|
|
|
|
||
|
Articles
|
||
|
Articles
|
The QCA Drama GuidelinesDateline: 19th February, 2006Our story about the new guidelines for drama teaching produced by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority has been widely reported in the national and local press, to the extent that I was contacted by a local paper and asked for my comments, in my capacity as a former drama teacher rather than as editor of the BTG. I read the full report on the inquiry and I was, to say the least, horrified by the bullying and sexual abuse inflicted on his students by the teacher in question. I was also horrified by the reaction of both the senior management of the school and the local education authority who both seemed more concerned with sweeping the matter under the nearest carpet than with protecting the students in their charge. Some of the allegations referred to sexual acts inflicted on the students (sixth formers mainly, as far as I could gather) but others were about things which had happened in actual lessons, the least of which was the use of totally inappropriate material of an overtly sexual nature. Students were made - as part of lessons - to handle each other's genitals, to simulate sex acts and even to strip naked. It is understandable, therefore, that the author of the report should make a recommendation that the QCA should draw up guidelines for drama teachers as to what is and what is not appropriate in a drama lesso or a school production. It is understandable, too, that the QCA should reiterate what every drama teacher (indeed, every teacher) knows: that there should never be nudity or intimate contact in drama lessons or school productions. Understandable, too, are the strictures about inappropriate language and the recommendation that teachers should cut and/or adapt texts so that they are appropriate for their students.. Indeed all but a very tiny minority of drama teachers (and that tiny minority are the paedophiles who have somehow slipped through the net, and I would estimate that they are less than a fraction of 1% of the total number of teachers) follow these guidelines already, not because they are guidelines but because they are just normal common sense. In spite of their own beliefs and the somewhat silly statements often made by those who should know better, children are not small-sized adults: they are immature emotionally, psychologically and intellectually, and our job as teachers and adults in general is to encourage them to grow into maturity at their own pace. Teachers recognise this, although regretfully some parents don't and too many products aimed at teenagers certainly don't - have you looked at some of the content of some teenage girls' magazines? So the majority of the QCA recommendations have been the normal practice of teachers for more than forty years that I know of (twelve years of my own schooldays and over thirty years as a teacher). But - and this is a "but" which has become all too common in the education world - the QCA goes beyond this and, in its efforts to protect children from every possible danger, whether likely or unlikely, has fallen into the trap of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Romeo and Juliet must not kiss. What nonsense! Yes, some children and young people might find it difficult to kiss on stage, but that's because of self-consciousness. If Mary Smith and Joe Bloggs are in the play and flatly refuse to kiss, that's fine: someone else should play Romeo and Juliet. It's no different, really, from the kid who says, "I'm not going to sing." If (s)he doesn't want to sing, then they can't play a part where singing in required. Do we ban the production of musicals in schools because some don't want to sing? Or ban football teams because some don't want to play? Of course we don't: we just accept that those who don't want to sing don't appear in a musical and those who don't want to play foorball don't get picked for the team. Of course we have an absolute duty to protect children from sexual abuse and there are certain things we must prohibit absolutely (and it does no harm for the QCA or any other body to remind us of what they are occasionally), but we must not go too far or children will never mature. There is no better way of getting children to appreciate Shakespeare than for them to perform it, and Romeo and Juliet is one of the most accessible plays for kids, reflecting as it does many of the things that most concern them in their own lives. To replace, as the draft guidelines suggest, those kisses with a peck on the cheek or an embrace, is to take away the meaning not just of the scene but of the whole situation and therefore the whole play. You don't force them to kiss: you cast your characters from those who are willing to do so. Let's be sensible. Protection? definitely: wrapping in cotton wool? definitely not!
|
|
|
|