GCSE EXAMINERS' REPORTS

Transcription

1 GCSE EXAMINERS' REPORTS DRAMA SUMMER 2015

2 Grade boundary information for this subject is available on the WJEC public website at: Online results analysis WJEC provides information to examination centres via the WJEC secure website. This is restricted to centre staff only. Access is granted to centre staff by the Examinations Officer at the centre. Annual Statistical Report The annual Statistical Report (issued in the second half of the Autumn Term) gives overall outcomes of all examinations administered by WJEC. Unit Page Unit 1 - Devised Practical Performance 1 Unit 2 - Performance from a Text 4 Unit 3 - Written Examination 6

3 DRAMA General Certificate of Secondary Education Summer 2015 UNIT 1: DEVISED PRACTICAL PERFORMANCE Principal Examiner: Beverley Roblin and Laurel Davies Standards once again varied from centre to centre and some of the issues that have been raised in the past still remain pertinent for the 2015 exam. The very best work showed an excellent understanding of the methods of the chosen practitioner/genre, which were chosen to enhance the work and were carefully woven into the piece rather than simply being added on. However, a recurring problem was candidates failing to grasp the style of their chosen practitioner, particularly when candidates based their work on the theories of Brecht. In these cases, the work was frequently naturalistic and only occasionally used direct address to the audience and/or a few projections/placards. Adding a few of the practitioner s methods is not sufficient to award top marks. Work that is deemed to be worthy of marks in the range, must have sophisticated individual understanding and interpretation and development and realisation of ideas. We would urge centres, wherever possible, to take candidates to view professional productions in the chosen style to help them understand how the methods work in performance. Work that was awarded marks in the top mark range continued to interpret the theme in an exciting and imaginative way. Many candidates showed the ability to 'think outside the box' with their ideas whilst still having a sound understanding of how the theme linked with the original stimuli. The very best work demonstrated a clear link between the chosen style and the candidates use of performance skills. To award marks in the range the voice and movement must reflect the style but also must be used sensitively and in a disciplined manner. Unit 1 moderators commented that some candidates were placed in this bracket without demonstrating the necessary skills. Candidates must be able to access both movement and vocal skills in this category. Even if the chosen style is Physical Theatre or Artaud, we would expect appropriate dialogue as opposed to simply movement, with the occasional word or scream thrown in for good measure. Moderators were particularly impressed with the standard of group work produced by a large percentage of the candidates. The work had been well-rehearsed, well-structured and listening and interaction was mature and disciplined. The very best examples showed a high level of collaboration with all group members having an excellent grasp of the chosen style. Role and style were sustained for the specified time and all candidates within the group were given sufficient opportunity to develop their role and show their performance skills. Unit 1 moderators were pleased to see the emergence of some interesting work on musical theatre, where centres had not only written the script but also the songs. Pieces based on the style of Knee High also produced some interesting and engaging work and clearly demonstrated how practical workshops can have a massive influence on candidates' practical work. However, similarly, there was also mature and sophisticated work based on more traditional practitioners such as Boal. These pieces showed highly developed understanding of key methods. 1

4 Whilst we encourage centres to experiment with a variety of practitioners, some centres are still using genres which are not appropriate e.g. detective/horror, which are more akin to film genre rather than theatrical style. It is imperative that if you are unsure as to whether a particular style is suitable you must contact the WJEC to check appropriateness. Moderators also commented that many centres used space effectively and as another way to explore and show a depth of understanding of their chosen practitioner. Some of the most interesting work was performed in a relatively small space which allowed candidates to explore proxemics and demonstrate depth of understanding regarding spatial awareness. We would remind centres that the timings required per candidate are stated in the specification and we would urge centres to follow these. Candidates should not be awarded marks in the categories if there is a significant shortfall in the performance time. Similarly we would also like to remind centres that candidates should not go significantly over the allocated time. All candidates within the group should be given sufficient opportunity to show a developed role and display their performance skills. We are aware that technical facilities vary enormously from centre to centre. Some of the very best work used sophisticated lighting, music, etc. to great effect whilst other centres produced brilliant work using simple but highly imaginative effects. The majority of centres had obviously encouraged candidates to use music, lighting, costume and props to enhance the performances and create pieces of theatre. The choice and use of technical effects should reflect the chosen style. For example, a minority of candidates who chose to explore the methods of Stanislavski mimed using phones, cups, etc. Whilst we would not expect detailed naturalistic sets, we would expect simple props to be used effectively. There was some impressive work undertaken by technical candidates. With the very best work it was apparent that the technical candidate worked closely with the acting candidates in the group. It is also clear that they made a significant contribution to the content of the piece and not simply worked in isolation on their chosen technical skill. Moderators commented on how some pieces showed originality and this was enhanced by an in-depth knowledge of the chosen skill. Technical candidates should be filmed undertaking the viva. The viva can take the form of a PowerPoint given by the candidate or a Q&A undertaken by the teacher. It would be helpful to the moderator if the candidates work booklets and models etc. could be filmed to give the moderator a 'feel' for the content. However, if the technical candidate is chosen in the moderated sample please could you send any additional material e.g. working logs etc. Please remember that no more than two technical candidates offering different technical skills can be used in a group. Further guidance on this can be found on page 16 of the specification continues to see a marked improvement in the quality of the DVDs and moderators reported far fewer problems in this area. However, there were a minority of centres that submitted DVDs that didn t play or had no/ poor sound quality. Some centres used very dark, shadowy lighting to create a specific atmosphere. Whilst we applaud the artistry behind this, we would remind centres that the moderators must be able to view all candidates clearly. WJEC has issued clear guidelines regarding the filming of the examination and we would urge all centres to familiarise themselves with these. There were some problems regarding the submitted paperwork. All the required documentation is available on the website. Please contact WJEC if you need further clarification. The stimuli remain the same for Centres are reminded that the content of final pieces must be deemed appropriate for GCSE candidates. 2

5 Task Two; Devised Performance Report. Centres are reminded that task two has to be completed under high control. Candidates are given 5 hours to complete the work. Candidates may carry out research and initial preparation for their report outside of the classroom. The report should be written under formal supervision and should take between four to five hours to complete. This can be taken either in one session, or over a series of lessons. During teaching and learning time, teachers may prepare candidates on how to construct a report, but during the taking of the task, teachers should only display the general structure as outlined above. Teachers may remind candidates of the elements they must include in the report but they must not write or re-draft candidates work for them. As in previous years, moderators felt this area was more rigorously assessed than the practical element. The very best work showed the ability to analyse and evaluate each of the key points within the 3 specified areas; rationale, development and evaluation of performance. However, some candidates are still writing the report as continuous prose. Examples from their practical work were referenced throughout in order to highlight key points. The work clearly detailed the development of the performance piece from its initial conception (rationale) to the individual's contribution and their development as a performer/technician. Rationale Many candidates are still failing to discuss how the stimulus has influenced their initial ideas for the performance piece. Some candidates are still simply giving descriptive accounts of their chosen practitioner/style as opposed to analysing how the methods would help to shape the piece. Candidates that achieved high marks in this section were able to analyse, evaluate and establish how the work they had viewed had contributed to their own pieces. Evaluation of candidate's own contribution was often sketchy and lacking detail. Development Once again a significant percentage of candidates over concentrated on the technical effects as opposed to discussing the development of the piece in rehearsal and the development of their own individual role. Many failed to analyse in detail whilst not giving specific examples of key moments in the rehearsal process. Hot seating was frequently the only method discussed under role development. The very best work gave a clear picture of how the piece/individual developed throughout the rehearsal process and there were clear and specific references and links to the chosen style/practitioner. Evaluation of performance Candidates that were awarded marks in the top range showed the ability to analyse and evaluate each area of the specified assessment criteria as opposed to describing parts of it. Once again work was detailed, citing specific examples in order to illustrate a point. They clearly understood why certain choices were made regarding technical effects and were able to make clear links with their chosen style/practitioner. The chosen stimulus was revisited and its effectiveness in the final performance evaluated. 3

6 DRAMA General Certificate of Secondary Education Summer 2015 UNIT 2: PERFORMANCE FROM A TEXT Principal Examiner: Beverley Roblin and Laurel Davies Once again this year, the team were privileged to view some work of outstanding quality, with candidates sustaining 25 minute pieces displaying acting skills of the highest calibre. Some witnessed energetic and thought provoking pieces, whilst other examiners reported on sensitive and subtle interpretations, all of which were more than worthy of the full marks awarded. These performances showed maturity, insight and sophistication and held the audiences attention throughout. Again we congratulate these young people for their outstanding preparation and talent. Equally, albeit fewer in number, examiners reported on lighting, sound and costume design candidates who literally wowed them with their understanding and creative vision in their chosen technical area. The process of choosing a suitable piece of theatre for specific groups of candidates is the key to the success of this unit. Examiners viewed a wide range of genres and performance styles which at best ensured that candidates were able to reach their full potential. Generally, examiners reported favourably on choice of texts which ensured that each student was able to use acting skills within their ability and thus able to achieve marks in all areas of assessment. Centres are reminded that they are NOT permitted to perform extracts from the play chosen for Unit 3 study. The main problems with choice of texts included: extracts that are too short (insufficient opportunity to develop characterisation) an imbalance of opportunity for all candidates plays that are too challenging for the candidates film scripts, which were episodic and disjointed insufficient material for one character e.g. Be My Baby doubling up Matron and Delores in order to meet the time requirements extracts that are too long (candidates failing to sustain performance). As noted in last year s Principal Examiners Report, some centres still fail to follow the good practice guidelines shared at each CPD course. Briefly, these are: o The basic requirement of learning lines thoroughly, avoiding the heavy reliance on prompts which affects candidates ability to sustain the performance o rehearsing with props before the examination o rehearsing in costume particularly period costume which changes the dynamics of a character and requires a lot of preparation and physical adaptation o rehearsing in the examination space prior to the day of the exam. Despite this, the majority of centres are providing candidates with positive experiences in a supportive environment, allowing them to enjoy their final performance of the GCSE Drama course. 4

7 Centres which gave the examination day a high profile, with a live audience and technical support, certainly ensured that their students had the best opportunity and examiners felt that centres that supported actors with lighting, sound and costume saw more effective performances. WJEC requires that centres prepare a written programme for the visit stating: play to be performed, candidates names and numbers and characters played / technical option. Most centres provided this and were well organized from an administrative aspect there is a substantial amount of paperwork to prepare and we thank you for your care and precision. Every centre made a DVD copy of the examination and most submitted the work to the WJEC. This is certainly a valuable process for you and for us, as Principal Examiners, to monitor and gain an overview of standards and best practice. As noted last year, this performance forms the basis of Section B in the written examination paper (Unit 3). It is good practise to view the DVD of the performance and encourage the students to evaluate the various strengths and weaknesses of their work in preparation for the exam. Candidates find it difficult to be objective about their own performance and reviewing the work can certainly support their efforts. On behalf of the practical examination team we thank you for you warm welcome and professionalism during the practical exams. 5

8 DRAMA General Certificate of Secondary Education Summer 2015 UNIT 3: WRITTEN EXAMINATION Principal Examiner: Beverley Roblin and Laurel Davies 2015 saw the introduction of the new set texts. On the whole, the answers were equally good across the range of texts. Question (i) As stated in the specification, candidates can be asked questions on a number of areas and this year we focused on voice as opposed to movement. On the whole candidates dealt well with the focus and were able to give appropriate suggestion for tone and tempo in the lines for the selected character. However some candidates did not give a separate reason for tone and tempo therefore could not be awarded the maximum 4 marks. Question (ii) Once again this question was generally well answered however the same issues as in previous years, these being: candidates not stating a specific and relevant period candidates only stating one colour or garment candidates not stating both hair and make-up make-up suggestions are vague or not appropriate e.g. he wouldn t wear make-up because he s a man reasons given are repetitive and vague. In addition to this, the costume question in Face proved problematic at times as candidates of all abilities confused the Martins. Question (iii) The best answers showed an excellent grasp of character motivation and the subtleties of relationships between characters. Each area of the specified criteria was discussed with detailed reference to the selected scene. However, there were a number of weaknesses with candidates who failed to score highly. These included: describing character motivation, without dealing with performance elements a general character description from the whole play, with little or no reference to the specified scene candidates not tracking the character through the whole section candidates not giving equal attention to all the skills stated in the question candidates discussing the wrong character. 6

9 Question (iv-a) Although the standard of diagrams had improved, some candidates still fail to cover the four areas specified in the question. Other weaknesses included: incorrect name of stage for diagram incomplete diagrams e.g. no back wall entrances and exits are vague and not relevant to specified stage type audience in incorrect position not recognised stage type e.g. three pronged horseshoe Question (vi b) The main reason why candidates fail to score highly on this question is because they discuss technical elements for the whole play as opposed to focusing solely on the specified scene. The best responses showed excellent grasp of atmosphere and colour and the subtleties presented in the selected scene. These candidates had a clear and creative vision which followed a logical development from choice of style and stage to set design, use of colour, lighting and sound. They also made detailed and relevant reference to highlight choices made, which linked clearly to the atmosphere and requirements of the scene. Weaknesses included: not stating chosen style no reasons given for choice of stage over emphasis on one element e.g. lighting little or no reference to the specified scene repeating information previously given e.g. costume description for characters superficial description of set content not developed in any length a generic answer which had been learned before the exam but not adapted to the set scene. Confusions did prove problematic for candidates in question (iv-b). There tended to be a general description of the set for the whole of Mother Figure, with little or no reference to the specified scene. Whilst we accept that there is no scenic change in each of the plays, candidates must look for ways in which to anchor their answers within the scene e.g. use of props, lighting with close reference to changes in atmosphere. Section B Generally this question was the weakest element of the paper. The very best candidates showed an excellent understanding of the performance / technical elements with mature evaluative skills. They explained their strengths and areas for development and gave specific references to highlight key points. These responses were well structured dealt with the whole performance as opposed to touching on one or two moments. Weaknesses included: Not stating name of play and character/role with the performance. Describing the rehearsal process with little or no reference to the performance Giving detailed character analysis with no reference to the acting skills Acting candidates over-emphasising technical elements as opposed to analysing and evaluating their own performance Analysing everyone in the group rather than focusing on their OWN performance Describing the performance as opposed to analysing and evaluating General and vague statements with little reference to chosen scene. GCSE Drama Report Summer 2015/ED 7

10 WJEC 245 Western Avenue Cardiff CF5 2YX Tel No Fax website: