UNIVERSITY of CALGARY Demystifying the Dramatic Degree

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

Demystifying the Dramatic Degree: A Study of Post Secondary Theatre

Education in Canada

Christine Alison Johns

A THESIS

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

GRADUATE DIVISION OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

CALGARY, ALBERTA

January, 2008

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

ISBN: 978-0-494-38216-5

Abstract

This dissertation explores the current state of undergraduate theatre

education in Canadian universities through an examination of the Bachelor of

Fine Arts (BFA) degree. This study focuses on identifying the curricular variations within BFA (Theatre) degree programs across the country and attempts to understand how these variations are understood and if and how these differences affect the expectations, satisfaction, and employability of recent program graduates.

In attempting to demystify the BFA (Theatre) degree, this study reveals the complex environment of university theatre programs in Canada which includes both the BA and BFA degree. The literature defines a BA (Theatre) degree as an academic liberal arts style degree that primarily emphasises

advanced communication and research skills while providing some practical

components. A BFA (Theatre) degree is defined as a professional conservatory‐

style intensive training program that emphasises hands‐on practical work while

providing some academic components. Over the last 40 years however, an

exponential growth of theatre programs in Canada has created a blurring of this

BA (academic) and BFA (professional) line.

This study begins with a historical examination of theatre education and

specifically the development of the BFA (Theatre) degree in Canada and connects

this development to changes in the Canadian theatre scene. The second stage of

the study maps out the current BFA (Theatre) degree programs offered in

Canada including program overviews, curriculum and courses offered. Based on

this data, universities are grouped as offering either conservatory‐style or liberal

arts‐style BFA (Theatre) programs. The final stage of the study examines the

students’ experience in the BFA (Theatre) programs and provides a snapshot of

the expectations, satisfaction and employability of graduates from both

conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style theatre programs. The final chapter

provides a summary of the findings of the study and makes recommendations for further study and inquiry.

The results of this study provide a comprehensive overview to the current

BFA (Theatre) degree in Canada. The findings provide clarity to the program

options available to theatre students and produce an updated understanding of

what constitutes a Canadian BFA (Theatre) degree.

iii

Acknowledgements

It is my pleasure to thank the many people who made this dissertation possible.

It is difficult to overstate my gratitude to my Ph.D. supervisor, Dr. B. Lynn Bosetti. Her willingness to openly share her wisdom, experience and advice has been invaluable and her passion and enthusiasm has served as a constant inspiration. It was also with her encouragement and blessing that I was able to explore interests and activities that have set the stage for my future career.

I would also like to thank the other members of my supervisory committee, Dr. Ann Calvert and Dr. Anthony Marini; I have learned so much from your knowledge and expertise. Thank you for always managing to find time to answer those questions or let me talk through a problem and for all of the support over the past four years. And thank you to my examining committee for pushing me to delve even deeper into the material.

Thank you to the many staff and administrators in GDER and at the University of Calgary for the opportunities that you have provided me with. I can not imagine a better place to have undertaken this degree.

Thank you to both the past and present staff and executive members of the GSA, whom I have had the honour of working with. I have learned some of the most important lessons from you which I will carry with me always.

A thank you to the Kelly’s, and especially to Maxine and Tony who have always been there to provide advice and offer that gentle push when I needed it most.

To my family, my grandparents Clarence and Elsie, my parents Brian and Dianne, my sister Shannon and my brother David – you have always been my rock. You have been there from day one and I could not have accomplished any of this without your love, support, encouragement and advice. All of you inspire me to push harder, dig deeper and be stronger than I ever thought possible.

And finally to my husband DJ – I simply could not have done this degree without you by my side. You have provided endless guidance and encouragement, but also provided a listening ear on so many occasions. Thank you for your patience, your unconditional love and for helping me put everything into perspective. Love.

Dedication

This dissertation is dedicated to my husband DJ who I met during my BFA degree and who has shared my passion for this topic and seen the importance of this study from day one.

Table of Contents

Title Page ...... i Abstract ...... ii Acknowledgements ...... iv Dedication ...... v Table of Contents ...... vi Table of Figures ...... viii

Chapter One: Introduction 1.1 Preamble ...... 1 1.2 The Problem ...... 6 1.3 The Research Questions ...... 11

Chapter Two: Review of Related Literature 2.1 Liberal Arts and Higher Education ...... 13 2.2 Theatre and Liberal Arts in Higher Education ...... 17 2.3 The Liberal Art Versus Conservatory Theatre in Higher Education ...... 19 2.4 Theatre in Canadian Institutes of Higher Education ...... 21

Chapter Three: Methodology 3.1 Rationale for Methodology ...... 26 3.2 Research Design ...... 28 3.3 Survey ...... 31 3.4 Participants ...... 33 3.5 Data Collection and Analysis ...... 34 3.6 Limitations and Delimitations ...... 37 3.7 Ethical Considerations...... 40 3.8 Overview of the Study ...... 42

Chapter Four: Historical Context 4.1 An Exploration of 20th Century Post Secondary Theatre in Canada ...... 44

Chapter Five: Current BFA (Theatre) Programs in Canada 5.1 Introduction to BFA (Theatre) Program Profiles ...... 90

5.2 University of British Columbia ...... 91 5.2 Simon Fraser University ...... 96 5.4 University of Victoria ...... 102 5.5 University of Alberta ...... 120 5.6 University of Calgary ...... 129 5.7 University of Lethbridge ...... 134 5.8 University of Regina ...... 140 5.9 University of Saskatchewan ...... 146 5.10 Laurentian University ...... 151 5.11 Ryerson University ...... 154 5.12 University of Windsor ...... 163 5.13 York University ...... 166 5.14 Concordia University ...... 171 5.15 Memorial University ...... 179 5.16 BFA (Theatre) Programs: Classification ...... 182

Chapter Six: The Voice of BFA (Theatre) Graduates 6.1 A Collective Voice: Survey Results from Canadian Theatre Graduates ...192 6.2 A Dramatic Divide?: Conservatory and Liberal Arts Survey Results ...... 213 6.3 Discussion: What We Can Learn from the Graduates ...... 237 6.4 Essential Elements in a BFA (Theatre) Program ...... 251

Chapter Seven: Conclusion 7.1 Theatre Education in Canada for Today and Tomorrow ...... 257

References ...... 269

Appendix A: Survey Instrument ...... 276

Appendix B: Ethics Approval ...... 292

vii

Table of Figures

Figure 1: University Distribution of Participants ...... 193 Figure 2: Sex of Participants ...... 194 Figure 3: Age of Participants ...... 195 Figure 4: Primary Specialization ...... 197 Figure 5: Current Work Situation ...... 202 Figure 6: Primary Theatre Employment ...... 203 Figure 7: Secondary Theatre Involvement ...... 204 Figure 8: Income Distribution ...... 206 Figure 9: Annual Income ‐ Theatre Derived ...... 207 Figure 10: Annual Income ‐ Non‐Theatre Derived ...... 208 Figure 11: Type of Program ...... 216 Figure 12: Age Distribution of Participants ...... 217 Figure 13: Geographical Location ...... 218 Figure 14: Participants Categorization of Program ...... 220 Figure 15: Previous Post Secondary Education Distribution ...... 221 Figure 16: Additional Post Secondary Education Distribution ...... 222 Figure 17: Current Work Distribution ...... 230 Figure 18: Primary Theatre Employment Distribution ...... 231 Figure 19: Secondary Theatre Employment Distribution ...... 232 Figure 20: Theatre Involvement Distribution ...... 233 Figure 21: Annual Income ‐ Theatre Distribution ...... 235 Figure 22: Annual Income ‐ Non‐Theatre Distribution ...... 236

viii 1

Chapter One: Introduction

1.1 Preamble

This research study explores the current state of undergraduate theatre1 education and training in Canadian universities through an examination of the

Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) degree. This study focuses on identifying the curricular variations within BFA (Theatre) degree programs across the country and attempts to understand how these variations are understood and if and how these differences affect the expectations, satisfaction, and employability of recent program graduates. The results of this study will provide clarity to the program

options available to theatre students and produce an updated understanding of

what constitutes a Canadian BFA (Theatre) degree.

Theatre, as an independent program of study, is relatively new to

Canadian post secondary institutions. Prior to the University of Saskatchewan

opening its Department of Drama in 1945, university theatre in Canada was

mostly limited to the study of dramatic literature in departments of English,

1 Although standard dictionary definitions distinguish “theatre” as the actual performance and “drama” as the art or practice of producing works, these words are often used interchangeably in critical literature. This chapter adopts the term “theatre” as an all‐encompassing term that refers to all aspects of dramatic study and performance, but does use the term “drama” when required by a proper course or department name or when referred to specifically as such in the literature.

2 extra‐curricular offerings through on‐campus theatre clubs and associations, and through amateur theatre experience. The University of Saskatchewan offered the first theatre degree program in Canada and the University of Alberta and

Queen’s University quickly followed suit. All three universities offered a liberal arts style program which concentrated primarily on academic courses, but offered a few practical courses as well. The University of Alberta began offering

the country’s first professional Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) program in 1947. By

1955, 4 Canadian universities were offering undergraduate theatre degrees. Over

the next half‐century the number of university theatre programs grew

exponentially. Currently, 29 Canadian universities from coast to coast are offering degrees in theatre and these programs combined are producing over 600

graduates yearly2.

Over the past two decades, Canadian educational researchers and government organizations have been paying particular attention to the relationship between education, training and labour market experiences of post‐ secondary graduates. Since 1982, Statistics Canada, in partnership with Human

2 This data comes from Human Resources Development Canada’s 1999 Post Secondary Graduate Report. Theatre programs fall under the category of “Other Performing Arts” not including music programs. In 1996, the last recorded year, 695 students graduated in this category. The performing arts category would also include graduates of dance programs – which make up a very small percentage of the total number of Other Performing Arts graduates.

Resources Development Canada, has conducted the National Graduate Survey to a cross‐section of Canadian post‐secondary graduates. The Canadian survey was designed to obtain longitudinal data on the relationships between post‐ secondary education, training and labour market activities, the long‐term labour market experiences of graduates, earnings and occupations and graduates’ additional educational experiences and qualifications. Although this survey is not discipline specific, the data collected has shed some light on fine and performing arts graduates entering the labour force.

Using data from the National Graduate Survey and Canada’s Labour

Force Survey, Luffman (2000) suggested that over the last few years, researchers have learned a great deal about the Canadian arts labour force. She suggests that

researchers know that those employed in the arts and culture industries in

Canada have, on average, higher levels of education, higher rates of self‐

employment, lower wages, a greater likelihood of working part time and a

tendency to be concentrated in certain regions of the country. They know that

two and five years after graduation, arts graduates were more likely than other

graduates to not be working in a field related to their education, be

moonlighting, be self‐employed, have changed employers or have found

temporary work. Despite the instability, over 70% of arts graduates indicated

4 that they would choose to take the same studies again given their experiences.

Over 90% agreed that their studies gave them an in‐depth knowledge of their particular field and the skills needed for a job (Luffman, p. 1‐9).

Although the numbers show that arts graduates are generally pleased

with the education they received, the statistical outcomes from the labour market

component of these survey instruments have not reflected well on faculties and

departments offering fine and performing arts programs in the current research,

economic and political environment. Of even greater concern, is that the

available statistics do not adequately reflect the current labour market situation and career progress for performing arts graduates and available data is not divided into specific arts disciplines such as theatre. The ability to examine

specific disciplines in the arts is essential given the specific education required

and the variances in the labour market for each discipline.

According to Statistic’s Canada, the live performing arts industry,

including theatre, is growing. Including both for‐profit and not‐for‐profit

companies, the industry generated operating revenues of approximately $1.2

billion in 2005, which is up 2.2% from the previous year. Within the arts industry,

theatre companies accounted for 28% of this total operating revenue and

5 comprised the largest segment of the not‐for‐profit sector. Forty eight percent of revenues from the not‐for‐profit sector were generated by theatre companies, compared with only 10% of the for‐profit sector. In 2005, Canadian theatre companies generated $346.5 million in operating revenue and spent $113.7 million in salaries, wages and benefits (Statistics Canada, 2004). In the most recent Statistics Canada Canadian Performing Arts Survey, completed in

2002/2003, over 21,000 employees and over 14,000 volunteers were working in the theatre sector in Canada (Statistics Canada, n.d.).With a growing Canadian

performing arts sector and increased employment opportunities, Canada needs

arts graduates, and specifically theatre graduates, to meet the labour market

demand.

1.2 The Problem

Undergraduate students interested in pursuing a university degree in theatre are faced with a number of difficult choices regarding which program to attend. This is due to the number of programs being offered as well as variations in the type of degrees and programs available. Of the 29 universities offering theatre degrees, 6 offer only Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) degrees, 15 offer only

Bachelor of Arts (BA) degrees and 8 offer both Bachelor of Fine Arts and

Bachelor of Arts degree options. The 2000 Now What? The Guide to Post

Secondary Theatre Training in Canada defines a BA in theatre as an academic liberal arts style degree that primarily emphasises advanced communication and

research skills while providing some practical components. A BFA in theatre is defined as a professional conservatory‐style intensive training program that emphasises hands‐on practical work while providing some academic components (Theatre Ontario, 2000). These definitions appear to be consistent with the program descriptions provided by universities that offer both BA and

BFA theatre programs. For example, the University of Alberta’s website

(Undergraduate Programs, n.d.) recommends the BA program to students who

are passionate about the theatre and who want to delve into the diversity of

theatre, broaden drama and research skills, and include an interdisciplinary

focus to their studies. The BFA is recommended to students who want an

7 intensive training program designed to prepare them for a professional career in the theatre. Not only must students decide whether a BA or a BFA degree is right for them, the type of program offered must also be taken into consideration.

Identified above are two types of theatre programs, one, which is a liberal arts‐style program, and the other, a conservatory‐style program. From the degree descriptions, it would appear that a student wanting a liberal arts style program would choose a university offering a BA degree, while a student wanting a conservatory‐style or professional training program would seek out a university

offering a BFA degree. Unfortunately for students, it is not that simple. Using the

simple classification adopted by the 1977 Report of the Committee of Inquiry into

Theatre Training in Canada, or the “Black Report” as it became known, a

conservatory‐style program is classified as one which is professionally oriented

and where the primary function of the department is the training of students who aspire to be actors, designers, technicians, stage managers, managers and

producers (Black, Marsolais, Peacock, Porteous, Ronfard, 1977, p. 2). The Report

also suggests that some of the universities that claim to be a professional or

conservatory‐style program are often misleading students. The report states that,

“in many cases, claims made in their brochures and by their faculty appear to be

inaccurate. In others, departments sin by omission. No overt claims are made,

8 but students are allowed to make assumptions about the training they are receiving” (Black et al., p. 88). The report also suggests that at many universities there is confusion within departments on the specific intent of the theatre program. It is possible that this “misleading of students,” as stated by the Black

Report, is not due to malicious intent, but rather reflects the complex environment in which theatre education operates, and differences between the world of academics and those of practitioners. Regardless of the reason, if there

is indeed confusion within departments and in the promotional materials over

the type of program being offered, how are students supposed to understand the

options and select the best program to suit their interests, expectations and

future career and/or academic goals?

Over the past half‐century, the post secondary theatre education

environment has grown increasingly complex, and students need accurate

information to assist them in making informed decisions about which program at

which institution would be most suitable for them, given their career and education objectives. When theatre degrees were first introduced into the university a clear division was present between the professional and the academic degree. Universities offering professional training programs awarded

BFA degrees and those offering more academically focused programs awarded

BA degrees. Along with the exponential growth of theatre programs in Canada has come a blurring of this BA (academic) and BFA (professional) line. The impact of this blurred line has affected the BFA degree most significantly as BFA

(Theatre) programs across the country are promoting either a conservatory‐style program or a liberal arts‐style curriculum to their students. Although significant developments have occurred in the field of university theatre education, the literature (promotional materials and student‐oriented program guides) has not caught up. Guides meant to assist students in choosing the best program to suit their needs are still defining the BFA theatre degree according to now outdated classifications. The time has come for an in‐depth investigation into the current university theatre offerings in Canada that looks closely at both approaches in order to bring clarity to program options and to the emergent meaning of the

BFA (Theatre) degree.

This study examines variations in the curricular offerings in BFA (Theatre) programs across Canada and if and how these differences affect the expectations, satisfaction, and employability of recent program graduates. It provides clarity to the program options available and produces an updated understanding of what

constitutes a BFA (Theatre) degree. This study maps out the types of BFA

(Theatre) programs available in Canada and investigates the perspective of the

10 students who have graduated from these programs regarding their motivation to study theatre, expectations for their theatre degree, program satisfaction, and employment expectations and reality. In taking this approach, the results of this study will assist students in making more informed decisions about their choice of program and encourage them to think beyond the four years of the degree and to their future career goals and expectations. Students and graduates will be

more aware of the skills that they acquire during their undergraduate program

and will be better able to represent themselves to employers and funding

agencies. This research will provide theatre faculty and administrators with a

heightened awareness of the current offerings in post secondary theatre

education in Canada and how their particular program fits within a national

scope. Universities are in the business of students and the results of this study

will aid theatre curriculum planners in understanding the demographics and

expectations of the students they attract to their program, and the satisfaction,

employability, and career path of their graduates. The research will also provide

arts academics with information in which to better inform decision and policy

makers on the rigorous nature of creative arts and theatre education and its

positive outcomes.

1.3 Research Questions

This study asks the primary question: How do Bachelor of Fine Arts theatre programs in Canada differ in curricular offerings and do these differences affect the expectations, satisfaction, and employability of recent program graduates? Within this primary question, secondary research questions will be addressed such as:

• How does the theatre program promote itself in its promotional

literature, websites, and publications?

• What courses are offered (both academic and professional) in BFA

(Theatre) programs in Canada? How do these courses differ between

conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs?

• What are the motivations of BFA (Theatre) graduates to study theatre

and how do these differ based on type of program attended?

• What employment expectations do theatre graduates from various

programs have and how do these expectations differ based on type of

program attended?

• What are the labour force and professional demographics of theatre

graduates and how do these vary based on type of program attended?

Through a historical look at the development of the theatre degree, an in‐ depth examination of the current state and curriculum offerings of the

BFA (Theatre) degree in Canada and a snapshot of the expectations, satisfaction and employability of graduates, this study will examine these questions and provide recommendations for future exploration.

Chapter Two: Review of Related Literature

2.1 Liberal Arts and Higher Education: A Contemporary Look

In 1842 Egerton Ryerson presented one of the first speeches in Canada

emphasising the importance of a liberal arts education. His speech, an

“Inaugural Address on the Nature and Advantages of an English and Liberal

Education” spoke strongly in favour of a liberal arts curriculum that is grounded

in reason and truth. Throughout the 1850’s and 60’s, liberal arts curricula, first in

colleges and then in universities, flourished. Although liberal arts style

curriculum has been offered at public Canadian post‐secondary institutions since

the mid‐nineteenth century, it was not until 1949 with the appointment of the

Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences

and their 1951 report when the importance of government funding for a liberal

arts education would be emphasised. The Royal Commission’s task was to

“examine Canada’s cultural life and suggest steps which the federal government

might take to improve and enrich that side of our lives which is concerned with

the things of the mind and of the spirit” (Shea, 1952, p. 9). The work of the

Commission, dubbed “The Massey Report,” led to a series of 146

recommendations covering a wide range of arts and culture topics from radio,

television and film, to art, galleries and museums, to scholarship, research and universities. The Commission believed that a study of Canadian cultural life was

14 not complete without an examination of the part played by universities. Of the many problems identified in the higher education system, the Commission identified one of the most serious as the plight of the social sciences and humanities – or the liberal arts. A central theme of the university section of the

Massey Report is the neglect which the liberal arts are suffering in Canada’s

university system. The report suggest that the liberal arts may not produce special skills, but they do train students to think, to develop judgement, taste, the

ability to express themselves clearly and logically and they help to produce

cultured citizens with a broad social view (Shea, p. 40‐42). The Report defined

the role of the federal government in higher education as related to culture and

favoured widespread public access to post‐secondary education, particularly a

liberal arts education. In its recommendations to Canadian universities, the

report stressed the critical role universities play as ʺnurseries of a truly Canadian

civilization and culture” (Black et al., 1977, p. 136). The report states,

Not only does a study of the liberal arts give education the mental discipline without which it is meaningless, it gives the student the intellectual curiosity and interest which enrich his life. The purpose of the university is, through a liberalizing education, to enable persons to live more complete lives; this should be true of any training which has a proper place in a university. Academic courses stripped of the humanities lose enrichment as well as discipline. They provide for a living, but not for the life which makes living worthwhile. How have we come to neglect this essential truth? (p. 138).

Despite strong views supporting a liberal arts education, such as that expressed in the Massey Report, the liberal arts tradition has forged upon a battlefield of duality, apprehension and opposition by the clashing forces of new ideas and paradigms, each attempting to prescribe the most effective method of combining theoretical knowledge with practical education in order to encompass

a well rounded education (Boyer and Levine, 1981; Oakley, 1992). As a result of

theses changing dualities, Frederick Weaver (1991) suggests, “the definitions of

what actually does comprise the subject matter of liberal arts disciplines are

vague, in coherent, and susceptible to rapid, opportunistic changes” (p. 86).

While the individual components of a liberal arts education are subject to debate

and change, an overall understanding of what the term “liberal arts” refers to is

generally accepted. According to Hubert Heffner (1964), a liberal arts education

prescribes to the same three main objectives as determined by the 1945 Harvard

report, General Education in a Free Society: 1) an ability to communicate orally and in writing the results of contemplation; 2) training in logical reasoning and the development of the capacity to formulate supportable conclusions; and 3)

training in the capability to make sound judgements (Heffner, p. 18‐19). In 1981,

Clifton Conrad and Anne Pratt proposed similar objectives by suggesting that

the aim of liberal education is to develop a template that aids in the student’s

exploration of uncharted territory and that a liberal education should be a

“patterning process whose basic design establishes a method of inquiry, the limitations of which are subject only to individual ability and interest” (Conrad

& Pratt, 1951, p. 48‐49). A liberal education must make the connections between past, present, and future, as well as between content and context. Henry

Crimmel (1993) took the argument one step further, placing liberal arts education against vocational training and suggested that a liberal education must not be “subordinated to a vocational purpose” and, instead, should create relevant pragmatic values for each student (p. 138). He goes further to suggest

that while vocational or professional training programs may prepare a person for a career, these programs are not able to cultivate the knowledge and understanding required in today’s society (p. 361).

2.2 Theatre and the Liberal Arts in Higher Education

In the premier issue of the Educational Theatre Journal (October 1949),

George Kernodle’s (1949) essay, “Theatre Practice and Theatre Theory in the

Liberal Arts Curriculum” placed theatre within a liberal arts tradition. He suggested that a liberal arts education should present its learners with three main goals: 1) faith in one’s self and one’s aspirations; 2) knowledge of history as well

as current advancements in science; and 3) an augmentation of one’s spiritual life

through the acquired knowledge of the importance of such curricula as art,

philosophy and religion. He went on to propose that these three goals should

reflect a student’s subjective needs and not just “field of knowledge to be

learned” (Kernodle, p. 85). Kernodle cautioned liberal arts educators to “never

build up theories and principles and histories that lose sight of the immediate

impact of the theatre on the subjective. We must never distrust the sensuous

basis of theatre as an art” (p. 83).

Jonathan Levy (2001) goes further than Kernodle and suggests that theatre

is a fundamental part of a liberal arts education. He believes that this is not because of the technical skills that theatre can teach, but because of the variety of human skills, habits and qualities it can teach; “sometimes better, often more

deeply and usually more lastingly than they can be taught, and learned,

18 elsewhere” (Levy, p. 6). Levy suggests several practical skills that theatre, as a part of the liberal arts curriculum, can teach students: 1) Meeting deadlines and time management. 2) Cooperation, collaboration and interdependence. 3) Self‐ expression and awareness. 4) Persistence, dedication and hard work. 5)

Flexibility of mind and imagination. 6) Problems do not usually have one solution. 7) A corollary or consequences for your actions. 8) Meticulous preparation is not the enemy of spontaneity. 9) The importance of play and

playfulness. These are the practical skills that Levy lists, but he also states

intangible ones including: 1) The habit of sympathy or fellow feeling and 2) The

exercise of the practical imagination on human possibilities (Levy, p. 10). Levy

goes on to suggest that the real reason that theatre should be taught as a part of a

liberal arts program is not that there is a long and honourable precedent for

teaching it, but that “theatre is an ancient, primary, and essential human activity,

both an expression and a reflection of the essence of our lives” (p. 60‐62).

2.3 Liberal Art Versus Conservatory Theatre in Higher Education

In 1949, professor Edwin Burr Pettet of Carleton College published an essay describing the value of a college or university major in theatre. He suggested that the worth of such a major was that it would integrate academic theory with theatre practice. In 1959, Glynne Wickham presented a similar point of view at the American Educational Theatre Association convention, suggesting

that “a university program in theatre should give serious attention to theatre as

an art, while undertaking some producing activity, but it should not make

pretences about training professional talents” (As cited in Hobgood, 1964, p.

149). In disagreement were scholars such as W. McNeil Lowry and Theodore

Hoffman who argued that the tradition of liberal arts methods at universities

should be exempted for professional training programs in theatre. Like many

other scholars, they were of the opinion that post secondary theatre programs

had assumed the position of the traditional independent professional

conservatories and academic theatre departments therefore carried the responsibility of developing professional calibre theatre artists (Hobgood, 1964, p. 149; Lowry, 1962, p. 109‐110). In response to Lowry, Frank Whiting (1963) argued against his position suggesting that a theatre program could encompass a liberal arts education and still develop students with competent abilities in the theatre practice (p. 158‐162). Disagreeing with Whiting and other scholars such

20 as Hubert Heffner who took up similar positions, Dean of the Yale School of

Drama, Robert Brustein (1970) proposed a different relationship between the university and the theatre. He argued in favour of a professional theatre education, but suggested that theatre should not be included as a discipline within eth academic or university environment, but should instead be

established as an academy or conservatory only loosely connected to the

university (Brustein, p. 239). As a result of these conflicting beliefs, universities

across North America have adopted differing methods and models of theatre

education, some offering strictly professional or conservatory‐style training,

others offering a more traditional university liberal arts oriented program.

2.4 Theatre in Canadian Institutes of Higher Education

In January 1902, Madame Josephine Dandurand, President for the Standing

Committee for the Promotion of Industrial and Fine Arts in Canada, circulated to members of the committee the draft of a recommendation to be sent to the federal government (Tippett, 1990, p. 36). This document argued that in order for Canada to

maintain its “rank among civilized nations” it had to ensure that talented people did not leave the county because of lack of encouragement and that these individuals were not overlooked in the first place because cultural education was “left to chance and priviledge” (Dandurand, 1902, p. 2). Although not writing specifically about

theatre, Madame Dandurand’s document, which proposed two systems for the

promotion of art in Canada, anticipated the thinking that would later go towards the

arguments for the creation of national theatre centres across Canada (Tippett, p. 37).

Prior to 1939, little theatres and amateur theatre productions were

scattered throughout Canada. For the most part, anyone wishing to become

actively involved in theatre acquired the necessary training either through

rehearsal and performance, or through private study. But the post‐war years showed a broader concern with Canadian arts and culture and particularly the desire to create a national theatre for Canada (McDonagh, 2002, n.p.). In 1947,

Emrys Maldwin Jones stated, ʺIf Canada is to boast the possession of a national

22 theatre the universities of Canada must do their share to bring it about; and their share is the most important oneʺ (As cited in McDonagh, 2002, n.p.). According to Patrick McDonagh, universities across Canada were not only equipped to instil students with a knowledge of and respect for theatrical tradition, but they

also had the facilities and desire to mount productions (McDonagh, n.p.). Hart

House was associated with the University of Toronto from its construction in

1919, although its productions generally featured professional actors. However,

in 1946, Hart House came more fully under the control of the university, and

student involvement was encouraged, although it was not yet part of a degree

program. At the University of British Columbia, Dorothy Somerset founded the

Summer School of the Theatre in 1939, and taught the university’s first credit

courses in theatre in 1946. In 1945, Canadaʹs first Department of Drama, offering

some professional courses, was established at the University of Saskatchewan.

The University of Alberta and Queen’s University quickly followed suit,

establishing theatre programs which were grounded in the liberal arts, but

offered a few practical courses as well (Waldhauer, 1991, p. 19, 42). By 1955, there

were eight full‐time drama instructors teaching 120 students in four university

programs across the country. In response to the Massey Reportʹs call for a

National Theatre and the need for what Robertson Davies referred to as ʺa

practical theatre studio,ʺ the National Theatre School was founded in Montreal in

1960. But while the National Theatre School’s emphasis on professional training set it apart from other programs, it was hardly alone as post secondary theatre programs were growing steadily across the country (Smith, 1985, p. 365). In 1965 the University of Alberta started the first professional conservatory‐style theatre program in Canada leading to a BFA degree. This program was in direct response to the program at the National Theatre School and in response to the

growth of professional theatre in Canada and the increasing demand for theatre

artists (Glenfield, 1999, p. 14‐15). Following the University of Alberta’s example,

other universities from coast to coast began offering similar programs. By the

year 2000, 12 BFA programs had been established at Canadian universities.

As the post secondary theatre programs (both BA and BFA) grew in

Canada, so did the conservatory versus liberal arts discourse. This discourse has

been noted on several occasions including in the 1977 “Report of the Committee

of Inquiry into Theatre Training in Canada” which suggests that a dramatic

divide exists between the type of programs offered in institutes of higher

education and in Now What? The Guide to Post Secondary Theatre Training in

Canada, which advises students to choose their program carefully because of the

various theatre degree options available (Black et al. 1977; Theatre Ontario, 2000,

p. 7‐10). The list of recommendations from the Report of the Committee of

Inquiry into Theatre Training in Canada suggests that universities in Canada

should re‐examine their function in the area of theatre training and that

university programs must decide what is the exact nature of the training they

intend to offer and define themselves clearly in all written publicity as well as in

the classroom. “Universities must stop misleading students….The number of

university theatre department graduates who believe they are prepared for work

in the profession is criminal” (Black et al., 1977, p. 88).

Despite the comments made by scholars and practitioners on both sides of the issue and the historical tensions that have been ongoing in the literature for the past half‐century, there has been little research conducted on the student

experience in conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style theatre programs and the

impact of this program choice on their future career. Academics and theatre

professionals have long debated the advantages and disadvantages of the various program types, but there are limited sources of data to back up their claims. Although there is significant literature surrounding the philosophical

debates, no available study has been conducted that provides a look at both the

conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style theatre programs and examines the expectations, satisfaction, and employment success of graduates from different

BFA (Theatre) programs. This study examines these areas and fills a current gap in the literature.

Chapter Three: Methodology

3.1 Rational for Methodology

This study is designed to gather and conceptualize information on the various methods of theatre education in post secondary institutions in Canada

and to determine if and how the type of program attended impacts the

expectations, satisfaction and employability of its graduates. A mixed method

research design, which uses qualitative methodologies (open‐ended survey

response items and document analysis) in conjunction with quantitative

methodology (selected‐response survey items) were employed for the purpose of

investigating the different program models. The strength of a mixed‐method

design in educational research lies in its triangulation of various sources of data

(Lincoln & Guba, 1985). There are several advantages to combining research

methodologies. First, educational research is concerned with both theoretical

knowledge and with the application of findings for policy, research and practice.

Combining qualitative and quantitative research methodologies enhances the

value of this investigation, extending the usefulness of the data to students,

practicing educators, program administrators, and researchers. Both methods

build upon one another, qualitative providing an in depth overview and

descriptive accounts of the particular phenomena, and quantitative methods

providing a means for generalization and reproduction by other researchers.

The quantitative data will provide the statistical basis for direct comparison between particular dimensions of each program and the identification of patterns and relationships. These relationships and patterns can then be further developed and explored through qualitative investigation in further studies. The use of mixed‐method design is becoming widely accepted (Johnson and

Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Greene, 2005) and this increased recognition of the need for

a full understanding of research problems from a variety of perspectives has given rise to writings by numerous researchers about the importance of adopting a “pluralist attitude” (Howe, 1988, p. 11) in conceptualizing research questions.

The use of both qualitative and quantitative methods provides distinct and

complementary information about the different models of post secondary theatre

education in Canada.

3.2 Research Design

A mixed methods approach was used to conduct this research study.

Quantitative and qualitative methods were employed to investigate university theatre programs in Canada offering Bachelor of Fine Arts degrees, and to examine the expectations, satisfaction, and employability of graduates from these programs. By combining multiple research methods, the content and flexibility of the data collection and analysis was maximized in order to have a full

understanding of the program models and the type of graduate that these

programs produce. By providing both qualitative and quantitative data, this practical study looks beyond the theoretical debates to examine what is currently

occurring in post secondary theatre in Canada and how the program differences

affect the expectations, satisfaction and employability of the graduates.

The research involved three stages, each stage building upon the previous

ones. Stage 1 consisted of a literature review of the fine arts versus liberal arts

tensions in order to draw out the theoretical implications of this debate and

identify the fundamental principles from which the research will proceed.

Background and historical literature was collected on the development of theatre programs in Canada with a particular focus on the conservatory and liberal arts

curriculum.

Stage 2 consisted of a review of all Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) programs currently offered at Canadian universities. This review profiles the current state of university theatre programs in Canada by way of an examination of the promotional material available to students interested in the program.

Information ine th profile includes program overview and description, type of program offered, detailed curriculum structure and specific courses offered, and

admission requirements (audition, interview etc.). Wherever possible, this review was conducted using unobtrusive research methods including the program and university information available on web sites, in calendars, university and college guides, recruitment and promotional documents and other print and electronic materials that are readily available. The exclusion of

documents not readily available to students was decided upon due to the desire

to classify program types based on the same information on which students

would base their decision to attend a specific program.

Stage 3 consists of a survey instrument that was sent to a sample of

graduates from BFA (Theatre) programs across the country. The survey data was

used to compare the expectations, satisfaction, employability, and demographics

of graduates from both conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs. The

30 results of the survey provide a snapshot of the opinion of BFA (Theatre) graduates as they reflect back on their degree programs. The triangulated data from these three stages provides a comprehensive overview and brings clarity to the current BFA (Theatre) degree in Canada. The data also provides necessary feedback from graduates of both conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs which will aid in future program development and inform future studies in this area.

3.3 Survey

A survey was developed specifically for this research project due to the lack of an appropriate measurement instrument. The current measurement instruments used in Canada, including the National Graduate Survey, the Labour

Force Survey and university‐specific graduate surveys are focused more towards traditional non‐arts disciplines and do not provide meaningful data on the

expectations, satisfaction and employability of fine arts graduates. They do not

consider the philosophical and pedagogical differences that exist in post‐

secondary fine arts programs and the effect that this has on the graduates.

A new survey, the Destination Survey for Creative Arts Graduates, was under

development by researchers at the University of Calgary, Canada and the

Victorian College of the Arts, The University of Melbourne, Australia. Using this survey as a base and utilizing the knowledge that was obtained by the researchers during the development of the Destination Survey for Creative Arts

Graduates, the BFA (Theatre) Graduate’s Survey was developed.

The survey was distributed to a cross section of graduates from the

fourteen BFA (Theatre) programs in Canadian universities. The survey

instrument was developed by the primary investigator for the purpose of this

32 research and was subjected to a number of revisions and tests to improve its design. The instrument was pilot tested with ten graduates of theatre degree programs. Participants were regarded as representative of those for whom the survey was designed. Pilot participants were asked to provide feedback about the content of the survey questions, as well as to make suggestions about how to improve the overall design. Answers to the survey helped to inform questions

such as: What are the career paths, performance and achievements of theatre

graduates from conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs and how do

these differ based on type of program attended? What are the labour force and

professional demographics of theatre graduates and how do these vary based on

type of program attended? What are the expectations of theatre graduates from

conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs and how do these expectations

differd base on type of program attended? What skills do theatre graduates from

the two programs types obtain and how do they rate their level of program

satisfaction?

The analyzed data from the surveys and interviews along with the

program information collected was triangulated into findings and this full‐length

study of post secondary theatre education in Canada was produced.

3.4 Participants

The survey was administered to a sample of individuals who graduated from the fourteen programs offering BFA (Theatre) degrees in Canada. Two hundred sixteen graduates participated in the survey. Due to challenges in obtaining contact information for BFA (Theatre) graduates, a snowball sampling technique was utilized. Snowball sampling is a technique for developing a research sample where existing study subjects recruit future subjects from among

their acquaintances. Snowball sampling is often used for hidden populations or

where it is difficult to access subjects using other sampling techniques. In the case of the survey component of this study, poor alumni records at institutions

made it difficult to contact BFA (Theatre) graduates. The electronic survey

invitation was sent to all BFA (Theatre) graduates for whom contact information

was available. The participants were asked to forward the survey invitation on to

fellow BFA (Theatre) graduates who they were in contact with. Due to the

snowball sampling technique used, it is impossible to determine the total number

of graduates who received an invitation to participate and thereby impossible to

determine a survey response rate. However, this sampling technique permits this

study to survey a difficult to reach population and obtain information from BFA

(Theatre) graduates on their expectations, satisfaction and employability.

3.5 Data Collection and Analysis

Academic departments and faculties in the fine arts commonly keep alumni records including contact information for their graduates. Due to

Freedom of Information and Privacy regulations, the departments and/or faculties were approached to help administer this survey to their graduates. An introductory letter that describes the nature of the investigation and requests the

department or faculty’s participation to distribute the survey to their graduates

was sent electronically to all fourteen theatre departments and/or faculties. Once the department or faculty had agreed to distribute the survey information to their graduates, the department or faculty was sent electronically an introductory

letter which explained the study, the URL for the online survey and a survey

password. The introductory letter was also included in the body of the email.

This information was distributed to the theatre graduates. Password protection

allowed only identified participants to fill out the electronic survey and a

restriction on IP addresses acted as a deterrent from a participant filling out more than one survey as only one submission can come from a single computer. A

follow up email was sent through the departments to participants two weeks

after the first email encouraging participation in the study.

Early on in the process it was identified that many theatre departments and faculties did not possess up‐to‐date alumni records and only had contact information for a select number of graduates. At this point it was determined that a snowball sampling technique would be utilized for this study. The process above was followed, however, recipients of the survey invitation were asked to

forward the invitation on to other BFA (Theatre) graduates. Although the

snowball sampling method would not lead to a representative sample, it was the

best method available to conduct this study considering the need to reach a

population that was difficult to find.

The survey data was collected using the web‐based survey software,

Question Pro. QuestionPro was selected due to its advanced analysis tools, strict

whereby academics around the world use this web‐based program to collect and

analyze their data. Each page of the survey contained a contact email address in

case any participant had difficulty with the web‐based instrument. Following the

closure of the survey instrument, a frequency analysis was run on the entire data set. A grouping analysis was then run on participants from the conservatory‐

style and liberal arts‐style theatre programs. The data sets from the frequency

analysis and the grouping analysis were exported to Microsoft Excel for further

36 analysis and study. The open ended survey questions were analyzed using content analysis.

3.6 Limitations and Delimitations

Limitations

A major limitation to this study is the classification of programs as either conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐style in the survey component of the research.

Justification for the classification is included in the study and is aligned with definitions of the program types in the literature. However, it is possible that the classification may not reflect the viewpoints of program administrators, other

researchers or students. Although this study attempts to compare different types of theatre programs, it is understood by the researcher that the style of education provided at each individual institution may not reflect the type of education that is being offered at other institutions who have classified themselves in the same way. The time that this research is being conducted will also influence the outcome. Much is dependent on the current theatre department administration, current faculty and staff, and the academic plan of the department, faculty and university. These variables will affect the context of this study. Although this study is looking at the impact that program choice has on a future career, it is acknowledged by the researcher that external forces, unrelated to education, may also have affected the career path of the graduate. It is the hope that the open‐ ended survey questions will draw out some of these external factors, which can then be taken into consideration during the data analysis. The accuracy of the

38 contact information that the university has in its records for their alumni is also a limitation to this study and poor alumni records have limited the number of survey participants in the survey component of this study. The snowball sampling technique utilized does not provide a representative sample of BFA

(Theatre) graduates, however, it does provide a snap‐shot of the opinions and experience of graduates from conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style theatre programs.

Questionnaire

The major limitation evident in the survey component of the research is the issue of non‐response and the limited number of updated alumni records kept by the departments and/or faculties. To reduce non‐response, reminders were sent out to all potential survey participants two weeks after the initial

survey link was distributed. An additional limitation is that participants may

leave questions blank or not follow instructions properly. Participant’s responses

to some questions may also be determined by their current life situation and if

surveyed two or three weeks or months later or earlier, their responses may be different. In the analysis of the data collected, the researcher’s own value system may affect the analysis on the open ended questions. Care was taken by the

39 researcher to ensure impartiality throughout the data collection and analysis process wherever possible.

Delimitations

Although BA programs in theatre are also offered in Canadian universities and diploma and certificate programs in theatre are offered in professional schools and community colleges across the country, this study is only concerned with programs leading to a BFA degree. This study does not engage in a detailed curriculum evaluation, but rather provides an overview of the program and course offerings available. An examination of actual course outlines and classroom pedagogy will not be considered. This research is intended to look at the impact of the different types of programs on theatre graduates. Current in‐program students are not considered. This is not a longitudinal study and although it is recognized by the researcher that a theatre

artist’s career develops over a number of years, this study will not be tracking

career growth, but rather providing a snap shot of the current situation.

3.7 Ethical Considerations

Approval for this study was granted by the Conjoint Faculties Research

Ethics Board at the University of Calgary and was obtained prior to data collection.

Participation in this study was strictly voluntary and acceptance of a consent form was required. The primary ethical concerns with this study were the

personal and potentially sensitive nature of the data collected during the

questionnaire. This personal data includes responses on the participant’s

previous experiences in the theatre department and with their current job and salary. Participants had the option of not providing a response to any question that they were uncomfortable with and at any time could withdraw altogether from the study.

The anonymity of survey participants was assured unless contact

information was voluntarily provided. An option at the end of the survey

allowed for participants to voluntarily provide their contact information for

follow up investigation. If this information was provided, it remained

confidential and only the principle researcher had access to the information. Due

to the anonymity of the questionnaire, participants were only able to withdraw

their responses if identifying contact information was provided on the survey

41 instrument. At publication time no participant had chosen to withdraw from the study.

3.8 Overview of the Study

The following pages provide the results of a study on the Canadian BFA

(Theatre) degree which is intended to bring clarification to the degree and the types of programs available. The study also provides a snap‐shot of the opinions and experiences of BFA (Theatre) graduates from all fourteen institutions

currently offering the degree in Canada and outlines the expectations,

satisfaction and employability of these graduates. The study begins with a

historical examination of theatre education and specifically the BFA (Theatre)

degree’s development in Canada. This historical look is important for this study

as in order to understand the current degree programs available, an understanding of how the degree programs developed is required. The second stage of the study maps out the current BFA (Theatre) degree programs in

Canada including program overviews, curriculum and courses offered. This

information was generated by data that is publicly available to students who

may be making the decision to attend a BFA (Theatre) program, and which

program to attend. The final stage of the study examines the students’ experience

in the BFA (Theatre) programs by providing a frequency analysis of all survey participants. A grouping analysis that compares the conservatory‐style participants with the liberal arts‐style participants is then conducted which provides an understanding of the expectations, satisfaction and employability of

43 graduates from the two program types. The final chapter provides a summary of the findings of the study and makes recommendations for further study and inquiry.

Chapter Four: Historical Context

4.1 An Exploration of 20th Century Post Secondary Theatre in Canada

Theatrical activity has had a long and honourable history within Canadian

universities. Although not formalized in its early days as actual stage

productions or in an academic study of the discipline, paratheatrical activities

such as debates, conversaziones, and concerts have existed on campuses since

Canadian university origins in the 17th and 18th centuries. By the 19th century,

literature clubs, focusing specifically on classical dramatic literature began to form, followed shortly by dramatic clubs and theatre guilds. By the late 19th century almost every university in Canada had such a club, designed specifically to encourage the extra‐curricular and cultural development of its students

(Waldhauer, 1991, p. 1‐2). However, it was not until the 20th century when

university theatre education would step out into the spotlight in Canada. This

chapter undertakes a critical examination of the 20th century development of post

secondary undergraduate theatre education in Canada and attempts to map out

the historical terrain of the advancement of these programs. This chapter

provides a greater understanding of the people, places, events and approaches

that have influenced the origins and growth of drama departments on campuses

across Canada and provides a brief look into major theatre education

developments in Europe and the United States. More importantly, however, this

45 chapter makes the argument that although influenced by both European and

American systems, post secondary undergraduate theatre education in Canada is a distinctly Canadian model that has developed out of and responded to the changing Canadian theatre environment.

The Early Years: Theatre training from 1872 ‐ 1930

Early Theatre Education

Formal post secondary theatre education in Canada can be traced back to

1872 when the Trinity College of Music in London, Ontario began offering a single course in theatrical theory and literature. By 1886, courses in the

performing arts had become part of the curriculum of Toronto’s Royal

Conservatory of Music. For over half a century, these two musical institutions

provided the only formal, post secondary English‐language theatre education in

Canada (Lorenowicz, 1989, para. 1). The limited amount of fine and performing

arts education at the post secondary and earlier levels concerned Madame

Josephine Dandurand, President for the Standing Committee for the Promotion

of Industrial and Fine Arts in Canada. In January of 1902, Madame Dandurand

submitted a draft to the federal government arguing that in order for Canada to

maintain its “rank among civilized nations” it had to ensure that talented people did not leave the country because of lack of encouragement and that these

46 individuals were not overlooked in the first place because cultural education was

“left to chance and privilege” (Dandurand, 1902, p. 2). The draft recommendation made it clear that it should be seen as the responsibility of all levels of government, but specifically the federal government, to cultivate public taste through the support of arts education and cultural societies. Although the

recommendations made by Madame Dandurand and her committee have been

cited as “remarkable” (Tippett, 1990, p. 36), the ideas presented were not new.

Four years earlier, J.W.L. Forster wrote in the fourth volume of Canada: An

Encyclopaedia of the Country that the prerequisite for a unique national culture was the establishment, by the federal government, of art schools and galleries

(Forster, 1898, p. 352). Forster’s statement was consistent with an even earlier observation made by W.A. Sherwood in an 1894 edition of Canadian Magazine. He

suggested that a country’s national standing was most clearly indicated by the

quality of its cultural achievement (Sherwood, 1894, p. 498‐50). Although not

writing specifically about theatre, Madame Dandurand’s document and the

statements made by Foster and Sherwood, anticipated the thinking of individuals who would later argue in favour of founding a National Theatre for

Canada and eventually lay the groundwork for discussions of a national theatre

school. Despite the fact that discussions were beginning to take place about the

arts and arts education in Canada, it would be another 43 years before students

47 interested in studying theatre would be able to pursue a university degree in the area.

Theatre in Canada during the early 20th Century

During this early part of the twentieth century, Canada saw a rise in the number of amateur theatres popping up across the country. These theatres, established primarily as an alternative to the foreign commercial touring shows which dominated the theatre scene until the 1930s, quickly spread across

Canada, existing in every large town and many smaller centres as well. The most

widely known theatre from this period was Hart House Theatre at the University

of Toronto. Built in 1919, many of Canadaʹs most successful actors, directors,

designers and technicians began or enhanced their training and started their careers at eHart Hous (“The Little Theatre Movement,” para. 2).

Hart House Theatre

When Hart House theatre was built in 1919 by the trustees of the Massey

Foundation under the direction of its administrator, Vincent Massey, it was to

provide for the non‐academic interests of the university’s undergraduates. The

original Hart House building, on which construction was started in 1911, did not

include plans for a theatre. However, following the war, plans were put into

48 place for a theatre to be built in the basement of the building. The theatre was designed to seat up to 500 people and it was equipped with the latest technology including workshops and wardrobe rooms, and special effects for making smoke, rain, lightning, and flowing water. It was sin thi location that Toronto’s

first Little Theatre was born (“Hart House Theatre,” para. 2).

The Massey Foundation gave Hart House to the University of Toronto on

November 11th, 1919, but the theatre was not included in the deal. A group

called The Player’s Club, which was founded by Roy Mitchell – who had been directing plays for the Toronto’s Arts and Letters Club since 1908 ‐ controlled the theatre independently. The theatre officially opened on November 27th, 1919, with productions of The Queenʹs Enemies and The Farce of Pierre Patelin. Vincent

Massey, after whose grandfather Hart House had been named, became its first

chairman, a position he held until 1935 (“Hart House Theatre,” para. 3). Before

the Second World War, Hart House Theatre’s activities were dominated by

aspiring or accomplished actors and not by students. Actors, or those interested

in the craft would come from across the country to work or apprentice at what was then one of the most impressive non‐touring playhouses in Canada. With so

few opportunities for theatre training available in Canada, Hart House opened

its doors to those aspiring to become actors, directors or designers, allowing

49 them to work alongside those more experienced. Known for the high quality work being produced and top‐of‐the‐line facilities, Hart House would set a leading example for amateur theatre across the country and help to set the standard for Canada’s Little Theatre Movement. In 1946 the control of Hart

House Theatre was transferred to the University of Toronto and greater student

involvement, though only as an extra‐curricular, non‐credit activity, occurred.

With the rise in professional theatre during the 1950s, Hart House left its roots as

a solely amateur theatre and began producing professional shows. In 1966 the

Senate of the University of Toronto approved the establishment of the Graduate

Centre for Study of Drama which then assumed control of Hart House, using it to stage its major student productions. Hart House Theatre continued with its

combined role of producing student productions and professional productions until 1986 when The Drama Centre moved into the new Robert Gill theatre. Hart

House has come full circle and now operates solely as an independent community theatre in Toronto. Although Toronto now has a multitude of community and professional theatres, Hart House Theatre still has an illustrious

place in the development of the Little Theatre Movement in Canada and in the

beginnings of theatre training in this country (Whittaker, 1989, p. 257).

The Little Theatre Movement

The Little Theatre Movement in Canada was a vast grassroots network of companies that rebelled against the foreign commercial touring shows of the day and instead produced high quality amateur productions in small theatres across the country. Since the large touring shows were often only available in the larger

urban centres, the Little Theatres exposed a whole new group of Canadians to the theatre. The Little Theatres cultivated a different kind of theatregoing in

Canada and provided essential training for a generation of actors, dramatists, designers and technicians. With an increase in the number of theatres across the country came the need for a large number of artists in all areas of production.

Since this large number of Canadian theatre artists had previously not been required and standard institutions to obtain formal theatre training were not yet in existence, for the most part, each theatre took it upon themselves to train their own artists. Little Theatres encouraged their artists to be involved in all aspects

of play production, including acting, directing, design, administration,

marketing and technical areas. In the 1920s and 30s, Hart House began regularly introducing Canadian plays into its programming and the other little theatres followed suit. Theatre artists and audiences from coast to coast were arguably being introduced to the first truly Canadian theatre. As the foreign touring

shows fell victim to the hard economic times and retreated back to their own

51 countries, Canadian amateur theatre flourished. Because of their non‐ professional status, these theatres and their theatre artists were able to survive the economic depression of the 1930s and provide the continuity that allowed

Canada to bridge the gap between the imported commercial shows of the early

20th century and the post‐Second World War appearance of Canadian

professional theatres (Gardner, 1989, p. 305).

As the number of theatres in Canada committed to producing their own

work grew, so did the number of people interested in pursing theatre training. In

1921, two theatre schools opened in British Columbia: Carrol Aikins founded the

Home Theatre in the Okanagan Valley of Namarata and L. Bullock‐Webster

established the BC Dramatic School in Victoria. Students were recruited for the

schools through a lecture circuit of drama clubs, civic groups and university

organizations. By its second year in operation, the BC Dramatic School in

Victoria had 65 students attending small group classes and receiving individual

instruction in speech, acting and movement. The students from both schools

ranged from young children to older businessmen, so while professional training

was identified as one of the school’s aims in its promotional material, it could

hardly have been its primary goal. Instead, both schools acted as their own little theatres and produced a show each year in which the students performed

(McDonagh, 2001, para. 6‐7). Although a few budding thespians were provided training at schools such as Home Theatre, BC Dramatic School and the small number of similar schools across the country, the norm was still to learn through experience and many future actors, designers and technicians were trained right in the theatres where they would later perform.

From Competitive to Professional

In the early 1930s, a move towards festivals and competitions provided a

new focus to Canadian theatre. In November 1931, within months of being sworn

in, the new Governor‐General, the Earl of Bessborough, stated that the Little

Theatre phenomenon provided the basis for ʺa great Drama League, Dominion

wide,ʺ which might give birth to ʺa movement for national dramaʺ (Lee, 1973, p.

88‐89). His call echoed what others had been saying for some years. In 1928,

Herman Voaden had written:

Little theatres are springing up in great numbers. Many of them are abortive in character and poorly led. The great need is for an organization to encourage the formation of these new groups, to guide them in the direction of artistic activity and to point the way to a distinctly Canadian drama. (1928, p. 106)

On Oct. 29, 1932, the Governor‐General, significantly facilitated behind the scenes by Vincent Massey, created the Dominion Drama Festival (DDF) to showcase amateur theatre. The weeklong finals were held in a different city each

53 year with prizes being awarded in several categories: actors, directors, designers, and technicians. For more than 30 years, the DDF trained a whole generation of theatre lovers and gave experience to a large number of amateur theatre artists.

The Little Theatres across Canada, bolstered now by the formal structure of the

DDF, performed their plays in theatre playhouses or in venues that aspired to be such spaces. Taking a brief hiatus during the war years, the DDF emerged again in 1946, stronger than ever, and prepared to lead Canadian theatre into the

future.

In less than a decade, Canada dha changed from a primarily agricultural

to an industrial nation, and returning troops and a wave of European immigrants

brought with them new cultural demands. With the establishment of the

Stratford Festival in 1953, professional theatre took on a new prominence in

Canada. The Canada Council responded to this new trend and decided that

cultural funding would go to professional rather than amateur theatres. The

results of this enthusiasm and financing were impressive. In less than ten years,

professional regional theatres were established in most provinces: the Vancouver

Playhouse and the Neptune Theatre in Halifax in 1963; the Saidye Bronfman

Centre in Montreal in 1967; Theatre Calgary and Theatre New Brunswick in 1968;

the National Arts Centre in Ottawa and the Centaur Theatre in Montreal in 1969;

54 and the St Lawrence Centre in Toronto in 1970. In addition, the Grand Theatre in

London, Ont., and the Bastion Theatre in Victoria, B.C., went professional in 1971

(“Regional Theatre,” para. 3). The growth of professional theatre in Canada continued over the next several decades. By 2004, 117 professional theatres were registered with the Professional Association of Canadian Theatres (PACT).

Despite receiving no funding from the Canada Council, small amateur theatres

still continued to thrive across the country (Professional Association, n.p.).

Although there is currently no mechanism to record the number of amateur

theatres in Canada, in 1983, Samuel French estimated the number to be between

700‐800, which was most likely a low estimate. Today, the number would likely

be well over 1000 and possibly quite a bit higher, as you would be hard pressed

not to find some type of community theatre group not only in the cities,o but als

in almost every medium and large sized town across the country (Gardner, 1989, p. 304 – 309).

The Middle Years: The Emergence of Formal Theatre Programs

Early University Theatre

Unlike Europe and the United States, Canada has not developed a strong core of private professional training schools separate from the university and college system (the only exception to this is the National Theatre School).

Although a few private schools dedicated to theatre training existed for short

periods of time throughout the years, most theatre artists learned as apprentices

in the few resident professional companies available or from their experiences in

the Little Theatres across the country. Canada’s first professional actors, director

and designers often had their training in amateur productions, and the teachers of these enthusiastic amateurs were often immigrant actors, directors, or painters. The change in the 1950s from a predominately amateur to a professional theatre was paralleled by an equivalent growth in the study of theatre as an academic and practical discipline (Peacock, 1989, p. 191).

Until the mid 20th century there was no formal theatre education available

at the university level. In the early part of the century, most universities offered

courses in dramatic literature, criticism and even history, but regarded the

practice of theatre as an extra‐curricular activity, more suited towards drama

societies, departments of extension and inter‐collegiate festivals. There were

56 early signs of theatrical activity on campuses. In November 1899, a handful of students under the leadership of S. W. Dyde, Professor of Mental Philosophy, formed a dramatic club at Queen’s university. Around this same time, most universities in Canada had formed similar dramatic clubs or guilds (Waldhauer,

1991, p. 8). The University Dramatic Club of Montreal, using mainly McGill personnel and alumni, staged one of their first shows in 1907. The University of

British Columbia’s Player’s Club started in 1915 and lasted for forty‐three years

as an all‐student drama society. Play reading groups were on the University of

Alberta campus as early as 1911 and the University of Toronto’s Hart House

encouraged the development of amateur drama activities on the campus from its

beginnings in 1919 (Peacock, 1989, p. 192).

The First Drama Degrees

With the economic prosperity resulting from the post war years, and an

increase in the number of theatres and calibre of the work being produced, the

Canadian theatre scene sparked the interest of several university staff and faculty

members across the country. Dr. William Angus, from Queen’s University,

started teaching non‐credit theatre courses in the Queen’s Summer School in

1937. At the University of British Columbia, Dorothy Somerset founded the

Summer School of the Theatre in 1939, and taught the University’s first credit

57 courses in theatre in 1946. In 1944, Emery Jones was brought to the University of

Saskatchewan where his primary responsibilities were “the teaching of Drama in its more academic and cultural aspects, with the hope of establishing Dramatics as a worthy part of an integrated programme in the Fine Arts” (President’s Office

Records, n.d. series II, file B‐55). In 1945, Jones would lead the creation of

Canadaʹs first Department of Drama, and subsequently would become the first

full‐time professor of Drama at a Commonwealth university (“Events in the

History,” n.d., para. 5). Leading to a Bachelor of Education Degree in Drama, the

program at the University of Saskatchewan offered a primarily liberal arts

curriculum with a few professional courses taken in the upper years. Although there were early concerns with professional theatre courses being integrated into

a university degree program, Jones justified their existence and emphasised the

need for a theatre program to include both a liberal arts education and practical

training courses. He states,

if Canadaʹs drama is to be truly cultural, artistic, well‐informed, and of a high standard of performance, if it is to have its proper leaders, writers, producers, and audiences, there is need of training on a high level; and only our Universities are equipped and staffed and organized to give such advanced education.... A National Theatre cannot exist only with trained artists and producers; it must also have a trained audience.... the purpose of teaching drama should not be to train only ʺexpertsʺ and practising artists in the theatre any more than the purpose of teaching history is to train only teachers of history. It is to be expected that a few students will specialize in drama in order to make a career of the theatre; but the

vast majority of them will follow the drama courses only as a development of their cultural appreciations. (1946, p. 322)

Jones’ comments on a National Theatre for Canada and the role that universities could play in its development reflect the early connection between the Canadian theatre scene and university theatre education. The University of Saskatchewan’s

Department of Drama was established in direct response to the growth in

Canadian theatre, particularly the Dominion Drama Festival. With the federal

government’s increased interest in Canadian culture and in a National Theatre,

the case for theatre as a subject worthy of academic pursuit was well accepted.

At the University of Alberta, non‐credit drama courses had been offered

through the Department of Extension since the early 1940s, but in 1946, Robert

Orchard arrived at the University of Alberta and headed the creation of the

Drama Division of the Faculty of Fine Arts. That same year, courses in acting,

stagecraft, and theatre history were being taught and by 1967, a Bachelor of

Education in Drama (B.Ed) program was established. Orchard brought with him

the knowledge from his own theatre studies in England and New York, and his

most recent experience as a Little Theatre director in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Knowledgeable about the Canadian theatre scene, and about the lack of formal

theatre training available, Orchard, along with Elizabeth Sterling Haynes and

Gordon Peacock, began the process of shaping a program that would prepare students to meet the demands of working in the Canadian theatre. Orchard was firm in his conviction that live theatre was an essential component of theatre education. Since the University of Alberta lacked a sufficient space for the students to experience live theatre, Orchard lobbied for the creation of a theatre

owed solely by the University. In his proposal for Studio Theatre, submitted to

Dean John Macdonald, he claimed that,

it is, illogical to teach any course in theatre when there is not an adequate number of good productions to which to refer as examples. Both music and art have records and reproduction on which to base much of their study. Theatre does not exist in the printed page, and cannot, alas, be ‘canned’. It exists solely in the live performance. It has constantly to be recreating its own study material. It is equally unsound for any department to teach Aeschylus, Shakespeare, Racine, Sheridan, Ibsen, and Shaw merely as so much literature. No professional histrionics can make up for the experience of seeing at least one of their plays in performance (Glenfield, 1999, p. 4‐5).

In 1949, Studio Theatre opened its doors for the first time and later that

year presented its first show. The Studio Theatre’s debut was timely. Edmonton’s

Little Theatre was producing plays in 1949, there was an active drama club on

campus, and although there were a few professional touring productions, there

was no resident professional company in Edmonton. From the beginning, Studio

Theatre would be a place for both the theatre community and students alike,

producing both professional and amateur productions and providing students

60 the opportunity to work with theatre professionals. With an active drama department at both the University of Saskatchewan and the University of

Alberta, others began to follow suit and a strong cross‐country movement to provide theatre education in university was well underway.

In 1947, Queen’s University divorced the study of theatre from the English curriculum and established a BA degree within a Department of Drama

(Waldhauer, 1991, p. 42). Like the University of Alberta and University of British

Columbia’s summer drama schools, Queen’s had begun offering practical theatre

courses in the summer of 1934. The description in the Summer Calendar of that

year promised that, “The Acting and Staging of Drama…will be designed to

supply practical instruction and encouragement for those who wish to take part

in amateur performances or to produce plays acted by school pupils” (As cited in

Waldhauer, 1991, p. 19). The course culminated in a public performance,

however, the calendar also makes it clear that choral singing, art, and the acting and staging of drama could not “be reckoned towards credit for a degree, but

[were] designed to stimulate and satisfy the cultural interests of teachers and others” (As cited in Waldhauer, 1991, p. 19). Herman Voaden, a well‐known figure in Canadian theatre was invited to teach and direct this first Summer

School course. In 1941 Queen’s Drama Guild students petitioned the Principal

61 and the Board of Trustees at the University to have Dr. William Angus, who had been teaching theatre courses in the Queen’s Summer School since 1937, officially designated as a “Director of Dramatics.” In 1947, the Department of Drama at

Queen’s was born with Dr. Angus at the helm. The Department offered a

Bachelor of Arts Degree with a Major in Drama (Waldhauer, 1991, p. 42).

The fledgling drama departments grew quickly and by 1955, there were

eight full‐time drama instructors teaching 120 students in 4 university programs

across the country. In 1958, the University of Windsor and the University of

British Columbia opened their doors to students interested in studying theatre,

offering a liberal arts style program including a few practical courses leading to

BA degree in Drama. As Canada’s Centennial approached, an explosion of new

theatrical education facilities began. Between 1968 and 1974, 21 University

theatre departments were founded. Of that number, 12 began in the 1966‐1968

Centennial period (Lorenowicz, 1989, para. 3).

The National Theatre School

In 1951, the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters

and Sciences, more commonly known as the Massey Report, after its chairman

Vincent Massey, commented on the increased involvement in theatre that

Canadian universities were suddenly playing. The Commission applauded the contribution that the universities were making with their departments of drama, but noted the lack of a national theatre school that could focus all of its attention towards professional, conservatory style training for the theatre. However, before the Commission would endorse such a school, it stressed the importance of developing a national theatre for Canada. The report states,

a few Canadian universities have full‐time departments of drama, and in such summer schools as the Banff School of Fine Arts much excellent work is being done. But nowhere in Canada does there exist advanced training for the playwright, the producer, the technician or the actor; nor does it seem rational to advocate the creation of suitable schools of dramatic art in Canada when present prospects for the employment in Canada of the graduates seem so unfavourable…. Repeatedly at our sessions throughout Canada the question of a National Theatre was discussed. …. If there were such an outlet and such a goal for young Canadians gifted in the arts of the theatre, it has been suggested to us that it would be advisable and necessary to make provision in Canada for the more advanced training of young artists discovered by the Dominion Drama Festival and by other amateur and professional organizations. (Royal Commission, 1951, p. 197, 199)

Despite the fact that no resolution had been made on the idea of a

National Theatre for Canada, the idea of a national theatre training school was growing. In 1952, Michel Saint‐Denis, the French actor, director, theatre educator,

and since 1937 a frequent Dominion Drama Festival adjudicator, spoke out in

favour of the idea of the school and again advocated for it on his next visit to

Canada in 1958. Subsequently, at meetings in Quebec City, Montreal, and

Toronto with Canadian theatre artists, members of the Canada Council, and the

Dominion Drama Festival it was agreed that the proposed school should be bilingual, national in scope, and conceived along the lines of Saint‐Denis’ principles of theatre training. Questions of financing and location proved to be more contentious, and it was not until the establishment of the Canadian Theatre

Centre in 1959 that the school moved significantly towards realization. Under the umbrella of the Canadian Theatre Centre, a committee was formed to investigate the planning of the proposed school and report its findings to the Centre. The committee selected Montreal as the school’s location, with the opening scheduled

for fall 1960. The Board of Directors of the Canadian Theatre Centre ratified the

committee’s recommendations on February 8, 1960 and the National Theatre

School (NTS) opened on schedule that fall in three rented rooms in the Canadian

Legion Building in Montreal (Smith, 1985, p. 365). The forward to the plan for the founding of the National Theatre School, stated that,

to meet the needs of Canada’s theatre this country must train its own artists and workers. No longer can its purpose be adequately served by sending its students abroad for training. If a national expression through theatre is to be achieved, then that training must be on a national level and a matter of national concern. (as cited in Dunton, 1982, p. 1)

The National Theatre School’s curriculum follows the European

conservatory model of theatre training. The certificate program offers students

64 intensive training in one of the theatre crafts – Acting, Design, Technical theatre,

Playwriting and Directing (although the directing specialization has been on and off over the years). Students take courses in various areas meant to hone their skills in a craft. For example, students in the acting specialization might take courses in such areas as: voice, movement, improvisation, mask, characterization

and dialect etc. Moving through the years in the program as a cohort and rarely

allowed or able to accept work outside the program, the students work towards a

final graduation piece where they are then showcased to directors and theatre companies from across the country. However, while the National Theatre

School’s emphasis on professional training set it apart from the universities, it

was hardly alone, as within just a few years, professional theatre programs began

emerging in university curricula across the country.

The BFA Emerges in Canada

In 1965, the University of Alberta created three new departments from the former Department of Fine Arts: Music, Art, and Drama. That same year the

newly created Department of Drama established its first professional theatre

training programs, the Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) in Acting and the BFA in

Theatre Design. With the establishment of these new programs, it was the

University of Alberta’s intent to place itself alongside the National Theatre

School and provide a true conservatory‐style training program that would offer students intensive courses to prepare them for a professional career in the theatre, while offering a university degree – not available at the National Theatre

School (Glenfield, 1999, p. 14‐15). The new programs were developed under the leadership of Gordon Peacock, the newly appointed Head of the Department of

Drama. Having obtained an MFA degree from Carnegie Institute of Technology and Art (the first school offering degrees in drama in the United States), Peacock

brought with him a vision and mandate that would advance educational theatre

in Canada (Glenfield, 1999, p. 6). Students entering the BFA programs were offered a rigorous conservatory‐style theatre program intended to prepare them for the professional theatre. In addition, however, the students were required to take academic courses in areas outside of their specialization in order to graduate students who were prepared for a professional career, but who also had a thorough understanding of the theatre including its social, cultural and political

aspects. The program combined the European conservatory model with the more

academic degree already offered in BA and B.Ed programs across Canada. The

establishment of the BFA program was in direct response to the rise in

professional theatre during the late 1960s in Canada and the increasing demand

for theatre artists.

Following the University of Alberta’s example, BFA degrees in Drama began appearing in universities across the country. In the early 1970s, Concordia and Ryerson began offering programs, followed by York in 1975 and Lethbridge in 1977. Encouraged by the success of these early BFA programs, universities from coast to coast began offering similar programs. By the year 2000, 12 BFA programs had been established at Canadian universities.

The Black Report

While the number of university theatre programs, B.Ed, BA and BFA, continued to grow across the country, their effectiveness in preparing students

for professional careers began to be questioned. In 1977, Dan MacDonald,

president of Canadian Actors’ Equity, wrote that with the proliferation of university theatre programs,

it is a constant worry to our members that so many students are being ground out by theatre courses and dumped onto an already saturated market, ill‐prepared, in too many cases, to work in a professional situation, and not having been debunked of the notion that a BA in theatre stamped on the candidate’s posterior does not automatically assure leading roles, top salaries and stardom…. The majority of ‘theatre schools in Canada are not connected, in any useful way, with the professional theatre, and ‘train’ the students from an academic point of view only, rather than a practical, theatrical one. The best way to learn your craft, most actors would say, is to do it, and to put yourself in a position to watch other, more experienced, actors do it (Black, Marsolais, Peacock, Porteous, & Ronfard, 1977, p. 10).

The Canada Council had similar concerns and in 1975 they commissioned a national study in the field of professional theatre training, and in 1976, a formal inquiry began. In 1977 Malcolm Black, one of the earliest champions of Canadian theatre and appointed to Chair the study, presented the Report eof th Committee of

Inquiry into Theatre Training in Canada which studied forms of theatre training in

37 institutions across the country (including the Quebec CEGEP/post secondary system, not discussed in this chapter, which began to offer theatre training in the late 1960s). For reasons still unclear, the Canada Council withheld the release of

what came to be known as the “Black Report” for one year. According to theatre

scholar Don Rubin, officially the Council claimed translation problems as the

reason for the delay, however, unofficially it was suggested that the Council was not satisfied with the report’s methodology and conclusions, especially as it related to Anglophone schools and universities (Rubin, 1985, p. 286).

The Black Report caused a stir in Canadian theatre training circles when it

finally became public. Despite concerns with the methodology used in the study,

its anecdotal style and lack of hard data, the report’s position was clear: “theatre

training has become an industry in our county – an industry that has grown

without any realistic appraisal of the actual needs within the profession” (Black

et al., 1977, p. 11). The report recommended the setting up of a regulatory board

68 to assess and report on professional theatre schools on an ongoing basis. The committee suggested that “this body would be responsible for granting recognition to training schools, recommending those for public subsidy, and ensuring that the profession is adequately represented in the training process”

(Black et al., 1977, p. 92).

The committee also noted real confusion as to what constitutes a

professional theatre training program, especially among universities. According

to the Report, only three schools, the National Theatre School, Ryerson

Polytechnical and the Vancouver Playhouse qualified as true conservatories that

adequately trained students for professional careers in the theatre. Praise was

limited for the university offerings, although the University of Alberta’s BFA

program received the Report’s approval, as did elements of other programs such

as University of British Columbia’s directing program. The Report expressed

specific concern with universities who were offering BFA degrees. It states that,

people with Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) degrees after their names don’t necessarily know the first thing about theatre; and this comment was echoed in various forms. A departmental chairman suggested that the BFA degree had become seriously devalued. It had originally signified a truly professional training and concentration. Now it has become obtainable in universities offering what is really a liberal arts degree (Black et al., 1977, p. 14).

A list of recommendations from the Report suggests that universities in

Canada should re‐examine their function in the area of theatre training and that university programs must decide what is the exact nature of the training they intend to offer and define themselves clearly in all written publicity as well as in the classroom. The Report goes as far as to suggest that, “universities must stop

misleading students…. The number of university theatre department graduates who believe they are prepared for work in the profession is criminal” (Black et al., 1977, p. 88). The Report recognized the great value of theatre as a liberal art and suggested that universities should adopt a liberal arts approach to theatre

education as its primary function. It is interesting to note that this list of recommendations came from a committee made up of 5 members most of whom were educated in the European system of theatre education. The European

system, after which the early American university programs were based, differentiates between professional theatre training and the university.

Universities provide a strictly liberal arts program that educates students in dramatic literature, criticism and history while practical theatre training is left to the non‐degree granting conservatories and institutions where students can be

properly trained in their craft.

Another Perspective: Theatre Education in the UK and America

The Oxford and Cambridge Tradition

In the United Kingdom, theatre education, like other fields in higher education are routed in the tradition of Oxford and Cambridge where what matters most is the subject studied, studied as a thing of intrinsic dan absolute interest, separated from a particular age or trend and in disregard of its value as

vocational training for a particular career. The Oxford and Cambridge tradition

is slowly changing however, as universities are starting to offer more technical

and vocational programming. The student and the career are beginning to be

seen as just as important or in some cases more important than the subject being

studied. Although things are starting to change, in order for theatre to be offered

at a university in the UK it must be defended as a subject of both to those who

hold the traditional view that learning is to be pursued for its own sake and to those who hold that the first duty of a university is towards its students and their

immediate future rather than towards a timeless devotion to learning as such.

According to British theatre scholar Nevill Coghill (1952), the study of theatre

can fulfill both roles. He suggests that theatre is capable of humane study at the university level, even by the most rigorous and absolute standards, but he does question the ability of the subject to be studied as a university major. Coghill goes on to suggest that programs in drama are capable of being taught in such as

71 way as to prepare students for various related careers without departing too far from the ideal of learning for its own sake (p. 40).

A British Example

In 1947, Bristol University became the first British university to inaugurate a department of drama offering a degree program to its students. At the time there was no British precedent to serve as a model and so the university looked to the United States. American universities offered a variety of examples, but it

was thought best to avoid a direct copy and evolve a program that would be

appropriate to the university’s particular environment. British universities were

in the unique situation of having a number of professional theatres producing

high quality classical and contemporary work close by. This, they felt, eliminated

the necessity of training their drama students in the craft of theatre, and focused

their attention instead on the literature, art, architecture and social condition of

the theatre. The twin aim of the Bristol Department of Drama was to study

Drama as a living projection of a text and to tackle social problems created by

rapid developments in popular dramatic entertainment. Drama was taught in the

Faculty of Arts as one of three subjects needed for the General Degree of

Bachelor of Arts (Wickham, 1952, p. 106‐107). During the time of the

Department’s creation, there was a push in Europe to explore other models of

72 university theatre education, particularly the American system. Scholars such as

Coghill (1952) did just that and concluded that in the United States, the function of a university is to prepare the student for the workforce and the majority of universities offer far more technical and professional training courses then can be found in the UK (p. 40).

The Oxford Drama Commission

Interested in exploring the possibility of starting a department of drama at

Oxford, in 1948 Oxford University invited a Commission to investigate the study

of the theatre as a curriculum subject in American universities. Spending less than three weeks in America, the Commission traveled around to a number of

universities, interviewing the heads of departments of drama and examining the

curriculum, structure and facilities available. Upon their return to Oxford, the

“Report of the Oxford Drama Commission” was produced. This report identified

three lines of criticism that they had for the American model, highlighted their discussions with the department heads and finally made a recommendation on a department of drama at Oxford. One of the criticisms identified in the report is that some of the American departments of drama are “unduly vocational”

(Gibberd, 1948, p. 5). The report identifies a vocational course as one that is

directed to giving a certain competence to a student that will enable him to be

73 successful in the profession that he is adopting. A second objection identified is that there is not enough rigorous intellectual material being studied in these departments. The Report also suggests that if a university decides that it is concerned primarily with teaching students to understand theatre in its various forms the question may be raised whether this understanding is increased by the activities of the student either in acting himself or in the production of plays.

American theatre scholar Mr. Granville Barker expressed his views to the

Commission. He made the point that, “a student who is required to act a part in

a play immediately becomes engaged in the method of presenting his part and ceases to let his mind turn on the significance of the play as a whole” (Gibberd,

1948, p. 6). He goes on to suggest that a preoccupation with acting will divert attention from the meaning of the play. Barker instead thought,

it much better that students should read and discuss plays in a class with their teacher, different parts being allotted to different students and sometimes the same part being allotted in succession to two or three students with a view to discussion of the interpretation which each student was giving to the play. The students might well move about the room and partially act their parts, but anything in the nature of acting before an audience would destroy the purpose of their study.” (Gibberd, 1948, p. 6)

Professor Allardyve Nicoll, former chairman of the Department of Drama at Yale

University, shared some of the same concerns as Barker in regard to the

74 disruptive effect of undergraduate acting on academic studies, but he also laid great emphasis on the need for a theatre in the university at which students could see the plays which they were studying actually performed (Gibberd, 1948, p. 6).

In considering whether it was desirable, following the American model, to incorporate a school of drama in the Oxford curriculum, the Commission

distinguished two questions. The first question was: Should there be a school of

the university that would unite literary studies with the active production of

theatre? In answer to this question, the Commission thought that any attempt to

follow the practice of American Universities in this direction would not easily be

assimilated with the aims and tradition at Oxford. It was noted that the

distinctive part in the past of the Oxford curricula was the insistence on a

rigorous intellectual discipline, and it was thought that this tradition might be

“endangered if the University were to direct, even in part, its energies towards a

different end” (Gibberd, 1948, p. 6). It was noted that since Oxford had the

“distinctive function of maintaining the standards of scholarship, learning and rigorous thinking at the highest levels,” the Commission recommended that

Oxford not follow the American model of theatre education (Gibberd, 1948, p. 7).

The second question was whether it was desirable to construct a new literary

75 curriculum dealing with drama alone, which would take its place alongside other schools in the University without any fundamental departure from

Oxford’s traditional methods and practice. This school would exclude the practical activity of producing plays, but would concentrate on a comparative study of plays, periods and the social and literary conditions in which various schools of drama arose. The committee rejected this second proposal seeing a school of drama being at a disadvantage in relation to other schools in which drama is currently studied. It was thought that the advantage of a comparative study of drama would only occur at the expense of divorcing it from a larger

literary tradition. The commission noted that, “the student would lose by

studying the English drama without any careful study of the other forms of

literary expression with which its development is closely connected” (Gibberd,

1948, p. 7). It was for these reasons that the Commission did not recommend the

creation of a school of drama. In accepting this view, it was deemed that it is not

necessary for student themselves to act the plays in order for them to understand

them. It was, however, noted that students should have the opportunity of

seeing the plays that they study and for this reason the Commission did advocate

a theatre owned by the University (Gibberd, 1948, p. 7). Oxford accepted the recommendation of the Commission, and a department of drama was never established at the University.

The Commission took a harsh stand on the American system, especially considering that it was the European system that the first American programs were based on. Courses in the dramatic arts have been offered at American universities since the year 1900 within departments of Oratory, English

Literature and Rhetoric, Expression, Public Speaking, and Speech. Similar to the

European system American universities believed in a strong liberal arts

education, one which provided their students with the three objectives which

would later be outlined in the 1945 Harvard report, “General Education in a Free

Society”: 1) an ability to communicate orally and in writing the results of

contemplation; 2) training in logical reasoning and the development of the

capacity to formulate supportable conclusions; and 3) training in the capability to

make sound judgements (as cited in, Heffner, 1994, p. 18‐19). Both the European

and American systems were heavily grounded in the liberal arts; however, a

major difference existed in departments where the initial drama courses existed.

In Europe, drama existed primarily as a literary subject in departments of

English or Literature. In America, drama courses were traditionally housed in

departments of Speech or Expression, Classics and the like. Regardless of the department, these early university drama courses allowed students to pursue development in the literature, art, politics, language acquisition and history of

77 the stage, but did not provide specific training in the craft. Similar to the

European situation, specific training in a craft such as acting, directing or design was limited to a few private conservatories or to university drama clubs. Even during the time of the Oxford Commission, American universities were offering primarily a liberal arts curriculum to their students with only the odd practical

course being offered at a few select universities.

Theatre Education in America

From 1900 to 1925, the number of American universities that incorporated

course instruction in theatre increased steadily. This was due, in part, to the

vitalizing influence of the Little Theatre Movement that developed throughout

North America and Europe during the second decade of the 20th century. In

Canada, the focus of the Little Theatre Movement was on creating a National

Theatre, however, in the United States, the Movement attracted significant

attention from the universities. American colleges and universities were greatly

attracted to the Movement’s artistic experimentation and as a result, managed to

keep the little theatre movement alive even as, during the 1930s and 40s, most of its stages were darkened by the war, the depression, the domination of talking motion pictures and advancements in radio programming (Hobgood, 1964, p.

157).

In 1912, George Pierce Baker inaugurated at Harvard University what would become the famous “47 Workshop.” There, plays written in his English

47 class were given their ultimate and conclusive test not in the classroom but on a stage before an audience. This was one of the first times in the United States that an attempt had been made to correlate academic instruction with practical theatre. Baker’s work fostered the development of theatre taught as performance rather than only literature. Baker’s methods were piloted not only at Harvard and Yale (where Baker moved in 1924) but also enticed a number of other universities to follow suit (Harrop, 1973, p. 67). A precedent for offering courses in practical theatre had already been set since universities had been offering

credit courses in areas such as music and art for several years. Many institutions began to place increased emphasis on the drama clubs, associations and university theatres. The overriding mission was to win autonomy through the legitimization of theatre as an accredited course of study. As a result, university and college programs across America developed rapidly until theatre achieved

status as a field in higher education (Hobgood, 1964, p. 157).

With an increase of theatrical activity in American society, there was also

an increasing demand for trained teachers and directors. One of the early

79 objections to the study of dramatic art was that it wasted the time and money of the students. For many students, there had been no demonstrable practical end that warranted the time and energy spent on a study of theatre. With the rising demand for teachers and theatre directors as well as community players, this objection lost validity (Damon, 1953, p. 192‐192). In 1900, 15 universities across

the United States were offering credit courses in theatre. This number grew to 25

in 1910, 37 by 1915 and 53 by 1920 (Damon, 1953, p. 114). By 1925, departmental titles not only suggested that courses involving oral activity were offered; they tended to specifically refer to theatre or dramatic art. Over the next thirty years, majors in theatre began to be offered and departments of drama sprung up in universities across the country (Damon, 1953, p. 174‐177). With the advent eof th

1960’s, the study of theatre entered an era of overall professionalization and the number of practical courses being offered rose significantly. In 1962, a statistical analysis was published, edited by Burnett Hobgood, entitled the Directory of

American College Theatre. The analysis estimated that fifteen thousand students enrolled in theatre courses annually pursuing either a university major or minor in the area. As of 1960, forty‐two percent of the academic departments offering theatre programs still did so as an offshoot of another department in the manner

of the early American university Speech and Drama tradition (Himes, 1998, p. 40‐

41). American universities struggled to find the appropriate balance between the traditional academic courses that needed to be offered and the theatre craft.

The Idea of Theatre in the University Curriculum

The Balance of Theory and Practice

Theatre is one of the most difficult arts to keep balanced between theory and practice. Theatre scholar George Kernodle (1949) suggests that theatre is one

of the most important art forms because it does combine both of these extremes.

He states,

it combines the universal and the particular. It unites the intellectual idea with the sensuous detail. No other art can surpass it in joining the external and the internal, for it brings in the objective world in a most personal way, and yet suffuses the outside world with personal values. It can surpass all other arts in dealing at the same time with the wildest social implication and the most intimate individual need. (p. 85)

Too often, within the university environment, the theory and practice of theatre are thought of as two separate areas of study that are distinct from one another and often one being more worthy academically than the other. There is a need to think of both areas as part of the study of theatre, and without both areas in place at a university, a thorough understanding of the subject is impossible. American

universities have struggled and continue, in some circles, to struggle over this

81 integration. The European university model of only training students in theory and not in practice still exists today in the majority of British universities, although times are beginning to change. In Canada, the situation is quite different. Since the first departments of drama began operating in Canadian universities, they ehav been offering integrated programs, including both theory

and practice into the curriculum. This decision was not a reflection of what was

currently happening across the border in America or in Europe, but rather in

direct response to the current theatre situation in Canada. The theatre,

particularly the non‐professional theatre, was thriving and in need of both

educated patrons and participants. The universities, with the help of theatre

enthusiasts and scholars on the campuses, responded to this demand. Early programs offered a primarily liberal art approach, but with practical courses

included in the curriculum as well. As the situation for Canadian theatre began

changing ‐ the country saw an increase in the number of professional theatres,

movement towards a National Theatre and the creation of a national theatre training school ‐ the universities again adapted and began offering a more

professional training program leading to a BFA degree. The BFA degree was not

in response to the American or European model, but instead a direct response to

the Canadian theatre environment. Although significant debates and studies

over the worth of a theatre degree or of the appropriateness of theatre training in

82 a university environment were limited in Canada to the “Black Report,” and a few scholarly publications, south of the border the issue was widely debated.

The Idea of Theatre in the University Curriculum

In 1949, professor Edwin Burr Pettet of Carleton College published an essay describing the value of a college or university major in theatre. He

suggested that the worth of such a major was that it would integrate academic

theory with theatre practice and not privilege one over the other. This sentiment

touched off a debate during the early 1950s over the question: If theatre in higher education was not to be a practical training program for the professional stage,

then what other purpose could it serve (Hobgood 1964, p. 148). As a part of the

debate, Samuel Seldon attacked the notion of a Ph.D program in theatre in 1955.

Sensitive to the fact that academic theatre programs were not actually teaching philosophy nor pressing research onto all of their postgraduates, Seldon proposed that the postgraduate theatre degree, instead, be terminal and referred

to as the Master of Fine Arts degree (MFA), thus accommodating the graduate

who was neither fully an artist nor a scholar but a bit of both (Macgowan, 1957,

p. 94). A British point of view entered the picture in 1959 when Bristol’s

department chair Glynne Wickham, speaking at that year’s American

Educational Theatre Association convention, asserted that “a university program

83 in theatre should give serious attention to theatre as an art, while undertaking some producing activity, but it should not make pretences about training professional talents” (as cited in Hobgood, 1964, p.149).

In disagreement were scholars such as W. McNeil Lowry and Theodore

Hoffman who argued that the tradition of liberal arts methods at universities should be exempted for professional training programs in theatre. Like many other scholars, they were of the opinion that post secondary theatre programs

had assumed the position of the traditional independent professional

conservatories, and academic theatre departments therefore carried the responsibility of developing professional calibre theatre artists (Hobgood, 1964, p. 149; Lowry, 1962, p. 109‐110). In a response to Lowry, Frank Whiting argued against his position suggesting that a theatre program could encompass a liberal arts education and still develop students who possess competent abilities in theatre practice (1963, p. 158‐162). Disagreeing with Whiting and other scholars such as Hubert Heffner who took up similar positions, Dean of the Yale School of

Drama, Robert Brustein (1970) proposed a different relationship between the university and the theatre. He argued in favour of a professional theatre education, but suggested that theatre should not be included as a discipline within the academic or university environment, but should instead be

84 established as an academy or conservatory only loosely connected to the university (p. 239).

At the 1956 convention of the American Educational Theatre Association,

Kenneth Macgowan from the Department of Theatre Arts at UCLA, stated that it was not enough for post secondary instruction to merely train a student to think but that the student must also learn by “vicarious experience as much as he can of the full range of human emotion. Then he may think better too, but, the

important thing is that he will go through life with a livelier sense of all its rich

and satisfying values”. Thus, to more “effectively cultivate creative intelligence,”

theatre students of the coming years needed to meet “certain basic requirements

of a sound general education” in order to “supplement and extend” their

interests. Thus, argued Macgowan, the integration of required general curricula

would be a way for the department to set up “a strong defense against the

familiar charge of disguised vocationalism” (1957, p. 90, 95).

In 1962, Lowry observed that the, “best equipped theatres in the United

States… are not those in which professional actors appear but those maintained

by the universities” (p. 104). In addition to facilities, Lowry also identified another dilemma common to post secondary theatre: the one who is “trained to

85 teach theatre history is not necessarily qualified to direct a play, any more than the historian of art is qualified to teach painting or sculpture” (p. 109). He notes that the training environment must be capable of providing “opportunities for professional apprenticeship through non‐academic persons or institutions.” And so he claims that the future of the dramatic arts within an academic environment

is dependent upon a plan for major restructuring if the program is to ever have

the capability of offering legitimate vocational training (p. 109‐110).

Theatre education historian Burnett Hobgood took a neutral stance on the

argument over professional versus liberal art theatre education in the university.

To him, the controversy was pointless. Hobgood (1964) believed that there was

no real resolution to determining the precise role of vocational training in college

and university theatre due to the innumerable combinations of viewpoints

possible on the matter. But, whatever position scholars might have adopted on the question, the overriding consensus was that the intention of including a theatre program in the university system was to educate those interested in the

art about its meaning and unique processes (p. 150).

In her 1989 essay, “Theatre Education: Approaching a New Decade,”

Barbara Salisbury Wills foresaw that “the question of what comprises basic

86 theatre education will spark lively debate in the 1990s, and that debate will result in action, evaluation, and research” (p. 27). Just as Wills had predicted, not only did debate over what comprised university theatre education continue to come into question, but also so did the usefulness of the theatre degree. Just as academic theatre was beginning to participate more freely in dialogues with

other fields of study, and coming into its own as an autonomous discipline,

theatre programs across the country were being discretely re‐evaluated by the institutions. With the advent of the 1990s came budget cuts, reallocations and

“the call to dismantle theatre studies” across the United States despite a

continued growth in the number and quality of applicants” (Worthen, 1993, p.

414). Daryl Chin and Larry Qualls (1995), co‐editors of Performing Arts Journal, state that the equivocal BFA and MFA degrees are proving to be relatively

worthless credentials which were created as a profitable business ploy concerned

more with catering to the desires and interests of the bourgeoisie than educating

scholar/artists (p. 1). The same year, theatre professor and scholar Gautam

Dasgupta (1995) noted that university theatre productions often try to replicate

the commercial theatre and this renders students victims to the pressures and

harsh demands of professionalism. As a result he claimed, “it is more common to

find students exercising their imaginations in vital ways in classroom work” but curbing that same creativity under the pressure of the main stage productions

87 where, in order to save face, students become preoccupied with controlling their experimental urges (p. 95). Bonnie Marranca (1995) agreed with Dasgupta’s assessment and pointed out that what “so strikingly exemplifies university theatre study nationwide is its lack of vision,” she found it particularly disconcerting that the “culture of banality that passes for theatre in this country

now pervades every branch of its thinking and practice. It needs desperately to

be addressed, especially at this cultural moment when ignorant, loud voices

question the place of art in society” (p. 60). She continues, suggesting that

training in the dramatic arts, in order to prepare for the twenty‐first century,

must “become more visionary.” Current programs need to develop and nurture

“the new conceptions of character, language, and sound (p. 56‐57).

Canadian theatre scholar John Hawkins (1998) would have agreed with

Marranca about university theatre education needing to adapt to the changing

society. It is his assertion that old distinctions of the conservatory BFA degree

qualifying students to work in the professional theatre and a liberal arts BA degree qualifying students for the amateur theatre are outdated given the changes in the nature of what constitutes the professional theatre in Canada. He notes that most post secondary theatre training programs came into being under circumstances very different from those that exist now (p. 149‐150). When

Canadian universities first began offering degrees in theatre, the majority of theatres in Canada were amateur and connected with the Dominion Drama

Festival. The BA degree was created within this context. With the rise of the professional theatres in Canada and continuing on with the Little Theatres from the Dominion Drama Festival becoming increasingly professionalized and

developing into regional theatres, the BFA degree became increasingly popular.

At the time of the creation of the degree, there was a clear distinction between

what constituted a BFA degree versus a BA degree. Early BA and B.Ed programs such as those at the Universities of Saskatchewan, York and Alberta, were firmly

grounded in the liberal arts and although offering a few courses in theatre

practice, did not make any attempts to be recognized as a professional program.

It was not until the rise of professional theatres in Canada and the establishment

of a professional National Theatre School that universities would begin to offer

the BFA degree. The early theatre programs in Canada developed in response to

the Canadian theatre situation at the time, and other universities followed suit,

modeling themselves after other Canadian programs. Canadian theatre

education, although influenced by both European and American systems, is a

distinctly Canadian model that has developed out of and responded to the

changing Canadian theatre environment.

Today 29 universities across Canada are offering theatre degrees, 14 of which offer the Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) degree. With an increasing number of programs being offered, a growing arts and culture sector across the country and increasing jobs for graduates of the creative and performing arts, it is time to examine theatre education in Canada to ensure that it is adapting to a

changing society and meeting the needs of both the theatre community and its

students and graduates. As the number of theatre programs in Canada has

grown, the once clearer line that separated the conservatory‐style and liberal

arts‐style programs along the line of the BFA and BA degree has become blurred.

In order to understand the current theatre education environment in Canada, one must look closely at the programs being offered and how these programs

impact the experience of the students and graduates.

Chapter Five: Current BFA (Theatre) Programs in Canada

5.1 Introduction to BFA (Theatre) Program Profiles

This chapter provides a brief summary of the fourteen BFA (Theatre)

programs offered in Canada. Each summary contains an overview of the theatre program and its specializations. A listing of courses for each year of the program

is provided in order to more fully understand the differences in curricular

offerings between the programs. Admission requirements are also included in

the summaries. The information for these summaries was collected directly from

publicly available material on the theatre program and university websites. The course information was collected directly from the 2007/2008 university calendars and/or comprehensive course listings. In the case of some programs, information was readily available; in the case of other programs, information, particularly on degree requirements and course offerings was more difficult to obtain. The intent of this chapter is to make this information more readily accessible to prospective and current students, arts administrators and researchers and to provide a comprehensive summary of the current BFA

(Theatre) programs available in Canada.

5.2 University of British Columbia3

The University of British Columbia offers three undergraduate degrees in

theatre, a Bachelor of Arts degree in Theatre, a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in

Design and Production and a Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree in Acting. All three

programs are housed within a department of theatre, film and creative writing.

The theatre program at the University of British Columbia promotes itself as a

renowned training program in which students master classical techniques and

traditions alongside contemporary and experimental work through explorations

in theory and practice. Students study under the guidance of faculty, resident artists and guest artists who are promoted as being working professionals and

leaders in their disciplines. The production program is an integral part of the

instruction provided in the theatre program as it serves the professional and

pedagogical requirements of the curriculum and provides the University of

British Columbia campus with a Mainstage season of four plays and a Studio

season of full‐length and one‐act plays and Summer Stock program. Faculty,

MFA students and guest artists are involved in the direction and design of the

Mainstage productions. The involvement of professional guest artists provides

3 Information for the University of British Columbia program was obtained through the program website: http://www.theatre.ubc.ca/index.shtml and the academic calendar website: http://www.students.ubc.ca/calendar/index.cfm?tree=12,197,283,0

92 students the opportunity to participate in professional standard stage productions.

Design & Production

The Bachelor of Fine Arts degree in Design and Production is described as preparing students for entry‐level jobs in professional theatre or for more advanced training in graduate school. The three year program focuses in areas of set, costume, lighting and sound design, costume construction, stage and production management, and production technologies. During the first year of

the program, students are able to explore the various areas of design and

production work through participation in department productions. In the second

and third years the students pursue a more concentrated area of interest in course work and practical application. As part of the technical training program, all Design and Production students are required to participate in Department of

Theatre productions.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Students select two courses from the following: Graphics for

Theatre and Film Design, Technical Theatre and Production I. Students

also take a number of liberal arts options.

Year Two: Production II (two courses). Four courses from the following:

Styles of Décor and Dress, Scenery Design I, Costume Design I, Lighting

Design I, Sound Design I, Scenery Production I, Scene Painting I, Stage

Management, Costume Construction. Students also take a number of

liberal arts options.

Year Three: Production III (three courses). Three courses from the

following: Scenery Design II, Costume Design II, Lighting Design II,

Advanced Study in Design and Scenography, Scenery Production II, Scene

Painting II, Production and Theatre Management and Costume

Construction II. Students also take a number of liberal arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic) include: Personal interview, a portfolio

and a letter of intent may substitute for the interview in certain circumstances.

Acting

The Bachelor of Fine Arts Acting program is promoted as offering a

professional actor training program which is supplemented by a solid grounding

in theatre history and a liberal arts education. In this three year program students spend their first year focusing on the development of the actorʹs instrument

through scene study, improvisation, storytelling, movement and voice. The

94 second year includes the study of styles, language, and individual artistic development through scene study and monologues. The third and final year includes screen acting, auditioning, voice and movement tutorials, creating solo pieces, singing and stage combat. Theatre courses are fully integrated with

Theatre at UBC productions and Bachelor of Fine Arts Acting students participate in shows that are directed and coached by guest artists and faculty who are working theatre professionals.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Beginning B.F.A. Acting I, Beginning B.F.A. Acting II,

Beginning Voice and Movement I, Beginning Voice and Movement II. One

course from either: Drama: Forms and Ideas or Drama: Forms and Ideas

II. Students also take a number of liberal arts options.

Year Two: Intermediate B.F.A. Acting I, Intermediate B.F.A. Acting II,

Intermediate Voice and Movement I, Intermediate Voice and Movement

II, and Rehearsal and Performance. Two courses from the following:

History of Theatre I, History of Canadian Theatre, and History of Theatre

II. Students also take a number of liberal arts options.

Year Three: Advanced B.F.A. Acting I, Advanced B.F.A. Acting II,

Advanced Voice and Movement I, Advanced Voice and Movement II, and

Advanced Rehearsal and Performance. Students also take a number of

liberal arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic) include: Audition consisting of two contrasting monologues – one classical and one contemporary, a song sung a capella.

5.3 Simon Fraser University4

Located in the School for the Contemporary Arts at Simon Fraser

University the Bachelor of Fine Arts Theatre program offers two concentrations:

performance and production/design. The theatre program is promoted as being

respected nationally and internationally as a training ground for theatre artists.

The School for the Contemporary Arts has an interdisciplinary approach while

continuing to provide comprehensive disciplinary training. The interdisciplinary

approach requires students in the Theatre program to learn the fundamentals of

an art form outside of their major, encourages faculty and students to produce

work that crosses disciplinary boundaries and incorporates the various art

disciplines within historical and theoretical courses. The program advertises this

interdisciplinary as giving the program’s graduates a unique advantage as they enter their professional lives. All students in the Bachelor of Fine Arts Theatre

program work on productions each academic year and have opportunities to

participate in interdisciplinary performances such as dance, film and music.

4 Information for Simon Fraser University’s program was obtained through the program website: http://cgi.sfu.ca/~scahome/?q=theatre and the academic calendar website: http://students.sfu.ca/calendar/U%20Arts%20and%20Social%20Sc6.html#1001230

Major in Theatre Performance

The three year performance major program is promoted as being designed to give students a foundation in theory and skills that will enable them to create their own theatre. The emphasis is on the development of independent artists who can generate original work and initiate their own projects. Students in the program are encouraged to participate in productions and to develop their own scripts and performance pieces. A key element of the theatre program is a three‐ pronged performance series. Each fall and spring student work under the direction of faculty or guest professional artists on the main stage of the SFU theatre. Main stage performances focus on contemporary plays and adaptations of classics. In the fall students also perform in student directed one‐act plays. In the spring the BlackBox studio theatre serves as a testing ground for playmaking and studio classes providing students with eth opportunity to administer their own theatre and showcase their writing on the stage.

Course Requirements:

Qualifying courses (Usually taken prior to enrolling in the Major):

Introduction to Acting I, Introduction to Acting II, Introduction to

Production and Technology. Other courses required for the Major (but not

requiring an audition) might also be taken during the qualifying year.

In addition to the qualifying courses, students in the Theatre Performance

Major take courses which are divided into lower and upper divisions.

Lower division requirements include: Fundamental Integration of

Human Movement, Acting I, Acting II, Playmaking I, Playmaking II,

Theatre Laboratory I, Theatre Laboratory II, Context of Theatre I. Students

choose one of the following: Stage and Production Management or

Technical Theatre. Students also select two studio courses outside of the

Theatre specialization from the School for Contemporary Arts.

Upper division requirements include: Acting III, Acting IV, Theatre

Laboratory III, Theatre Laboratory IV, Context of Theatre II. Students also

select a number of elective options within and outside of the School for

Contemporary Arts.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Audition (following completion of qualifying courses) which includes presentation of a monologue, ensemble work, improvisation and an interview.

Major in Theatre Production and Design

The production and design stream is promoted as being designed for students who want to concentrate on the production and design elements of theatre. The program is structured so that students will accumulate practical experience in a variety of production contexts, while building a strong foundation in the theoretical and critical aspects of their work. Students collaborate with artists in other disciplines and gain hands on experience in

design, technical direction and support, stage and production management,

event planning, and publicity. Students are involved in all aspects of the School

for Contemporary Arts multidisciplinary performance season.

Course Requirements:

Qualifying courses (usually taken prior to enrolling in the Major) include:

Introduction to Acting I, Introduction to Production Technology,

Introduction to Stage and Production Management. Other courses

required for the Major (but not requiring an interview) might also be

taken during the qualifying year.

In addition to the qualifying courses, students in the Theatre Production

and Design Major take courses which are divided into lower and upper

divisions.

100

Lower division requirements include: Introduction to Electroacoustic

Music, Context of Theatre I, Production Ensemble I, Production Ensemble

II, Production Practicum I, and Production Practicum II. Students take one course from the following: Introduction to Contemporary Dance, Dance

Improvisation, Fundamental Integration of Human Movement, Dancing in Cyberspace. Students choose one of the following courses: Introductory

Studio in Visual Art I, Introductory Studio in Visual Art II, methods and

Concepts: Spatial Presentation. One theory/history course and one studio

course outside of the theatre specialization from the School for

Contemporary Arts is chosen by the student

Upper division requirements include: Context of Theatre II, Production

Ensemble III, Production Ensemble IV, Stage Lighting, and Stage Design.

Three courses are taken as a Production Practicum. Students choose one for the following courses: Special Project in Dance Composition,

Playmaking III, Playmaking IV, Advanced Studio Skills, Theory and

Practice of Directing, Context of Theatre III, Production Ensemble V,

Production Ensemble VI, and Interdisciplinary Projects. In addition, students select four course options outside of the Theatre specialization.

101

Admission Requirements (non‐academic): Personal interview.

102

5.4 University of Victoria5

Located within the Faculty of Fine Arts, the University of Victoria offers a

Bachelor of Arts program in Theatre History and seven specializations within the

Bachelor of Fine Arts degree program. The specializations include: Acting,

Applied Theatre, Design, Directing, Production and Management, Theatre

History and Theatre / Writing. A Theatre Generalist option within the Bachelor

of Fine Arts program may also be selected. The undergraduate theatre program

is intended for students who wish to prepare for a career in professional,

educational or community theatre or who wish to further their studies in graduate or professional schools. The curriculum is designed to equip students not only for the further study and practices of theatre, but also for the many different career and academic paths open to graduates from a liberal arts institution. Class sizes in the Department of Theatre are limited to maximize

individual instruction and courses are taught by what ared describe as nationally

and internationally recognized teachers and professionals. The Department of

Theatre advertises itself not as a professional training school, but a combination

5 Information for the University of Victoria’s program was obtained through the program website: http://finearts.uvic.ca/theatre/ and the academic calendar website: http://web.uvic.ca/calendar2007/FACS/FoFiA/DoTh/index.html

103 of hands‐on training combined with the demands of university‐level academic education. The Department of Theatre views Theatre as a public art form and presents the majority of its work to the public. Through Main Stage productions and the Student Alternative Theatre Company, students are able to perform, design, build and manage a variety of theatrical productions.

Design

The Design specialization is promoted as offering students comprehensive

instruction ranging from fundamental design theory to present‐day applications

in Canadian theatre. Students launch their Design specialization with a series of introductory courses in set, costume and lighting design in rorder fo students to develop their understanding of the history, theory and practice of theatrical design. Students develop skills in areas of drafting, drawing, computer‐assisted

design, three‐dimensional communication, model‐making and costume construction. Students also study areas such as budget, working procedures and

standards and professional membership organizations. Design students have the

opportunity to assist professional designers on main‐stage productions and some

have the privilege of designing their own productions in the Departments’

theatres.

104

Course Requirements:

Year One: An Introduction to Stage Craft and Technical Practice,

Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: I, Introduction to

the History and Language of the Theatre: II, Introduction to the Art of

Acting. Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Two: An Introduction to Production and Management Areas of the

Theatre, Theatre from French Classicism to the End of the 19th Century,

Modern Theatre, Introduction to Design: I, Introduction to Design: II,

Introduction to Costume Design. Students select one of the following

courses: Costume Design, Costume History: I, Costume History: II,

Lighting for the Theatre: I and Lighting for the Theatre: II. Students also

select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Three: Introduction to Scenic Design and Scenic Design or Lighting

for the Theatre: I and Lighting for the Theatre: II or Introduction to

Costume Design and one of the following courses: Costume Design,

Costume History: I, Costume History: II. Students also select a Theatre

History course and a variety of Liberal Arts options.

105

Year Four: Introduction to Scenic Design and Scenic Design or Lighting

for the Theatre: I and Lighting for the Theatre: II or Introduction to

Costume Design and one of the following courses: Costume Design,

Costume History: I, Costume History: II or two of the following courses:

Costume Design, Costume History: I, Costume History: II. Students also

select a Theatre History course and a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Visual arts samples

including items such as freehand sketches, fashion drawings, art pieces,

paintings or sculptures.

Acting

The Acting specialization is open to students in their second year of study in the department and is based on academic standing and a personal audition.

Students in the Acting specialization enter into a concentrated and progressive program of acting, voice and movement over a period of three years. Students begin with scene work and character study in second year with a specific emphasis on Canadian plays. Third year acting concentrates on styles and special genre work with an emphasis on such playwrights as Ibsen, Chekhov,

Shakespeare and Molière. Fourth year acting explores various aspects of self

106 development and self created work, especially in voice and acting. Students receive instruction in vocal areas such as: breath control, tonal and consonant action, resonance and range, Shakespeare, dialects, etc. and undertake physical and movement training in areas such as: the Alexander Technique, modern dance, neutral and character mask and acrobatics . In the final year of the

program auditions skills are developed in preparation for the transition into

either the professional world of theatre or conservatory training. Agents and casting directors from Canadaʹs major cities, in addition to local artistic directors from Victoria and Vancouver, partake in annual workshops to assist the graduation class.

Course Requirements:

Year One (Pre‐Acting Specialization year): An Introduction to Stage Craft

and Technical Practice, Introduction to the History and Language of the

Theatre: I, Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: II,

Introduction to the Art of Acting. Students also select a variety of Liberal

Arts options.

Year Two: An Introduction to Production and Management Areas of the

Theatre, Theatre From French Classicism to the End of the 19th Century,

Modern Theatre, Acting: I, Acting: II, Introduction to Voice, Introduction

107

to Stage Movement, Theatre Performance. Students also select a variety of

Liberal Arts options.

Year Three: Acting: III, Acting: IV, Speech in the Theatre: I, Speech in the

Theatre: II, Stage Movement: I, Stage Movement: II, Theatre Performance.

Students also select a Theatre History course and a variety of Liberal Arts

options.

Year Four: Acting: V, Acting: VI, Speech in the Theatre: III, Speech in the

Theatre: IV, Stage Movement: III, Stage Movement: IV, Theatre

Performance. Students also select a Theatre History course and a variety

of Liberal Arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Audition video

containing a contemporary monologue.

Applied Theatre

The four‐year Applied Theatre program partners the art of the theatre

with effective pedagogy to build upon the growing recognition of theatre as an

educational methodology for social, political, economic and therapeutic issues.

108

The program is designed to provide the theoretical and experiential foundations for students who wish to examine the use of theatre forms as they apply to teaching and in non‐theatrical settings, such as cultural, recreation and community centres, historic and environmental sites, museums, prisons, hospitals, social service and hhealt agencies. Students begin their program by

exploring improvisational techniques and collective creation. Students in their

second year undertake a historical survey of theatre applications in non‐

traditional settings. In the upper years students study workshop design and

facilitation which culminates in their own projects of either a performance or

workshop based creation for a specific setting such as a school or community

centre.

Course Requirements:

Year One: An Introduction to Stage Craft and Technical Practice,

Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: I, Introduction to

the History and Language of the Theatre: II, Introduction to the Art of

Acting, Exploring Theatre through Dramatic Process. Students also select

a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Two: An Introduction to Production and Management Areas of the

Theatre, Theatre From French Classicism to the End of the 19th Century,

109

Modern Theatre, Introduction to Applied Theatre. Students also select a

variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Three: Directing I, Directing II, Applied Theatre: I, Design Aesthetics:

I, Design Aesthetics: II, Directed Studies in Applied Theatre. Students also

select a Theatre History course and a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Four: Special Topics in Education, Applied Theatre: II. Students also

select a Theatre History course and a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Additional supporting materials if desired.

Directing

Students in the Directing specialization study the art and craft of their discipline by directing throughout their program. Students in the Directing

specialization are encouraged to take a board range of liberal arts courses in

areas such as art history, philosophy and English in order to develop a deeper understanding of the social, political, and artistic histories of world cultures. As

part of the Directing specialization students have the opportunity to direct and

present scenes, in some cases, one‐act plays and in exceptional cases, self‐

110 directed projects under faculty supervision. Directing students also have the opportunity to work collaboratively with students in the Department of Writing to put on the annual Studio Series. Mentorship is available to Directing students by faculty artists and the guest directors who frequent the Department.

Course Requirements:

Year One: An Introduction to Stage Craft and Technical Practice,

Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: I, Introduction to

the History and Language of the Theatre: II, Introduction to the Art of

Acting. Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Two: An Introduction to Production and Management Areas of the

Theatre, Theatre From French Classicism to the End of the 19th Century,

Modern Theatre, Acting: I (for Theatre Students Who Are Non‐Acting

Specialists), Acting: II (for Theatre Students Who Are Non‐Acting

Specialists). Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options,

however, Drama Workshop is highly recommended for Directing

specialists.

Year Three: Directing I, Directing II, Design Aesthetics: I, Design

Aesthetics: II, Students also select a Theatre History course and a variety

111

of Liberal Arts options, however, Structure in Stage Drama is highly

recommended for Directing specialists.

Year Four: Directing: III, Directing: IV, Theatre Laboratory. Students also

select a Theatre History course and variety of Liberal Arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Additional supporting

materials if desired.

Production Management

The Production and Management specialization examines the theatre process from rehearsal to performance, with an emphasis on developing an understanding of the collaborative nature of theatre production and encouraging teamwork. Students in the specialization learn the principles, procedures and skills required in each of the major production and management areas: scenic

construction, wardrobe, properties, lighting, sound, stage management, audience services and marketing and communications. In the first year of the program students rotate through various production and management areas and applying their skills on department productions. Second year students advance to a managerial level in a selected production or management area and are

responsible for a significant practical project related to main‐stage productions.

112

Advanced courses at the third and fourth year levels provide supervised practical experience in one or more specialized areas. Students have the opportunity to work with faculty, guest directors and designers, and staff as they learn professional work standards and ethics and make professional contacts.

Course Requirements:

Year One: An Introduction to Stage Craft and Technical Practice,

Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: I, Introduction to

the History and Language of the Theatre: II, Introduction to the Art of

Acting. Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Two: An Introduction to Production and Management Areas of the

Theatre, Theatre from French Classicism to the End of the 19th Century,

Modern Theatre, Introduction to Design: I, Introduction to Design: II.

Students may choose either Theatre Laboratory or a theatre elective and a

variety of Liberal Arts Options.

Year Three: Advanced Production and Management, Directed Studies in

Production and/or Management. Students may select Introduction to

Costume Design and Costume Design or Costume History: I and Costume

History: II or Lighting for the Theatre: I and Lighting for the Theatre: II or

113

Introduction to Scenic Design and Scenic Design. Students also select a

Theatre History course and a variety of Liberal Arts options

Year Four: Specialized Studies in Production and Management, Theatre

Laboratory. Students may select Introduction to Costume Design and

Costume Design or Costume History: I and Costume History: II or

Lighting for the Theatre: I and Lighting for the Theatre: II or Introduction

to Scenic Design and Scenic Design. Students also select a Theatre History

course and a variety of Liberal Arts options

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Additional supporting

materials if desired.

Theatre Writing

Students in the Theatre Writing specialization must be accepted into both

the Departments of Theatre and Writing. Workshops form the cornerstone of the

writing program allowing students the opportunity to discuss and analyze their

work in intensive peer sessions as they develop and hone their writing skills. In the first year of the program students are introduced to the basic structures in the

writing styles of drama, poetry, creative non‐fiction and fiction and are involved

in the writing and criticism of all four genres. The primary focus is on writing for

114 the stage which covers the topics of: creation of character, dialogue, structure and conflict. Students have the opportunity to explore the move from the script to the stage and the influence of the director, designer, actor and audience when they write and workshop their work in class. In the upper year courses students focus on work‐shopping their dramatic writing and have an opportunity to write and workshop a short stage or screen play.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Writing, An Introduction to Stage Craft and

Technical Practice, Introduction to the History and Language of the

Theatre: I, Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: II,

Introduction to the Art of Acting. Students also select a variety of Liberal

Arts options.

Year Two: Drama Workshop, An Introduction to Production and

Management Areas of the Theatre, Theatre from French Classicism to the

End of the 19th Century, Modern Theatre. Students select Two courses

from the following: Lighting for the Theatre: I and Lighting for the

Theatre: II or Design Aesthetics: I and Design Aesthetics: II or Costume

History: I and Costume History: II. Students also select a variety of Liberal

Arts options.

115

Year Three: Drama Workshop, Students select two courses from the following options: Seminar in Theatre History: I, Seminar in Theatre

History: II, History of Opera to the Late Nineteenth Century, Modern

Opera, Introduction to the History of Japanese Theatre, Seminar in

Japanese Theatre and Drama: From 1500 to the Present Day, Studies in

Theatre of the Ancient World, Studies in Medieval Theatre, Studies in

Baroque, Rococo and Neoclassical Theatre, Studies in 19th Century

Theatre, Studies in 20th Century Theatre, Studies in Renaissance Theatre,

Costume History: I, Costume History: II, Directed Studies in the Theatre

History, Directed Studies in the History of Drama, Seminar in Theatre

History: III, Seminar in Theatre History: IV, Studies in Canadian Theatre

and Drama. Students select a number of Writing and Liberal Arts options.

Year Four: Advanced Drama Workshop. Students select one courses from the following options: Seminar in Theatre History: I, Seminar in Theatre

History: II, History of Opera to the Late Nineteenth Century, Modern

Opera, Introduction to the History of Japanese Theatre, Seminar in

Japanese Theatre and Drama: From 1500 to the Present Day, Studies in

Theatre of the Ancient World, Studies in Medieval Theatre, Studies in

116

Baroque, Rococo and Neoclassical Theatre, Studies in 19th Century

Theatre, Studies in 20th Century Theatre, Studies in Renaissance Theatre,

Costume History: I, Costume History: II, Directed Studies in the Theatre

History, Directed Studies in the History of Drama, Seminar in Theatre

History: III, Seminar in Theatre History: IV, Studies in Canadian Theatre

and Drama. Students select a number of Writing, Theatre and Liberal Arts

options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Letter of Intent,

Creative writing sample

Theatre History

The Theatre History specialization provides the opportunity for students

to study the theatrical past within a practically‐oriented contemporary theatre

complex. Students create their programs in close consultation with faculty,

choosing from among a wide range of areas of study including: finance and

economics, acting, ancient Greek theatre, 19th‐ and 20th‐century commercial

theatre, opera history, and theatre criticism. Students may also study the history

of design, directing, dramatic literature and production. Interdisciplinary studies

with the other fine arts disciplines and other departments on campus such as: the

117

Departments of History, Law, English, Greek and Roman Studies, Pacific and

Asian Studies, and Germanic Languages and Literatures are also encouraged.

Course Requirements:

Year One: An Introduction to Stage Craft and Technical Practice,

Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: I, Introduction to

the History and Language of the Theatre: II, Introduction to the Art of

Acting. Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Two: An Introduction to Production and Management Areas of the

Theatre, Theatre from French Classicism to the End of the 19th Century,

Modern Theatre. Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Three and Year Four: Graduating Project, Students select four

courses from the following list: Seminar in Theatre History: I, Seminar in

Theatre History: II, History of Opera to the Late Nineteenth Century,

Modern Opera, Introduction to the History of Japanese Theatre, Seminar

in Japanese Theatre and Drama: From 1500 to the Present Day, Studies in

Theatre of the Ancient World, Studies in Medieval Theatre, Studies in

Baroque, Rococo and Neoclassical Theatre, Studies in 19th Century

Theatre, Studies in 20th Century Theatre, Studies in Renaissance Theatre,

118

Costume History: I, Costume History: II, Directed Studies in the Theatre

History, Directed Studies in the History of Drama, Seminar in Theatre

History: III, Seminar in Theatre History: IV, Studies in Canadian Theatre

and Drama. Students also select a number of Theatre options, approved

options, and Liberal Arts courses.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Additional supporting

materials if desired.

Generalist

The Generalist specialization is designed for students who wish to

combine their Theatre studies with a wide range of other liberal arts disciplines.

Year One: An Introduction to Stage Craft and Technical Practice,

Introduction to the History and Language of the Theatre: I, Introduction to

the History and Language of the Theatre: II, Introduction to the Art of

Acting. Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

119

Year Two: An Introduction to Production and Management Areas of the

Theatre, Theatre from French Classicism to the End of the 19th Century,

Modern Theatre. Students also select a variety of Liberal Arts options.

Year Three and Year Four: Students select a number of Theatre History,

Theatre and Liberal Arts options suited to their particular interest.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Department of Theatre Questionnaire,

Two letters of reference, Response to two essay questions, Additional supporting

materials if desired.

120

5.5 University of Alberta6

The University of Alberta offers its students a conservatory‐style BFA

degree and a BA liberal arts option. The BFA Drama programs in Acting,

Technical Theatre and Design are designed for the student actor or technician

who is committed to the pursuit of a professional career. The BFA Acting

program provides a creative and educational climate which is promoted as an

environment where actors learn and begin to practice the discipline of acting in a

conservatory‐like three year intensive program designed specifically as

preparation for a career as a professional actor in theatre, film, television and

radio. The BFA in Technical Theatre is an intensive three year professional

training program conducted in a conservatory‐style which combines practical

technical training, business management and production opportunities. Students

in the technical stream may specialize in Stage Management or Technical

Production. The BFA Design program delivers conservatory‐style training and

promotes itself asg both bein comprehensive and diverse in theoretical and

practical approaches to costume, lighting and set design.

6 Information for the University of Alberta’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/drama/ and the academic calendar website: http://www.registrar.ualberta.ca/calendar/Undergrad/Arts/Programs/ 43.8.html#43.8

121

Acting

The BFA in Acting program is advertised as being designed to serve the individual, the ensemble, and the art. Its aim is to educate, inspire, and train students for a career as a professional actor. Students in the program are trained in the acting discipline which includes specific training in dance, singing, voice

and movement. Specific skills during the program are also emphasized during

the three‐year program including: how to research a play and a role, independent and collaborative work, utilizing life experience into the acting work, script readying – cold and prepared, how to audition, and respect for all

elements of the theatre.

The three year acting program is divided into themes or areas of emphasis.

The first year of the program serves as basic training in acting. Individual and

group exercises and improvisations form the basis for analysis of text, scene

study, and character development. The second year of the program focuses on period styles in the course work in acting, singing, dance and movement, voice and speech, and characterization. During the third and final year, the focus is on performance and the ensemble participates in the Studio Theatre season as the

resident company. The aims of the final year include consolidating skills obtained during previous years to prepare students for professional level stage

122 rehearsal and performance, to prepare rehearse and run at a professional level in full production conditions, understand the practice and protocol for technical and production aspects of the theatre, introduction to film and broadcast techniques and the ability to contribute fully to an ensemble.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Theatre History I, Theatre History II, Beginning Movement,

Movement in Rehearsal and Performance, Voice and Speech, Speech in

Rehearsal and Performance, Acting in Rehearsal and Performance,

Acting‐Technique I, Acting‐Technique II, Production Lab II B,

Explorations Acting I

Year Two: The Modernist Stage, Modern Canadian Theatre, Theatre

Movement, Movement in Rehearsal and Performance, Advanced Voice

and Speech, Speech in Rehearsal and Performance, Make‐up for stage,

Acting in Rehearsal and Performance, Advanced Acting Technique I,

Advanced Acting Technique II, Explorations in Acting II.

Year Three: Advanced Movement, Movement in Rehearsal and

Performance, Dialects and Accents/Language Styles, Speech in Rehearsal

123

and Performance, Rehearsal and Performance, Professional and Critical

Orientation, Explorations in Acting III.

Admission requirements (non‐academic) include: One year (30 credits) of

University or College credits transferable to the University of Alberta,

Participation in a Thirty minute Acting Audition including two monologues

(Shakespeare and Modern North American), Prepared Song Excerpt, Prepared

Movement Piece, Improvisation Exercise, Script Reading Exercise, a Personal

Interview. Prior to the Audition the following materials must be submitted: Two

letters of recommendation, Personal statement, Theatre Resume, and a Black and

White 8x10 Head Shot.

Technical Theatre

The BFA in Technical Theatre is promoted as an intensive four year

professional training program conducted in conservatory‐style small classes

which are supervised by theatre professionals who are knowledgeable in theory

and practice. Students in the program receive a combination of practical technical

training, business management and production opportunities. The technical

program offers specialization in the areas of Stage Management and Technical

Production. The program advertises that upon graduation students reach a level

of professionalism that prepares them to eventually serve in professional theatre,

124 ballet, or opera companies, or in film or television as Stage Managers, Production

Managers, Technical Directors, or Area Heads.

In the Technical Production area the focus of study is on: Scenic Carpentry, Stage

Carpentry, Lighting, Sound, Properties, Computer Aided Drafting and Design

(CADD).

Course Requirements:

Year One: Students take a variety of liberal arts and drama options.

Year Two: Production Crew I, Production Lab I, Stage Craft, Management‐

Practices for Technical Theatre, Technical Drawing for Theatre Design,

Theatre Design I, History of Dress and Décor I, II, and Production

Techniques: Lighting Design.

Year Three: Theatre History I, II, Production Crew II, III, Management

Practices for Technical Theatre, Workshops in Technical Theatre, CAD for

the Theatre, Production Techniques: Scene Painting, Production

Techniques – Sound or one of the following courses: Computer Graphics

for Theatre Design, Production Techniques: Advanced Scene Painting, 3D

CAD for the Theatre, Production Techniques Advanced: Lighting Design.

125

Year Four: Workshops in Technical Theatre, Special Projects, Production

Crew III, Production Techniques: Costume, Practicum, Professional

Orientation, Production Techniques – Sound or one of the following

courses: Computer Graphics for Theatre Design, Production Techniques:

Advanced Scene Painting, 3D CAD for the Theatre, Production

Techniques Advanced: Lighting Design, Production Techniques:

Advanced Costume.

The Stage Management program revolves around core stage management classes, practical projects, as well as course work in areas of theatre history,

theatre practices, theatre design, genres and theories. Upon graduation, Stage managers will have earned one stage management apprenticeship credit with

Canadian Actorsʹ Equity Association.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Students take a variety of liberal arts and drama options.

Year Two: Theatre History I, II, Production Crew I, Production Lab II,

Stage Management I, Management‐Practices for Technical Theatre,

Fundamentals of Stagecraft and Design, Technical Drawing for Theatre

126

Design, Production Techniques: Costume, History of Dress and Décor I or

II. One of the following courses is also selected: Introduction to Dramatic

Process, Scene Study I, Specialized Skills in Stage Management.

Year Three: Production Crew II, Management‐Practices for Technical

Theatre, Production Crew III, Advanced Stage Management, Theatre

Design I, Production Techniques: Lighting Design, History of Décor and

Dress I or II. One of the following courses is also selected: Introduction to

Dramatic Process, Scene Study I, Specialized Skills in Stage Management.

Year Four: Modern Canadian Theatre, The Modernist Stage, Introduction

to Directing, Special Projects, Production Crew III, Professional

Orientation, Advanced Stage Management.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Three letters of recommendation,

Theatre resume, Letter of Intent and participation in a Personal Interview.

Design

The BFA Design Program is the smallest of the conservatory‐style offerings at in the Department of Drama at the University of Alberta, usually accepting only six students in the first year of the program. The program offers

127 students an intensive four year program in the study of costume, lighting and set design. During the program students take a wide range of design courses including: Stagecraft and Design which requires not only design projects, but also research into the social, political, economic and visual world of the play;

History of Decor and Dress, Art Fundamentals, Design Fundamentals, Studio

Techniques for Theatre Design, Drawing, Computer Graphics for Theatre

Design, Technical Drawing for Theatre Design, Scene painting, Lighting Design,

Costume Design and a variety of courses that allow the student to work as

Assistants with Designers on main stage shows and eventually to take on the

responsibility for an element in the design of a show. A final Portfolio credit

provides an opportunity for the student’s portfolio to be assessed prior to

graduation.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Stagecraft and Design Studio, Techniques for

Theatre Design, Technical Drawing for Theatre, Design Production Lab II,

Art Fundamentals, Design Fundamentals. Students also select two courses

from Theatre History, Theory, Dramatic Literature or Play Analysis.

Year Two: Theatre Design I, Computer Graphics for Theatre Design, CAD

for the Theatre, 3D CAD for the Theatre, Production Techniques: Scene

128

Painting, Production Techniques: Advanced Scene Painting, History of

Décor and Dress I, History of Décor and Dress II, Drawing, Running Crew

Projects. Students also select two courses from Theatre History, Theory,

Dramatic Literature or Play Analysis.

Year Three: Theatre Design II, Computer Graphics for Theatre Design, 3D

CAD for the Theatre, Production Techniques: Lighting Design, Production

Techniques: Advanced Lighting Design, History of Décor and Dress I,

History of Décor and Dress II, Design Assistantship I, Production Design

I, Drawing II, Introduction to Directing.

Year Four: Theatre Design III, Portfolio, Production Techniques: Costume,

Production Techniques: Advanced Costume, Topics in the History of

Theatre Design, Design Assistantship II, Production Design II, Practicum

Professional Orientation.

Admission requirements (non‐academic) to the Design program include: Design portfolio demonstrating creative skills in drawing and painting.

129

5.6 University of Calgary7

The Department of Drama at the University of Calgary offers two

undergraduate degrees in drama, a Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree (Drama) and a

Combined Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree (Drama Education) / Bachelor of

Education (Master of Teaching Program). The Department of Drama at the

University of Calgary is promoted as being committed to an ideal of drama as a

collaborative, performance‐based art form, rooted in a solid understanding of

text and theory. Students in both programs explore the connection between

theory and practice and play and performance, through a wide variety of courses and many opportunities to participate in the creation of a variety of performance

works.

The Department of Drama’s educational vision is to emphasize the

connection between theory and practice in the creation of performance works.

The objective that follows from this vision is to provide students with the

research skills needed for theoretical and practical investigations of theatre.

While the Department aims to graduate students with a well‐rounded education that have a variety of applications in theory and in life, it also recognizes and

7 Information for the University of Calgary’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.finearts.ucalgary.ca/drama/index.shtml and the academic calendar website: http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/2007/what/courses/DRAM.htm

130 supports the intent of many students to prepare for careers in professional theatre and educational drama. To this end, the teaching staff of the Department of Drama seeks to expand the learning environment to include and enrich the wider theatrical community and to provide the foundation for a variety of career options

In addition to courses, the Drama program offers a wide range of performance, technical and design opportunities to enhance a student’s academic

program. The Department of Drama produces four main stage plays each year

allowing students to experience performance in a large theatrical venue with full

design, technical, costume and property support. Smaller scale performance

opportunities are also available throughout the year including introductory and

advanced directing class projects. The student‐run Nickle and Dime Theatre

provides a series of noon‐hour performances throughout the year. Performance

opportunities are cast through an audition process.

Bachelor of Fine Arts (Drama)

The Bachelor of Fine Arts (Drama) program is a four‐year degree program

which includes both academic and practical training. Course selection can

provide emphasis in academic studies, theatre administration, theatre for young

audiences and developmental drama, acting and directing, technical production

131 and design, and film. Qualified fourth year students may be placed in an internship course with local professional theatre organizations.

Course Requirements:

Required courses in four‐year Drama program include: Introduction to

Acting, Introduction to Theatre Production, Introduction to Drama and

Seminar in Drama I. A choice of one of the following: Seminar in Drama

II, History of Theatre: Origins to Late Eighteenth Century, History of

Theatre: Late Eighteenth Century to the Present or Canadian Theatre and

Drama. Students may choose their remaining courses from a variety of

Drama, Fine Arts and Liberal Arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Standard University of Calgary

admission procedures apply. Auditions are required to access the upper level

acting classes.

Bachelor of Fine Arts (Drama Education)/BEd (Master of Teaching Program)

This combined degree program, administered by the Faculty of Fine Arts,

leads to the Bachelor of Fine Arts and Bachelor of Education degrees. Students

enrolled in this program enter the Faculty of Fine Arts in their first year and then

apply to enter the combined degree program after the successful completion of

their first year. After successful completion of the course requirements (usually

132 three years), students complete the two year Bachelor of Education program which satisfies the present teaching certification requirements in the Province of

Alberta. The program is designed for students intending either to teach drama in schools or to work as drama specialists with young people or community groups. The program is promoted as providing extensive course work in

performance creation and other aspects of the theatre, which relate directly to the

particular needs of theatre with and for youth and communities. Within the

Drama Education program, there are three areas of focus which can be self‐

determined based on option course selection: Elementary Drama Education,

Secondary Drama Education, and Community Drama

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Acting, Introduction to Theatre Production,

Introduction to Drama and Seminar in Drama I, Performance Creation I

and a Liberal Arts option.

Year Two: Seminar in Drama II, Theatre for Young Audiences I,

Performance Creation II and a variety of Drama, Fine Arts and Liberal

Arts options.

133

Year Three: Drama Education and a variety of Drama, Fine Arts and

Liberal Arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Standard University of Calgary admission procedures apply.

134

5.7 University of Lethbridge8

The University of Lethbridge’ Faculty of Fine Arts offers a Bachelor of

Arts in Dramatic Arts and a Bachelor of Fine Arts in Dramatic Arts to students

interested in pursuing studies in theatre. The program is promoted as offering

students the excitement of live theatre in combination with studies in literature,

acting, design and technical production. The Bachelor of Arts degree is described as offering a general studies program whereas the Bachelor of Fine Arts degree provides in‐depth studies with a choice of two majors – Performance or

Technical/Design. At the time of the preparation of this thesis, a third major –

Theatre Studies was awaiting approval by the Quality Council in Alberta. While all three degrees serve as stand‐alone programs, any of the three can be used as a foundation for a combined degree in Drama Education which is highlighted as a particular strength at the University of Lethbridge. Throughout their program,

Bachelor of Fine Arts students have the opportunity to perform in a variety of

performance series in which students perform, work on set and costume design

and stage manage. To add a level of interdisciplinary, each year the departments

of Music and Dramatic Arts present a fully staged opera as a cooperative

8 Information for the University of Lethbridge’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.uleth.ca /ffa/sectiondrama.htm and the academic calendar website: http://www.uleth.ca/ross/calendar/part15.pdf

135 production that students are actively involved in. The program advertises that through a combination of academic study and practical experience students develop knowledge and skills that prepare them to be imaginative, flexible, adaptable, and creative. Graduates are prepared to enter the entertainment industry, graduate studies or use their communication skills, creative expertise

and technical skills in a variety of other professions.

Performance Major

Students pursuing the Performance Major select this specialization in year

two following successful completion of an audition. In the Performance Major,

students study acting, voice, and movement, and the option to select electives in

areas of particular interest such as theatre for young audiences, dance, directing,

and film. Students in the performance stream must earn part of their degree with portfolio credit earned through performing in department productions. During

the course of their degree, Performance Majors must take the following courses.

Courses are recommended to be taken sequentially, however the level of a

particular course and the year the course is taken in do necessarily need to align.

Course Requirements:

Level One (Not specific to Performance Major): Introduction to Dramatic

Arts. A number of Liberal Arts options are also selected.

136

Level Two: Play Reading and Analysis, History and Development of

Theatre I, History and Development of Theatre II, Canadian Theatre,

Acting Fundamentals, Voice and Speech: Fundamentals, Movement

Studies: Fundamentals, Improvisation and Dramatic Process, Stage

Makeup. One of the following courses is selected: Directing:

Fundamentals, Theatre for Young Audiences I, or Dramatic Writing:

Fundamentals. Two of the following courses are chosen: Stage Craft I,

Stage Craft II or Design for the Theatre Fundamentals. A number of

Liberal Arts options are also selected.

Level Three: Acting: Scene Study I, Acting: Scene Study II, Voice and

Speech for the Actor, Movement Studies II, Portfoilo in Dramatic Arts II.

Two of the following courses are selected: Film Studies, Theatre in

Performance, Theatre Studies Series, History of Costume, and Theories of

Theatre. A number of Drama and Liberal Arts options (including a course in dramatic literature) are also selected.

137

Level Four: Performance Workshop, Acting for the Camera, Portfolio in

Dramatic Arts III. A number of Drama and Liberal Arts options are also

selected.

Admission Requirements: An Audition must be completed before declaring a

Performance Major in year two. Prerequisite courses must also be completed prior to acceptance ine th Performance Major.

Technical/Design Major

Students wishing to pursue the Technical/Design Major must select this

specialization in year two following successful submission of a portfolio

containing materials representative of recent theatre experiences as a designer or

technician. Students in the program are introduced to all areas of production and

design including scenery, properties, costumes, makeup, lighting, sound, and stage management. Students are encouraged to work in a minimum of two areas as they progress in their course work. All technical and design students acquire practical skills by working on main stage and other department productions.

Senior level qualifying students are often given major technical or design responsibilities in the Mainstage and Department productions. Courses are recommended to be taken sequentially, however the level of a particular course and the year the course is taken in do necessarily need to align.

138

Course Requirements:

Level One (Not specific to Performance Major): Introduction to Dramatic

Arts. A number of Liberal Arts options are also selected.

Level Two: Portfolio in Dramatic Arts I, Stage Craft I, Stage Craft II,

Design for Theatre Fundamentals, and Stage Makeup. Two courses are

selected from the following courses: Acting: Fundamentals, Voice and

Speech: Fundamentals, Movement Studies: Fundamentals, Theatre for

Young Audiences I, Improvisation and Dramatic Process. A number of

Drama and Liberal Arts options are also selected.

Level Three: Theatre in Performance, Production Techniques, Technical

Theatre Studies, Design Techniques, Design for Theatre: Studio I, History

of Costume. Two courses are also selected from the following: Film

Studies, Theatre Studies Series and Theories of Theatre. One course from

the following: Portfolio in Dramatic Arts II, Portfolio in Dramatic Arts III.

A number of Drama and Liberal Arts options are also selected.

139

Level Four: One of the following courses is selected: Production

Practicum, Production Practicum II, Design for Theatre: Studio II. A

number of Drama and Liberal Arts options are also selected.

Admission Requirements (non‐academic): A portfolio of work detailing recent experiences as a designer or technician must be submitted and evaluated prior to

declaring a Technical/Design Major in year two.

140

5.8 University of Regina9

The Theatre Department at the University of Regina offers four Bachelor of Arts programs in Theatre and three Bachelor of Fine Arts programs. The

Bachelor of Fine Arts degree is offered in three specializations: Acting, Design,

and Stage Management/Technical Theatre. These three specializations promote

themselves as blending practical training with the study of theatre history,

theory and the liberal arts to suit each studentʹs interests and career path. The

Theatre Department states that it is committed to training artists and scholars,

creative individuals who are well versed in the interpretative and critical aspects

of theatre arts. Students in all Department programs take courses in the other

fine arts, the humanities and the sciences, to supplement a series of eight courses

in dramaturgy, theatre history and literature. Each year the Department presents a full season of plays, operating on the model of Canadaʹs regional theatres, to

provide students with opportunities for professional training. As students

participate in performances, they put their course work into practice, developing

individual skills and problem solving abilities. In the upper years of the

9 Information for the University of Regina’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.uregina.ca/finearts/theatre/index.html and the academic calendar website: http://www.uregina.ca/gencal/ugcal/facultyofFineArts/ugcal2007_301 .shtml#BFA

141 program, students have the opportunity to participate in professional field experiences through the Department’s outreach and enrichment projects.

Acting

The four year degree program is intended to begin the training of the professional actor. The program focuses on the skill and technique of text interpretation and performance. Class sizes are limited to guarantee close

supervision and coaching. Progressive courses in acting, voice and movement

are integrated as students perform in Department productions. Plays in the

Department’s season are carefully selected to provide appropriate roles for

developing performers.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Stage Management, Introduction to Acting,

Acting Theory and Practice. Students also take one fine arts and a variety

of liberal arts options.

Year Two: Dramaturgy I, Acting I, Dramaturgy II, Introductory Theatre

Design, Acting II. Students also take two fine arts options and three

elective courses.

142

Year Three: Voice I, Movement and Dance I, Historical Approaches to

Theatre, Acting III, Voice II, Movement and Dance II, Critical Approaches

to Theatre, Acting IV, Directed Studies in Production. Students also take

one elective course.

Year Four: Voice III, Movement and Dance III, Acting Styles I,

Performance in Production I, Voice IV, Movement and Dance IV, Acting

Styles II, Performance in Production II. Students also take two courses in

Theatre Literature or History.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Standard University of Regina admission procedures apply. No audition is required. For entry into third and fourth year a minimum average in all performance courses is required along with a recommendation of continuation from the Theatre Acting Review

Committee.

Design

Students enrolled in the Design specialization learn the aesthetics and practical principles of theatre design as they prepare for graduate studies in an

Master of Fine Arts program or professional school. The four‐year program

143 requires a minimum of ten classes in set and costume design and a graduating design practicum for a fully mounted production in the Departmentʹs season.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introductory Theatre Design and either Introduction to Stage

Craft or Introduction to Costume Construction. Students take three option

courses and a variety of liberal arts courses.

Year Two: Dramaturgy I, Acting Theory and Practice, Dramaturgy II,

Elementary Costume Design, Elementary Scene Design, Art: Two‐

Dimensional Form, Art: Three‐Dimensional Form and Introduction to Art

History. Students also take either Introduction to Stage Craft or

Introduction to Costume Construction and an option course.

Year Three: Intermediate Costume Design, Intermediate Scene Design,

Advanced Design I, Advanced Design II, Introduction to Stage

Management, Historical Approaches to Theatre, Critical Approaches to

Theatre. Students also select two Theatre Literature or History courses

and an option course.

144

Year Four: Design Assistantship. Students select either Scene Design

Research I or Costume Design Research I. They also select between Scene

Design II and Costume Design II. Two Theatre Literature or History

Courses are also chosen along with four option courses.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Standard University of Regina admission procedures apply. A minimum average in certain specialization courses is required for admission into advanced courses.

Stage Management/Technical Theatre

The four year Stage Management/Technical Theatre specialization trains students in the preparing, mounting and running a production. During the course of the program, students secure a solid grounding on which to build a professional career by applying their course studies and gaining practical

experience in a minimum of twelve productions.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Stage Craft, Introduction to Costume Design,

Introduction to Stage Management, Introduction to Acting, Introductory

Theatre Design. Students also take one Fine Arts option, two option

courses and a variety of liberal arts options.

145

Year Two: Introduction to Costume Construction, Dramaturgy I,

Technical Theatre, Dramaturgy II, Practical Stage Management, and

Elementary Sound. Two liberal arts and two elective courses are also

selected.

Year Three: Elementary Lighting, Historical Approaches to Theatre,

Critical Approaches to Theatre, Acting Theory and Practice, Directing, and

Intermediate Lighting. Two Fine Arts options and two elective options are

also selected.

Year Four: Intermediate Technical Theatre, Lighting Design Practice and

Theory, and Production Management/Technical Production. Two Theatre

Literature or History Courses are also chosen along with three elective

option courses.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Standard University of Regina admission procedures apply. A minimum average in certain specialization courses is required for admission into advanced courses.

146

5.9 University of Saskatchewan10

The University of Saskatchewan offers four Bachelor of Arts programs in

Drama and Theatre History and two Bachelor of Fine Arts degrees in the areas of

Acting and Design. The Bachelor of Fine Arts programs are promoted as being

designed for students who wish to acquire a thorough knowledge of one of the

performance‐oriented areas of theatre as part of their general education and for

those who wish to prepare for graduate schools or conservatories in areas of

acting or design. The Drama Department seeks to produce graduates who will

use drama and theatre to foster educational, artistic, and community

development and growth. Admission to the three year Bachelor of Fine Arts

program is applied for at the end of the student’s first year; after all required Pre‐

BFA courses have been successfully completed. Students pursuing a Bachelor of

Fine Arts degree have the opportunity to explore the disciplines of theatre, film,

radio and television through acting, directing, designing, stage managing,

writing and presenting plays. Students learn to interpret dramatic text, study the

evolution of theatrical production and gain hands‐on experience with lighting,

sound production and stage management. Through both main stage and

10 Information for the University of Saskatchewan’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.arts.usask.ca/drama/ and the academic calendar website: http://www.usask.ca/calendar/arts&science/programs/programs/ drama/#anchor9

147 student‐run productions, students in the Bachelor of Fine Arts program have opportunities to present their work to the university and wider community.

Acting

Students enrolled in the Bachelor of Fine Arts Acting program study the practice of acting in a variety of media.

Course Requirements:

Year One (Recommended Pre‐BFA year): How to Read Drama, Acting I,

Acting II, and Technical Theatre: Scenic Construction. Potential Acting

students are also recommended to take the English course: Literature and

Composition. A variety of Elective and Liberal Arts courses are also

selected.

Year Two: Technical Theatre II Stage Properties, Theories of Acting and

Directing, History of Theatre from 600 BCE to 1850 CE, Acting II, Acting

IV and a variety of Electives and Liberal Arts options.

Year Three: History of Theatre from 1850 to Present, Technical Theatre III

Costume Construction, Acting V, Acting VI, Physical Theatre I Clown,

Voice for Actor I, Movement for Actor I and a variety of Electives and

Liberal Arts options.

148

Year Four: Technical Theatre IV Stage Management, Advanced Studies in

Theatre History I or II, Acting VII, Acting VIII, Physical Theatre II

Commedia, Voice for Actor II, and Movement for Actor II. One course is

selected from either Dramatic Theory and Criticism or Studies in

Canadian Theatre. A variety of Electives and Liberal Arts options are also

selected.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Standard admission procedures from

the University of Saskatchewan apply.

Design

Students enrolled in the Bachelor of Fine Arts Design program study the practice of scenic, lighting, and costume design for the stage.

Course Requirements:

Year One (Recommended Pre‐BFA year): How to Read Drama, Acting I,

Technical Theatre: Scenic Construction, Technical Theatre II Stage

Properties, and English Literature and Composition. A variety of Elective

and Liberal Arts courses are also selected.

149

Year Two: Acting II, History of Theatre from 600 BCE to 1850 CE,

Technical Theatre III Costume Construction, Technical Theatre IV Stage

Management, Theatre Design I Introduction, Theatre Design II

Introduction. Two courses from the following list are selected:

Introduction to the History of Art I, Introduction to the History of Art II,

Painting I Foundation, Painting and Related Work II, Drawing and

Related Work II, Foundation in Photography I and Photography II.

Year Three: History of Theatre from 1850 to Present, Theatre Design III,

Intermediate and Theatre Design IV Intermediate or Technical Theatre I

and Technical Theatre II. Two courses are selected from the following list:

Introduction to the History of Art I, Introduction to the History of Art II,

Painting I Foundation, Painting and Related Work II, Drawing and

Related Work II, Foundation in Photography I and Photography II. Two

Drama electives are also selected.

Year Four: Theatre Design V Advanced, Theatre Design VI Advanced,

Dramatic Theory and Criticism, Studies in Canadian Theatre, Two Drama

and two Fine Arts options are also selected.

150

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Standard admission procedures from the University of Saskatchewan apply.

151

5.10 Laurentian University11

The Theatre Arts Programme at Laurentian University is offered at its federated Thorneloe University. The programme offers a concentration in

Theatre Arts for a General Bachelor of Arts, a combined concentration of Theatre

Arts and another subject for a General Bachelor of Arts and an interdisciplinary

Bachelor of Fine Arts with a major in Theatre Arts. The Theatre Arts Programme

at Laurentian has for main objectives:

1. To develop the capacities of students to be collaborative, interdisciplinary

and collegial, as required by theatrical/artistic milieus;

2. to give students analytical and creative tools for understanding and

creating theatre;

3. to nurture personal and social insights in both students and faculty,

enabling them to work in a creative and fulfilling way; and

4. to provide Laurentian and the wider community with imaginative theatre

capable of broadening our humanitarian and artistic vocabulary.

11 Information for Laurentian University’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.huntington.laurentian.ca/index.php?file= fine_ arts_e.html and the academic calendar website: http://oldwebsite.laurentian.ca/HUNTINGTON /index.php?file=requirements_fa_e.html

152

The advertised purpose of the program is to allow students to explore Theatre

Arts as a liberal arts discipline within the Faculty of Humanities. The program is promoted as a unique interdisciplinary Bachelor of Fine Arts program that provides students the opportunity to take one major and one minor concentration from programs in music (performance or education) and theatre

(performance or production) and the visual arts.

Theatre Performance

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Theatre, Fine Arts Elective.

Year Two: Interarts I, Acting I, Theatre History I, Fine Arts elective, Fine

Arts elective in minor area of specialization.

Year Three: Interarts II, Speech, Movement, Theatre History, Theatre

elective and Fine Arts elective in minor area of specialization.

Year Four: Interarts III, Acting II, Theatre electives and Fine Arts elective

in minor area of specialization.

Admission Requirements (non‐academic): Personal Audition which includes

contrasting monologues, and a Group Audition which includes cold readings,

creative movement and improvisational work.

153

Theatre Production

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Theatre.

Year Two: Interarts II, Stagecraft I and II or Lighting I and II or Audio I

and II, Theatre History, Fine Arts elective in minor area of specialization.

Year Three: Interarts II, Theatre Production Major (in one of the areas

listed in year two), Theatre History II, Theatre elective and Fine Arts

elective in minor area of specialization.

Year Four: Interarts III, Theatre Production Major (in one of the areas

listed in year two), Theatre electives, Fine Arts elective in minor area of

specialization.

Admission Requirements (non‐academic): Personal interview.

154

5.11 Ryerson University12

Ryerson University offers three professionally driven BFA Theatre

programs leading to specializations in the areas of Performance Acting,

Performance Production and Performance Dance. The programs are advertised

as preparing students for professional opportunities in the entertainment

industry ‐ including theatre, television, and film ‐ and the arts education

community and for post‐graduate studies in the area of theatre performance.

Ryerson’s theatre program combines five key components which they claim are

unavailable as a package in any other Canadian theatre program. These components include:

Conservatory‐style training

In addition to what is referred to as “comprehensive in‐class instruction”

students spend a “substantial amount of time practicing the art of

theatre,” they “live and breathe it”. The Theatre School trains from the

ground up and encourages talented students to apply who may have

diverse backgrounds and experiences. By the end of four years, students

are expected to have developed a professional level of experience, focus,

12 Information for Ryerson University’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.ryerson.ca/theatreschool/ and the academic calendar website: http://www.ryerson.ca/calendar/2007‐2008/PDF/Comm_Design‐FT‐0708.pdf

155

discipline, technique, and versatility through extensive workshop and

studio training, individual coaching and mentorship, and experience

participating in or mounting full‐scale theatrical productions.

University education

Ryerson includes liberal arts components as part of the education it offers

to its theatre students. Described as “a university education”, this

component dis to intende encourage personal growth and develop the

creative processes by learning to explore, critically filter, and interpret the

world. Outside of their particular area of focus, students also study

subjects designed to enhance a particular specialization such as: history of

art and performance, music, film, entrepreneurship, business‐related

dcourses an liberal studies. Students are informed that throughout their

studies they will undertake research and analysis, write papers, and

complete independent study projects, all which will better equip them to

evolve and shape their career.

Collaborative community

The Theatre School promotes itself as creating an open forum for “Acting,

Dance, and Performance Production students to communicate with, learn

from, and support each other as part of a creatively pooled, partnered

156

ensemble”. Together students take classes, work on projects and mount

“professionally run performances”. Students are informed that through

this program they will develop required skills such as collaboration,

flexibility, and a professional approach which is expected in the industry.

Culture of entrepreneurship

In addition to collaboration, the program also emphasizes a focus on

developing personal creative initiative to follow through with students’

own artistic visions and the entrepreneurial thinking needed to generate

individual works and employment opportunities. The program overview

specifically states that the curriculum is designed to help students “adopt

the tools, know‐how, and ingenuity to create original performance pieces

or launch business ventures in theatre, dance, or other forms of

production”.

Industry contact

Ryerson promotes its location – downtown Toronto as being a strong link

to industry and highlights the fact that the City of Toronto is ranked third

largest in the world for English‐language theatre and in North America

157

for television and film production. The opportunity to learn from guest

artists and faculty who are dedicated educators, work in the business,

have distinguished careers and can provide students with professional

contracts is also used as a highlighted feature of the program.

Ryerson offers two theatre based specializations, one in Performance Acting and one in Performance Production:

Performance Acting

Ryerson’s Performance Program focuses on the fundamentals of theatre.

Students studying in the Performance program study acting, movement and voice. They focus on several approaches to acting including modern scene study, mask, classical, clown and film. Students also receive dance and music instruction and participate in workshops such as stage combat and playwriting.

The program includes instruction on the business side of acting including optional courses in areas of entrepreneurship, business, human resources,

marketing, and new‐venture start‐up. Over a period of four years students

transition from class work to studio presentations, to a full season of public

performances and self‐generated work in their final year.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Music I: Introduction, Creative Performance Studies, Anatomy of

158

Movement and Lifestyle I, Production Elements of Performance I, Time

Lines of Performance History I, Time Lines of Performance History II,

Fundamentals of Tech I: Acting, Fundamentals of Tech IIL Acting. Students select two Liberal Arts options.

Year Two: The Moving Image in Performance I, Music II: Singing, Creative

Performance Studies II, Performing Arts in Canada, Intermediary Tech I:

Acting, Intermediary Tech II: Acting, Canadian Theatre Development.

Students select one Liberal Arts option.

Year Three: Creative Performance Studies III, Performance Tech I: Acting,

Performance Tech II: Acting. Students select two courses from the following

Professional Table of Courses: Vocal pedagogy: Speech Arts, Singing for

Performers, Dance Pedagogy, Audition Preparation, Special Topics, Musical

Theatre Repertoire, Dance Styles: Historical Period, Dance Styles: Modern

Social, Drama/Dance in Education, Staging the Theatrical Production,

Advanced Practicum in production, Make‐Up and Wiggery, Audition

Preparation. Students select two courses from the following Professionally‐

Related Table of Courses: New Venture Startup. The Moving Image in

Performance II, History of Costume I, The Material of Cultures of North

159

America, Introduction to Management, Organizational Behaviour and

Interpersonal Skills, Marketing I, Marketing II, Musicology, Anatomy of

Movement and Lifestyle II, Text Examination: Dramaturgy and Direction,

Canadian Theatre Development, Landmarks of Choreographic

Development, Human Development in the Arts, Performance

Entrepreneurship I, Application of Music in performance, Performing Arts

in the Media, Theatre Management. Students also select two Liberal Arts

options.

Year Four: Creative Performance Studies IV, Independent Study Seminars,

Advanced Performance Tech I: Acting, Advanced Performance Tech II:

Acting. Students select two courses from the Professional Table of Courses

listed in Year Three above. Students select two courses from the

Professionally‐Related Table of Courses listed in Year Three above.

Students also select one Liberal Arts option.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Acting Admission: An Audition including: Personal Presentation – “do” a whole play in three minutes, Classical

Monologue, Contemporary Monologue, Personal Statement, Resume with an

8x10 inch Photograph and Letters of Recommendation.

160

Performance Production

In the Performance Production program students focus on areas of management, production and design. The management related studies include training in scheduling, staffing, budgeting, personnel, artistsʹ relations, contracts, promotions, technical direction, and production management. Production and design studies a cross‐section of prop and costume construction, lighting, sound, technical drawing, set and model building, scenic painting, pattern drafting, and

sewing. Performance Production students undertake historical studies of

performance styles through the ages and develop an understanding of Canadian

theatre, music and musical production. Students also develop written and oral

presentation skills as required by technical and production professionals.

Throughout the year production students have guaranteed opportunities to

collaborate on theatrical and dance performances which are organized under

professional company standards and operate under the guidance of invited

professional artists. In the final year of the program students undertake an

independent study project related to their specialization.

Course Requirements:

Year One: Elements of Production I, Elements of Production II, Time Lines

of Performance History I, Time Lines of Performance History II, Production

Technique I, Production Technique II, Design Communication I, Design

161

Communication II. One Liberal Arts option is also selected.

Year Two: Research Methods, Canadian Theatre Development, Production

Technique III, Design Communication III, Fundamentals of Design Theory,

Performance Arts in Canada, Production Communication II, Production

Technique IV. Two Liberal Arts courses are also selected.

Year Three: Musicology, Production Technique V, Production Technique

VII, Conceiving the Production. Students select three courses from the following Professional Table of Courses: History of Costume I, Staging the

Theatrical Production, Advanced Practicum in Production, Stage

Management, Technical Direction, Administration Special Topics, Theatre

Administration, Makeup and Wiggery, Theatre Costume, Scenic

Construction, Lighting Design, Scenic Painting, Theatre Safety and

Occupational Health, Fabric Dying and Costume Painting, Construction

Special Topics, Scenic Construction III, Set Design, Structure for Performing

Arts, Sound Design Special Topics, Production Management, Tour

Administration, Music for Theatre, Corsetry: History and Construction,

Costume: Special Topics, Lighting Design Special Topics, Scenic Painting,

Properties IL Design and Construction, Special Effects and Pyrotechnics,

162

Scenic Construction II, Costume Design, Sound Design, Electricity in

Theatre. Students select two courses from the following Professionally‐

Related Table of Courses: New Venture Startup, Employment and Labour

Law, Organizational Behaviours and Interpersonal Skills, Industrial

Relations, Marketing I, Marketing II, Performance Entrepreneurship I,

Production Management, Set Design, Lighting, Grip and Effects Specialty,

Sound Synthesis, The Nature of Narrative I, The Nature of Narrative II,

Fashion Event Planning, Psychology of Art and Creativity, The

Entertainment Industry, Landmarks of Choreographic Development.

Year Four: Production Technique VII, Production Technique VIII,

Independent Study, Students select five courses from the Professional Table

of Courses listed in Year Three above. Students select one course from the

Professionally‐Related Table of Courses listed in Year Three above.

Students also select one Liberal Arts option.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Production Admission: A Personal

Interview, Photograph, Resume, Two Letters of Reference, Personal Statement.

Sketches, Drawings, Models, Tapes and/or Production Materials may be brought to the Production Interview.

163

5.12 University of Windsor13

The University of Windsor offers students three Bachelor of Arts programs

in Drama, Drama in Education and Community and Drama and

Communication, and a Bachelor of Fine Arts program in Acting. The four year

Bachelor of Fine Arts Acting degree is advertised as being designed to prepare

graduates to pursue careers as professional actors. Graduates are also promoted as pursuing careers in related arts fields and pursuing graduate studies. Small class sizes are promoted as a personalized approach that fosters artistic growth,

the development of technique, and a positive university experience. In addition to classes, Dramatic Arts students are involved in University Players theatre which is described as a serious and dedicated training ground for young theatre

artists. First year students learn the back‐stage and front‐of‐house operation of

the theatre as members of running crews and in later years, students work in the

areas that correspond to their chosen degree programs. The drama program is

offered within the School of Dramatic Art at the University of Windsor. The

School is dedicated to providing excellence in training and education in drama

13 Information for the University of Windsor’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.uwindsor.ca/drama and the academic calendar website: http://web4.uwindsor.ca/units/registrar/calendars/undergraduate/Fall2007.nsf/main/ 22C2CF6B138CE93C85256D36005B8411?OpenDocument

164 and theatre and addressing the cultural, individual, and social needs and realities of diverse communities. The School focuses on delivering programs that offer degrees which prepare students for performance, educational drama and theatre production while continually supporting the creative pursuits of its faculty, staff and artists who are acknowledged as peers by others working in their field.

Acting

Course Requirements:

Year One: Nature of Theatre I, II, Voice for the Actor I, II, Movement for the

Actor I, II, Acting and Improvisation I, II, Theatre History, Drama of the

Western World I, II.

Year Two: Voice for the Actor III, IV, Acting for the Theatre I, II, Movement

for the Actor III, IV, Improvisation for the Theatre, Theatre History.

Students also undertake drama and liberal arts options.

Year Three: Acting‐Work in Progress I, II, III, IV, Voice and Movement for

the Actor I, II. Students also undertake drama and liberal arts options.

Year Four: Graduate Recital, Directed Studies in Performance, Character

165

Study, Principles and Practices of Arts Administration, Television

Performance, Performance Seminar, Directed Studies in Performance.

Students select both drama and liberal arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic) include: Audition, three Letters of

Reference, Theatre Resume.

166

5.13 York University14

York University offers a variety of theatre degrees leading to Bachelor of

Arts, Bachelor of Arts (Honours) and Bachelor of Fine Arts (Honours) degrees.

Students concentrating in studio work, either in performance or production, graduate with the BFA Honours degree. York promotes itself as one of the

largest and most comprehensive theatre programs of its kind in Canada,

combining in‐depth academic studies and rigorous practical training in all aspects of theatre. The program is advertised as teaching both the creative and technical skills involved in performance, directing and production, lighting, costume and set design. In addition students are provided with the opportunity

to take courses in dramatic literature, theatre history and theory, theatre criticism, and playwriting. Public presentation is an important part of the BFA curriculum and each year the in‐house production company, Theatre @ York, mounts a full season of productions and workshop performances. All students in the theatre program are involved in some capacity in the season either on or off the stage. York’s Theatre Department aims to give its students additional insight

into the professional world of theatre by hosting a guest speaker series which

14 Information for York University’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.yorku.ca/finearts/theatre/index.htm and the academic calendar website: http://calendars.registrar.yorku.ca/calendars/20072008/FAprogs/ theatre.htm

167 regularly presents talks by theatre artists who are active in their craft. The York

Theatre Journal which is published annually provides a public forum for students to develop their skills as theatre writers, researchers, critics and editors.

All students who enter the Theatre Department are considered to be in the

BA Honours program. At the end of the first year, students who do not choose to

remain as a Theatre Studies major in the BA Honours program are evaluated by

audition or interview if they wish to enter second year in Production or Acting.

The Department also offers a Minor in Production and a Minor in Theatre

Studies.

Acting

Students pursuing admission to the Acting conservatory in the BFA program must audition at the end of their first year of study for admission into year two. Year two takes an introductory approach to the principles of acting,

stressing spontaneity, concentration, relaxation and personal expression. There is

a strong emphasis on acquiring individual technical skills in voice and

movement which is developed through scene study exercises. Students who

successfully complete year two move on to year three where they continue exploration of the principles of acting, movement and vocal techniques. Students

gain an increased understanding of the script through performance and develop

168 techniques in building a character. In the final year in the program students undergo advanced work in voice, movement, and acting which they develop through projects in un‐mounted and fully mounted productions. Particular emphasis in the fourth year is given to career oriented skills, such as audition techniques.

Course Requirements:

Year Two: Voice I, Voice II, Acting I, Acting II, Movement I, Movement II,

Theatre Survey II. General education credits are also taken in years two and

three.

Year Three: Voice III, Voice IV, Acting III, Acting IV, Movement III,

Movement IV, Theatre Survey III. General education credits are also taken

in years two and three.

Year Four: Voice V, Voice VI, Acting V, Acting VI, Movement V, Movement

VI.

Admission requirements (non‐academic) include: Statement of intent, two contemporary contrasting monologues, sing a song.

169

Production/Design

Students interested in the Production/Design stream may apply to the program after completion of their first year. Students have the option of studying in the disciplines of: set design, costume design, lighting design, scenery/costume/prop construction, theatre management and production/stage management, however, students in Production/Design are expected to study more than one discipline.

Starting in their second year of study, students explore a range of disciplines in production and design and further their study through the production practicum. In year three students further their development of basic production

and design skills and in year four they continue their development to hone skills in their specific specializations.

Course Requirements:

Year Two: Production practicum, Stagecraft, Theatrical worlds in

transition, History of visual sources. Recommended courses include:

Introduction to costuming, Basic costuming I, Introduction to Design for

Theatre.

Year Three: Production practicum, Modern theatre and society.

Recommended courses include: Basic Costuming II, Lighting Design I,

170

Drafting I, Drawing for the Theatre I, Set & Costume Design I, Set &

Costume Design II, Theatre Management, Materials of Production, Stage

Management.

Year Four: Production Practicum, Costume Design III, Lighting Design II,

Stage Design III, Drawing for the Theatre II, C.A.D. for Stage Design,

Professional Aspects of the Theatre, Theatre Technology, Proscenium

Stage Equipment, Health and Safety in the Arts.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Demonstrated potential for success in the Production/Design option, including the ability to work well with others,

Letter of intent indicating why the applicant wishes to pursue studies and particular interest, Resume, Personal interview, Portfolio for admission to design classes.

171

5.14 Concordia University15

The Theatre Department at Concordia University promotes itself as

inspiring and preparing students to enter Canada’s rapidly evolving performing

arts culture. Students are provided with a basic grounding in design, theatre and

development, production, performance, and playwriting, which serves as preparation for advanced studies. Courses and creative projects develop skills in acting, creative and theoretical research, production, design, playwriting, and theatre for personal and social change. In addition, students also have the

opportunity to take part in professional internships, and to train with faculty

members and artists, who are active on the local and national theatre scene, in

Montreal’s arts community and beyond. The program states that graduates are

well prepared for future training, and established theatre practitioners frequently

seek out their graduates as interns and assistants. In addition to structured

opportunities for graduates, students are also prepared for self‐employment and

entrepreneurial roles within a national and international context.

15 Information for Concordia University’s program was obtained through the program website: http://finearts.concordia.ca/HTML/theatre.htm and the academic calendar website: http://registrar.concordia.ca/calendar/81/81.120.html

172

Concordia University offers five three‐year programs leading to a Bachelor of

Fine Arts Degree: Theatre Performance, Design for Theatre, Theatre and

Development, Playwriting, Major in Theatre.

Theatre Performance

The Specialization in Theatre Performance is described as an intensive program which prepares the actor for further training and performance in a variety of theatrical genres and performance styles. Students begin their studies

in the basic foundations which are provided in the core courses and then performance students go on to further explore and refine their skills in movement, voice and singing, characterization and ensemble work. Advanced

course work includes specialized classes in mask, Commedia del‐arte and

Shakespearean interpretation.

Course Requirements:

The Artist in Community, Introduction to Design for the Theatre I, Script

Analysis, Theatre History I, Current Canadian Theatre, Theatre History II,

Introduction to Theatre Production, Acting I, Acting II, either The Artist

and the Performance Event or Introduction for Design for the Theatre II,

and six courses from the following: Theatre Movement I, Character and

Text, Acting Elizabethan Text, Theatre Movement II, Voice and Speech I,

173

Voice and Speech II, Special Topics in Theatre Performance, Theatre

Movement III. Students also must take four elective courses from the

Department of Theatre and a variety of liberal arts options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Letter of Intent, Personal photo, Group interview, Group audition, Prepare monologue to perform.

Design for the Theatre

The Specialization in Design for the Theatre program comprises itself of a number of specialties including: lighting, costume, set and props design.

Students are exposed to each part and the role each plays in the theatre while developing an understanding of many other areas of theatre production.

Through an involvement in the imaginative and technical aspects of the various

streams of theatre design, group projects, and individual portfolio development, students progress from exploring the essence of the design process to developing more refined understandings and skills. Senior students in the Design for

Theatre Specialization work on advanced individual projects, with opportunities to design for departmental productions.

174

Course Requirements:

The Artist in Community, Introduction to Design for the Theatre I,

Introduction to Design for the Theatre II, Script Analysis, Theatre History

I, Current Canadian Theatre, Theatre History II, Introduction to Theatre

Production, Acting I, Directing. One course from the following: Acting II

or The Audience ande th Performance Event. Three courses from the

following: Lighting Design, Costume Design, Set Design and Special

Topics in Design for the Theatre. An additional three courses from the

following: Lighting Design Realization, Costume Design Realization,

Costume Accessories Realization, Set Design Realization, Stage Properties,

Scene Painting, Special Topics in Design for the Theatre. Students must

also take three elective courses from the Faculty of Fine Arts and are

advised to take two of these in Studio Art and a variety of liberal art

options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Letter of Intent, Personal photo,

Portfolio submission of previous design work, Personal interview.

175

Theatre and Development

The Specialization in Theatre and Development focuses on the history, theory and practice of theatre from the perspective of artʹs capacity to inform and to effect personal and social change. The program explores the application of theatre to developmental drama, drama in education, and drama therapy for their educational, therapeutic, and rehabilitative value. Students in the program

study collective collaborative and multidisciplinary approaches including street

theatre, environmental staging, popular, participatory, and celebratory theatre

within the contexts of community building and development, cultural

democracy, and historical and contemporary relationships between art and activism.

The Theatre and Development specialization prepares students to

assume entrepreneurial roles within the Canadian theatre scene. Classes occur in

a studio setting that emphasizes active learning and students have access to a

range of practical classes in acting, directing, playwriting, design, administration,

and production to enhance their program. In the upper years of the program,

students have the opportunity to participate in field work in area of personal

specialization including diverse or special needs populations, community based

theatre companies or developing community arts projects.

176

Course Requirements:

The Artist in Community, The Audience and the Performance Event,

Introduction to Design for the Theatre I, Script Analysis, Theatre History I,

Current Canadian Theatre, Theatre History II, Introduction to Theatre

Production, Acting I. One course from either: Acting II or Introduction to

Design for the Theatre II. Five courses from the following: Theatre with

Diverse Populations, Storytelling, Oral Histories and Identity; Popular

Theatre: Theory and Practice, Theatre with Young People, Special Projects

in Theatre and Development I, Special Projects in Theatre and

Development II, Special Topics in Theatre and Development, An

Introduction to Drama Therapy. Students must also take five elective

courses from the Department of Theatre and a variety of liberal art

options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Letter of Intent, Personal photo, Group interview, Group audition, Prepare a 3‐minute original piece to perform.

Major in Playwriting

The Major in Playwriting is a three‐year program which admits only a small number of students each year. The Program is designed to expose

playwriting students to all elements of the theatre from acting and designing, to

177 administration and aesthetics, as well as providing a well‐grounded concentration in writing skills. Students in the Playwriting program start their first year developing and understanding of the craft and move on to more focused skills in areas such as the study and writing of different genres, the one‐ act play, the one‐person play, theatre for young audiences. Students undertake a major project in their last year of study. The program advertises that BFA Major in Playwriting graduates leave the program with a well‐rounded and entrepreneurial sense of what is required in order to write seriously for the stage.

Course Requirements:

The Artist in Community, Introduction to Design for the Theatre I, Script

Analysis, Theatre History I, Current Canadian Theatre, Theatre History II,

Introduction to Theatre Production, Acting I, Directing. Two courses from

the following: Design for the Theatre II, Acting II, The Audience and the

Performance Event. Students also take the following courses in

playwriting: Elements of Playwriting, Playwriting I, Playwriting II,

Playwriting Workshop. Students are also required to take a number of

liberal art options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Letter of Intent, personal photo,

Portfolio submission of theatre writing, Personal interview.

178

Major in Theatre

The Major in Theatre promotes itself as offering a balance between academic study and practical experience, between artistic and organizational concerns. The Major in Theatre is designed to be a flexible program which provides an introduction to many aspects of theatre, from theatre history and theory, to stage management, directing and theatre administration. The Major is

intended for students who seek a general understanding of theatre that can serve

as the basis for graduate work in the field, or for future involvement in the creation and running of theatres.

Course Requirements:

The Artist in Community, Introduction to Design for the Theatre I, Script

Analysis, Theatre History I, Current Canadian Theatre, Theatre History II,

Introduction to Theatre Production, Acting I. Two courses from the

following are selected: Design for the Theatre II, Acting II, The Audience

and the Performance Event. Students also take six elective courses from

the Department of Theatre and a variety of liberal art options.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Letter of Intent, Personal photo, Group interview, Group audition, Prepare monologue to perform.

179

5.15 Memorial University16

The Theatre Program at Sir Wilfred Grenfell College is a four year BFA

(Theatre) program with specializations offered in either Acting or Stagecraft. The program is promoted as being designed to educate and train the student in the history, theory and practice of the theatre arts. The program advertises the degree as providing undergraduate training, delivered by theatre professionals, and an all‐around liberal arts education that prepares students to enter the profession, professional graduate school of theatre, theatre conservatory or an apprenticeship in the theatre profession. The promotional materials also state that in addition to the theatre training, the degree provides a broad liberal arts

education including dramatic literature which enables the graduate to pursue a

variety of careers outside the theatre profession. Students in the program

participate in Studio lab courses, Masterclasses and starting in second year

participate in at least two mainstage productions a year. The centre piece of the

Theatre Program at Grenfell two month trip to Memorial Universityʹs campus in

Harlow, England. While at the Harlow Institute students take courses from

British theatre professionals and see theatrical productions around Europe.

