2:3 Analysing and evaluating a theatre production

KEY KNOWLEDGE

• the nature of theatre production analysis and evaluation

• how application of acting, direction and design enables an audience to construct meaning from a performance

• the ways in which theatre styles are interpreted by work in selected production roles

• how the application of acting, direction and design can be informed by the contexts of the script

• approaches to using elements of theatre composition evident in a theatre production

• approaches to using technologies in theatre production

• theatre terminology and expressions.

KEY SKILLS

• analyse and evaluate a theatre production

• analyse the application of acting, direction and design in a theatre production

• analyse ways in which acting, direction and design are used to interpret theatre styles evident in a production

• analyse connections between contexts of the script and the use of acting, direction and design

• evaluate the ways in which acting, direction and design enables an audience to construct meaning

• analyse the use of elements of theatre composition evident in theatre production

• analyse the use of technologies in theatre production

• use theatre terminology and expressions appropriately.

ASSESSMENT TASK

Written report completed in class time under exam conditions.

Students will have 15 minutes of reading time and 1 hour of writing time. Students will be permitted to bring handwritten notes into the exam, in the format of the provided booklet on 'Emil and the Detectives' that is completed during class activities prior to the assessment.

The report will be written in response to provided guiding questions (see below) and assessed according to the rubric below.

Other good terminology for evaluative writing

Higher-scoring evaluations understand that theatre impacts audiences in a variety of ways: emotionally, intellectually, empathetically, aesthetically, rhythmically, etc.

These evaluations will have a more sophisticated grasp of evaluative language.

You are urged to build a word bank of evaluative terminology. For example, rather than simply being ‘effective’, consider whether or not an aspect of the performance was:

• subtle – as opposed to broad or overstated

• fluent – as opposed to jarring or disjointed.

• engaging – as opposed to distancing or distracting.

• well-controlled – as opposed to careless or underworked.

• well-paced – as opposed to ponderous or poorly timed.

• lyrical – as opposed to prosaic or lacklustre

• evocative – as opposed to gratuitous or superfluous.

• high-end – as opposed to poorly rendered or under-developed.

• believable – as opposed to presentational or laboured

• well-researched – as opposed to anachronistic or decontextualised.

• dynamic – as opposed to tedious

GUIDING QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN REPORT

You can use these as practice questions as you prepare for the SAC.

Analyse and evaluate the ways in which the application of acting skills was influenced by the intended theatre styles of the production.

How did the use of production areas contribute to how the audience constructed meaning from the play?

What were the most important or effective creative choices (and in which production roles) in the construction of meaning for the audience?

How did the use of elements of theatre composition contribute to that meaning-making?

What do you notice about the similarities of the contexts of the script/source material and the performance?

Were the acting techniques (application of acting skills) based on naturalism/realism or other modern approaches?

Do you recognise the influence of any particular theatre practitioners or styles of the modern era?

Did the use of theatre technologies contribute to meaning-making for the audience? If so, how effectively?

How were the themes of the original script/source apparent in the interpretative choices of the production team?