In order to achieve candidacy in educational theatre, students need to complete four projects: Educational Theatre Portfolio, Research Framework, Arts Dialogue, Performance Review. These projects aim to more holistic determination of students’ successful entry to candidacy and are more focused on the students’ research as it fits within an “educational theatre” model. The candidacy exam connects students to their professional and scholarly networks, and, in this respect, aims to develop the next generation of leaders in the field. Also, the exam ensures that students have achieved basic competence in the educational theatre discipline. Please review the New York State Learning Standards for the Arts and the New York City Department of Education Blueprint for Teaching and Learning in Theatre, Grades Pre-K – 12.
Please note that the Research Framework and Arts Dialogue sections must be included in the Educational Theatre portfolio. This inclusion needs to be clearly labeled.
Students must have identified a Mentor, and Student Support Group at the time of preparing for candidacy, and they need to have been in regular communication with both before applying for candidacy.
A mentor is someone students identify as agreeing to help shepherd them through the candidacy process, and who may then go on to be the student’s principal point person (dissertation chair) as the student develops and completes an dissertation. Mentors have different expectations so please ensure you have selected one who fits your work ethic. For instance, some mentors require at least a two-week lead time to review materials, maybe longer, which can impact on your timeline to completion. Other mentors can have a quicker turnaround.
A student support group is created by the candidate and consists of no more than three or four trusted critical friends who will provide thorough and regular feedback on the students’ work before it is shared with the mentor. These friends could be other doctoral students or even outside reviewers who you feel can contribute to the quality of your study. We try to avoid having mentors read first drafts and being copy editors. Many stylistic and content issues can be easily picked up by the student support group in advance of faculty input. In qualitative research, it is expected that you will go through a process of peer debriefing, so the sooner you have a student support group the better.
Students file for candidacy at the beginning of the semester and submit their digital portfolio either in PDF format or as a secure website (such as NYU’s Google Sites platform) to the mpap-doctoral-studies@nyu.edu according to the deadlines posted in the MPAP Doctoral Handbook: Deadlines and Dates for MPAP Candidacy. Additionally, a Candidacy application form signed by your faculty advisor must be included in the submission and sent separately to the Steinhardt Office of Doctoral Studies, steinhardt.doctoral.studies@nyu.edu.
A digital portfolio of students' work that demonstrates competence around the artistic processes outlined in the New York State Learning Standards for the Arts:
· Creating – Conceiving and developing new artistic ideas and work
· Performing – Realizing artistic ideas and work through interpretation and presentation
· Responding – Understanding and evaluating how the arts convey meaning
· Connecting – Relating artistic ideas and work with personal meaning and external context
And:
· Knowledge of how to apply theatreform to the students’ chosen culminating project
· Experience in Arts Based Research (ABR) and Practice-Led Inquiry
Portfolio might include combination of best papers, performance reviews, teaching citations, descriptions of workshops led, creative products. If you feel weak in a particular area you should explain where the gaps exist in your knowledge base and how you plan to improve your competency, perhaps by taking further coursework. Faculty advises that you operate as a reflective practitioner, identifying your strengths and those areas which you need to build. Please note, the portfolio will also include tasks 2 and 3 below. For the Research Framework task, a paper that analyzes reviewers’ comments for an article submitted for publication must be included, or an analysis regarding the selected publication, or a detailed discussion about a creative product where an applied theatre project, or similar, is implemented (see Research Framework below for further information). For the Arts Dialogue task, a paper reflecting on the student’s written and oral presentation must be included (see Arts Dialogue below for further information).
The portfolio must be introduced by a detailed statement that clearly articulates how it meets the criteria. In the detailed statement (at least 10 pages) students address how their portfolio reveals competency in the five criteria above. Headings are suggested and students refer to particular sections of the portfolio which substantiate the claims which are being made. An annotated appendix is needed which articulates the content of the portfolio. A Table of Contents needs to be included. A CV, reference and resource/reading list must be provided in the portfolio.
Please do not pad the portfolio with an abundance of material. We recommend a “less is more” approach where you selectively choose materials which most aptly demonstrate how you are demonstrating competency. We don’t need 10 flyers which all show that you have acted or directed. Select and analyze pertinent artifacts.
· Demonstrates competence across the six bullets listed above
· The statement clearly articulates how the student has achieved competency
· The portfolio is well referenced and there is an annotated appendix
· Narrative that addresses (1) how you are meeting competency in the standards, (2) the ways students operate as reflective practitioners, and (3) the skill level in Arts Based Research and practice-led inquiry.
· Artifacts that eloquently and succinctly reveal student has met competency
· An annotated bibliography
· An annotated appendix describing the items in the portfolio
· Table of Contents
· CV
· Have you submitted the portfolio on line and at a secure site?
An article submitted for publication to a periodical in the field, preferably a peer reviewed journal, which has reviewers' comments attached. A clear research framework or design informed by appropriate literature needs to be included. Ideally, this article would be published. Students need to analyze the reviewers’ comments and how they might incorporate them in their article. Possible publication outlets include:
Youth Theatre Journal (AATE)
ElevAATE (AATE)
RiDE: Research in Drama Education
Drama Research (National Drama, UK)
The Drama Magazine (National Drama)
The Teaching Artist Journal
ArtsPraxis
Applied Theatre Research
International Journal of Education and the Arts
Alternatively, a paper that the student feels is ready to be submitted to a particular publication with a statement as to why they have selected that publication. A sustained argument as to how their paper merits publication needs to be made, as well as a discussion on the areas in students’ ability that might require further work.
An alternate creative product could be considered where the students devise and implement an applied theatre project, or similar, with appropriate peer review and evaluation. Peer review would include faculty mentors and leaders in the discipline. For instance, one doctoral student wrote an ethnodrama dealing with discrimination. It was presented in an educational theatre class, videotaped, and reviewers were invited to attend and critique the presentation. The audience too provided invaluable feedback and completed questionnaires. The student also sent the play to leading scholars in applied theatre and ethnodrama, and solicited written feedback. Armed with comments from faculty, other reviewers, and a student audience, the candidate wrote a written analysis of the research framework. This analysis, the play script, and the video were included in the portfolio and addressed the criteria below.
· The article, paper or creative product constitutes “research” in the field
· The research framework or design is clear and effectively argued
· Reviewers’ comments are attached with the student’s analysis
· An article, paper, or creative product prepared for peer review and/or publication
· Research framework or design is supported by literature and clearly articulated
· Reviewers comments attached
· Student analyzes the reviewers comments and demonstrates how the comments are being included in the final article, paper, or creative product
A written and oral presentation on the students' research to a selected scholarly community. This presentation can be presented at an appropriate professional meeting (e.g, conferences such as the American Alliance for Theatre and Education, International Drama in Education Research Institute, Research in Drama Education Conference, the NYU Forum series) or other professional setting. Program in Educational Theatre faculty needs to be present and/or represented at this presentation, wherever possible. The candidate consults with the support group and mentor on where and when the Arts Dialogue takes place. We recommend the dialogue occurs in a non-NYU setting where candidates can clearly demonstrate that they are connecting to their professional and wider scholarly networks outside NYU, though guest lectures in courses for undergraduate or master's students can be appropriate as well.
This presentation must be accompanied by an appropriate written paper which can be given to participants, and which can be read by participants after the “dialogue”. Ideally, the formal presentation setting will provide opportunities for feedback, dialogue or interaction from the audience or participants. Such opportunities should be discussed in the final paper included in the portfolio. Paper must be appropriately referenced with an extensive bibliography which reveals the literature that informs the presentation
Students must write up the Arts Dialogue and include it in their portfolio. The paper should address what the presentation was, where it took place, who attended, and how it meets the criteria below. If students feel their Arts Dialogue was inadequate in some way they should clearly reflect on how it could be improved.
· Student can discuss how the arts dialogue constitutes scholarly work at an appropriate professional meeting.
· Students include the paper presented and includes the feedback that was given
· The dialogue demonstrates leadership (or evolving leadership) in the field
· A bibliography which shows how the research sits within the field’s literature
· Complete a significant project that feeds into the student’s proposed dissertation topic
· Prepare and include a written reflection paper for presentation at an appropriate professional meeting
· Review paper and presentation with the student support group at least two weeks prior to the formal presentation and analyze written feedback
· Present paper at an appropriate professional meeting in a dialogic format which allows input, feedback, and/or discussion from/with colleagues in the field; must be attended by a member of the Educational Theatre faculty or their representative
· Write a summative reflection of the Arts Dialogue for inclusion in the portfolio addressing the above criteria that incorporates feedback and discusses next steps
After completion of the three tasks above, faculty in the Program in Educational Theatre meet with the candidate and examine how the student has met candidacy and whether further work is required. In instances where a deferred pass with conditions is given, students will be advised what specific tasks need to be completed in order to achieve candidacy.
· Student has demonstrated satisfactory performance in the portfolio, research framework, and arts dialogue
· Student recognizes areas of strength in performance as well as areas that require further work
· Student is able to complete other assignments if required