16 Information for Memorial University’s program was obtained through the program website: http://www.swgc.mun.ca/theatre/ and the academic calendar website: http://www.mun.ca/regoff/calendar/sectionNo=SWGC‐0452

180

Acting

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Theatre History I, Introduction to Acting,

Introduction to Stagecraft, Introduction to Theatre History II, Acting I.

Year Two: Acting II, Production‐Acting, Dramatic Literature, Art History

Survey I.

Year Three: Acting III, Acting Masterclass, Production Acting, Acting

Masterclass II, Dramatic Literature.

Year Four: Acting IV, Acting Masterclass III, Production Acting, Theory of

Directing and Design, Directed Study, Harlow Institute.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Audition including two contrasting

monologues, Sing a short song.

Stagecraft

Course Requirements:

Year One: Introduction to Theatre History I, Introduction to Acting,

Introduction to Stagecraft, Introduction to Theatre History II, Stagecraft I.

Year Two: Stagecraft II, Production‐Stagecraft, Dramatic Literature, Art

History Survey I.

181

Year Three: Stagecraft III, Stagecraft, Production Stagecraft, Dramatic

Literature.

Year Four: Stagecraft IV, Stagecraft, Production Stagecraft, Theory of

Directing and Design, Directed Study, Harlow Institute.

Admission requirements (non‐academic): Personal or phone interview, examples of stagecraft work, Personal statement.

182

5.16 BFA (Theatre) Programs: Classification

In examining the current BFA (Theatre) programs in Canada, it becomes clear that the program philosophy, structure, course offerings and admission requirements vary by institution. This variance was noted earlier in Canada by the Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Theatre Training in Canada (1977).

This report suggested that two styles of theatre training programs exist in post

secondary institutions, a conservatory‐style and a liberal arts‐style. The report

defines a conservatory‐style theatre program as a professionally oriented

program that serves the primary function of training students who aspire to be

actors, designers, technicians, stage managers, managers and producers while

providing some academic components (Black, Marsolais, Peacock, Porteous,

Ronfard, 1977, p. 2). In the Now What? The Guide to Post Secondary Theatre

Training in Canada (2000) Liberal arts‐style theatre programs are defined as an often interdisciplinary program that primarily emphasizes advanced communication and research skills while providing some practical theatre components (Theatre Ontario, 2000, p. 7). Using these definitions as a guide for classifying current BFA (Theatre) programs in Canada, 8 out of 14 programs would be categorized as conservatory‐style programs. This is evidenced by the language used in the program description such as: professional training, conservatory, and intensive. Despite the literature (Black et al., 1977; Theatre

183

Ontario, 2000) which classifies the BFA (Theatre) degree as a conservatory‐style intensive training program (the literature suggests that BA (Theatre) programs are liberal arts‐style programs), 6 of the BFA (Theatre) degrees in Canada appear to offer a liberal arts‐style rather than conservatory‐style program; their promotional literature emphasises an interdisciplinary approach, in‐depth academic studies, and an integration of text, theory and practice in their promotional documents. Based on a review and analysis of the promotional literature and program requirements of BFA (Theatre) programs across Canada, there appears to be a great variance in what constitutes a BFA degree in theatre.

Universities offering BFA (Theatre) degrees that could be classified as conservatory‐style based on the criteria outlined in the Black Report (1977) and

Theatre Ontario (2000) include: Simon Fraser University, University of British

Columbia, University of Victoria, University of Alberta, University of Regina,

Ryerson University, York University and University of Windsor. These universities were classified based on program descriptions provided in their

course calendars, department websites and online promotional materials. For

example, Ryerson University is promoted as preparing students for “professional

opportunities in the entertainment industry” (Ryerson, n.d). Ryerson also states

that the program offers training under the guidance of a wide variety of working

184 artists (Ryerson, n.d.). Simon Fraser University pegs its theatre school, which is located within the School for the Contemporary Arts, as being respected nationally and internationally as offering challenging training for theatre artists.

The key element in Simon Fraser’s program is the exposure that theatre students get to art forms such as music, dance and film which provides students with a

“unique advantage as they enter their professional lives” (Theatre, n.d.). The

University of Alberta claims that its program is an “intensive conservatory

training program” that is designed for the “student actor committed to the

pursuit of a professional acting career” (BFA Acting, n.d.). Their technical theatre

program is promoted as a “hands‐on, intensive conservatory‐style technical

training program” (BFA Technical Theatre, n.d.). The University of Regina’s

program suggests that students in the Stage Management / Technical Theatre

program are able to secure a solid grounding on which to build a professional

career and students in the Acting specialization begin the training of the

professional actor (Program, n.d.). The University of British Columbia’s BFA

(Theatre) program is intended to offer a professional training program that also provides some of the benefits of a liberal arts education (Theatre at UBC

Programs, n.d.) and the University of Windsor promotes its acting program as being designed to prepare graduates to pursue careers as professional actors

(School of Dramatic Art, n.d.). Throughout the above program descriptions,

185 common words can be found such as: training, professional, conservatory, practical and intensive. These programs have a stronger emphasis on practical theatre that combines conservatory‐style training with academic courses. The majority of conservatory‐style programs have an audition requirement and/or personal interview and portfolio submission for first year entry. Yearly evaluations are required to advance to the next year and enter more advanced

courses. The majority of the conservatory‐style programs promote themselves as

preparing students to enter the theatre profession upon graduation.

These conservatory‐style programs provide a different conception of theatre training than the 6 liberal arts‐style theatre programs offered at Canadian

Universities. Program descriptions for the liberal arts‐style programs use

different language than the conservatory‐style programs. For example, the

University of Calgary BFA (Theatre) program claims that it is committed to an

ideal of drama as a collaborative, performance‐based art form, which is rooted in

a solid understanding of text and theory. Students explore the connection

between theory and practice and play and performance (Welcome to the

Department of Drama, n.d.). Concordia University’s program emphasises

“creativity, imagination, and critical thinking” while students explore “a wide

range of past and present approaches to theatre by combining traditional and

186 innovative research” (Beaux‐arts Concordia Fine Arts, n.d.). The University of

Saskatchewan promotes its programs as offering students a thorough knowledge of one of the performance‐oriented areas of theatre as part of their general education and suggest the BFA program for students who wish to prepare for conservatory‐style programs (Student Handbook, 2005‐2006, p. 33). Memorial

University advertises its theatre program as an “all‐round education in the theatre that allows students to enter the profession, pursue graduate level studies, or another degree” (Theatre at Grenfell). Laurentian University offers a

“unique interdisciplinary Bachelor of Fine Arts program” with a major in theatre.

Laurentian’s interdisciplinary approach focuses on the “history and theory of

artistic movements as well as the analysis of individual works” (Fine Arts, n.d.).

As can be seen, none of these programs use language such as professional

training or conservatory in their course descriptions and instead choose

combinations of words such as: text and theory, collaboration, instrument for

social and personal change, broad liberal arts education. This suggests a different

conception of what constitutes a BFA (Theatre) degree than the conservatory‐

style programs. The promotional material often identifies the liberal arts‐style

programs as preparing students for professional or conservatory‐style training

programs. The full‐length program descriptions emphasize advanced

187 communication and research skills, interdisciplinarity, scholarship and critical thinking. Although these programs have a stronger focus on academics, they also have significant practical components including encouraged or mandatory participation in productions. Most of these programs do not require auditions in first year, although some have auditions or interviews to enter into the second year or take advanced courses in certain production areas.

Although some cross over can be seen in the mandates, descriptions and

admission requirements between the various programs, a strong divide exists in

the type of curriculum offered to students who pursue a degree in the

conservatory‐style program and those in the liberal arts‐style program. All 8 conservatory‐style programs require students to declare a specialization upon

entry in first year and provide a structured curriculum around that specialization

area. Conservatory‐style programs tend to limit their specialization offerings to areas of performance, technical theatre (including stage management) and design. Within these specializations, courses are required in a variety of areas

that advance the professionalization and skill development of the student. For

example, in the BFA acting specialization at York, first year students are required

to take two voice courses, two acting courses, two movement courses and one theatre survey course. The first year BFA acting program at Windsor requires

188 two courses in acting and improvisation, two in movement, two in voice, two drama literature courses and two theatre survey courses. At Ryerson, the technical production program has a mandatory first year program that requires students to take courses in Basic Theatre Electricity, Costume, History of Art,

Production, Scenic Construction, Sound, Stage Lighting, Stage Management,

Technical Drawing and Model Making, Theatre Management and Theatre Safety.

Few elective courses are offered or allowed within conservatory‐style programs

as the course load is usually quite full with required courses.

In comparison, liberal arts‐style BFA programs provide a more flexible learning environment. Students are frequently not required to choose a specific

specialization or when they do they are able to combine areas to suit particular

needs and interests. Courses are available in areas such as acting, directing,

design, developmental and technical theatre, but often only one full course in

each area is offered in each year of the program. Students are usually required to

take other course credits from related drama courses, non‐drama courses, fine

arts courses, option electives, and required electives such as English, Sciences,

Social Sciences or Humanities. The intent is to provide a well‐rounded liberal

education with a focus in the area of theatre. Liberal arts‐style theatre programs

are often more self‐directed and allow students to tailor a program to suit their

189 specific needs and interests. For example, the University of Calgary offers a standardized first year program which requires all students to take full courses in acting, production and theatre history. Theatre history courses are mandated throughout the four‐year program, with options for the specific courses taken.

Following this first year, students are allowed to informally specialize in areas of interest by grouping courses together. The equivalent of one full course is offered

in each year of the program in diverse areas such acting, directing, design,

developmental or educational drama. Other specialized courses are available

such as stage management and puppetry. In the first year at the University of

Saskatchewan, acting students are required to take a half course in reading

drama, a half course in technical theatre and a full course in acting. Other courses

are electives of the students’ choice and required English courses. The first year

course for design is similar except that students take a full course in technical

theatre and only a half course in acting. Advanced courses in the specializations such as courses in acting, technical or design are generally offered at one full course equivalent a year.

As can be seen, the divide between the conservatory‐style and the liberal arts‐style of post secondary theatre education is most evident when an exploration is taken into the specific course and program requirements for the

190 degree. Conservatory‐style programs tend to provide a more structured curriculum with fewer options for electives. These programs require students to declare a specialization from first year and provide the students with intensive training in that area. While a liberal arts program may provide an acting specialist with one acting course each year, a conservatory program offers

multiple courses in subjects such as acting, improvisation, movement and voice.

Conservatory programs often mount their theatrical seasons as a part of the

course load, participation is mandatory and students become progressively more

involved year by year. In comparison, the liberal arts model provides more flexible options, often requiring students in their first year to take general courses

that survey many areas of theatre. Specialization courses are offered, but usually only one course a year is required, and these courses often remain broadly labeled such as acting, directing or design. Students are encouraged and usually required to take multiple courses outside of the drama department. Participation in productions is encouraged, but usually voluntary and all students have equal

opportunity for involvement based solely on audition.

While all BFA (Theatre) programs share some commonalities such as the

availability of theory and practice, the programs’ philosophies, mandates,

pedagogy and course offerings differ dramatically. Theatre students are

191 graduating across the country with the same letters behind their name, but having received different education and training. How do these differences affect the experiences of BFA (Theatre) graduates? What impact if any do these differences in programs have on the expectations, satisfaction and employability of theatre graduates? The implications and importance of questions such as these go beyond the post‐secondary institution. In order for theatre to continue to

thrive in Canada, educated and trained theatre artists are necessary and a full

understanding of university or academic theatre is required. Prior to this study

there has been little research on how the conservatory versus liberal arts debates

and their associated pedagogical practices play themselves out and inform

theatre in higher education in Canada. The past two chapters attempted to

provide understanding and clarity to the history, development and current state

of the Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) degree in Canada. The next chapter

provides an opportunity to hear from BFA (Theatre) graduates as they reflect on

their motivations for studying theatre, their expectations for the degree program,

satisfaction with the program and their labour market success since graduating.

192

Chapter Six: The Voice of BFA (Theatre) Graduates

6.1 A Collective Voice: Survey Results from Canadian Theatre Graduates

This chapter provides the results from the Theatre Graduates Survey that

was administered to Canadian BFA (Theatre) graduates through the 14 theatre

programs using a snowball sampling technique. The first section of the chapter

provides the frequency analysis for all participants in the survey for the purposes

of identifying the overall expectations, satisfaction and employment for a sample of theatre graduates in Canada. The second section of the chapter compares the responses of participants in conservatory‐style programs to those in liberal arts‐ style programs for the purposes of identifying any differences in the responses based on type of program attended. The third section provides a discussion of the survey results and the final section of the chapter provides a summary of the responses from an open‐ended survey question which asked participants to provide commentary on essential elements in a BFA (Theatre) program.

193

Participant Profile

Two hundred and sixteen participants responded to the invitation to participate in the theatre graduates survey. Participants were invited to participate based on their status as Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) graduates from one of the 14 Canadian universities offering the BFA (Theatre) degree.

Participation in eth survey included graduates from all 14 universities. One

hundred ninety participants responded to the question asking what university they attended. The University of Victoria had the highest percentage of participants at 52 (27.4%) and the Universities of Calgary and Concordia tied for

the second largest group at 13.7% (n = 26). Laurentian and Simon Fraser

Universities were the smallest groups with 1 participant each (.53%).

Figure 1: University Distribution of Participants

194

Of the total number of survey participants, 179 responded to the question of gender. Of the 179 who responded, 95 were females (53.1%) and 84 were males

(46.9%).

Figure 2: Sex of Participants

One hundred seventy nine participants responded to the question of age.

Of these participants the age ranged from 20 – 25 years (24%, n = 43) to 41 years and over (19%, n = 34), with the largest age group ranging from 26 – 30 years

(30.7%, n = 55).

195

Figure 3: Age of Participants

Of the 190 respondents who answered the questions on location of residence, 90% percent (n = 171) indicated that they currently live in Canada while 4.2% (n = 8) indicated that they live in the United States of America and

5.8% (n = 11) identified that they live internationally. Prior to attending university 2.1% of the participants (n = 4) lived internationally – including the

United States of America, 23.2% (n = 44) lived in Canada in a different province

from which they chose to attend university, 30.5% (n = 58) lived in the same

province but not in the same city as where they attended university, and 44.2%

(n = 84) lived in the same city as the university they attended.

One hundred ninety five participants responded to the question of previous degree granting education. Prior to starting their theatre degree, 75.4%

196

(n = 147) of participants had no previous degree or diploma granting post secondary education. Of those who did have previous post secondary education,

12.3% (n = 24) had college level education, 7.2% (n = 14) had university level education and 5.1% (n = 10) had either institute or other degree or diploma granting education. One hundred ninety participants responded to the question of non‐degree granting education. Of these participants, approximately one half,

50.5% (n = 96), had prior non‐post secondary theatre training including workshops, intensive training courses or internship opportunities prior to

entering their theatre degree program.

Of the 193 participants who responded to the question of additional post

secondary education, 54.9% (n = 106) did not pursue additional post secondary

education following their theatre degree. Almost 22.8% (n = 42) pursued

graduate education while 9.3% (n = 18) undertook an additional undergraduate degree. 5.7% (n = 11) indicated that they went on to attend a college or institute.

Of the 8.3% (n = 16) of respondents who selected the “other” option, the majority indicated that they were considering pursuing additional education.

Seven theatre specializations were provided as options in the survey and

197 participants responded to this question. The largest specialization group

197 indicated by participants was Acting at 35.5% (n = 70) followed by Technical /

Stage Management at 25.9% (n =51) and Design at 16.8% (n = 33). Under 10%

(9.6%, n = 19) indicated “Other” as a specialization. Participants listing “Other” primarily indicated their specialization as Theatre History or a “Comprehensive” program which included a number of different specializations. One hundred ninety participants responded to the question of the type of program they

attended. 56.3% (n = 107) of participants indicated that they considered their theatre program to be primarily a Professional or Conservatory drama program while 43.7% (n = 83) indicated that their program was primarily a Liberal Arts or

Academic program.

Figure 4: Primary Specialization

198

Program Expectations

Of the 182 participants who responded to this question, the majority

(92.3%, n=168) of survey participants indicated that they undertook their theatre degree because they either strongly agreed or agreed that they were good at their area of specialization. The majority (94%, n = 171) of respondents undertook the theatre degree because of the creative and artistic benefits and 73.1% (n = 133) listed wanting to contribute to their community as a reason to undertake the degree. Of the 182 participants who responded to the question of employability,

85.7% (n = 156) of survey participants identified that they wanted to be

employable in their field upon graduation. Of the 181 participants who

responded to the questions of secure employment and financial rewards, only

35.9% (n = 65) believed that their theatre degree would lead them to secure employment. Thirty‐seven percent (n = 67) of survey participants believed that

their theatre degree would result in future financial rewards.

All 182 participants who responded to the question of creative challenges either strongly agreed or agreed that during their theatre program they expected to have creative challenges and opportunities. Of 181 participants, 89.5% (n =

162) expected to establish professional contacts through their education. Of 182 participants, 75.3% (n = 137) believed that they would have the option of going

199 on to higher education such as a graduate degree. Of the 182 participants who responded to this question, 56.6% percent (n = 103) did not expect to have to work at a non‐theatre job to sustain their theatre work following graduation and

61.5% (n = 112) expected to be employed in theatre immediately following graduation. Of 181 participants that responded to this question, 58% (n = 105) expected to earn a living salary from their theatre work and only 14.4% expected to continue with theatre as a hobby rather than be employed in their theatre field upon graduation.

Program Satisfaction

Looking back on their theatre degree, out of the 181 survey participants who responded to the question, 93.9% (n = 170) believed that they were given opportunities to develop in their theatre work. Out of 180 participants who responded to the question, 96.7% (n = 174) believed that their program provided

them with useful theatre skills and techniques and 79.4% (n = 143) identified that

they received high quality skill development during their program. Of the 180

participants, 76.1% (n = 137) felt that during their program they were encouraged to engage in critical thought and participate in ah higlevel of academic activity.

Of the 179 participants who responded to this question, 66.5% (n = 119) indicated

that they had the opportunity to develop a mentoring relationship during their

200 theatre degree. Of the 181 participants who responded to the career questions,

20.4% (n = 37) Strongly Agreed and 43.1% (n = 78) Agreed that their program prepared them well to start out in their career and 19.3% (n = 35) Strongly

Agreed and 47% (n = 85) Agreed that their theatre program had prepared them well for career progression. If survey participants were to do their degrees over

again, out of 181 participants, 86.2% (n = 156) indicated that they would still take

a theatre program. Out of 179 survey participants, 26.8% (n =48) Strongly Agreed

and 36.3% (n = 65) Agreed that they would take the same type of program again.

Out of 180 participants, 40.6% (n = 73) indicated that they would still take a

theatre degree but would attend a different school.

Of the 178 participants who responded to this question, 89.3% (n = 159)

indicated that they developed aesthetic and creative skills during their theatre

program. Of 177 participants, 74.5% (n = 132) indicated that they gained excellent problem‐solving skills and 75.1% (n = 133) believed that they developed excellent analytical skills. Of the 178 participants who responded to this question, 93.8% (n

= 167) felt they enhanced their ability to work as a member of team and 74.2% (n

= 132) either Strongly Agreed or Agreed that their program had fostered excellent organizational and time management skills. Of 178 participants, 64.6%

(n = 115) either Strongly Agreed or Agreed that their theatre program helped

201 them develop excellent written communications skills. Of 177 participants, 80.8%

(n = 143) responded that their program helped them develop excellent verbal communication skills. Of the 178 participants who responded to this question,

78.1% (n = 139) indicated that during their theatre program they obtained practical skills which would wallo them to succeed in their theatre practice and

only 50% (n = 89) of respondents felt that they had obtained the necessary skills

to succeed in the non‐theatre workforce. Thirty‐six percent (n = 64) of the 178

participants indicated that their theatre program had provided them with

training on how to find work after graduation.

Having completed a Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) program, 25.8% (n =

46) of the 178 participants who responded to the question of employment expectations indicated that they expect to make a living solely from theatre work directly related to their specialization in the theatre program. Of the 178

participants, 8.4% (n = 15) responded that they expected to make a living from

theatre work in an area not directly related to their specialization. The majority of

respondents, 47.2% (n = 84), indicated that they expected to make a living from a

combination of theatre work and non‐theatre based work. Only 7.9% (n = 14) responded that they expected to earn a living from non‐theatre based work.

202

Graduate Employment

Of the 189 participants who answered this question, 64.6% (n = 122) indicated that they were currently employed full time (including contract work) either in an arts or non‐arts based position and 23.8% (n = 45) indicated that they were employed part time. Full or part time studies were being pursued as a

primary activity by 6.8% of participants while only 4.8% (n = 9) are unemployed.

Figure 5: Current Work Situation

Of the 182 survey participants who responded to the question on primary

theatre employment, 35.7% (n = 65) indicated that they do not currently derive a

primary income from theatre work. Of the 182 participants, 14.8% (n = 27) are working as a Stage Manager, Production Manager or Technical Director and

203

9.89% (n = 18) derive their primary income from their Acting work. Participants who selected the “Other” category indicated that they either combined positions to make up their primary theatre income, for example, working as an Actor,

Stage Manager, Technician and Technical Director or held a position in a related arts field such as film, dance or production focused companies but not directly in

theatre.

Figure 6: Primary Theatre Employment

204

As participants may generate a secondary income from more than one area, participants could select more than one secondary theatre involvement. As a result, 222 responses were received on the question of secondary theatre employment. The subsequent chart shows a distribution of the type of secondary theatre employment which is undertaken by the survey participants.

Figure 7: Secondary Theatre Involvement

205

Of the 180 survey participants who responded to this question, 26.1% (n =

47) indicated that they currently work for professional theatre companies while

16.7% (n = 30) responded that they did not work at all in theatre. Of the 180 participants, 14.4% (n =26) indicated that they were paid and work in semi‐ professional theatre companies while 4.4% (n = 8) are paid but work for non‐ professional theatre companies. An additional 13.9% (n = 25) of participants consider themselves theatre volunteers or provide services to theatre companies without being paid. Participants had the option of selecting the “Other” option and 24.4% (n = 44) reported “Other” theatre involvement including a combination of professional and non‐professional work, teaching positions or arts‐related positions not directly connected to the theatre. Of the 200 survey participants who responded to the union question, 50.5% (n = 101) indicated that they didt no belong as a member or apprentice to a theatre based union, while

37.2% (n = 79) reported they belonged to a union with Equity being the highest at

18.5% (n = 37).

Of the 179 survey participants who responded to the question of income

percentage, 33% (n = 59) indicated that their income was 100% derived from their

theatre work while 19.6% (n = 35) reports that their income is 100% not derived

from the theatre. Of the 179 participants, 20.1% (n = 36) indicated less that 25% of

206

their overall income comes from their theatre work. The remaining 27.4% (n = 49)

have alternate ratios of theatre to non‐theatre income ranging from 90% theatre

and 10% other to supplemental income from a number of artistic pursuits,

outside of theatre, making up 100% of the participants income.

Figure 8: Income Distribution

Of the 177 survey participants who responded to the question of income,

64.4% (n = 114) indicate that they are earning between $0 and $20,000 a year

(before taxes) from their theatre‐based work. Twenty‐six percent (n = 46) of the

177 participants who responded to this question report receiving no income from

207 their theatre work and 15.3% (n = 27) indicate that they received under $5,000. Of the 177 participants 15.8% (n = 28) reported earning $40,000 or more in annual income from theatre work with 9% (n = 16) reporting income of $50,000 or over.

Figure 9: Annual Income ‐ Theatre Derived

When asked about non‐theatre based income, 29% (n = 51) of the 176 survey participants who responded to this question reported no income from

non‐theatre based work. The majority of respondents 63.6% (n = 112) reported

208 that they had earned between $0 and $20,000 from non‐theatre based income. Of the 176 participants, 15.3% (n = 27) reported that they earned $40,000 or more from non‐theatre based work with 12% (n = 21) reporting over $50,000 earned.

Figure 10: Annual Income ‐ Non‐Theatre Derived

209

In Summary

Bachelor of Fine Arts graduates from across Canada participated in the

BFA Graduates Survey including graduates from all 14 universities offering BFA programs at Canadian Universities. The highest level of participation was the

University of Victoria and the smallest groups were Simon Fraser and Laurentian

Universities. The majority of participants currently reside in Canada and prior to

starting their degree, lived in the same city where they attended university. Prior

to starting the Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) program the majority of surveyed

graduates had no prior degree of diploma granting post secondary education,

however approximately onef hal of them had attended non‐post secondary

theatre training such as courses and workshops. The majority of survey

respondents specialized in Acting during their Theatre program with the second

most popular specialization among survey participants being the Technical /

Stage Management specialization. Slightly more than half of all survey

participants indicated that they considered their program to be primarily a

Professional or Conservatory program while just under half viewed their

program as primarily a Liberal Arts or Academic program.

Survey participants overwhelmingly indicated that they undertook their

theatre degrees because they were good in their area of specialization, desired

210 the creative and artistic benefits, wanted to contribute to the community and wanted to be employable in their field. Just over one third of participants recorded that they believed that their theatre degree world lead them to secure employment or that their theatre degree would result in future financial rewards.

During their program, over three quarters of survey participants indicated

that they expected to have creative challenges and opportunities, establish

professional contacts and would have the option of going on to higher education.

Over half of respondents recorded that they did not expect to have to work at a

non‐theatre based job to sustain their theatre work and over 60% expected to be

employed in theatre immediately following graduation. Just over half of

respondents expected to earn a living salary from their theatre work.

When reflecting on their program satisfaction, the majority of respondents believed they were given an opportunity to develop in their theatre work, they

received high quality skill development and engaged in high levels of academic

activity. Just over 60% of survey participants believed that their program

prepared them well to start out in a career and prepared them well for career

progression. If the survey participants were to do their degree over again, over

85% indicated that they would take a theatre program again while just under

50% said they would take a theatre degree but at a different school.

211

Around 90% of respondents indicated that they developed aesthetic and creative skills during their degree while almost 94% believed that as a result of the theatre program they had enhanced their ability to work as a team.

Approximately 75% of respondents felt that they had developed excellent problem‐solving, analytical and organizational and time management skills.

Almost 80% responded that they obtained practical skills which would allow

them to succeed in their theatre practice while only 50% felt that they had the

necessary skills to succeed in the non‐theatre workforce.

Only 25% of respondents identified that they expect to make a living

solely from their theatre work in their specialization. The majority indicated that

they expected to make a living from a combination of theatre and non‐theatre based work. Almost 65% of participants indicated that they were currently

employed full time while an additional 24% are employed part time. Out of the participants who work in theatre, the majority work for professional companies.

Seventeen percent indicated that they do not work in theatre at all. About one third of all participants indicated that their income was 100% derived from theatre work while 20% report that their income is 100% not derived from their theatre work. The majority of theatre graduates (64%) are making under $20,000

212 a year from their theatre work, however, 70% of respondents identified that they earn an annual income from non‐theatre based work.

213

6.2 A Dramatic Divide?: Conservatory and Liberal Arts Survey Results

Context

For the purposes of this part of the analysis, the survey results from conservatory‐style graduates were compared to the results from the liberal arts‐ style graduates. The participants were divided based on the classification of the university which they graduated from. This classification was achieved as identified in Chapter Five by using the definitions of conservatory‐style programs and liberal arts‐style programs from the Report of the Committee of

Inquiry into Theatre Training in Canada (Black, Marsolais, Peacock, Porteous &

Ronfard, 1977, p. 2) and the Now What? The Guide to Post Secondary Theatre

Training in Canada (Theatre Ontario, 2000, p. 7). The universities were classified

as follows:

Conservatory‐style

University of British Columbia

Simon Fraser University

University of Victoria

University of Alberta

University of Regina

Ryerson University

York University

University of Windsor

214

Liberal Arts‐style

University of Calgary

University of Lethbridge

University of Saskatchewan

Laurentian University

Concordia University

Memorial University

This classification was established using the program information available on university websites, in academic calendars and course listings.

Following the above conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style program definitions, programs using language such as “conservatory”, “professional” and

“training ground” were placed into the conservatory group. Programs using

language such as “liberal art” and “academically based “or which do not use

language suggesting a conservatory‐style program are included in the liberal arts

group. The other measure used to determine grouping was the type of courses

required for degree completion. This measure was only used in instances where

grouping based on language alone was impossible given the non‐specific program descriptions provided. Programs with multiple required courses in a

particular specialization or discipline were placed in the conservatory group

while programs that required fewer few specialized courses and offered a more interdisciplinary rather than specialized curriculum were placed in the liberal

215 arts group. It should be noted that although this grouping of conservatory and liberal arts‐style programs is being done, the majority of the conservatory programs provide some liberal arts options and the majority of liberal arts programs offer some conservatory –style courses for their students. A grouping analysis was performed on the conservatory and liberal arts groups. However,

the results are not able to be generalized to the larger theatre graduate

population primarily due to the small sample size. The results of this analysis are

intended to provide a snapshot of the perspectives of Bachelor of Fine Arts

(Theatre) graduates as they reflect on their program expectations, satisfaction

and employability upon graduation.

Demographics

Of the 190 survey participants that responded to the question of what

University they attended, 61.6% (n = 117) graduated from a conservatory‐style

program and 38.4% (n = 73) graduated from a liberal arts program as categorized by the criteria above. Survey participants from both the conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs had approximately the same percentages of women to

men in their programs.

216

Figure 11: Type of Program

Of the 108 conservatory‐style participants who responded to the question,

52.8% (n = 57) were female participants and 47.2% (n = 51) male participants and

of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants, 53.5% (n = 38) were female participants

and 46.5% (n = 33) were male participants. The age distribution between students

from 20 to 25 years of age and 26 to 30 years of age is consistent between both the

conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style survey participants. Of the 108

conservatory‐style participants, 24% (n = 26) are between 20 to 25 years of age

and 30.6% (n = 33) are between the ages of 26 to 30. Of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants who responded to the question, 23.9% (n = 17) are between 20 to 25

years of age and 31% (n = 22) are between the ages of 26 to 30. A higher

217

percentage of survey respondents from the liberal arts‐style programs reported

being between the ages of 31 to 35 (25.4%, n = 18) compared with survey

participants from the conservatory‐style programs (15.7%, n = 17), however, a

higher percentage of survey respondents from the conservatory‐style programs reported being over the age of 41 (22.2%, n = 24) compared with survey

participants from the liberal arts‐style programs (14.1%, n = 10).

Figure 12: Age Distribution of Participants

A higher percentage of survey participants who graduated from liberal

arts‐style programs attended a university in the same city in which they lived. Of

the 73 liberal arts‐style survey participants who responded to this question,

56.2% (n = 41) attended a university that was local to them. Of the 117

218 conservatory‐style participants who responded to this question, 36.8% (n = 43) attended a university that was local to them. A higher percentage of conservatory‐style participants attended a university that was located in the same province but not in the same city where they were located before enrolling in the program. Just over one third of conservatory‐style participants (38.5%, n =

45) attended an institution located provincially compared with 17.8% (n = 13) of liberal arts‐style participants. The majority of survey participants are currently

living in Canada with only 7.7% (n = 9) of conservatory graduates and 13.7% (n =

10) of liberal arts graduates currently living outside of Canada.

Figure 13: Geographical Location

219

Program

Of the 118 conservatory‐style participants, the majority (34.8%, n = 41) specialized in Technical Theatre/Stage Management. Of the 73 liberal arts‐style participants, the majority (53.4%, n = 39) specialized in Acting. The second most common specialization for conservatory‐style graduates who participated in the survey is Acting (26.3%, n = 31) and for liberal arts‐style participants it is tied between Design and Technical Theatre/Stage Management (15.1%, n = 11).

Of the 117 conservatory‐style survey participants who responded to the categorization of program question 65.8% (n = 77) indicated that they would classify their program as conservatory‐style and 34.2% (n = 40) indicated they would classify is as liberal arts‐style. Of the 73 liberal arts‐style participants who responded to this question, 58.9% (n = 43) would classify their program as liberal

arts‐style and 41.1% (n = 30) would classify their program as conservatory‐style.

220

Figure 14: Participants Categorization of Program

Regardless of the program that survey participants graduated from, the majority did not have a previous degree or diploma from a post secondary institution prior to beginning their BFA (Theatre) program. Seventy‐six percent

(n = 92) of the 121 conservatory‐style participants and 74.3% (n =55) of the 74 liberal arts‐style participants who responded to this question had not undertaken degree or diploma granting education. Of the 117 conservatory‐style participants

and the 73 liberal arts‐style participants who responded to this question, 48.7% (n

= 57) of conservatory‐style and 53.4% (n= 39) of liberal arts‐style participants had

undertaken non‐post secondary theatre training including workshops, courses,

221 and apprentice or internship programs prior to undertaking their theatre degree.

This previous theatre training ranged from high school and youth theatre groups to community theatre workshops and professional intensive courses.

Figure 15: Previous Post Secondary Education Distribution

The majority of conservatory‐style and liberal‐arts style survey participants did not pursue additional post secondary education following their

BFA (theatre) degree. Of the 118 conservatory‐style participants, 54.2% (n = 64) and 56% (n = 42) of the 75 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they had not pursued additional post secondary education. A slightly higher percentage of liberal arts‐style participants (24%, n = 18) than conservatory‐style participants

222

(20.3%, n = 24) went on to pursue a graduate degree following completion of their BFA (theatre) degree. A higher percentage of conservatory‐style participants went on to pursue an additional undergraduate degree (13.6%, n =

16) than liberal‐arts style participants (2.7%, n = 2).

Figure 16: Additional Post Secondary Education Distribution

223

Program Expectations

Of the 110 conservatory‐style participants and the 72 liberal arts‐style participants who responded to the question, the majority of conservatory‐style

(93.6%, n = 103) and liberal‐arts style (90.3%, n = 65), indicated that they undertook their theatre degree because they either Strongly Agreed or Agreed that they were good at their area of specialization. Of the 108 conservatory‐style

participants and the 71 liberal arts style participants who responded to the

question, only 12% (n = 13) of conservatory‐style participants and 15.5%, (n = 11)

of liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they chose to undertake the degree

because they did not know what else to study. Of the 110 conservatory‐style

respondents, 90.9% (n = 100) indicated that they had undertaken a theatre degree

because of the creative and artistic benefits. Of the 72 liberal arts‐style respondents, 98.6% (n = 71) indicated that they had undertaken a theatre degree

because of the creative and artistic benefits. Of the 72 liberal arts‐style participants, 80.5% (n = 58) indicated that they undertook their theatre degree so they could contribute to the community. This is compared with only 68.2% (n =

75) of 110 conservatory‐style graduates who identified contributing to the

community as a reason for undertaking the theatre degree. Of the 110

conservatory‐style participants who responded to this question, 85.5% (n = 156)

and 86.1% (n = 62) of the 72 liberal arts‐style graduates indicated that they

224 wanted to be employable in their field upon graduation, however only 37.3% (n =

41) of the 110 conservatory‐style participants and 33.8% (n = 24) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants believed that their theatre degree would lead them to secure employment. Of the 71 liberal arts‐style survey participants, 43.6% (n = 31) reported that their theatre degree would result in future financial rewards

compared to 32.7% (n = 36) of the 110 conservatory‐style participants who responded the same way.

All survey participants either strongly agreed or agreed that during their

theatre program they expected to have creative challenges and opportunities. Of

the 72 liberal arts‐style participants, 88.9% (n = 64) and 89.9% (n= 98) of the 109 conservatory‐style participants expected to establish professional contacts

through their education. The majority of the 72 liberal arts‐style participants

(77.8%, n = 58) and 110 conservatory‐style participants (73.6%, n = 81) responded that they believed they would have the option of going on to higher education

such as a graduate degree. Only 37.3% (n = 41) of the 110 conservatory‐style participants expected to have to work at a non‐theatre job to sustain their theatre

work following graduation which is compared with 52.8% (n = 38) of the 72 liberal arts‐style participants who responded the same way. Of the 110 conservatory‐style participants, 61.8% (n = 68) responded that they expected to

225 be employed in theatre immediately following graduation compared to 61.1% (n

= 44) of the 72 liberal arts‐style participants who responded the same way. Of the

109 conservatory‐style participants who responded to this question, 58.7% (n =

64) expected to earn a living salary from their theatre work. Of the 72 liberal arts‐ style survey participants who participated in this question, 56.9% (n = 41) of the

72 liberal arts‐style survey participants expected to earn a living salary from their theatre work. Only 13.8% (n = 15) of the 109 conservatory‐style and 15.3% (n = 11) of the 72 liberal arts‐style participants expected to continue with theatre as a

hobby rather than be employed in their theatre field upon graduation.

Program Satisfaction

When asked on the survey instrument to reflect back on their theatre degree, 94.6% (n = 104) of the 110 conservatory‐style participants and 94% (n =

66) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants responded that they were given

opportunities to develop in their theatre work. Of 109 conservatory‐style participants, 96.3% (n = 105) responded that their program provided them with useful theatre skills and techniques which is compared with 97.2% (n = 69) of the

71 liberal arts‐style participants who responded the same way. Of the 109

conservatory‐style participants, 84.4% (n = 92) recorded that they received high

quality skill development during their program compared with 71.8% (n = 51) of

226 the 71 liberal arts‐style participants. Of 109 conservatory‐style participants,

79.8% (n = 87) responded that they were encouraged during their theatre program to engage in critical thought and participate in a high level of academic activity compared to 70.4% (n = 50) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants who

responded the same way. Of 108 conservatory‐style participants, 69.4% (n = 75)

indicated that they had the opportunity to develop a mentoring relationship

during their theatre degree and 62% (n = 44) of the 71 liberal arts‐style

participants responded the same way. Seventy percent (n = 77) of the 110

conservatory‐style participants responded that they believed their theatre program prepared them well to start out in their career compared with only

53.5% (n = 38) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants. Of 110 conservatory‐style participants, 69.1% (n = 76) agreed that their theatre program had prepared them well for career progression and 62% (n = 44) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants responded the same way. If survey participants were to do their degrees over again, 82.7% (n = 91) of the 110 conservatory‐style participants and

91.6% (n = 65) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they would still take a theatre program. Of 109 conservatory‐style participants, 71.6% (n =78) indicated that they would take the same type of program again compared with only 50% (n = 35) of the 70 liberal arts‐style participants who responded the same way. Of 109 conservatory‐style participants, 32.1% (n = 35) and 53.5% (n = 38) of

227 the 71 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they would still take a theatre degree but would attend a different school.

Of 107 conservatory‐style participants, 88.8% (n = 95) indicated that they developed aesthetic and creative skills during their theatre program while 90.1%

(n = 64) of the 71 liberal arts‐style survey participants responded the same way.

Of the 106 conservatory‐style participants who responded to the question, 77.3%

(n = 82) and 70.4% (n = 50) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they gained excellent problem‐solving skills and 78.5% (n = 84) of the 107 conservatory‐style participants and 70% (n = 49) of the 70 liberal arts‐style participants believed that they developed excellent analytical skills. Of 107

conservatory‐style participants, 94.4% (n = 101) and 93% (n = 66) of the 71 liberal

arts‐style participants recorded that they enhanced their ability to work as a

member of team and 77.6% (n = 83) of the 107 conservatory‐style participants and

69% (n = 49) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants either Strongly Agreed or

Agreed that their program had fostered excellent organizational and time management skills. Seventy‐one percent (n = 76) of the 107 conservatory‐style

participants felt that their theatre program helped them develop excellent written

communications skills and only 54.9% (n = 39) of the 71 liberal arts‐style

participants felt the same way. In the area of verbal communications, 84.9% (n =

228

90) of the 106 conservatory‐style participants and 74.7% (n = 53) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants responded that they had developed excellent verbal communication skills during their degree program. Of 107 conservatory‐style participants, 83.2% (n = 89) reported that during their theatre program they obtained practical skills which would allow them to succeed in their theatre practice while 70.4% (n = 50) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants responded the same way. Of 107 conservatory‐style participants, only 56.1% (n = 60) and

40.9.% (n = 29) of the 71 liberal arts‐style respondents felt that they had obtained

the necessary skills to succeed in the non‐theatre workforce. In the area of career

search training, 45.8% (n = 49) of the 107conservatory‐style participants and

21.1% (n = 15) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that their theatre program had provided them with training on how to find work after graduation.

Having completed a Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) program, 26.6% (n =

29) of the 109 conservatory‐style participants who responded to this question and

24.6% (n = 17) of the 69 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they expect to

make a living solely from theatre work directly related to their specialization in the theatre program. Of the conservatory‐style participants that responded to this question, 10.1% (n = 11) of conservatory‐style and 5.8% (n = 4) of liberal arts‐ style participants responded that they expected to make a living from theatre

229 work in an area not directly related to their specialization. The majority of respondents, 44% (n = 48) of conservatory‐style and 52.2% (n = 36) of liberal arts‐ style participants, indicated that they expected to make a living from a combination of theatre work and non‐theatre based work. Only 9.2% (n = 10) of

conservatory‐style and 5.8% (n = 4) liberal arts‐style participants responded that

they expected to earn a living from non‐theatre based work.

Graduate Employment

In the area of employment, 66.5% (n = 76) of the 116 conservatory‐style

participants and 63% (n = 46) of the 73 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they were currently employed full time including contract work while 23.3%

(n = 27) of conservatory‐style participants and 25% (n = 18) liberal arts‐style

participants indicated that they were employed part time. Approximately 7% of both conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style survey participants are currently pursing either full or part time studies as their primary activity while only 4.3%

(n = 5) of conservatory‐style and 5.5% (n = 4) of liberal arts‐style participants are unemployed.

230

Figure 17: Current Work Distribution

In the area of primary theatre employment, 31.5% (n = 35) of the 111 conservatory‐style participants and 43.1% (n = 31) of the 72 liberal arts‐style participants who responded to the question indicated that they do not currently derive a primary income from theatre work. Of the survey participants who indicated that they derived a primary income from theatre, the majority of conservatory‐style participants, 18% (n = 20), are working as a Stage Manager,

Production Manager or Technical Director while the majority of liberal arts‐style

participants, 15.3% (n = 11) are working as Actors. The second highest percentage

of conservatory‐style participants are working as Designers, 10.8% (n = 12), while

231

the second highest percentage of liberal arts‐style participants are working as

Stage Managers, Production Managers or Technical Directors.

Figure 18: Primary Theatre Employment Distribution

The majority of respondents, 68.4% (n = 91) of the 133 conservatory‐style participants and 71.9% (n = 64) of the 89 liberal arts‐style participants, identified that they obtained an income from a secondary theatre involvement in addition to their primary theatre role. Since participants could select more than one

secondary theatre involvement the subsequent chart shows a distribution of the

232 type of secondary theatre employment which is undertaken by the survey participants.

Figure 19: Secondary Theatre Employment Distribution

In the area of theatre involvement, 27.5% (n = 30) of the 109 conservatory‐ style participants and 23.9% (n = 17) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they currently work for professional theatre companies while

17.4% (n = 19) of conservatory‐style and 15.5% (n = 11) of liberal‐arts style participants responded that they did not work at all in theatre. Approximately

14% of both conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they were paid and work in semi‐professional theatre companies while 5.5% (n =

233

6) of conservatory‐style and 2.8% (n = 2) of liberal arts‐style participants are paid

but work for non‐professional theatre companies. In the area of volunteerism,

9.2% (n = 10) of conservatory‐style participants consider themselves theatre

volunteers or provide services to theatre companies without being paid

compared with 21.1% (n = 15) of liberal arts‐style participants who responded the

same way.

Figure 20: Theatre Involvement Distribution

Approximately 50% of both conservatory‐style and liberal‐arts style

survey participants indicated that they did not belong as a member or apprentice

234 to a theatre based union. Thirty‐eight percent (n = 46) of the 121 conservatory‐ style participants and 41.8% (n = 33) of the 79 liberal arts‐style participants responded that they belonged to a union with Equity being the highest at approximately 18% for survey participants from both types of programs. Thirty‐ eight percent (n = 41) of the 108 conservatory‐style participants and 25.4% (n =

18) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants indicated that their income was 100% derived from their theatre work while 15.7% (n = 17) of conservatory‐style and

25.4% (n = 18) of liberal arts‐style participants report that their income is 100% not derived from the theatre. Of the 108 conservatory‐style participants, 21.3% (n

= 23) and 18.3% (n = 13) of liberal arts‐style respondents indicated that less that

25% of their overall income comes from their theatre work. Approximately 9% of

survey participants from both programs identify that their income is derived about 50% from work in theatre and the rest from non‐theatre based work.

The majority of theatre graduates who earn an annual income from theatre based work are making between $0 and $20,000 a year (before taxes) from

their theatre‐based work. Of the 106 conservatory‐style participants who

responded to this question, 22.6% (n = 24) and 31% (n = 22) of the 71 liberal arts‐

style participants report receiving no income from their theatre work while 14.2%

(n = 15) of conservatory‐style and 16.0% (n = 12) of liberal arts‐style participants

235 indicate that they received under $5,000. Of the 106 conservatory‐style participants who responded to this question, 18.9% (n = 20) and 11.3% (n = 8) of the 71 liberal arts‐style survey participants reported earning $40,000 or more in annual income from theatre work with 10.4% (n = 11) of conservatory‐style and

7% (n = 5) of liberal arts‐style participants reporting income of $50,000 or over.

Figure 21: Annual Income ‐ Theatre Distribution

When asked about non‐theatre based income, 29.5% (n = 31) of the 105

conservatory‐style participants who responded to this survey question and 28.2% of the 71 liberal arts‐style survey participants reported no income from non‐ theatre based work. The majority of respondents, 66.7% (n = 70) of conservatory‐

236 style and 59.2% (n = 42) of liberal arts‐style reported that they had earned between $0 and $20,000 from non‐theatre based income. Of the 105 conservatory‐ style participants, 15.2% (n = 16) and 15.5% (n = 11) of the 71 liberal arts‐style participants responded that they earned $40,000 or more from non‐theatre based work with 12.4% (n = 13) of conservatory‐style and 11.3% (n = 8) liberal arts‐style survey participants reporting over $50,000 earned.

Figure 22: Annual Income ‐ Non‐Theatre Distribution

237

6.3 Discussion: What We Can Learn from the Graduates

Demographics

The majority of Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) graduates who chose to participate in the survey were from conservatory‐style programs. Over 60% of the survey participants graduated from one of the 8 universities that have been categorized into eth conservatory‐style group. This percentage closely

corresponds with the ratio of conservatory‐style to liberal arts‐style programs that were included in the study. The ratios of male to female survey participants from both the conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs are similar at approximately 53% female and 47% male. The age distribution of survey participants was similar for both conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style participants from 20 – 30 years of age, however more survey participants

between the ages of 31 – 35 participated in the survey from liberal arts‐style

programs while more participants over the age of 41 from conservatory‐style programs responded to the survey. The results of the survey revealed that a

higher percentage of participants who graduated from liberal arts‐style programs

attended a university in the same city in which they lived prior to attending the program. A higher percentage of conservatory‐style participants attended a university in the same province as where they lived, but not necessarily the same

238 city. This difference may be attributed to students willing to relocate to attend a more specialized (conservatory‐style) theatre program.

Program

Survey participants were asked whether they considered their theatre program to be primarily a conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐style program. A higher percentage of conservatory‐style participants responded that they

considered their program to be primarily conservatory‐style than liberal arts‐

style participants who considered their program to be primarily liberal arts‐style.

Regardless, a high percentage of survey participants from both program types

responded in contradiction to the groupings of conservatory‐style and liberal

arts‐style that have been identified for the purposes of this analysis. There are

instances where survey participants who had attended the same institution responded differently to this question. This may be attributed to a number of

factors including the perception of the type of program attended and the groupings for the purposes of this study being in contradiction to one another,

the written material that the program uses to promote itself differing from the

curriculum being offered and the student experience in the program, and

confusion over the nature of conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs.

239

The majority of survey participants who attended conservatory‐style programs specialized in Technical Theatre/Stage Management while the majority of liberal arts‐style participants specialized in Acting. The high percentage of conservatory‐style participants in technical specializations may be attributed to the higher proportion of conservatory‐style programs that offer specializations in the technical fields. Students who are pursuing technical theatre career paths may have also selected a conservatory‐style theatre program for the discipline‐ specific courses that are more readily available in conservatory‐style programs.

Further study on theatre graduate’s motivations for program selection is required in this area.

Survey participants from both conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs responded similarly when asked about previous degree or diploma granting education and non‐post secondary theatre training received prior to

their theatre degree program. This leads the researcher to believe that survey

participants had similar educational and training backgrounds regardless of the

type of theatre program they attended. Following the participant’s theatre

degree, a similar number of both conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they had not pursued additional post secondary education. This may be contributed to the high percentage of survey participants

240 who indicated that a motivation for pursuing a theatre degree was to be employable in their field and that additional education was not required. Of those participants who did pursue additional post secondary education, a slightly higher percentage of liberal arts‐style participants went on to pursue a graduate degree, where a much higher percentage of conservatory‐style

participants went on to pursue an additional undergraduate degree. The

majority of participants who pursued a graduate degree did so in a theatre or arts related field while the majority who pursued an undergraduate degree did

so in either a teacher education program or a theatre or arts related discipline.

The higher percentage of conservatory‐style survey participants who pursued an

additional undergraduate degree could be attributed to the specialized nature of their degree programs and a desire to obtain a broader range of skills in the theatre or teaching field to aid in employability. Conservatory‐style survey participants also received more skill development during their program in the

area of professional preparation; this awareness of the industry may also

contribute to these participants acquiring additional skills and education

following their theatre degree.

Program Expectations

241

The majority of survey participants from both program types indicated that they had similar motivations for entering their theatre degree program.

Participants listed their primary motivations as being good in their area of specialization, for the artistic and creative benefit and to be employable in their chosen field. A higher percentage of survey participants from the liberal arts‐ style programs also indicated a primary motivation as being able to contribute to the community. This higher percentage of liberal arts‐style graduates wanting to contribute to the community could be attributed to the type of curriculum offered in the liberal arts‐style programs. The majority of liberal arts‐style programs include courses in a wide variety of fields of study and a higher number of liberal arts options which may provide graduates with a broader understanding of their contribution and participation in the theatre field. Slightly

more than one third of participants from both program types indicated that they

believed that their theatre degree would lead to secure employment. A higher percentage of liberal arts‐style survey participants than conservatory‐style participants believed that their theatre degree would result in future financial rewards, however, the majority of participants from both programs indicated

that they did not expect future financial rewards from their chosen career path.

The higher percentage response from conservatory‐style than liberal arts‐style

participants may be attributed to the career development courses provided in

242 many of the conservatory‐style programs. As a result, conservatory‐style participants may have a clearer understanding of the theatre business and have a more accurate understanding of the expected income for their chosen career.

Survey participants overall indicated that their motivations for pursuing a theatre degree include the desire to be employable in their field, but did not

expect to achieve secure employment with future financial awards as a result.

Survey participants from both program types had many similar

expectations for their theatre program. Participants indicated that during their

Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) degree they expected to have creative challenges

and opportunities, to establish professional contacts, and to have the option of

going on to higher education. The majority of participants from both programs

also indicated that they expected to be employed in theatre immediately

following graduation; however, more liberal arts‐style participants indicated that

they expected to have to work at a non‐theatre job to sustain their theatre work.

This higher percentage may be attributed to conservatory‐style graduates having

more discipline specific training in a particular field which they associate with

the ability to obtain employment. Conservatory‐style participants expect to be

employed in their discipline, earning enough money to sustain their lifestyle, but

do not expect to achieve high financial rewards as a result of their career choice.

243

The majority of survey participants from both programs indicated that they did not intend to continue with theatre as a hobby after graduation and instead expected to make a living salary from their theatre work. The employment expectations of the survey participants indicate that the majority of these individuals entered into a Bachelor of Fine Arts (Theatre) program with the intention of making their career in their chosen theatre field. Participants indicated that they were interested in the artistic and creative benefits of the

program and the option to go on to higher education, however overwhelmingly

they were interested in obtaining employment in the theatre profession.

Participants expected to make a living salary from their theatre work, but the majority did not expect secure employment nor to obtain future financial rewards from their chosen career.

Program Satisfaction

Survey participants were asked to reflect on their program satisfaction.

Participants from both program types indicated similar high levels of satisfaction with the following: the opportunity to develop their theatre work, to develop useful theatre skills and techniques, to develop aesthetic and creative skills, and to enhance their ability to work as members of a team. Survey participants from the conservatory‐style programs indicated higher satisfaction with their

244 programs than liberal arts‐style participants in the following areas: high quality skill development, to engage in critical thought and participate in a high level of academic activity, excellent problem‐solving, analytical, organizational, time management, written communication and verbal communication skills.

Conservatory‐style participants also indicated higher levels of satisfaction on career development skills than the liberal arts‐style participants. Conservatory‐

style participants had higher levels of satisfaction in the following career

development areas: preparation to start out in a career, preparation for career progression, practical skills which would allow them success in their theatre practice, and obtaining necessary skills to succeed in the non‐theatre workforce.

This higher percentage of satisfaction from conservatory‐style participant may be attributed to the specialized nature of conservatory‐style courses and an emphasis on training and skill development. As a result, conservatory‐style participants may be better able to articulate the skills and techniques that they

have obtained during their theatre degree. As the majority of conservatory‐style programs indicate that they are preparing or training students for a career in the

theatre, the specialized courses available may also have more emphasis on career

planning and development. The lower satisfaction from liberal arts‐style

graduates may also be attributed to assumptions being made by prospective

students about the BFA (Theatre) degrees and that all programs are designed to

245 prepare students for professional careers. This assumption is supported by the literature that defines a BFA degree as a professional training program, despite evidence to the contrary in Canada where BFA (Theatre) degrees can have either a professional or academic focus.

Having completed a theatre program, survey participants were asked about their expectations for employment. The majority of respondents from both

program types indicated that they expected to make a living from a combination

of theatre and non‐theatre based work. Close to 25% of participants from both

program types indicated that they expect to make a living solely from theatre

work and fewer than 10% indicated that they did not expect to earn a living from theatre. Regardless of the type of program attended, survey participants had

similar employment expectations and anticipated having to combine both theatre

and non‐theatre based work for their income.

Graduate Employment

All survey participants, regardless of program attended, had similar

employment status. Approximately 65% of all participants indicated that they

were currently employed full time including contract work. Almost 25% of

participants indicated that they were employed part time while only

246 approximately 5% responded that they were unemployed. An additional 7% of participants are currently pursuing either full or part time studies as their primary activity.

A higher percentage of liberal arts‐style participants than liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they currently do not derive a primary income from theatre work. Out of the participants that did indicate a primary income from theatre, a higher percentage of conservatory‐style graduates are working as Stage

Managers, Production Managers or Technical Directors, while a higher percentage of liberal arts‐style graduates indicated that they are working as

Actors. The difference in theatre profession may be attributed to the type of courses offered in conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style programs and the theatre specializations of the survey participants during the degree program. The majority of conservatory‐style participants indicated that they undertook a

Technical Theatre/Stage Management program while the majority of liberal arts‐ style participants listed Acting as their specialization. Further study is required in this area to determine the reason for this difference.

The majority of survey participants indicated that they obtain income from secondary theatre involvement, outside of their primary theatre

247 employment. This response may indicate that regardless of program type or specialization, survey participants are working in more than one area of theatre to earn a living. Many of the responses indicate that the secondary theatre involvement is in a similar area to their primary involvement. For example, a primary Stage Manager might also be working as a Technician. However, many of the survey participants indicated that they were working in multiple areas of theatre or in arts related disciplines as their secondary employment.

Regardless of program attended, similar percentages of survey participants indicated that they worked for professional, semi‐professional and

non‐professional theatre companies. A higher percentage of liberal arts style

participants indicated that they consider themselves theatre volunteers or

provide services to theatre companies without being paid. Despite differences in

the satisfaction of the career and professional development received during their

theatre degree, survey participants from both types of programs had similar

percentages in the type of theatres they worked for. The higher percentage of

liberal arts‐style participants who indicated that they are theatre volunteers may

correspond with their higher community service motivation and reflect a greater

willingness to be involved in theatre without generating an income. The type of program attended did not affect the number of conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐

248 style participants who were members of a theatre‐based union. Approximately

50% of participants from both program types indicated that they did not belong to a union. Of those that did belong to a union, Canadian Actorsʹ Equity

Association held the highest percentage for participants from both program types. This percentage is aligned with the liberal arts‐style participants who identified that the majority of participants had specialized in Acting and of those working in theatre, the majority were working as Actors. This percentage is also aligned for the conservatory‐style participants, as the majority specialized in a technical area and of those working in theatre, the majority are working as Stage

Managers, Production Managers or Technical Directors. Stage Managers are represented by Canadian Actorsʹ Equity Association where Technical Directors and Productions Managers do not have an official union representing them. As

indicated by the survey participants, many Technical Directors and Production

Managers also work as Technicians or Stage Managers and would be represented

either by Canadian Actorsʹ Equity Association or International Alliance of

Theatrical Stage Employees.

A higher percentage of conservatory‐style survey participants than liberal arts‐style participants indicated that their income was 100% derived from their

theatre work while a higher percentage of liberal arts‐style participants indicated

249 that their income was 100% not derived from their theatre work. Approximately the same number of participants from both program types indicated that their income was less than 25% and approximately 50% derived from their theatre work. This may indicate that more survey participants from conservatory‐style programs than liberal arts‐style programs do not derive a secondary income from non‐theatre based work. This also may indicate that more participants from

liberal arts‐style programs are either not working in theatre, or may be reflective

of the higher percentage of liberal arts‐style participants indicating that they are theatre volunteers.

The majority of survey participants from both program types are earning an annual income from theatre between $0 and $20,000 a year. The percentages for participants from both program types earning under $20,000 a year from theatre based work is also similar with only a slightly higher percentage of liberal arts‐style participants earning this amount. A slightly higher percentage

of conservatory‐style participants than liberal arts‐style participants are earning

between $20,000 and $39,999 and between $40,000 and up for their theatre‐based

work. The majority of participants from both programs are earning under

$20,000 from non‐theatre income, with a slightly higher percentage for the

conservatory‐style participants. A slightly higher percentage of liberal arts‐style

250 participants earn between $20,000 and $39,999 and a similar percentage earn over

$40,000 a year from non‐theatre income. The salary percentages may indicate that for those participants working in theatre, more liberal arts‐style participants earned less money from theatre work than conservatory‐style participants. The incidence of more liberal arts‐style participants earning between $20,000 and

$39,999 may be reflective of a higher percentage of conservatory‐style participants who derive a primary income from theatre. This may also reflect the choice of theatre profession of the conservatory‐style participants. The higher percentage of participants from conservatory‐style programs who work in the technical fields may also correspond with a higher annual salary. Further investigation and analysis is required in this area.

251

6.4 Essential Elements in a BFA (Theatre) Program

Survey participants responded to an open ended survey question asking them to reflect on what elements they felt were important in a Bachelor of Fine

Arts (Theatre) degree. One hundred seventy three participants responded to this question and provided input in areas of teaching, skill development, aesthetics and creativity, academics and professional development. Survey participants reflected positively on their experience during their theatre degree and based their responses and examples on the theatre program they attended. Regardless

of whether the survey participant attended a conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐

style program, their responses were similar.

Survey participants indicated that passionate teaching staff who are

deeply involved with student growth and development was essential. It was also

noted that teaching staff in the skill disciplines, such as acting, design, stage management, technical theatre etc., should be working professionals in order to provide students with the skills and techniques that are not only required in the

classroom, but also in the theatre profession. Survey participants indicated that

the teaching staff needed to push students to their limit creatively and allow

them the opportunity to academically reflect on their experiences. One student

252 commented that during her BFA (Theatre) degree she felt like “both a scholar and an artist.”

A focus on academics and liberal arts options was deemed important by the survey participants, particularly when the option courses contributed to a greater understanding of theatre, society and culture which would aid the student in their chosen discipline. It was noted by several participants that these

courses, however important, should not be replacements for technical courses.

Strong technical skills are what many participants felt would get them hired

upon graduation and the academic or liberal arts courses are what they felt would make them better in their chosen field. Several respondents noted that the

academic and liberal arts courses are what set the BFA (Theatre) degree apart from a Theatre Diploma program and one of the reasons why the participants

had chosen to pursue their program of choice. On participant states, the BFA

(Theatre) degree “teaches critical analysis, which provides an ideal foundation for almost any other pursuit.” Participants indicated a need for a better understanding of how theatre skills can be transferred to other fields of employment. One participant states that BFA (Theatre) programs need to “teach practical skills that will be applicable to other jobs … because when you first graduate, there is no way that you will get that big design gig. It just doesnʹt

253 happen. So, you need to be prepared to use your talents in other ways while you network.”

Skill development was seen as an important element of a BFA (Theatre) degree program. Survey participants indicated that all programs require a focus on technical skills in the particular discipline. It wasd that note these skills

should be obtained both in the classroom and in performance opportunities

where the skills can be put into practice. Participants also linked the importance

of performance opportunities to the development of ensemble, teamwork and

time management skills. Participants from both program types valued the

opportunity to gain understanding in a variety of theatre disciplines, particularly

in their first two years of study. “All students should be required to gain excellent understandings of all theatrical disciplines, no matter where oneʹs main interests lie,” stated one participant. Survey participants indicated that the development of entrepreneurial skills during a theatre degree program was important as was the opportunity to be involved in the creation of new work.

The majority of respondents included comments on employment or professional

development as an important area in the BFA (Theatre) degree. Several survey

participants linked high levels of skills development to being employable upon

graduation. Many participants stressed the importance of career preparation and

254 training to start and progress in a theatre career. “I think that the BFA program needs to prepare students more for the realities of working in the theatre world.

Not only about building ones creative skills but also what to expect when you graduate,” stated one graduate. Another commented that theatre programs should include, “practical classes about the business of theatre including: auditions, unions, agents, selling yourself, headshots, self‐employed tax information, and networking.” Opportunities to develop professional

relationships and contacts were identified as an important part of this process.

Many survey participants identified that they did not feel prepared to enter the profession in their chosen theatre field and that more emphasis, particularly in the final year of study, on professional development would have been beneficial.

In the open‐ended survey questions, several participants indicated that

greater clarity needed to be made between what constitutes a conservatory‐style

and a liberal arts‐style theatre program. Similar to comments made by the 1977

Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Theatre Training in Canada, participants

expressed concern over programs misrepresenting the education they are providing to students. The majority of participants who commented in this area felt that both conservatory‐style and liberal‐arts style theatre programs had their place in post secondary institutions, however programs need to be clearer in

255 their promotional material and documentation on the type of program being offered. One participant states that programs need to make “it clear upfront whether you [the programs] train actors or are more of a liberal arts program”.

Another participant suggested that theatre departments provide a “strong indication right up front of what the program teaches” in order to attract the

students who will be the best fit for the program and get the most out of it.

Student need to have access to current information about theatre education in

Canada and what constitutes a BFA (Theatre) degree at various institutions. If

this information is not provided, students are left with outdated definitions and

assumptions about theatre education which may effect their satisfaction with the

education they received and ultimately their future career development.

Regardless of the type of program offered and the skills obtained, survey

participants indicated a desire to have an understanding for the Canadian

Theatre community and for their BFA (Theatre) program to be connected to the current theatre environment in Canada. It was noted by a participant that over the years the style of Canadian theatre has changed from primarily big theatres with an emphasis on spectacle and illusion to smaller independent companies and more of a focus on how theatre can shape personal, social and cultural

realities. University theatre programs are preparing artists for this theatre

256 environment and the programs that they offer should be reflective of developing theatre movements, trends and changes. Universities in Canada, particularly theatre departments and arts faculties have a role to play not only in reflecting and responding to current trends and changes, but helping to inspire them. The students that are graduating from BFA (Theatre) programs in Canada are the

artists who are shaping the current and the future direction of theatre in Canada.

257

Chapter Seven: Conclusion

7.1 Theatre Education in Canada for Today and Tomorrow

It has been 59 years since the first BA (Theatre) program was established in Canada and 49 years since the first BFA (Theatre) program opened its doors to students. In this time, a great deal has occurred in the development of theatre in

Canada. This country has gone from primarily an amateur theatre scene to an increasingly professional one. In 1955 Actor’s Equity began operating in Canada with the intent of improving the working conditions and opportunities for performers, choreographers, fight directors and stage managers. In 1965 the

Association of Canadian Designers was created to represent set, costume, sound and lighting designers across the country and in 1976 the Professional

Association of Canadian Theatres (PACT) was established. These unions and associations, all which have strict requirements for membership, provided regulating bodies for professional performing artists, technicians, designers and theatres. Since the late 1970s, Canada has also seen a move towards cooperative theatres that were established because the participating artists felt that everyone involved ‐ whether union members or not ‐ contributed significantly to the work of the group. Originally, many groups used this model for artistic, social, political or other reasons; however, more recently, in response to reductions in funding and donations, some professional groups have embraced the

258 cooperative model as a viable alternative to standard funding options and restrictions. In the 1980s through to today, Fringe theatre festivals have provided performance venues for many different kinds of performers, both amateur and professional, who want to explore alternative or non‐mainstream theatre. Most recently, the trend in cities across Canada has been theatre graduates starting up

their own companies. These companies are often started by a small but diverse

group of theatre artists (many who have graduated from BFA programs) who

look after every aspect of the company from directing to design to marketing and

often acting (although many cast their shows through auditions as well). These

companies often fall between what would traditionally be considered amateur or

community theatre and professional theatre. Taking on an almost semi‐ professional status, these companies, although not members of PACT, attempt to produce high quality shows usually using limited financial resources. Many make solid attempts at paying their artists, some even at equity wage. Examples

of these types of theatres can be found throughout Canada such as: Theatre

SKAM in Victoria, Green Thumb Theatre in Vancouver, TheatreBOOM and

Urban Curvz Theatre in Calgary, Shadow Theatre in Edmonton, The Company

of Fools in Ottawa, Resurgence Theatre in Toronto and One Light Theatre in

Halifax.

259

University theatre programs have clearly had an impact on the theatre landscape. For a 2002 article in the Journal of the National Theatre School, Patrick

McDonagh interviewed Jan Selman, Chair of the Department of Drama at the

University of Alberta. Selman states, “Edmonton has an amazing amount of theatre activity for its size, partly because of the university.” Many of the local

theatres in Edmonton have been formed by University of Alberta theatre

graduates, including Theatre Network and Workshop West in the 1970s, and,

more recently, Shadow Theatre and Concrete Theatre. “There’s a really good

exchange,” Selman observes. “One year you’re a student, the next you’re a

producer/actor in town” (as cited in McDonagh, 2002, para. 5). The situation in

Edmonton is not unique as can been seen just by looking at the list of companies

being started by theatre graduates across the county.

Theatre graduates contribute significantly toe th Canadian theatre

landscape and have a wide range of opportunities available to them. Granted, the vast majority of theatres pay little or even nothing at all, but regardless of the official status of the theatre, whether community, amateur, semi‐professional or professional, all who participate are helping to shape the future direction of

Canadian theatre. Leading the way are graduates from university theatre

programs across the country. Take a look at any program or playbill for a show

260 currently being produced in Canada. In looking at the biographies of the company, you would be hard pressed to find a show that did not have at least a few, (and in some cases all), graduates of Canadian university theatre programs.

Thirty years ago, this would not have been the case. However, with the increased number of theatre programs being offered in Canada and an increased number

of graduates being produced each year, Canadian universities are having an

increased impact on this country’s theatre scene.

At one time, the conservatory‐style BFA degree prepared students for the

professional stage while the liberal arts‐style BA degree was for students with a

general or amateur interest in theatre but never intending it as a profession.

Today, this line between the BFA and the BA distinctions and conservatory‐style

and liberal arts‐style has blurred and the theatre‐related job market has

diversified. Graduates are now starting their own companies or engaging in

theatre collectives rather than just pursuing work on the professional stage (as cited in McDonagh, 2002, para. 5). Graduates are working not only in professional theatres, but in combinations of professional, semi‐professional and amateur theatres. They are often holding more than one job and these secondary

jobs often are in areas of theatre outside of the graduate’s educational

specialization. BFA (Theatre) graduates from programs across the country are

261 going on to pursue careers, not only in theatre, but in other arts and culture disciplines and in non‐related fields.

According to Statistics Canada, the performing arts sector in Canada is growing and theatre contributes substantially to this increase. Thanks in part to researchers such as Dr. Richard Florida and his Creative Class Group, words

such as “creativity” and “artistic” are finding their way into standard labour

market dialogues and associated arts‐based skills sets are being more widely

recognized and discussed (Florida, n.d.). With a changing environment for arts

and theatre‐based graduates and the university’s increased role in Canadian

theatre, the time has come for theatre departments across the country to re‐

examine themselves and their degree programs. In 1977, The Black Report noted that there was confusion among university theatre programs in Canada and the type of program (conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐style) that was being promoted and advertised to students (Black, Marsolais, Peacock, Porteous,

Ronfard, 1977). Based on a detailed review of the BFA (Theatre) program and courses offerings currently available to students, it is clear that this same confusion exists to this day. Only a few programs are quick to define themselves as either a conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐style program and have a curriculum

that backs up that definition. The majority of theatre programs use language in

262 their promotional and recruitment publications and documents that suggest that the program leans to either a conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐style model of theatre education without stating it explicitly. This leaves a prospective student in a difficult situation of having to guess at the type of program being offered and make a determination as to whether the specific program will suit that

student’s needs and future career aspirations. Based on current definitions, 8

BFA (Theatre) programs in Canada are offering programs which resemble the traditional conservatory‐style training program which is designed to prepare students for professional careers in the theatre. The remaining 6 programs offer a more liberal arts‐style program which combines a rigorous academic and interdisciplinary curriculum with practical hands‐on theatre experience. With a

comprehensive study of Canadian BFA (Theatre) programs now available, theatre departments need to examine the curriculum that they are offering to students to ensure that the education they want to be offering and advertise they are offering is actually what is being offered. I will repeat the same assertion that was made in 1977 by The Black Report and stress the importance of university theatre programs providing an accurate and most importantly, clear description of the type of program being offered to students. Potential theatre students, students who may go on to contribute to and help shape Canada’s theatre scene, deserve to have clear and accurate program information so that they can

263 determine the best program available to suit their unique interests, skills and personal and professional goals. This information will not only serve the students, but will also impact the department, faculty and university who desires to attract and retain the top students while providing a positive student experience.

With an understanding of the current BFA (Theatre) programs available in

Canada, and a distinction between conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style

curriculum being noted, the impact of these program types on students and graduates is questioned. In many areas, the impact reported by the survey

participants was minimal. Participants from both program types entered their

theatre degrees with similar backgrounds and experience. They also have similar motivations for pursuing a theatre degree and similar expectations for employment. Participants in the survey identified that they expected to be

employed in theatre upon graduation, but not necessarily in a full time position.

Although they expected to earn a living wage, they did not have high

expectations of financial rewards from their career choice. Although participants

reported similar motivations and expectations, their program satisfaction

differed.

264

Survey participants who undertook a conservatory‐style program had higher levels of satisfaction in high quality skill advancement (both professional and academic) and in career and professional development preparation. This lower satisfaction from liberal arts‐style participants may be attributed to inaccurate expectations as to the program’s curriculum due to a lack of clarity in the program’s promotional materials or an assumption of what a BFA (Theatre)

program offers. Regardless of conservatory‐style participants indicating higher

levels of satisfaction with their BFA (Theatre) degree program, all survey participants regardless of program attended had similar employment status

although a higher percentage of participants from conservatory‐style programs

derived their primary income from theatre while a higher percentage of liberal arts‐style participants work outside of the theatre. More conservatory‐style participants than liberal arts‐style participants indicated that they generate 100% of their income from work in the theatre; however a similar number of participants from both types of programs indicated that they engaged in secondary theatre employment outside of their specialization. Although fewer liberal arts‐style participants were working in theatre as a source of employment, more liberal arts‐style participants classified themselves as theatre volunteers

and providing services free of charge to theatre companies.

265

With a growing performing arts industry, Canada needs an increasing number of theatre artists to be the innovators and drivers of the Canadian theatre scene both today and tomorrow. University theatre programs across Canada are producing graduates who are contributing to Canadian theatre, however, as the number of theatre programs across the country grows, the line between what

constitutes a conservatory‐style and liberal arts‐style program blurs. More

conservatory‐style programs are offering increasing numbers of interdisciplinary

and liberal arts‐courses and more liberal arts‐style programs are offering more

professional type courses. Soon it may be the case that the traditional distinctions

between what constitutes conservatory‐style or liberal arts‐style education in

theatre are no longer relevant. Until this time, potential students need to be

aware of the differences in theatre programs available in Canada, not just the

difference between the BA and BFA degree, but also among the BFA (Theatre) degrees that are offered at the various institutions. Students need to examine the theatre program and its curriculum closely to ensure that it is offering a course of study that will serve their interests, needs and future aspirations, particularly in the growing and changing environment of Canadian theatre.

Theatre scholar, John Hawkins (1998), notes that University theatre programs need to embrace an expanded perspective about what constitutes

266 professional theatre and of the place of theatre in postsecondary education which prepares students to make their careers in it. He goes on to suggest that theatre departments must be prepared to restructure their curricula and resources to enable students to enter the theatre in all its various professional manifestations,

and to use the knowledge and skill developed through their theatre education in

whatever work they may choose to do both in or out of the theatre (163‐164).

Until recently, university theatre education in this country could be

considered distinctly Canadian since it had developed specifically for and out of

the Canadian theatre scene. Today, university theatre is taking on a more

prominent role. Instead of being reactionary, university departments of drama

and their graduates are shaping the future of Canadian theatre. With the wealth

of talent (just go see a performance at any Canadian theatre), scholarship (look at

the multiple Canadian theatre journals and publications), and university theatre

programs coast‐to‐coast (over 43 degree programs at 29 institutions), Canadian theatre has a bright future ahead. But in order to embrace this future, University theatre programs across the country need to examine their programs and their curriculum offerings in the context of the current university theatre education

environment in Canada. Programs also need to listen to their graduates and to the students who are currently in their theatre programs and use this feedback to

267 assist in their program review and evaluation. Through the survey, theatre graduates from different programs across the country have spoken out through the survey about their expectations and ambitions for their programs and future careers. They have spoken about the benefits of a BFA (Theatre) degree and the skills that they have obtained and subsequently utilized for careers both in and out of the theatre. Graduates have spoken about their passion for the arts and for

the creative and aesthetic principles that are rooted in a fine arts degree and the

benefit that these skills have had and continue to have on their lives and

professions. However, graduates have also spoken out about the need for clear

and precise information about the type of BFA (Theatre) degree that is being

offered to them so they can make informed decisions on their post secondary

education. Graduates are aware of the challenges associated with careers in

theatre and as a result they are emphasizing the need for integrated career and

professional development into their academic curriculum to better prepare them for their chosen profession.

Since its inception, the BFA (Theatre) degree has developed and changed along with the Canadian theatre scene and continues to change every year as

programs add new courses, requirements and specializations to their curriculum

offerings. To fully “demystify” the BFA (Theatre) degree one must have an

268 understanding of the history of the degree, the programs currently offered, and the impact of the programs on its graduates. Together, this information provides an understanding of not only the university theatre environment in Canada and an updated understanding of what constitutes a Canadian BFA (Theatre) degree, but it provides insight into the heart of cultural production in Canada. The way the performing arts are taught influence the kind of art that is practiced, the kind of art that is funded, the kind of art that is seen by the public and the way it is received by the critics and scholars.

269

References

Ayers, R.G., (ed.). (1960). Directory of American College Theatre (2nd ed.) East Lansing, MI: American Theatre Association, 1960.

Beaux‐arts Concordia Fine Arts. Theatre. Retrieved June 10, 2007, from http://finearts.concordia.ca/HTML/theatre.htm.

BFA Acting. Department of Drama. University of Alberta. Retrieved June 10, 2007, from http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/drama/bfaacting.cfm

BFA Technical Theatre. Department of Drama. University of Alberta. Retrieved June 10, 2007, from: http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/drama/bfatech.cfm

Black, M; Marsolais, G; Peacock; Porteous, C. and Ronfard, J. P. (1977). Report on theatre training in Canada. Ottawa, ON: The Canada Council.

Boyer, E. L & Levine, A. (1981). A quest for common learning: The aims of general education. Washington: The Carnegie Foundation.

Brustein, R. (1970). The Idea of Theatre at Yale: A Speech and an Interview. Educational Theatre Journal, 22, 235‐248.

Chin, D. and Qualls, D. (1995). The Arts and Education 50/51. Performing Arts Journal, 17(2/3), 1‐7.

Coghill, N. (1952). The study of drama at a universiy. In D.G. James (Ed.), The Universities and the Theatre. (pp. 40‐50). George Allen & Unwin, Ltd.

Conrad, C. F. & Pratt, A. M. (1981). Measure for measure: Liberal education and the fine arts – A delicate balance. Review of Higher Education, 3, 47‐58.

Crimmel, H. H. (1993). The liberal arts college and the ideal of liberal education: The case for radical reform. Lanham: University Press of America.

Damon, R. (1953). Origin and rise of curricular instruction in dramatics in the colleges and universities of the United States. Unpublished master’s thesis, New York University, New York.

270

Dandurand, J. (1902) To the Members of the Art Committee Archives of Ontario, RG 2, no.13 Temporary Box 10, 1‐2.

Dasgupta, G. (1995). Teaching Students to be Artists 50/51. Performing Arts Journal 17(2/3), 93‐99.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage Publications.

Dunton, Davidson. (1982). The national theatre school: A Report by Davidson Dunton. The Canada Council.

Events in the History of the University of Saskatchewan. University Archives. Retrieved November 15, 2005, from http://scaa.usask.ca/gallery/uofs_ events/articles/1945.php

Fine Arts. Laurentian University. Retrieved June 16, 2007, from http://huntington.laurentian.ca/index.php?file=fine_arts_e.html

Forster, J.W.L. (1898). Art and Artists in Ontario. In J. Castell Hopkins (Ed.), Canada: An Encyclopaedia of the Country 4, 352.

Fowle, W. B. ed. (1950). The Common School Journal, XI (Vol II, New Series). Boston: Fitz, Hobbs & Co., 325.

Gardner, David. (1989). Little theatre and amateur theatre. In E. Benson and L.W. Conolly (Eds.), The Oxford Companion to Canadian Theatre. (p. 301 – 309). Toronto: Oxford University Press. 1989.

Gay, L. R. (1987). Educational Research. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Gibberd, F. (1948). Report of the Oxford university drama commission with supplementary architectural report. Geoffrey Cumberlege: Oxford University Press.

Glenfield, F. (1999). The studio theatre: 1949‐1999. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta, Department of Drama, Anniversary Committee.

271

Harrop, John. (1973). University theatre USA: Success and failure. Theatre Quarterly 3(10), 67‐78.

Hart House Theatre. (n.d.). Retrieved Nov. 5, 2004, from http://www.harthousetheatre.ca/html/aboutus_history.html

Harvey, J. (2001). A Vigorous and Distinctive Cultural Life: The Legacies of the Massey‐Lévesque Report and the Kingston Artistsʹ Conference. Canadian Conference of the Arts. Retrieved March 15, 2004, from http://www.ccarts.ca/eng/03do/03_03cross _back.htm.

Hawkins, J.A. (1998). The apex and the base of the pyramid: The context for postwar postsecondary educational theatre in Canada. Theatre Research in Canada, 19(2), 140‐157.

Heffner, H. C. (1994). Theatre and drama in liberal education. Educational Theatre Journal, 16(1), 17‐24.

Himes, F. J. (1998). The janus paradigm: American academic theatre, the liberal arts and the massacre of genius. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1998.

Hobgood, B. M. (1964). Theatre in U.S. higher education: Emerging pattern and problems. Educational Theatre Journal, 6(2).

Kernodle, G. R. (1949). Theatre practice and theatre theory in the liberal arts curriculum. Educational Theatre Journal 1(1), 82‐85.

Langley, S. (1990). Theatre management and production in America: Commercial, stock, resident, college, community and presenting organizations. New York: Drama Book Publishers.

Lee, B. (1973). Love and Whisky: The Story of the Dominion Drama Festival. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Limited.

Levy, J. (2001). Practical Education for the Unimaginable: Essays on Theatre and the Liberal Arts. Charlottesville, Virgina: New Plays Inc.

272

Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage Publications, Inc.

Little Theatre Movement: 1920‐50. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved November 15, 2005, from http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ index.cfm?Pg Nm=mTCE&Params=A1ARTA0004721

Lorenowicz, K. (1989). An Historical Note. York Theatre Journal 31 [special edition]. Inside cover.

Lowry, W. M. (1962). The university and the creative arts. Educational Theatre Journal, 14(2), 109‐110.

Luffman, Jacquline. Labour Market Outcomes of Arts and Culture Graduates. Focus on Culture Quarterly Bulletin from the Culture Statistics Program 13(4), 1‐9.

McDonagh, P. (2002). Building a National Theatre: Teaching Theatre in Canada to 1960. The Journal of the National Theatre School of Canada 19.

McDonagh, P. (2002). The Stagecraft Legacy: Teaching Theatre in Canada 1960‐ 2000. The Journal of the National Theatre School of Canada 20.

McTeague, J. H. (1993). Before Stanislavsky: American professional acting schools and acting theory: 1875 ‐ 1925. Metuchen: Scarecrow.

Menand, L. (1995). Marketing Postmodernism. In R. Orrill (Ed.), The condition of American liberal education: Pragmatism and a changing tradition (pp. 140‐145). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

Oakley, F. (1992). Community of learning: The American college and the liberal arts tradition. New York: Oxford UP.

Peacock, Gordon. (1989). Education and Training. In E. Benson and L.W. Conolly (Eds.), The Oxford Companion to Canadian Theatre. (p. 191 – 193). Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Pettet, E. B. (1949). Thespis miscast in liberal arts. Educational Theatre Journal 1(2).

273

President’s Office Records. n.d. series II, file B‐55. University of Saskatchewan Archives. Retrieved November 25, 2005, from http://scaa.usask.ca /gallery/uofs_events/articles/1945.php

Professional Association of Canadian Theatres. Retrieved November 15, 2007, from: http://www.pact.ca/who.cfm.

Programs. Theatre. University of Regina. Retrieved June 16, 2007, from: http://www.uregina.ca/finearts/theatre/programs_detail.html#bfa_acting

Regional Theatre. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved November 11, 2007, from http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm? PgNm=TCE&Params=J1SEC786618

Report of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences 1949‐1951. (1951). Ottawa, ON: King’s Printer.

Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters, and Sciences Report. XV (1951). Ottawa: Kingʹs Printer. Retrieved from http://www.collectionscanada.ca/massey/h5‐400‐e.html.

Rubin, D. (1985). Training the theatre professional. In A. Wagner (Ed.). Contemporary Canadian Theatre: New World Visions. (p. 284‐292). Toronto: Simon & Pierre Publishing Company Ltd.

Ryerson Theatre School. Ryerson University. Retrieved June 13, 2007, from: http://www.ryerson.ca/theatreschool/index.html

School of Dramatic Art. University of Windsor. Retrieved June 19, 2007, from: http://www.uwindsor.ca/units/drama/drama_main_web/DramaticArt.nsf/ 00000000000000000000000000000000/7be81e641f208d6c85256d43007d5a71! OpenDocument

Shea, A. (1952). Culture in Canada: A study of the findings of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences, (1949‐1951). Toronto, Ontario: Associated Printers Limited.

Sherwood, W.A. (1894). A National Spirit in Art. Canadian Magazine 3(6), 498‐50.

274

Smith, B. (1985). National theatre school of Canada. p. 365‐366. In A. Wagner (Ed.). Contemporary Canadian Theatre: New World Visions. (pp. 365‐366). Toronto: Simon & Pierre Publishing Company Ltd.

Statistics Canada (2007). “Performing Arts.” The Daily. April 18. Statistics Canada. Retrived June 14, 2007, from http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/ English/070418/d070418c.htm#tab2ftnoter.

Statistics Canada. n.d. Table 506‐0001 Canadian summary characteristics of performing arts, by discipline and company size, every 2 years . CANSIM (database). 2002/2003. Retrieved August 16, 2007, http://cansim2.statcan. ca/cgi‐win/CNSMCGI.PGM.

Student Handbook (2005‐2006). Department of Drama. University of Saskatchewan. Retrieved June 19, 2007 from: http://www.arts. usask.ca/drama/StudentHandbook.pdf.

Theatre at Grenfell. Memorial University of Newfoundland. Retrieved June 16, 2007, from: http://www.swgc.mun.ca/theatre/program.htm.

Theatre Ontario. (2000). Now what? The guide to post secondary theatre training in Canada. Toronto, Ontario: Theatre Ontario.

Theatre. School for the Contemporary Arts. Simon Fraser University. Retrieved June 14, 2007, from: http://cgi.sfu.ca/~scahome/?q=theatre.

Theatre at UBC Programs: BFA Acting. Retrieved June 19, 2007, from: http://www.theatre.ubc.ca/programs_bfa_acting.shtml

Tippett, M. (1990). Making Culture: English‐Canadian institutions and the arts before the Massy Commission. Toronto, Ontario: University of Toronto Press.

Undergraduate Programs. Department of Drama, University of Alberta. Retrived June 10, 2007, from http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/drama/prospective undergrad.cfm.

Waldhauer, E. (1991). Drama at Queen’s: From its beginnings to 1991. Kingston, ON: TypeCast.

275

Weaver, F. S. (1991). Liberal education: Critical essays on professions, pedagogy, and structure. New York: Teacher’s College Press.

Welcome to the Department of Drama. University of Calgary. Retrieved May 20, 2007, from: http://www.finearts.ucalgary.ca/drama/index.shtml.

Whiting, F. M. (1963). W. McNeil Lowry’s ‘The university and the creative arts’: A reply.” Educational Theatre Journal 15(2), 158‐162.

Whittaker, H. (1989) Hart House Theatre. In E. Benson and L.W. Conolly (Eds.), The Oxford Companion to Canadian Theatre. (pp. 256 ‐ 257). Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Wickham, G. (1952). Conclusion: Retrospect and prospect. In D.G. James (Ed.), The Universities and the Theatre. (pp. 102‐115). George Allen & Unwin, Ltd.

Wills, B.S. (1989, Jan./Feb.). Theatre education: Approaching a new decade. Design for Arts Education, 25‐29.

Worthen, W. B. (Ed.) (1993). Comment. Theatre Journal 45, 415‐416.

276

Appendix A: Survey Instrument

Demystifying the BFA Degree: A Study of Post Secondary Theatre Education in Canada

Name of Researcher, Faculty, Department, Telephone & Email

Christine Johns, Ph.D Candidate Faculty of Education, Division of Educational Research (403) 259-3267 [email protected]

Supervisor

Dr. B. Lynn Bosetti, Faculty of Education, Division of Educational Research

Title of Project

Demystifying the BFA Degree: A Study of Post Secondary Theatre Education in Canada

Sponsor:

Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) Doctoral Fellowship

This consent form is only part of the process of informed consent. If you want more details about something mentioned here, or information not included here, you should feel free to ask. Please take the time to read this carefully and to understand any accompanying information.

The University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board has approved this research study.

Purpose of the Study

As a BFA theatre/Drama graduate, you are invited to participate in a study of BFA theatre graduates from Canadian universities. The purpose of this research is to explore the current state of undergraduate theatre education and training in Canadian universities through an examination of the BFA degree. This study will focus on identifying the curricular variations within BFA theatre degree programs across the country and attempt

277 to understand how these variations are understood and if and how these differences affect the expectations, satisfaction, and employability of program graduates. The results of this study will provide clarity to the program options available to students and produce an updated understanding of what constitutes a BFA theatre degree.

What Will I Be Asked To Do?

As a participant in this study you will be asked to fill out an online survey. You will be given the website address where the survey is located and a username and password to access the survey. The survey will take approximately 15 - 20 minutes of your time. At the end of the survey you will have the option of providing your contact information. If you provide this information you may be contacted for a follow-up telephone interview unless you indicate otherwise. All survey responses will be anonymous unless contact information is provided. All contact information will be kept confidential.

Participation in this study is voluntary and you may refuse to participate altogether, or refuse to participate in the interview part of the study. You are free to discontinue participation at any time during the study if you provide your personal information. If this information is not provided, the survey is anonymous and there will be no way to identify the survey as being submitted by you, therefore it cannot be withdrawn once it has been submitted electronically.

What Type of Personal Information Will Be Collected?

Should you agree to participate, you will be asked to provide information such as your gender, age, academic major, current income range and if you belong to a theatre based union. All personal contact information such as name, address and phone number is NOT required. If you choose to voluntarily provide your personal contact information you may be contacted for a follow-up telephone interview unless you indicate otherwise on the survey. All survey responses will be anonymous unless you voluntarily choose to provide your personal contact information. If you have provided this information, it will be kept confidential. If you agree to participate in a follow-up interview and are interviewed, the interviews will be transcribed, your name and identifying characteristics removed and you will be given an opportunity to review the transcribed interviews and add, delete or clarify any information.

Are There Risks or Benefits if I Participate?

This study will allow participants to provide input into an examination of BFA theatre programs across Canada, and help produce an updated definition of what constitutes a BFA theatre degree. Participants will be able to provide their perspective on their own motivation to study theatre, expectations for their theatre degree, skills they obtained during the degree program, and their employment expectations and reality. This study will help future theatre students to make more informed decisions about their choice of program and encourage them to think beyond the four years of the degree and to their future career goals and expectations. This research will also provide theatre faculty and

278 administrators with a heightened awareness of the current offerings in post secondary theatre education in Canada and how their particular program fits within a national scope. Universities are in the business of students and this study will aid theatre departments in understanding the demographics and expectations of the students they attract to their program, and the satisfaction, employability, and career path of its graduates.

The risks associated with this study are minimal; however, there is the potential for the participant to become uncomfortable with the personal and potentially sensitive nature of the data collected during the interviews and questionnaire (such as age, gender, salary range). This personal data may also include responses on the participant's previous experiences from their undergraduate study and with their current job and salary. Participants have the option of not providing a response to any question that they are uncomfortable with and at anytime may withdraw altogether from the study.

What Happens To The Information I Provide?

Participation in the survey is completely voluntary, anonymous and confidential. You may opt to provide your personal contact information at the end of the survey. If you provide this information you may be contacted for a follow-up interview. If you participate in an interview it will be your choice whether or not all or particular data obtained from the interview will be used in a confidential manner or not. You will have opportunity through both this consent form and the transcript release forms to indicate your decision on this issue of confidentiality. Likewise your individual and institutional anonymity will not be compromised in the research products from this study.

You are free to discontinue participation at any time during the study if you provide your personal information. If this information is not provided the survey is anonymous and there will be no way to identify the survey as being submitted by you, therefore it can not be withdrawn once it has been submitted electronically. The surveys will be stored electronically within a secure database. No one except the researcher and her supervisor will be allowed to see or hear any of the answers to the survey or on the interview tape. The data will be stored for 5 years on a computer disk within a locked office in the Graduate Division of Educational Research at the University of Calgary. After the five years all data will be permanently erased.

The data from the research will be used for the purposes of dissemination in refereed articles, conference presentations and a written dissertation. No data for publication or papers will identify you as a participant.

Consent

Your decision to complete and submit this online survey will be interpreted as an indication of your consent to participate.

279

In no way does this waive your legal rights nor release the investigators, sponsors, or involved institutions from their legal and professional responsibilities. You are free to withdraw from this research project at any time. You should feel free to ask for clarification or new information throughout your participation.

Questions/Concerns

If you have any further questions or want clarification regarding this research and/or your participation, please contact:

Ms. Christine Johns, Principle Investigator Division of Educational Research/Faculty of Education (403) 259-3267, [email protected]

Dr. B. Lynn Bosetti, Supervisor Division of Educational Research/Faculty of Education (403) 220-3648, [email protected]

If you have any concerns about the way you've been treated as a participant, please contact Patricia Evans, Associate Director, Research Services Office, University of Calgary at (403) 220-3782; email [email protected].

280

Demystifying the BFA Degree: A Study of Post Secondary Theatre Education in Canada: Survey Instrument

A. Your Program Information: This section asks information about the university drama program you attended.

1. What university did you attend for your BFA degree? 1. Concordia University 2. Laurentian University 3. Memorial University 4. Ryerson University 5. Simon Fraser University 6. University of Alberta 7. University of British Columbia 8. University of Calgary 9. University of Lethbridge 10. University of Regina 11. University of Saskatchewan 12. University of Victoria 13. University of Windsor 14. York University

2. What year did you graduate with your drama degree? 1. 1995 2. 1996 3. 1997 4. 1998 5. 1999 6. 2000 7. 2001 8. 2003 9. 2004 10. 2005

Other (Use this box if the year you graduated does not appear in the drop down menu above):

281

3. In relation to where you lived prior to starting university, did you attend an institution that was (Check ONE box only): 1. Local 2. Provincial 3. National 4. International

3a. Are you currently living in... (Check ONE box only). 1. Canada 2. United States 3. Abroad

4. What was your primary area of specialization in the drama program (Check ONE box only): 1. Acting 2. Design 3. Technical / Stage Management 4. Directing 5. Administration / Marketing 6. Directing 7. Secondary School / Developmental Drama 8. Other ______

5. Did you consider your program to be primarily (Check ONE box only): 1. A Professional or Conservatory drama program 2. A Liberal Arts or Academic drama program

6. Prior to your drama degree, did you have previous degree or diploma granting post secondary education (Check all that apply): 1. None 2. College 3. Institute

282

4. University 5. Other ______

6a. If you had previous post secondary education, what institution did you attend?

6b. If you had previous post secondary education, what was your specialization(s)?

7. Prior to your drama degree, did you have any non‐post secondary theatre training (workshops, intensive courses, non degree or diploma theatre conservatory programs, apprentice or intern programs). 1. Yes 2. No

7a. If yes, what group/institution did you take workshops, intensive courses, internships etc. from?

7b. If yes, what was your specialization (acting, directing, lighting, etc.)?

8. Following your drama degree did you or are you currently pursuing additional degree or diploma granting post secondary education (Check all that apply): 1. None 2. University (Graduate) 3. University (Undergraduate) 4. College 5. Institute 6. Other ______

8a. If you attended an additional post secondary program, what institution did you attend?

283

8b. If you attended an additional post secondary program, was/is your program/specialization(s)?

9. Following your drama degree did you or are you currently pursuing any non‐ post secondary theatre training (workshops, intensive courses, non degree or diploma theatre conservatory programs, apprentice or intern programs). 1. Yes 2. No

9a. If yes, what group/institution did you take workshops, intensive courses, internships etc. from?

9b. If yes, what was/is your program/specialization(s)?

B. Your Motivation to Study Drama: This section asks about your motivation for undertaking a drama degree from the point of view of when you started your program.

1. I undertook a drama degree because:

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree I am good at what I do (acting, directing, ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ designing, technical). I enjoy what I do. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ I wanted to be employable in my field. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ I wanted to contribute to the ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ community. I believed that it would result in future ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ financial rewards.

284

I believed it would lead to secure ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ employment. Of the social benefits (camaraderie, ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ friends, socializing, fame). Of the creative/artistic benefits. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ I did not know what else to study. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏

j. Other

C. Expectations For Your Drama Degree: This section asks about the expectations you had during your drama degree.

1. During my drama degree, I expected to:

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree Have creative challenges and ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ opportunities. Establish professional contacts through ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ my education. Have the option of going on to higher ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ education (graduate degree). Following graduation have to work at a ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ non‐theatre based job to sustain my theatre work. Be employed in theatre immediately ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ following graduation Earn a living salary from my theatre ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ work (acting, theatre admin, designing, directing, technical etc.) immediately following graduation. Continue with my theatre work as a ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ hobby, but not be paid after graduation.

h. Other

285

D. Drama Curriculum and Instruction: This question inquires about the drama curriculum and instruction you received during your drama degree.

1. Looking back on my drama program I believe that:

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree I was given opportunities to develop in ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ my theatre work (acting, theatre admin, directing, designing, technical etc.). The program prepared me well to start ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ out in my career. The program prepared me well for ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ progression in my career. The program provided me with useful ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ theatre skills and techniques. I was encouraged to engage in critical ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ thought and participate in a high level of academic activity. I received high quality academic ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ instruction. I received high quality skill ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ development. I had the opportunity to develop a ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ mentoring relationship. Would take the same program if I were ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ to do it all over again. Would take a drama program at a ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ different school if I were to do it all over again. Would take a program, other than ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ drama, if I were to do it all over again.

l. Other

286

E. Skills Obtained During your Drama Degree:This question asks you about the skills you obtained during your drama degree.

1. My drama degree program provided me with:

Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree Training on how to find work after ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ graduation (resume writing, practice auditions, practice interviews). Practical skills to succeed in my theatre ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ work. Skills to succeed in the non‐theatre ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ workforce. Aesthetic and creative skills. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ Excellent problem‐solving skills. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ Excellent analytical skills. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ The ability to work as a member of a ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ team. Excellent written communication skills. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ Excellent verbal communication skills. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ Excellent Organisational and time ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ management skills.

k. Other

F. Your Employment Expectations: This question asks about your employment expectations.

1. Having completed a drama degree I expect (choose the most appropriate response): 1. To make a living solely from theatre work directly related to my

287

specialization in the drama program. 2. To make a living from theatre work in an area NOT directly related to my specialization in the drama program. 3. To make a living from a combination of my theatre work and non‐theatre based work. 4. To earn a living from enon‐theatr based work. 5. Other ______

G. Primary Theatre Employment: How would you describe your current income‐derived primary theatre employment?

1. How would you describe your current income‐derived primary theatre employment? Check ONE box only. 1. I do not derive a primary income from theatre work. 2. I am a theatre director. 3. I am a dramaturg. 4. I am an actor. 5. I am a high school drama teacher. 6. I am a designer. 7. I teach drama classes (not high school). 8. I am a technician. 9. I am in arts management (marketing, communications, box office, administration). 10. I am a technical director. 11. I am an artistic director of a theatre company. 12. Other ______

H. Income‐Derived Secondary Theatre Employment: Since many people work in more than one theatre area, this question asks about any secondary theatre employment you may have.

1. How would you describe your current income‐derived secondary theatre involvement? (Check all that apply) 1. I do not derive a secondary income from theatre work. 2. I am a theatre director. 3. I am a dramaturg.

288

4. I am an actor. 5. I am a high school drama teacher. 6. I am a designer. 7. I teach drama classes (not high school). 8. I am a technician. 9. I am in arts management (marketing, communications, box office, administration). 10. I am a technical director. 11. I am an artistic director of a theatre company. 12. Other ______

I. Theatre Involvement: This section asks about your current theatre involvement.

1. What primarily describes your current theatre involvement? Please read all statements before checking a box. Check ONE box only. 1. I do not work in theatre. 2. I work for professional theatre companies (an Actors’ Equity house). 3. I am paid, and work for semi‐professional theatre companies. 4. I am paid, and work for non‐professional theatre companies. 5. I am not paid, but I work (actor, director, designer, technician, administration etc.) for theatre companies. 6. I am a theatre volunteer. 7. Other ______

J. Professional Income: This question asks information about your professional income level.

1. What best describes your current situation. Please read all statements before checking a box. Check ONE box only. 1. My income is derived 100% from my theatre work. 2. My income is derived 100% from work NOT related to theatre. 3. My income is derived about 50% from my work in theatre and 50% from work not related to theatre. 4. My income is derived less than 25% from my work in theatre and the rest is from other work, NOT directly related to theatre.

289

5. Other ______

K. What Have You Done with Your Drama Degree Since Graduating?

1. Please use the space below to tell us what you have been doing with your drama degree since graduating.

L. Demographics: Please tell us a little more about yourself by using the check boxes below.

1. Age? 1. 20‐25 2. 26‐30 3. 31‐35 4. 36‐40 5. 41 or above

2. Sex 1. Female 2. Male

3. I am a member or an apprentice of a theatre based union (Check ALL that apply): 1. Equity 2. IATSE 3. ACTRA 4. ADC 5. None 6. Other ______

4. What is your current work situation? (Check ALL that apply): 1. Work full time (including contract work)

290

2. Work part time (including contract work) 3. Full time student 4. Part time student 5. Unemployed

5. What is your annual income from theatre based work (before taxes)? 1. Not Applicable 2. Under $5,000 3. $5,000 ‐ $9,999 4. $10,000 ‐ $19,999 5. $20,000 ‐ $24,999 6. $25,000 ‐ $29,999 7. $30,000 ‐ $34,999 8. $35,000 ‐ $39,999 9. $40,000 ‐ $44,999 10. $45,000 ‐ $49,999 11. $50,000 and over

6. What is your annual income from non‐theatre based work (before taxes). 1. Not Applicable 2. Under $5,000 3. $5,000 ‐ $9,999 4. $10,000 ‐ $19,999 5. $20,000 ‐ $24,999 6. $25,000 ‐ $29,999 7. $30,000 ‐ $34,999 8. $35,000 ‐ $39,999 9. $40,000 ‐ $44,999 10. $45,000 ‐ $49,999 11. $50,000 and over

M. Additional information or comments?

1. Please share with us the key elements that you feel are important in a BFA drama program.

291

2. Please use the space below to provide any additional information that you may wish to share.

All of the above information in the survey will remain anonymous. However, if you would be willing to be contacted for additional information or a short interview, please fill out the information below. The personal information below will be treated as confidential. Name:

Phone Number (including area code):

Email address: