims and Objectives

I told the people that I have arranged to interview that I would send them something which outlined my inquiry. Letting them know what exactly I was investigating and to what end. This proved to be harder than I thought but this morning I finally got something down on paper. No doubt this will change with things being added and subtracted but I feel that it is a start. I'd love to know anyone's thoughts.

Title (working):

An Investigation into how the training of vocational musical theatre students prepares them for the demands of the profession. Do you maximise a performers chance of career success by training them to be as versatile as possible or by allowing them to specialise in a particular area of musical theatre?

 Aims:

• To discover how musical theatre students are currently being trained on a range of London musical theatre courses, looking at the reasons behind the training methods.
• To uncover the student perspective. What are their opinions on their training and the direction in which it is taking them?
• To look at the demands made on professional performers in the musical theatre industry, and ascertain how their training has impacted their careers in either positive or negative ways
• To look at the views of musical theatre casting professionals (director/producer/casting director), shedding light on how they approach the casting process and what they look for in prospective cast members.

 Objectives:

• To improve my understanding of the way musical theatre students are currently trained on some of the top London courses and in turn make myself a better teacher.
• To improve my understanding of the demands made of professional performers in today’s musical theatre industry. By understanding what is being asked of performers I hope to be able to better prepare my students to attain these attributes.
• To improve my understanding of the casting process and of what is really important to the people who give the jobs.
• To come to a better understanding of the musical theatre industry as a whole. Linking all the strands of evidence to create a clearer picture of how to best prepare someone in training for their future career.
• To share my findings (in a controlled way, maintaining participant anonymity) with any person or institution within the industry also wishing to widen their knowledge.

Interview Questions

Procrastination is my life's curse. I think too much and do too little. It is however time to wake up and do some work!

My inquiry looks at the training of musical theatre students, focusing on what is the best way to ensure they have successful careers. Perhaps 'ensure' is the wrong word because in the performing industry there are no guarantees. Rather, is there a way of training musical theatre students that gives them the best possible chance of career success? And if so what is it? Versatility is often quoted as being the most important thing but is it in fact more advantages to be specialised in a particular area?

There is no current consensus on training methods and so as part of my inquiry I will be interviewing the head teachers of four professional musical theatre courses in London to gather and compare differing view points. I've arranged the interview dates and they are fast approaching which leaves me with the dilemma of what to actually ask them. Below is a list of questions that I think will help begin to illuminate my inquiry. If any of you have a chance could you please have a look at them and let me know if they are clear and relevant? Also let me know if you think there are any glaringly obvious things that I haven't asked.

• Assuming that I know nothing about musical theatre, what would you say was the purpose of this course?
• How do you go about achieving those goals?
• What skills do you think it is important for a graduate to leave with?
• Can you specifically describe to me the content of this course? (How much dance/singing/acting etc.)
• I've noticed that some musical theatre courses are accredited by the national dance council and others by the national drama council. Do you think that the accreditation of this course reveals its primary focus?
• Do you think that all musical theatre courses are designed to do the same thing?
• Did you decide on the content of this course? If so, how did you make these decisions and why? If not, how do you feel about the content? Do you think anything should be changed? If so, why?
• What do you look for when accepting students onto this course?
• Do you think you accept a certain type of performer? If so, what is that type?
• When training do you push students to excel at their strengths or to improve their weaknesses?
• Is it the same for every student? 
• Do you have to adapt this course to the changing demands of the industry?
• Do you think the industry has changed/ is changing?
• What do you think is now required from a professional performer?
• Is there an ideal of what a professional musical theatre performer should be? If so, what do you think that is?
• Is versatility important? If so, why?
• What are your feelings about the phrase 'jack of all trades, master of none'?
• In your experience are there many performers who are equally talented in all disciplines?
• If someone can't do one of the three disciplines, or even two of the three, does that me they can't or shouldn't do musical theatre?

I think there are probably lots more things I should be asking, particularly specifics about the teaching (any teachers out there please feel free to comment), but I suppose this is a start. Thanks in advance for commenting. I hope everyone is well and is getting back into it. Only one term left, arghhhhhhhhh! 

Critical Reflection and Summary: Digital Portfolio

At the beginning of term I had very little idea about what a professional inquiry was let alone what I might actually investigate, how I might go about it and how I would ensure that it was ethically sound. Thankfully by engaging in the various tasks of the module I am now able to answer these questions and look back at the evolution of my ideas. 


I have discovered that my professional inquiry will be a way for me to increase my understanding of my profession with the hope of opening new doors and moving forward. I have also become aware of the problems that may face someone doing an insider inquiry (Appendix A).


My interest and profession revolve around musical theatre so I knew my inquiry would be related to this. I therefore started a Musical Theatre SIG on the BAPP Facebook page to see if others shared my interest (Appendix B), inviting people to join through a blog entry (Appendix C). Many interesting discussions occurred regarding perception and performance ability, some of which are outlined in my blog (Appendix D).


I also joined several other SIGs that complemented my own interests such as Dance and Drama in Education (Appendix E), Education and Training, Was it Appropriate For Your Career? (Appendix F) and Jack of All Trades... And Master of None (Appendix G). The creation of the SIGs has enabled my ideas to evolve through discussion with my peers. For example, the conversations I have been having with Rebecca Jane Gaskell both on her blog (Appendix H) and my blog (Appendix I). The SIGs didn't come without their problems however, although I found it difficult to change anything (Appendix J).


I initially thought my inquiry would be based on the perception of musical theatre but after meeting with professional peers to discuss my questions (Appendix K) and thinking over comments from BAPP students (for example, Stephanie Thomas' comments (Appendix L)) it soon became apparent that I was more interested in investigating the way musical theatre students are trained. It now seems the perfect inquiry as it marries my love of musical theatre with my desire to move into the vocational training of other performers.


Given that my inquiry would now be about musical theatre training and that my prior knowledge of ethics was relatively small (Appendix M) it seemed appropriate to look into the code of ethics for both performers (Appendix N) and teachers (Appendix O). This investigation of ethics coupled with information from the reader enabled me to make decisions about what ethical standards I would ensure were in place for my inquiry (Appendix P).


I began researching musical theatre generally, thinking about which performances I admire (Appendix Q) and what types of musical theatre there are (Appendix R). I also investigated opinions on how musical theatre students should be trained (Appendix S) as well as the training actually available (Appendix T). I have used Delicious as a way of bookmarking and sharing my electronic resources (Appendix U) (as well as looking at the resources of other members of my SIG (Appendix V)) and I have used the BAPP references wiki to share other important, non-electronic literature (Appendix W).


This accumulation of resources however wasn't enough to inform my thoughts and ideas. It was only through critical analysis of the literature, three of which are posted on my blog (Appendix X, Appendix Y and Appendix Z), that I really began to understand the professional landscape in which my inquiry will take place.


The final challenge was working out how to obtain the necessary information needed to increase my understanding and draw conclusions. I carried out a pilot observation (Appendix 1), survey (Appendix 2), interview (Appendix 3) and focus group (Appendix 4), some with more success than others. The failures didn't matter however because all the pilots gave me insight into exactly what I wanted to find out and into what would be the best way to obtain the information needed. 

This term has brought me to a place where I am now excited and confident to ethically conduct a professional inquiry that will not only benefit my understanding but will hopefully also contribute to the industry as a whole.

Interview

A couple of weeks ago I conducted a pilot interview with one of my professional peers. I initially tried to conduct this over the phone and because it is not possible to record on my phone I made notes on the interview. This proved to be an extremely difficult process and the information I collected ended up being paraphrased and sketchy. I also felt that not being able to see the person limited my appreciation of the nuances of their responses. I therefore decided to conduct the interview again in person.

The second time around I recorded the whole interview so that I could transcribe it and revisit it whenever I wanted. I did still makes notes however in case something went wrong with the recording. I also tried to create what Judith Bell describes as a 'draft schedule'. This is where I had a sequence of numbers for each question that signified a range of responses. I would circle which number was closest to the answer of the interviewee.

This process gave me an indication of the area in which the interviewees thoughts lay but I think because of my inexperience the sound recording was much more useful because it gave the detail. During future interviews I will always try to record the process because it makes analysis much easier and more accurate (there is no risk of paraphrasing to suit you purpose). I must admit though that I hadn't realised how time consuming transcribing would be. I found my transcript vital but I am slow at typing so in future I need to set aside at least five hours to transcribe a one hour interview.

I decided to make my interview semi-structured, again at the advice of Judith Bell. She writes,

The advantage of a focused interview is that a framework is established beforehand and so recording and analysis are greatly simplified. This is important for any research, but particularly so for limited-time studies (2005).

I didn't want to make my interview completely structured as I felt I needed the possibility of following where the interviewee might lead. I also didn't want to make my interview completely unstructured as I am constantly aware of my limited time scale and knew that there was certain information I needed to collect in a certain amount of time.

I think ultimately this proved the best idea because it meant I could decide what information I needed before the interview started and make sure I had it before the interview ended. It also meant that a couple of times I could ask spontaneous questions that gave me information and insight on an area that I hadn't previously considered.

I spent along time before the interview preparing my questions in much the same way as I did for my survey. Generally I tried to use open ended questions that would encourage the interviewee to give expansive, explanatory responses rather than one word answers.

Even after this careful preparation there were however times when the interviewee asked what I meant by a particular question. I think this proved to be one of the positive aspects of the interview process. I was able to clarify and explain what I meant so that the interviewee answered the question I thought I was asking. If I had been conducting other interviews this would also have been useful because I could have ensured all participants understood the question in the same way.

I did however find a problem with explaining what I meant by a particular question. I occasionally found myself saying, "The reason I'm asking 'A' is because I want to know if 'B' or 'C' happens." I think my clarification sometimes lead the interviewee to give an answer they may not have given without prompting. Now I am aware of this I will try not to do it in future.

The interview itself was very illuminating. I used it specifically to discover my professional peer's experience of their vocational training, what has been required of them in their profession, and how they think their training has impacted this.

One of the interesting discoveries was that even though the interviewee trained on a musical theatre course, the course itself was very much taught from an acting perspective and this was the reason for their choice.

By going to 'School A' I knew I was going somewhere more weighted in acting, so it wasn't really a surprise that the majority of classes included voice, voice and text, playtext, acting theory, stage combat and neutral mask. Things like the voice and playtext classes would have about three classes timetabled in the week compared to maybe one or two of each style of dance.

It was also interesting that the interviewee believes they are an actor who just happens to work in musical theatre and that the majority of work they have done has been in character driven shows such as Les Miserables and Woman in White.

The interviewee still believes in the importance of versatility however,

I think it is vital to be versatile, especially given the competition and lack of work within the industry. I think it is important to know you strengths but in order to be open to the maximum amount of work I think you need to be versatile.

The analysis of interviews is difficult and I intend do a lot of reading over the next few months on how to effectively draw conclusions from the qualitative statements of expert individuals. Regarding this interview, I found it difficult to draw extensive conclusions because I had nothing to compare it to. It sits as a lone opinion. Judith Bell writes, 'So, we must be wise and vigilant, critical of out interpretation of the data, regularly question our practice and wherever possible triangulate' (2005).

For my professional inquiry I intend to use interviews as the primary data collection tool because I think they uncover such depth of information. They don't just tell what happens but give you the reasons why as well. I am however going to make sure I select a wide enough range of people to give a rounded view of the questions being asked so as to eliminate any possible bias.

Literature Review 3

I will be reviewing the Foreword of the book Acting in Musical Theatre: A Comprehensive Course. This is written by Lynn Ahrens the Tony Award winning writer and lyricist whose musicals include Lucky Stiff, Once On This Island, and Ragtime.

Ahrens argues that musicals are by there very nature contradictory. They make comment on real life just as any piece of theatre does but they also contain elements of sheer fantasy where the audience are expected to believe that people just 'burst into song.' She believes it is the role of the writer to make this 'fantastical world ring true' but she also believes it is the responsibility of the actor.

She describes acting as an 'extremely difficult discipline' but believes that a 'performer' has the even more difficult task of acting 'within the strictures of rhythm and rhyme and melody.' An interesting perspective as I believe a musical is generally thought to require less acting skill than a play, not more.

Ahrens talks about the importance of music in a show but continually returns to the idea that it is the acting that makes musicals work. It is the acting that enables the audience to believe in what they are seeing and to become emotionally involved in the world of the musical. She writes, 'The song is simply a heightened extension of the dialogue and if we - actors and writers - make the transitions appear seamless and natural, it helps to convince the audience that what they are seeing is real life.'

Perhaps feeling the need to substantiate her beliefs Ahrens uses the cast of her current show The Glorious Ones as an example of what she means. She says the cast is a mix of seasoned musical theatre professionals and actors who are more normally seen in plays. Some have big voices and others workable voices. Some have natural dancing talent and the others are movers. In spite of these differences what the entire cast has the ability to do is to act the song and it is for this reason they were cast and the show works.

It is not surprising that Ahrens champions acting in musical theatre. After all the foreword is for a book that's purpose is to explain and develop the skills needed to act well in musical theatre. If her foreword said acting in musicals was pointless then nobody would bother to read the rest of the book, and I imagine the writers would have something to say about that.

Also she is a lyricist and writer so her preoccupation is bound to be with words and stories. I wonder whether the composer of her musicals is equally fond of an actor with a 'workable' voice singing his songs.

Ahrens paints a very positive picture of musical theatre and asserts that to do it well is immensely difficult. As somebody who works in musical theatre and as somebody who is writing in a book designed for musical theatre students and teachers she has an obvious bias. I imagine a playwright for 'straight' theatre may perhaps comment that most plays contain much more substance than most musicals and therefore the acting skill required for a play is much greater than that required for a musical.

In spite of her bias I think Ahrens view on the importance of acting in musicals is really interesting because, as I have mentioned before, a lot of my favourite musical theatre performances have come from 'straight' actors. These actors don't always have the best singing voices or dancing ability but they are always immersed in their characters. It is their ability to make me believe in the world of the musical that captures my imagination and makes the performance memorable.

Perhaps these 'straight' actors approach the rehearsal process in a different way to musical theatre 'performers'. They are used to working with text and character so that is where their focus lies. Whatever the cause in my opinion, and Aherns opinion, it is musical theatre approached from the acting perspective that is most successful.

As part of my inquiry I am extremely interested in seeing whether other professionals have the same opinion. Should we be focusing more of our attention on developing the acting skill of our musical theatre students?


Ahrens, L. 2008, 'Foreword', in J. Deer and R. Dal Vera Acting in musical theatre: a comprehensive course. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

Observation

Yesterday I carried out my pilot investigation. The reason I waited so long was because I wanted to do an observation of a class but needed to wait for the holidays to end first. The class I chose was a musical theatre performance class which involves a group of students rehearsing a musical theatre number from a show to performance level.

I decided I would need to make my observation a simple and structured one because I only had the opportunity to watch one class and therefore didn't have the luxury of waiting for meaning to evolve over time. I therefore started by working out exactly what it was that I wanted to know and concluded that as my interest lies in the balance of musical theatre curriculum I would like to know if emphasis was given to a particular discipline within the class.

I would firstly record how often the teacher gave dance notes, how often they gave singing notes, and how often they gave acting notes. I would also record how often the students asked questions about choreography, how often they asked questions about vocals, and how often they asked questions about characterisation. I hoped that at the end I would have some data that showed whether the class was being taught with a bias towards a particular discipline and whether this rubbed off on the questions asked by the students.

I created two simple grids, one for the teacher and one for the students (I originally thought about doing a grid for each of the students but I didn't know the class well and thought I may get confused with names. I also thought that my interest was more about the bias of the class as a whole so recording individual students wouldn't add much insight at this stage), and each was split into three sections (one for dance, one for singing and one for acting). Every time one of the disciplines was mentioned by teacher or students a mark would be made on the correct box on the grid.

The recording of the data proved to be fairly easy because I was listening out for very specific things and a rehearsal environment is one that I am used to. I am glad I decided on a structured approach because it enabled me to stay focused for the entire class, stopping my attention wandering to more interesting things.

It had been a concern of mine that my presence in the classroom would be a distraction to the students or that perhaps they might change their behaviour. This however didn't seem to be the case. The class is a very involved and busy one so perhaps they just didn't have the time to worry about me. I spoke to the teacher afterwards and he said that they behaved as they always do.

Another thing that particularly worried me was that the teacher, knowing that I was looking at how often each discipline was mentioned, would consciously make more effort to talk about all three so as to seem 'better'. I therefore decided to only give the teacher an overview of my aims rather than the exact specifics of what I was recording. I concluded that this was still ethically sound as the teacher consented and was given the reasons why he wasn't being informed more deeply. I also let him know that he could look at the results after as it might be useful to him.

My real problems came when analysing the results. Looking at my final grid for the teacher it showed that he gave notes on choreography 33 times during the class, he gave acting notes 8 times, and he gave singing notes only twice. The final grid for the students showed that they asked 15 questions about choreography, 2 about characterisation, and 0 about the vocals of the piece.

From the data it looks clear that there is a strong bias towards dance in this musical theatre class but I am unsure if in reality this is true. I remember the first things the teacher spoke to the students about was the importance of characterisation in this particular number, and almost every time he mentioned it he stressed that it was the most important thing. So if it is the most important thing why did he give more notes on the dance and why were more questions asked about the dance? This could be down to a number of reasons. It was early in the rehearsal process and steps were still being learnt so dance was at that point the focus. You have to know the steps before you can layer it with character. It could be that getting everyone to physically do the same thing takes more verbal correction than getting people to discover their character. It could also be that the acting and singing were already at a very high standard because of previous work and now it is the dance that needs to be improved.

Perhaps if I had been able to watch the class over a whole term and seen the process from start to finish then the data I gathered would be more fairly representative of what was going on. I must admit that I didn't find observation to be the most reliable of tools. It is probably due to my inexperience and the amount of time I have to spend on it but I think that the results I got were too open to interpretation. Observation is supposed to be about looking at what actually happens rather than what people say happens which I think is valuable. In reality however discovering what happens doesn't help you discover why it happens so the results are still very open to interpretation.

Survey

A few weeks ago I carried out a survey entitled 'The Effectiveness Of Your Training' and this blog aims to analyse the effectiveness of that survey.

When I created the survey my intention was to discover how well people felt their training had prepared them for their career and particularly what aspects they felt were most beneficial or lacking. I also wanted to investigate what people saw as important measures of success.

I initially posted my survey (created using Survey Monkey) on my blog and I got a reasonable response of about ten people from the BAPP course but I felt I wanted more people involved so I decided to also post the survey onto Facebook. I didn't ask anyone specifically to fill in the survey I just left it on my wall but the response number significantly increased to thirty four by the end of the survey period. I would definitely use Facebook again as a way of getting any future surveys to the maximum number of people. It would be possible to use contacts on Facebook to post the survey on their walls too so that people beyond your direct network could respond. Obviously the more people that respond to the survey the more relevant and accurate the information becomes. I understand the argument that this rules out anyone who doesn't have a Facebook account or a computer but I still feel I would be able to get enough of a cross section of the populations that I am interested in to make the method worthwhile and fair.

I would also use Survey Monkey to create any future survey because I felt it was easy to use and the graphs it creates are really useful in giving a visual overview of particular trends of thought. I would however consider paying the fee to create a survey that was slightly longer as I felt restricted by the limit of ten questions.

When I first created my survey I was aware of the ten question limit and tried particularly hard to only include questions that I thought would help me find out what I wanted to know. After looking at my results however I still created several questions that were completely pointless. The question 'Where did you train?', although interesting, gave me no specifically useful information. Also the question 'Are you currently working or have you ever work in the field you trained in?' was not useful. 97.1% (33) of respondents were working or had at some point worked in their chosen field so from this I could read that the training of most people was successful because it enabled them to work. The question however gave no insight into the type, length or regularity of work.

There is one other question that I would not ask again an that is the name of the respondents. Carly Osbourne and Ellie Sykes both commented that they thought respondents were more likely to be honest and forthcoming with their answers if they were anonymous. I absolutely agree with them. I think for the pilot survey it was fine to ask for names because we are comfortable with each other and it gave me the opportunity to follow up any queries I had. If I were doing a larger survey in future involving people who I did not know and who did not know me I would give up the chance of being able to follow up for the increased possibility of truthful responses.

Something interesting that emerged from the survey is that 64.7% (22) of respondents were only partially happy with the training they received and 2.9% (1) not at all happy. This has made me keen to continue with my inquiry into vocational training to see what it is that performers feel they actually need that they are not currently getting. Again, however, I feel I could have worded this question better. I asked, 'How well do you feel your vocational training prepared you for your chosen career: Not at all, Partially, Completely?' 32.4% (11) of respondents said they were completely happy with their training but when asked if they felt if anything could have done anything to prepare them better they all gave an answer. This made me think that perhaps they were not 'completely' happy meaning I should have given them a different option, such as 'very well'.

When asked what they felt (if anything) their college could have done to prepare them better 17.6 % (6) of respondents thought that audition technique could have been improved, 17.6% (6) of respondents felt that more information on self-employed business issues (i.e. tax and marketing) should have been given, and 20.6% (7) felt that the acting training could have been improved. These insights have made me want to ask specific questions around these particular issues.

When asked what aspect of their course (if anything) they felt was vital for their training 35.3% (12) thought that the discipline of the course was vital.

When asked to rate the importance of certain factors in determining how successful a performer is, quality of work and happiness came out marginally higher as the most important factors. If I were to ask this question again I would ask the respondents to rate them in order of importance. I think this would give a much clearer indication of what people think is the most important factor in determining success.

With regards to my pilot survey one of the things I found most beneficial was the mix of quantitative and qualitative information. It was useful to ask a quantitative question and then give people room to expand their answer, enabling me to find out why they thought certain things. Any survey I do in the future will definitely contain a mix of quantitative and qualitative questions.

I found the survey process really interesting and will be using it in my actual inquiry because it is a way of getting information quickly from a large pool of people. However, this piloting process has made me appreciate the importance of getting the questions right. They need to be clear (making sure they mean the same thing to everybody) and specific (making sure they are aimed at collecting the information you actually want to collect). The next time I carry out a survey I will spend much longer on working out exactly what it is that I want to know.

Literature Review 2

I will be reviewing the Preface and Chapter One of Ruth Leon's book 'The Sound of Musicals'.

Ruth Leon argues that musical theatre is more than a contrived art form by an elite group of people for an elite group of people but is in fact a natural amalgamation of humans' basic need to dance, sing and tell stories. She believes that all musicals come form that desire and that the great musicals are the ones that do it best.

The greats may be different from each other in many ways but what they all have in common is that 'every element of the show contributes to the whole and where the whole is indivisible.' They change the way we think about musical theatre and also have a 'universal' way of 'speaking to something deep within each member of the audience.'

Ruth Leon is an established writer, lecturer and theatre critic amongst other things and has been a part of the theatre industry for a considerable number of years. It seems obvious then that she would refute that musicals are a contrived, elitist art form. I would argue that Leon is perhaps a member of the elite society that she denies and is therefore biased in favour of musical theatre as is anyone who writes about a subject they love.

Leon would no doubt deny this elitist view but when she goes on to discuss the merits of 'great musicals' and what a 'great musical' should be I think she gives herself away. She dismisses many commercial successes such as The Phantom Of The Opera and Les Miserables, saying they are popular but not great. Is a shows popularity not a measure of its greatness? I imagine that a member of the general public would think so but as a member of a more critical, elitist group Leon imposes different criteria.

Leon believes that 'any stage show stands or falls by its characters and their complexity is what gets us through to the end.' Would the audience of We Will Rock You, who voted it 'Most Popular Show' at the 2011 Olivier Awards, agree? The show is notoriously light on character but is funny and has unarguably incredible music. It is a critically panned success story. Have the critics got it wrong? Is there something they didn't see? Is it in fact a great musical? I don't think so but then I think I too am a member of the elitist group that Leon refutes.

What all this makes me question is should we continue to train students for the critical, elitist ideal or should we focus on what the general public decides is good? Should we be training students to belt high, or do tricks because it is entertainment that is really important and not the careful integration of acting, singing and dancing? Musical theatre started as Variety. It consisted loose stories that were held together by popular songs of the day, very much like We Will Rock You or Mamma Mia. The art form 'at its best' has evolved from its origins but it has perhaps evolved into something that is elitist and not always popular.

Leon's book is written by an musical theatre lover for musical theatre lovers. Its style is friendly but it assumes prior knowledge of the intricacies of the industry. As such it plays up the importance of the art form and its contributors, at times sounding almost reverential. In other words it tells its audience what it wants to hear. No lover of musical theatre would want to be told how irrelevant, or unpopular their ideal is and Ruth Leon doesn't disappoint.

As a critic Leon has seen a huge number of shows over the years and therefore should be considered an expert in distinguishing good theatre from bad. Unfortunately theatre is always subjective and what is desirable to one is not necessarily desirable to another. The chapters I have reviewed and the book as a whole are extremely useful at getting the expert opinion of Leon but it should be remembered that there is a huge 'general public' out there who disagree.


Leon, R. 2010, 'Why Musicals?' and 'Something Wonderful' in The sound of musicals. London: Oberon.

Literature Review 1

I will be reviewing the following article written by Adrian Jeckells, principal of The London School of Musical Theatre. The article was written for the UK Performing Arts Website which aims to give guidance to those who want to train for a performance career. The article can be found at: http://www.ukperformingarts.co.uk/musicaltheatre/the_right_training.asp

As head of LSMT Adrian Jeckells has a lot of knowledge about the musical theatre industry and about what is required when training students. He should be considered an expert in the field and the article gives his expert opinion. It should however be noted that the article is only giving his opinion and is not substantiated.

In the article Jeckells argues that musical theatre performers need strong skills in singing, acting and dancing and that a good course will provide training in all three. He believes that a 'balanced curriculum' is the key to improving their employability (Jeckells, 2011). He gives advice on the more practical side of the industry and says that a good course should aid students in this. He discusses the different types of course available to those looking to train and gives guidance on how to check the track records of particular courses.

This article was written for those who want to train in musical theatre. These people will want as much practical information as possible and will be looking to this site and article to supply that for them. The writing style is helpfully clear and there are lots of facts and useful tips to guide the reader, such as looking at biographies in show programmes to see where cast members trained. I do think however that because of this upfront approach some opinion is passed off as fact and can therefore be misleading.

Jeckells has made certain assumptions when writing this article that should be discussed. His main argument that musical theatre 'requires people with a strong skill-base in singing, acting and dancing' is not substantiated. There are many people who work successfully as musical theatre performers and who can only do one or two of the three disciplines. His opinion on this matter however is stated as fact and means we should proceed with caution.

When discussing three year and one year courses Jeckells also makes assumptions about the type of person that would be right for each. He assumes that those training on a one year course will have more natural talent than those on a three year course. He writes, 'for some individuals three years of training at a reputable establishment is imperative as they may have potential but limited stagecraft or technical foundation... for others a three course is neither necessary or desirable.' He goes on to describe the type of person who would be right for a one year course '(the person) is naturally talented... a mature individual who may have extensive non-professional stage experience, has privately embarked on singing lessons and dance classes and now wishes to pursue a professional career.' A person reading this would naturally want to see themselves in the best possible light and would therefore more likely than not think themselves right for the one year course.

When considering these assumptions I think it is important for us to look at the bias of the author. He is the head of LSMT which is a one year course and he therefore has an allegiance with that type of course. Given that the audience of the article is people looking to train it is in his best interests to promote one year courses in a favourable light. This does however mean we get a skewed and misleading impression of the types of people who train on each course. It is my experience that people on a three course will have had as many private singing and dancing classes prior to professional training as those on a one year course. It is also my experience that they are no less naturally talented.

It should probably be noted here that I am aware that I most likely have my own bias with regards to the training of musical theatre students. I trained on a three course and am therefore inclined to defend the course and the talent of those who choose to train there.

Another bias that I believe the author has and does a good job at concealing is to do with the importance of singing. Jeckells says that it is important to be a 'triple threat' but he makes several comments about the importance of singing without making similar comments on the importance of the other disciplines. For example, 'the minimum requirement for an individual embarking on a career in musical theatre today is a strong singing voice' and 'the course should not be an acting course with some token singing classes.' He even list 'singing' first when discussing the three disciplines which I believe can be very telling.

All these things give us a more true picture of what the one year course at LSMT will be like. It may have the intention of being a well rounded course but in reality it may have a singing bias. Interestingly a friend of mine auditioned for LSMT last week. Unlike most musical theatre courses which see you do all three disciplines before they recall or offer a place, LSMT only hear people sing before they make a cut. It appears that singing is more important to Adrian Jeckells than acting and dancing.

The article is very interesting and very useful but as I have said before it is only an opinion (all be it from an expert) and it is weighted by an obvious bias towards one year courses. It would perhaps have been useful for the website to ask the head of three year course to give their opinions on the subject so that the readers were provided with a more rounded impression when facing the decision of where to train.


Jeckells, A. 2011, The right training [online]. Available from http://www.ukperformingarts.co.uk/musicaltheatre/the_right_training.asp [last accessed 22 April 2011]

Focus Groups

About three weeks ago I conducted a focus group but it is only now that I find the time to write about it. The group was made up of five musical theatre professionals at various stages in their careers. The process proved to be extremely interesting and I have learnt many things which I hope to outline in the following blog.

I approached the focus group in a very unstructured way. Instead of having a series of questions ready to put to the group I asked one main question at the beginning and then tried to guide the conversation to keep it vaguely on topic. Were I to attempt a focus group again I think I would prepare much more. I would have a list of important topics that I wanted to cover. There were times that the conversation naturally dried up and I would have been able to move it forward much more easily if I'd had a list in front of me. A list would also ensure that I covered all the necessary areas of the topic to help supply needed information.

The question I asked was 'What do you think makes a musical theatre performer successful?' I am interested in looking into the way musical theatre performers are trained and seeing what demands are made of them in the industry. It occurred to me that if I wanted to examine whether a particular way of training helped the success of a musical theatre performer then I would also need to examine what people within the industry defined as success.

The conversation covered many different areas of what people think contribute towards a persons level of success. As I mentioned before the group was made up of people at different points in their careers. A couple were seasoned professionals and one was yet to train. What I found particularly interesting is that people's perception of what constituted success changed with age and experience. It made me realise the importance in having a true cross section of the population (in this case musical theatre professionals) in the focus group. It is by having this diversity that contrasting ideas and perspectives come out and can be argued. I had a good age and experience range but I only had one woman to five men (including myself) and I think it should have been more balanced.

The person who had yet to train saw success in a very black and white way. If you worked in the West End in lots of different musicals you were successful and if you didn't then you were less so. The older members of the group were much less certain. Perhaps because they have more experience of the reality of the situation or perhaps because they didn't want to be judged on their own careers. The older members of the group felt that many aspects contributed to a persons level of success. They did feel that the consistency of employment did play it's part but that the variety of jobs was less important. If someone works in one show for five years are they less successful than someone who works in five shows over five years? They also felt that happiness was a very important part of a persons success. If you worked consistently but hated every minute they felt you were unsuccessful.

An interesting point that came up is that 'personal success' (the way you judge yourself) is different from success (how you are seen by others). One of the group gave a very good example of this. When working on a previous show they were asked to swing some of the dance tracks even though they aren't really a dancer. They agreed thinking they would never go on but eventually they did. They managed to get through the whole number without making a mistake and they viewed this as a personal success. They did however feel that had anyone watched who really knew about dance then that person would have found the performance unsuccessful.

This idea made us all reevaluate the question. We didn't want to admit it to ourselves but when looking at performers who are unknown to you their level of happiness is irrelevant to the way you view their success. Mainly because you have no way of judging it. If they have worked consistently, particularly in certain types of jobs you view them as successful.

We all realised that we were much harsher in judging others (particularly those people we didn't know) than we were in judging ourselves. This made me realise that when conducting and analysing a focus group you have to be aware of the personal biases of the group members, much as you would if you were reviewing a piece of literature written by them.

I found the focus group to be an interesting way of exploring ideas and considering things from different sides. It helped me to really explore the idea and people's views on it and raised issues that I had never previously thought of. The problem I found with it is that there was very little consensus on what people thought. The group was small which meant everyone's opinions were heard but people generally stuck to their initial ideas meaning that one viewpoint never had a majority.

I definitely extended my understanding of the issue but I don't think I am any nearer finding the 'answer' I was looking for. What has happened is that I am now in a more informed position to compare and contrast people's ideas and to from some of my own. I am starting to understand that qualitative data collection is not about finding conclusive 'answers' but is instead about mapping varying view points on a subject to give a clearer understanding of the whole.

Delicious

Hi everyone. I've started using Delicious and it's really good. I remember starting this course in September and reading about Delicious and thinking to myself, "Why is that useful?" Well I'm a convert. Not only can you see your bookmarks no matter what computer you are on, write yourself helpful notes so you remember what's on that page and tag it so you know what category it is in, but (and this is what I didn't get before) you can also share it with people. So this is me sharing some of the sites I am finding useful and if you guys have any sites you think others might benefit from then share them too. The link to my Delicious is: http://www.delicious.com/markiles

Research Project Ethics

When starting to think about the ethical considerations of my research project I found reading 3 in the ethics reader particularly useful. Although I am not a full time teacher I will be carrying out interviews and surveys in several vocational colleges so lots of the information was relevant.

The first thing I will seek before conducting my research is 'voluntary informed consent'. I think the most important thing here is transparency. I will inform all participants what the inquiry is about, what my aims and objectives are, any detriment that may arise for them as a result of taking part, and how and where the information will be used. Hopefully by doing this I will not have any problems getting participants. Luckily my project doesn't involve anyone under the age of eighteen which makes obtaining consent much easier but still crucial.

The people I interview I will give a full list of questions in advance so they can veto any they think are inappropriate and do not want to answer. I will give them a copy of the transcript afterwards and give them the opportunity to clarify or remove information. I will also make sure I will inform them of any previously unforeseen issues that have arisen that could be detrimental to them.

I will make it very clear that all participants are free to withdraw their consent at any point. I will not put any pressure on them to stay involved. Hopefully if I have been transparent enough from the outset about the purpose and outcome of the research then this won't happen.

I am going to ensure the anonymity of all the people involved in the research and of the colleges themselves. Firstly I don't think the identities of the colleges or people will have an impact the findings of the research and secondly I intend to survey students who I believe will give more honest answers about their training if they know there is no way their answers can be traced back to them (particularly if want they want to say is something bad).

Importantly I want to make clear that when obtaining informed consent form the students that it is one hundred percent 'voluntary'. I want to make sure they in no way feel pressure from me or more importantly from their head teacher to be involved. It is important to be aware of the unbalanced power in this situation, where the teacher can significantly impact the success of the student. They must be told that nothing bad will happen to them if they do not become involved. I think that anonymity will also help here because it makes it impossible to tell who has answered and who hasn't. I intend to get consent from the head teacher to survey the students (with them acting as Gatekeeper) but I then intend to get individual consent from each student as well.

In my last blog I mentioned the word 'balance' and it is my intention within this research project to balance out any ethical conflicts that may occur between the 'importance and rights of the individuals involved' (ethics reader, 2010). Equal consideration must be given to the needs of all participants. I should not assume just because it is something I want to know that others should have to help me. I also should not assume that because a piece of information is useful to me that it is justifiable to use it. I intend to make everyone involved aware of these possible conflicts and they will therefore have the choice to proceed or not.

One of the conflicts of interest I can see already is as follows. There is no direct benefit for the graduating students who help me. If the aim of my project is to improve training in musical theatre then this could actually have a negative impact on these students' careers. Their training is over but future generations, and their direct competition, will hopefully be trained better and therefore will be better able to get the already scarce jobs. In helping me the students will be helping their competition. I will make the students aware of this but hopefully they will also see that better training will improve the industry as a whole. An industry that they love and that they want to thrive. Hopefully they will also see that change takes time so perhaps the direct impact on them will be less than initially thought.

Another conflict may be that the information the graduating students provide may conflict with the interests of the college. If a student were to say detrimental things about the training it could affect others' opinions of the college. Hopefully keeping all information anonymous will prevent this but there is the risk that the students will talk about what they said in their surveys. I think it also important therefore to make them aware of why the information should kept anonymous. I think also that by making the various colleges aware of the benefits they could receive from the completion of the project (for example, a stronger consensus on what is required of a musical theatre performer) they may decide that they outweigh any negative possibilities. Again, transparency.

I think finally it is worth mentioning reliability of information. It is important not to 'falsify, sensationalise or distort findings'. As a general rule all information that is gathered should be included. Evidence should not be removed because it doesn't match your desired pattern. Similarly something shouldn't be quoted out of context or highlighted if it goes against the general trend. However, it is important to consider whether it is justifiable to include information that is clearly detrimental to participants even if it is vital for the project. I want to make sure at the very least that i am not directly harming any of participants. So once again I will be using reasoned consideration to achieve a balance between conflicting agendas.

Ethical Frameworks

My next blog will be about my ethical considerations with regards to my research project but I thought I would give context to this by firstly summarising my feelings on the differing ethical frameworks in place.

It seems to me that ethics is about responsibility to a social good. It is rarely about yes or no, black or white. Instead it is to do with the way we approach those hard to answer questions. Those grey areas. I think Hobbes' (1651) idea that ethics is a 'practical solution to social harmony and good' (BAPP course reader 5; professional ethics, 2010) is very accurate. Simply put, we are all competing for the same things, we all have equal need for them, and we are generally not always altruistic. Ethics are in place to ensure that we act fairly and with thought to others, but also that they do the same. Hobbes' idea suggests that morality for mutual benefit is what keeps society steady. Is this on closer inspection however under selling why people act ethically?

I have looked into Consequentialism and into Deontology but I don't think either of them completely satisfy and support my ethical standpoint. Initially the Consequentialist idea of maximising good is a very appealing one. Surely if we do that then the world would become as good as it can be. However, I have a problem that the ethical stance on something should be decided entirely on the outcome. Here is an example. 

A person is trapped under the rubble after an earthquake and four people decide to help get them out. It is very dangerous moving the rubble but they manage to free the trapped person and they all go on to live the rest of their lives. 

The outcome here is a good one. There were five survivors from the incident which is definitely maximising the good. Based on the outcome of this event it was ethically right for the people to help the trapped man but what if the outcome had been different?

A person is trapped under the rubble after an earthquake and four people decide to help get them out. It is very dangerous moving the rubble and in the process three of the rescuers are killed. The fourth rescuer and the trapped person go on to live the rest of their lives.

The outcome here is less good. Only two out of the five people survived which is no longer maximising the good. Based on the outcome of this second event the rescuers were ethically wrong for attempting to help the man. In light of examples like this I begin to question whether Consequentialism is actually that satisfying.

Perhaps Deontology has the answer? Immanuel Kant (1779) argued that the 'only absolutely good thing is good will'. I think this is a much more appropriate and useful concept when dealing with ethical considerations. It is by looking at people's intentions that we decide whether an act is ethically right or not. Looking again at the examples above through the eyes of Deontology in both instances the actions of the rescuers can be thought of as ethically right because their intentions were to save a trapped man who would have otherwise died. The outcome is now irrelevant. This way of looking at things seems much more clear cut and absolute which is where the problem with Deontology lies. It is about absolutes. It is about black and white and yes and no which I believe goes against the very nature of ethics. If things were black and white we would have no need for ethics. We would just know that something was right or wrong. For example, in Deontology lying is always considered wrong. What if you are lying with the good intention of saving someone's feelings? Killing a man is always wrong, but what if you are doing it with the intention of protecting your children? Deontology on the surface seems to be about intentions but is too rigid in it's framework. It is too full of moral absolutes.

So does Virtue Ethics hold the answer? This is about the moral character of the individual which at first seems to me to be rather ambiguous. This is surely a hard thing to judge and to quantify. Its origins come from Aristotle who believed virtue to be a habitual action that was the 'mid-point between two extremes' (ethics reader, 2010). The example given in the reader is that the virtue of courage is half way between cowardice and foolhardiness. What about the virtue of honesty then? If it is a mid-point then what are the extremes? Presumably one end of the scale is lying but what about the other end? Could it be saying exactly what you think all the time with no consideration for feeling? In that case it would seem that to have the virtue of honesty you don't always have to tell the truth. Perhaps a comforting thought to those people who were trying to find a way to justify their white lies.

So Virtue Ethics appears to be about balance. A word that I've seen used on a few different blogs (apologies for not remembering who you all are now) and which I really think clarifies things. Ethics to me is about using a reasoned, considered approach to achieve balance between conflicting ideas. Whilst doing this a persons intentions are of more importance that the actual outcome of events.

I think viewing ethics in this way is very useful when approaching a research project. The ethical role of the researcher is to ensure that equal consideration is given to all participants and that any conflicting needs and wishes are balanced. The researcher's intentions should be good and they must make their intentions clear. It is not enough to act ethically, you must also be seen to act ethically. This will instill trust from you participants and give your research credibility.

Survey

Hi everyone. I have created a survey that I would love as many people to do as possible. It is designed for people who trained in some kind of performance (i.e acting/singing/dancing). I would also love any comments you might have on the questions I asked or the way they were phrased.

I used Survey Monkey and it is really simple once you get the hang of it. As a free user you are only allowed to ask ten question which at first annoyed me but which actually meant I had to really think about what I wanted to ask and what would be beneficial to my research.

Here is the link http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/S5LX8HP
Thanks for your time.

Award Title Rationale

This is something I have been thinking a lot about over the last couple of months but I realised recently that I haven't yet written anything down. Hopefully it will clarify my thinking now that I finally am.

My training at Arts Ed London was in Musical Theatre so I think a key element of my awards title has to be Musical Theatre. Joanna mentions a conversation she had with Alan (in a comment on her blog) where he pointed out that the work we are doing now only makes up a third of our degree. Our previous education and work makes up the other two thirds so I think it would be difficult for me to justify not including the words Musical Theatre.

It is important to me that my award title will help progress my career. In the future I would like to move into teaching on a vocational musical theatre course so I want my award title to somehow reflect and aid this.

As I am interested in musical theatre and the way it is taught I am basing my inquiry around the best way to train musical theatre students. I want to investigate what is established, if it works, if there is a better way, and even if there is a consensus. I am excited about my inquiry and think it will lead to benefits not only for me but also for future students and the industry as a whole.

Initially I thought a good title would be BA Hons Professional Practice (Education in Musical Theatre). I then read a comment by Alan (again on Joanna's blog) where he says that in using the word 'education' it perhaps implies that you have 'studied pedagogy and curriculum', which I of course have not. So how do I incorporate Musical Theatre as well as he work I am doing on vocational training, with the aim of looking impressive to future employers from vocational colleges? Perhaps BA Hons Professional Practice (Vocational Training in Musical Theatre)? Or does this perhaps sound like I have just had the training myself rather than being able to train someone else. Perhaps BA ........ (Teaching Vocational Musical Theatre) would be better?

Any thoughts or suggestions you might have would be hugely appreciated. It is amazing how changing even one word can hugely impact a person's understanding of what you are qualified in. I want my award to mean something. To really say something about me and my abilities and achievements so please give me your thoughts. Thanks.

Ethics For Teachers

As I said in my earlier blog on ethics I am only just moving into the area of teaching and as such my knowledge of the profession and the ethics involved are some what limited. I decided to start my investigation into teaching code of ethics by simply using Google. The first site I came across was a teachers' code of ethics as laid out by the Ministry of Education, Employment and the Family. Here is the link;

http://www.education.gov.mt/ministry/doc/code_of_ethics.htm

One of the main things that struck me was the sheer detail of the code. Not only does a teacher have an obligation to his/her students (which is what I imagined) but they also have an obligation to the students parents, the other teachers they are working with, the school they are working for and the community as a whole. There are bound to be so many conflicts of interest when you have obligations to so many different groups. I initially thought that even though you should respect the relationship with the parents and the school your duty must be foremost to your student. I then read the following exert from the Association of American Educators website;

'We strongly affirm parents as the primary moral educators of their children. Nevertheless, we believe all educators are obligated to help foster civic virtues such as integrity, diligence, responsibility, cooperation, loyalty, fidelity, and respect-for the law, for human life, for others, and for self.'

I struck me that within this statement there lies a dilemma. You will have personal beliefs about the way people should behave and live. A personal code of ethics or sense of morality. However, as stated above it is not necessarily your place to morally educate a child, it is the place of the parent. If the parents' beliefs conflicted with your own on certain issues (as long as the actual welfare of the student was not at risk) you would have an ethical responsibility to hold your tongue. In this case you are surely giving more weight to your duty to the parents than to your duty to the student. I know that I would find this very difficult because the things I believe, I really believe. I think this must be the way science teachers feel when they are made to teach evolution and creationism side by side as scientific theories because of the moral beliefs of the parents and the school. If this was me I would feel like I was depriving the child of a true and fair education but it would not be my place to intervene. In protecting one ethical code are you not ignoring another?

I began to think about teaching on a vocational musical theatre course (as this is the direction I am heading in) and wondered what if any were the ethical conflicts involved. The first thing that occurred to me was that the students on a course like this would be over eighteen and as such you would no longer have an obligation to their parents. The decisions the student makes are entirely their own. This significantly reduces the areas of conflict. However, you still have an obligation to the school and the profession as a whole.

I started to think about the discussions that some BAPP students have been having about body image and how quite often people's perceptions of their bodies are strongly influenced by the way they were treated and how they were taught during their training. As a teacher on a vocational course is your objective to make your students the best they can be? To give them the best possible opportunity of getting as much work as they can? Is it to supply the industry with fiercely trained professionals who can strengthen and progress what is already in place? Is it also to improve the reputation of the college by producing graduating students of an incredibly high standard? If this is the case then you have to be hard on your students to make them the best. Who cares if you give them an eating disorder? In fact it would be unethical of you not to.

So clearly what I just wrote is ridiculous. There must be more to it. Perhaps it is less about making your students the best and more about making them the best they can be. It is about considering their individual needs not only as performers but also as people. I guess the ethics are really in place to keep a balance. You are obliged to train your students hard and make them good (you would be failing them otherwise) but you are also responsible for maintaining their emotional well being. In the long run this will also benefit the college and the industry because the graduating students will be well rounded individuals who have the chance of achieving longevity in an extremely challenging profession. This thought makes me come back to the idea that really the most important element is the student. As a teacher if you focus on their needs then ultimately there is advantage for everyone.

Ethics For Performers

Since my previous blog on ethics, where I wrote down what I thought would be good codes of practice for my two professions (Musical Theatre Performer and Teacher), I have been investigating the established ethical framework for these fields and seeing how they compare with my initial thoughts.

This blog concentrates on the established ethics in place for performers. The first thing I came across was an article on the LA Stage Times website. After the death of actress Kathleen Freeman a 1945 code of ethics for theatre workers was found amongst her possessions. Here is the full article and it is an interesting read;

http://www.lastagetimes.com/2009/08/a-1945-code-of-ethics-for-theatre-workers-surfaces/

One of the main things that struck me is that everything on the code of practice is still completely relevant today. It all still applies and is common practice in the theatre industry. The other thing it highlighted for me was the difference between professional and organizational ethics. I have recently read some blogs where people felt like they couldn't write codes of ethics as performers because they hadn't worked yet so they decided to write them from the perspective of a student within the organizational environment of dance or drama school. This is a totally valid point but in looking at the 1945 code of ethics I realised that the majority of the list contained rules that weren't for any specific environment. In others words they apply to the profession as a whole rather than any particular organization.

I think this is a key point when discussing the ethics of a performer because unless you end up in Eastenders for thirty years it is very unlikely that you will frequent the same work place, or even the same type of workplace for long. The environment that a performer works in is constantly changing. You could be working in a theatre, an arts centre or a TV studio. You could be in one place or on tour. It could even be the case that one minute you are working for a big producer and the next you are producing something yourself. I think because of this performers have developed a universal code of practice that applies to all situations. This means that even though people are forever changing their work environment there is still a strong sense of cohesion across the industry.

The majority of things that are on the list I learnt when I was at college and the things I didn't I had to learn pretty quickly in the profession. I have realised how important it is to give as much of this information to students before they graduate. Not only for their sake but for the continuing strength of the industry.

I thought I would also check the Equity website to see if they list any ethical considerations or codes of practice. I couldn't find anything listed but it did start to make me consider the role of equity within the performing industry. Within society we have laws that safe guard the fair and just treatment of people. Equity functions within the theatre in much the same way as the government functions within society. It creates and campaigns for rules to be set in place that safe guard the treatment of people in the industry. For example, ensuring that people are paid a fair wage, get adequate breaks and appropriate sick pay.

Another thing that Equity has been instrumental in creating is a code of practice for foreign performers working in this country. I found this piece of legislation from the Home Office that lays out what the acceptable use of foreign performers in British theatre is. This legislation is designed to fairly protect British jobs for British performers. It does however give the opportunity for exchanges of performers between countries. It made me realise that as a performer I have worked abroad a lot and as such it has always been part of my ethical responsibility to make sure I have a legal right to work in that country.

Continuing my search for codes of practice in performance I began to come across lots of information regarding the safe guarding of children. Many jobs require children and therefore there has to be rules in place to protect them. As an adult performer it is not usually your responsibility to look after these children but you should be aware of what is considered appropriate behaviour while they are around. When I was working on 'Chitty' there were twenty children in the cast. We were told when we first started the job that we should make sure we were never alone with them. We had to make sure we used appropriate language in their presence and were always fully clothed (something which seems obvious but when you pelting across backstage in a quick change you would sometimes forget). There were also rules in place about which toilets you could use because the adults and kids were not allowed to share. It is interesting as I am talking about these rules in a performance environment but they would also apply in a teaching environment.

My next blog will investigate the established ethics that are in place for teachers and I am sure as already seen there will be some overlap.