.fiw..m m... a. .. a... , . r..?......|£ Sufi: inn-.1: . .‘ 4', v z I: . 6...... in?»fiLfix«%Eafiafi%§§V§£§§»§ , .4262, _ ~ fin. . 3.1.. y . 3 i. INtSlS \ UNIVERSITY LI IIEBRAR 1111111111 11111111111 11111111111111111 3 1293 010504 LIBRARY Michigan State Unlvarslty This is to certify that the dissertation entitled PRE-PROFESSIONAL ACTOR TRAINING AT THE SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR'S SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS presented by Lucien Zabielski Douglas has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph . D . degree in Thgggre KM / // Ma jor pr‘o'fessor Date 9 '2 y- 9é 0-12771 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution —--— f—h . -4—~.—- _—‘-‘- —H__~_4 - 4 PLACE ll RETURN BOX to rotnovothis checkout from yout record. TO AVOID FINES mum on or baton duo duo. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 1—T[:I"—1 _ [:l__1 1—_1 "—ULJ- 11 I 1 MSU Is An Affirmative Adlai/Equal Opportunity Intuition mm: PRE-PROFESSIONAL ACTOR TRAINING AT THE SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR'S SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS BY Lucien Zabielski Douglas A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Theatre 1996 ABSTRACT PRE-PROFESSIONAL ACTOR TRAINING AT THE SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR'S SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS BY Lucien Zabielski Douglas This study examines the effects of a five-week program in pre—professional actor training for gifted tenth and eleventh grade students under a faculty of artist-teachers at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts (SCGSA). The core of the study utilizes a specially designed questionnaire to survey longitudinally five classes graduated from the SCGSA theatre program. In answer to a combination of forty closed-ended and open-ended questions, alumni assess the quality of faculty and instruction, the role of visiting professional artists, and the overall influence that the training has on them academically, professionally, and socially. Recorded data shows that students especially value the intensity of training with professionally experienced teachers and the opportunity for workshops taught by celebrated visiting artists. In addition to gaining a greater understanding of the acting process, respondents credit the program's organization of concentrated work in a peer-supported environment for building self-esteem, the discipline to designate and accomplish personal goals, a heightened awareness of the role of the arts in society, and an increased respect for academics and the pursuit of higher education. The study also describes the methodology employed in creating the questionnaire and outlines the procedure followed in conducting the survey. A copy of the questionnaire and a complete tabulation of all survey data are included. Through a series of personal interviews with the SCGSA founder/executive director and the past and present theatre program chairs, the study also highlights the individual perspectives confronted in shaping this fifteen-year-old program from its initially liberal arts-based curriculum to its present conservatory-styled training in acting skills. Additionally, interviews with four distinguished theatre artists, who serve as regular visitors to the program, point out their responses to the success with which the program achieves its central goal: to introduce students to the training demands of theatre as a profession. Copyright by LUCI EN ZABI ELSKI DOUGLAS 1996 I would like to dedicate this work to my Mother and Father, whose support and encouragement continue to be a great inspiration to me. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Georg W. Schuttler for his generosity of time, continuous support, and invaluable guidance in directing this study. I also wish to thank Dr. John Baldwin, Dr. Dixie Durr, and Dr. Howard Hickey, respectively for their invaluable consultations concerning the particular aspects of this work. I am grateful to Virginia Uldrick for providing the historical information, personal interviews, and additional materials relevant to my research. I also thank the SCGSA staff for assistance in word processing my first and second mailing cover letters. For furnishing me with detailed accounts of the development of the SCGSA theatre program, I am obliged to Mr. Robert Francesconi and Dr. Philip G. Hill, respectively. Finally, I am especially thankful to Mr. Gregory Zabielski for his professional advice on questionnaire procedures and statistical research. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES.......................... ..... . ...... ....Viii INTRODUCTION...0.00.00... ...... O0.........OOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOl CHAPTER ONE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCGSA THEATRE PROGRAM..............12 CHAPTER TWO SURVEY METHODOLOGYOO0.000000000000000. ..... 0.00.00.00.000048 CHAPTER THREE SURVEY RESPONSES TO SCGSA ACTOR TRAINING..................63 A. STUDENT PERSONAL VITAE............................66 B. THEATRE FACULTY AND INSTRUCTION...................70 C. VISITING PROFESSIONAL ARTISTS.. ..... .. ......... ...77 D. THE OVERALL EFFECT OF THE PROGRAM ON STUDENTS' ACADEMIC AND CAREER CHOICES.............82 B. THE OVERALL EFFECTS OF THE PROGRAM AS A NON-TRADITIONAL LEARNING EXPERIENCE...............9l CHAPTER FOUR VISITING ARTISTS' RESPONSES TO SCGSA ACTOR TRAINING......113 INTERVIEW: WILLIAM WARFIELD.........................115 INTERVIEW: MARILYN MCINTYRE.........................ll7 INTERVIEW: GERALD FREEDMAN....... ...... . ...... ......120 INTERVIEW: ROBERT BESEDA..... ..................... ..124 CONCLUSIONOOOOO00.....0....OOOOOOOOOOOOO00.000.00.0000000128 APPENDICES APPENDIX A. LETTERS OF INTEREST....................135 APPENDIX B. SCGSA THEATRE APPLICATION FORM.........137 APPENDIX C. SCGSA WEEKLY THEATRE SCHEDULE..........152 APPENDIX D. QUESTIONNAIRE/SURVEY RESEARCH MATERIALS..............................l53 APPENDIX E. SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE..... ........... ...159 APPENDIX F. Table 18. QUESTIONNAIRE MAILING STATISTICS.............................163 APPENDIX G. COMPLETE SEQUENTIAL TABULATION OF SURVEY DATA.................... ........ 164 LIST OF REFERENCESOOOOOCCOC00......COO....000000000000000212 vii Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. LIST OF TABLES RESPONSE RATE PER THEATRE CLASS.................6I DEMOGRAPHICS....................................65 HOW RESPONDENTS LEARNED ABOUT THE PROGRAM.......66 RESPONDENTS' CURRENT ACADEMIC STATUS............67 RESPONDENTS' CURRENT ACADEMIC INTERESTS.........69 RESPONDENTS' THEATRE INSTRUCTOR RATINGS.........71 INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES To TEACHING................73 INTENSITY OF INSTRUCTION........................73 VISITING PROFESSIONAL CELEBRITIES...............81 SCGSA INFLUENCE ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE........88 TRAINING EFFECTS ON STUDENTS' ACADEMIC PERFORMANCEOOOO...OCOCOOOOOOOOO0.000.000...0.0.90 OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH SCGSA THEATRE PROGRAMCOOOOOOOOO...OOOIOOOOOOCOOOOOOOO00......92 OVERALL EFFECTS OF SCGSA PROGRAM...............98 EFFECTS ON AWARENESS OF ARTS IN SOCIETY.......101 OVERALL EVALUATION OF FIVE-WEEK LENGTH TERM...104 DETAILED EVALUATION OF PROGRAM LENGTH.........105 OVERALL SUGGESTED PROGRAM LENGTH... ..... ......107 QUESTIONNAIRE MAILING STATISTICS..............163 viii INTRODUCTION In October 1980, with Arthur Magill, local businessman and entrepreneur, and Dr. J. Floyd Hall, then Superintendent of Schools for South Carolina's Greenville County, Virginia Uldrick, a music teacher in the Greenville County school system, presented a proposal for an intensive five-week summer arts program to then South Carolina Governor Richard W. Riley (currently U.S. Secretary of Education). Utilizing State discretionary funds, the South Carolina Legislature approved the proposal. The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts (SCGSA) was founded and began its first session nine months later in July 1980, renting facilities on the campus of Furman University in Greenville. Now in its fifteenth year with Virginia Uldrick as Executive Director, the School has added music and dance to its original core disciplines of theatre, visual arts, and creative writing. Admission is open to rising high school juniors and seniors from across the State of South Carolina, with approximately 250 students acceptedinto the program by audition or the submission of an apprOpriate portfolio. Having worked extensively as a music teacher and choral director in the Greenville public school system and throughout the community, Virginia Uldrick recognized the value of the arts in education and assisted in founding South Carolina's first arts high school: The Fine Arts Center. Located in Greenville, The Fine Arts Center, began functioning in August 1979 as a magnet school offering students from surrounding high schools advanced training in the arts as a supplement to their daily curriculum. Uldrick served as the Center's director and principal for its first five years of Operation. While the Fine Arts Center continued to enhance education in Greenville County, Uldrick wanted to develop a unique program that could serve students identified as gifted and talented in high schools throughout the entire state of South Carolina. In a 30 November 1993 personal interview, she explained her resolve to encourage talented students throughout the State of South Carolina: Gifted students should not get more of the same at an accelerated rate, but they should have a program that is different. Differentiated studies--so that they could maximize their potential and be challenged and stay interested. That's very important as students achieve at their highest level. A very talented student in a dull program, or just an accelerated program, will not achieve what a student with even lesser talent achieves in a program of differentiated studies. And challenging that mind and that talent to ever expand and stretch the student's horizons, so they are doing things they never dreamed they could do. And of course, that is like a ripple in a brook-- the ripple is set off and the student becomes challenged and begins to look toward different and more innovative and creative ways to process their art. Uldrick believed a program of "differentiated studies" should expose gifted students to learning from professionally experienced artists, thereby taking these students past the bounds of more traditional high school offerings. In creating such a program that would effectively address the needs of artistically gifted students across South Carolina's 91 school districts to "maximize their potential," one of Uldrick's foremost concerns was the selection of a proper faculty. In her November 1993 personal interview she explained: The concept of having these students working with traditional teachers just would not work, because traditional teachers are far more general in their instruction than specific; and, therefore, the philosophy that I believed in and that was created, not by me but by the Italians back in the days of Michelangelo, is to bring an artist in touch with an aspiring artist, or student artist, and give that student the opportunity of learning the craft that the great artist could communicate. She further elaborated on her concept of the "non-traditional" teacher: It was important that teachers not be required to be certified traditionally. . . . we believed and still believe today that talented young artists at the high school level must have the opportunity to study with a master artist, who may be a teacher, also, but not in the traditional sense: may be a studio artist, may be an actor on Broadway or in the movies or videos, may be a writer. . . . most of the people who applied, and were interviewed, and employed, were peOple who not only knew their art, but had a burning desire to communicate that art to the younger generation, and really loved young people. We were not 100 percent the first year, but each year thereafter we began to understand more fully how these teachers could be identified. In selecting as near to a “non-traditional" faculty as possible in part through a national search, Uldrick explained that SCGSA teachers were evaluated according to the following criteria: first, their knowledge: how they communicated that knowledge--their techniques; how detailed it was; how they assisted the students to begin to stretch their minds and take risks. The students we get in today's world are not willing to take risks. You have to teach a child to take risks. Overall program assessment included the director's evaluation of teachers, teacher self-evaluation, and student evaluation of teachers. Evaluation and assessment have played an integral role in the develOpment of the School's effectiveness. The assessment materials available to this researcher were previous end-term reports and self-evalua- tions provided by Philip G. Hill, Ph.D., professor of theatre at Furman University and first chairperson of the SCGSA theatre program. These materials will be examined in Chapter Two of this study. The recognition of the value of including the arts in education, albeit active, has progressed nationally at a pace below the hopes of arts educators. In a 14 March 1994 New York Times article, reporter Catherine S. Manegold states: The National Center for Education Statistics estimates that almost half of all American schools have no full-time arts staff members. . . . arts education in American public schools has suffered drastic cuts in recent years. In New York City, one of the world's greatest centers for the creative arts, two-thirds of the public schools offer no art instruction, according to a study prepared for the former chancellor. . . . Elsewhere, arts instruction ranges from sophisticated programs in states like Minnesota and . . . South Carolina to virtually nothing in areas of Los Angeles. In establishing a program of "differentiated studies" taught by a "non-traditional" faculty of artist-teachers, the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts has developed a curriculum of professionally-oriented studies to introduce select students from across the state of South Carolina to the demands of their various art interests as a potential career choice. The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of the SCGSA pre-professional actor training which introduces students to the demands of theatre as a profession. Limited to this purpose, the study endeavors to substantiate the premise that an arts program of ”differentiated studies" will "challenge" minds and talents to new heights of understanding, perception, and personal growth. The core of this study involves a survey of former SCGSA theatre students and their responses to the pre-professional actor training that they received in the five-week summer program offered at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. For this purpose, a specially designed questionnaire was prepared to survey longitudinally five classes graduated from the drama program over its fifteen-year history. The study also takes particular notice of the theatre program's development and the Executive Director's attention to assembling a faculty of "non-traditional" artist-teachers that would help students to "maximize their potential and be challenged." Studies relating to theatre education include a review of the philosophies of distinguished directors such as Joseph Chaikin and Richard Schechner, and the actor training practices of such recognized teachers as Stella Adler and Sanford Meisner. Additionally, research has noted the develOpment of training programs at The Juilliard School, the American Conservatory Theatre, MOntreal Repertory Theatre, and procedures for including the arts in the basic curricula of school systems throughout the state of Nebraska and the city of Albany, New York. Educators value particularly the following articles addressing the role of drama in elementary and secondary school curricula: A Model Drama/Theatre Curriculum, created by the American Alliance for Theatre and Education (AATE); National Standards for Arts Education, developed by the Consortium of National Arts Education Associations; and Assessment in K-12 Theatre Education, researched by Professor Barbara J. Molette of the Community College of Baltimore, in which she highlights twenty-five studies "that address indicators for student and program success" (1). In so doing, Molette notes, "Most of the available literature is concerned with evaluating student skills in creative dramatics" (1). In her research, Molette consulted with Dr. Kim Alan Wheetley, chair of the team that developed the AATE study and currently head of the Southeast Institute for Theatre in Education, and Dr. John C. Carr of the University of Maryland, also a member of the AATE guidelines team. Regarding research in this area, Molette says that, "Both persons stated that no standard criteria exist for assessing student and program success in theatre education" (1). The above studies offer only suggested outcomes and expectancies for training in creative dramatics and theatre arts. They do not propose a specific methodology of training, nor do they survey student responses to professionally-oriented actor training. Respecting his own study, the author has found no literature concerning the effects of pre-professional actor training on students at the high school level. Research examining actor training under a core faculty of non-traditional artist-teachers at the secondary school level and actual student responses to the training would appear to be of significant value, particularly in the area of pre-professional actor training. Noting the value of this investigation, United States Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley, and former South Carolina Governor, Carroll A. Campbell, Jr. have expressed interest in this study's findings (SEE APPENDIX A). In a 28 June 1994 letter to the researcher, Governor Campbell stated: As you may know, the South Carolina General Assembly passed legislation that addresses the establishment of a year-round Governor's School for the Arts and Humanities. The legislation requires that a study be conducted on the feasibility and desirability of creating a year-round school. I know that your findings will be of interest to members serving on the study committee, and I hope you will share them with us. Additional interest has been expressed by Douglas Herbert, director of arts in education for the National Endowment for the Arts, Washington, D.C. I believe this study, assessing the particulars of a unique theatre arts program, finds its justification in contributing precise information in support of the arts in education. Furthermore, as the outcomes of pre-professional actor training in the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts Theatre Program support the suggested outcomes of discipline-based arts education, as well as many suggested governmental standards, this research provides circumstantial evidence for recognizing the SCGSA theatre training as a exemplary program in secondary arts education. As a frame of reference to this study, the author wishes to provide biographical information outlining his work in both the academic and professional worlds of theatre. Lucien Douglas has received critical acclaim in The New York Times, Time Magazine, Women's Wear Daily, and Backstage for his work as an actor both on and off Broadway. In over 100 productions, with appearances ranging from New York's Roundabout Theatre to Washington's Kennedy Center to network television and radio, he has enjoyed the opportunity of working with such notable artists as Alfred Drake, Faye Dunaway, Stephen Lang, Rosemary Murphy, Mickey Rooney, Marian Seldes, Alexander Scourby, and Dianne Wiest. Additionally, he has appeared with the performing arts companies at Michigan State University, The University of Texas at Austin, and Pennsylvania State University. Mr. Douglas has served as Artistic Director for Connecticut's Sharon Playhouse, and has been guest director at the University of Tennessee's Clarence Brown Company, the North Carolina School of the Arts, The Juilliard School, New York University's Graduate Acting Program, and Penn State University. Respecting his special interest in working with authors on script development, his New York directorial work includes staged readings and productions of original materials at The Writers Theatre, Roundabout Theatre Conservatory, Ensemble Studio Theatre, Triangle Theatre, Waverly Place Theatre, and West Bank Cafe. In this capacity, among others, he has enjoyed working with Emmy Award winning writer Harding Lemay and actress/writer Katharine Houghton. Mr. Douglas has taught introductory courses in acting and voice and advanced courses in acting at Michigan State University while pursuing doctoral studies from 1992-1995. He has also served as guest lecturer in acting at The University of Texas at Austin for the 1994 fall semester, and visiting assistant professor of acting and guest director at Penn State University for the 1995-1996 academic year. He has chaired interdisciplinary workshops in acting and directing for the camera at both the University of Texas and Michigan State University, bringing together within each university the Departments of Theatre and the Departments of Radio, Television, and Film. Having a special interest in classical drama, Mr. Douglas has conducted research and lectured on directing and teaching methods utilizing the First Folio Shakespearean texts. Additional teaching credits include the American Academy of Dramatic Arts, Weist-Barron Television School (New York), North Carolina School of the Arts (where he teaches an annual workshop in acting for the camera), and the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts (where he served as a member of the theatre faculty from 1990-1994 and as the theatre program's assistant chair for the 1994 summer session). A member of the Association for Theatre in Higher Education (ATHE), Mr. Douglas has chaired acting workshops for the 1994 and 1995 National Conferences. He has been recognized by the National Foundation for Advancement in the Arts as a teacher of students identified for exceptional artistic achievement, has served as Keynote Speaker for the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts Academy Program, and has sat on the Board of Directors for both The Players and The Episcopal Actor's Guild. He is a member of the Ibsen Society of America, Actors' Equity Association, the Screen Actors Guild, and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists. Mr. Douglas' education and training includes the University of Connecticut (BFA, Phi Kappa Phi Honors) and the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, London. The facts and figures for this study were gained primarily via a survey of South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts theatre participants, numerous interviews with personnel associated with SCGSA, and primary written materials about the School offered by Virginia Uldrick and Philip G. Hill. Chapter One discusses the philosophies of Chairpersons Philip G. Hill and Robert Francesconi in 10 developing the theatre program from its initially liberal arts—based orientation to its current conservatory-styled training in acting skills. Specifics regarding curriculum, faculty, production versus non-production, and the role of professional visiting artists are discussed. Chapter Two outlines survey methodology, questionnaire preparation, and information gathering procedures. Chapter Three offers a detailed examination of statistics and information gathered from alumni responses to the forty-one closed-ended and open-ended questions put forth in the survey. Chapter Four highlights actor training philOSOphies and actual responses to the SCGSA theatre program as reported in personal interviews with four distinguished professional theatre artists who serve as regular visitors to the program. A conclusion follows, briefly discussing three formative issues revealed by the study. 11 CHAPTER ONE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCGSA THEATRE PROGRAM The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts from the outset sought a professional structure for its theatre program. Different understandings of what "professional" means in reference to the theatre artist caused a fundamental argument among three individuals responsible for creating this program. First, Virginia Uldrick, founder and Executive Director of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts, believed a professional program must give student artists an introduction to the artistic process by artist-teachers who had made significant artistic achievements in the profession itself. Second, Dr. Philip G. Hill, member of the Furman University theatre faculty and first chair of the SCGSA Theatre Program (1981-1983), believed students should experience theatre as an ensemble effort through five weeks of intensive work sampling the various technical and performance aspects of production. Third, Robert Francesconi, member of the North Carolina School of the Arts theatre faculty and current chair of the SCGSA Theatre Program (1984- ), considered training under artist-teachers in the specific skills of acting, as if taking the first steps toward a career, would challenge Students and give them a sound awareness of the artistic process. This chapter looks at the ideas put forth by these individuals in launching the SCGSA theatre program. 12 The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts began its first summer session on July 5, 1981 offering students the opportunity to study intensively in one of three artistic disciplines-~visual arts, creative writing, and theatre. As stated on its 1981 application form, the School's overall mission was defined as follows: The purpose of the Governor's School for the Arts is to l) assist the young artist to develop new ideas, 2) learn new techniques in the arts, 3) broaden his scope of thinking, and 4) prepare him/her for an arts-related career or a career in the arts. The program is designed to provide students with intensive and individualized instruction in the arts as well as to give him/her a variety of individual and group activities related to the artistic needs of the young, creative, and artistic person. Open to all rising junior and senior high school students throughout the state of South Carolina, application requirements to the first (1981) session of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts theatre program included a video-taped audition and the written completion of a standard application form (SEE APPENDIX B). Thirty (30) theatre students were accepted for the first year. Over the years the number has climbed to as high as forty-two (42), but normally only thirty-six (36) are admitted to ensure effective work from seven teachers over a five-week period. To accommodate its five-week summer session, the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts has continually rented its office, classroom, and dormitory facilities from Furman University in Greenville, SC. Dr. Philip G. Hill, 13 then chair of the theatre program at Furman and consultant to Greenville's Fine Arts Center, was available, highly interested, and therefore appointed by Executive Director Virginia Uldrick to organize and chair the SCGSA theatre program. In a 28 November 1993 interview, Dr. Hill explained that in 1981 former Furman University theatre student Jim Thigpen (currently artistic director of the Trustis Theatre in Columbia, SC) was the only high school teacher in the State of South Carolina holding a degree in theatre. Furthermore, Dr. Hill recalled that a survey conducted throughout the state by the South Carolina Theatre Association indicated about one-third of all high schools had no theatre activity. As highlighted in his prospectus for the 1981 theatre program: There are a great many young peOple in South Carolina who have a deep interest in theatre, together with some experience in it, but very little training and no idea about how to develop their talents. Most of these young peOple have developed this interest through participation in community theatre plays or in high school plays that were directed by persons untrained in theatre arts. Even where drama classes are taught in South Carolina high schools, these classes are usually taught by someone without a degree in drama. In 1981 Dr. Hill developed the following phiIOSOphy for the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts theatre program: The theatre section of the Governor's School for the Arts is therefore designed to give a carefully selected group of such students an intensive five weeks of training and experience in the theatre arts, stimulating them to a fuller understanding 14 of the theatre and preparing them for further study and development of their talents either in their senior year of high school or beyond. To achieve these outcomes, Hill and Dr. Anita Cowan (a University of Georgia teacher with professional acting credentials, hired as theatre faculty from a national search conducted by SCGSA) devised a curriculum that was "committed to breaking them (students) of bad habits . . . then re-introducing them to the fundamentals of theatre art." Accordingly, to meet their philOSOphical goals of "preparing them (students) for further study and development of their talents," Hill and Cowan outlined the following classroom objectives: A. To introduce the students to the training demands of theatre as a profession. B. To put into practice the vocal techniques necessary for an actor. C. To prepare the physical self for the demands of acting. D. To synthesize the elements of theatrical training and production in culminating public performances. It Should be noted that "introducing students to the training demands of theatre as a profession" remained the central goal of the SCGSA theatre program throughout its development. As expressed by Dr. Hill in the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts 1981 yearbook, these goals would provide theatre graduates with the following outcomes: At the end of the five-week session 1) students will have been introduced to theatre at a sophisticated level. 2) They will be able to take their new perceptions and skills back to their communities, and, more importantly, 3) they will 15 be able to make considered judgments for themselves as to their future commitment to theatre. Some will pursue it only avocationally, but others, no doubt, will elect to seek careers as theatrical artists. This draft of philosophy, classroom objectives, and projected outcomes outlined the overall mission in develOping the SCGSA theatre program. The 1981 SCGSA budget allowed for a total of three full-time faculty members and three part-time staff members. In addition to his own appointment and that of Anita Cowan's as full-time faculty members, Dr. Hill filled the remaining full-time positionalso from a national search: Helen Bray, a professional designer from Ohio University would teach costuming and design wardrobe. B. Don Massey (also from the University of Georgia) was hired along with local talent Denise D'Agostino and Jan Woodward as part-time staff members to handle lighting, make-up, and choreography, respectively. Because of Dr. Cowan's extensive qualifications in acting, movement, stage voice, and directing, Dr. Hill referred to her as "the most valuable member of the staff," and he began planning the theatre program with her assistance. Essentially the program began with a schedule typical of performing arts programs. Students were exposed to stagecraft, costuming, and general acting skills. Script analysis, movement, and technical theatre were taught in the morning; production-related work filled the afternoon. All classroom instruction related to the 16 performance and technical demands of the culminating production, Walter Kerr's adaptation of Aristophanes's The Birds. Selected by director Anita Cowan, it was believed that this "modernized" translation made a classic accessible to students, and, most especially, it afforded acting opportunities for all thirty (30) students in the first year (1981) theatre program. In his 28 November 1993 personal interview, Dr. Hill stated that initially the program gave "an introduction to the theatre" rather than "professional actor training." Under the circumstances, Dr. Hill further maintained: Anita and I were convinced (and remained so throughout all this) that we certainly wanted the highest standards we could get, and we wanted to teach these kids what it meant to be seriously devoted to the art of the theatre, but we had no notion at all of making professional actors out of them. Nor did we have any notion that in five weeks we were going to give them thorough courses in acting or voice or scene design or costume construction or any of those things. You'd get a little sampling and hopefully you would develop an attitude toward what needs to be serious about the theatre, and do the very best work of which you are capable and approach it as though it were meaningful art and not just a lark. This approach of general training appears to question the program's original objectives: "to introduce the students to the training demands of theatre as a profession." While Dr. Hill believed all that was needed to teach theatre was "a black box, and some actors, and a script," it was his understanding that Executive Director Virginia Uldrick held that "professional" meant a full-scale technically embellished presentation. Understandably, given the 17 executive director's mandate that the theatre program produce a "professional" quality production, the 1981 theatre faculty felt hard-pressed to sacrifice training for a technically impressive production. Judging that the executive director's purpose for insisting on "a big splashy production" was "more for its 'PR' than anything else," in his 28 November 1993 interview Dr. Hill recalled his feelings on this matter: I think we are teaching the wrong thing if we teach these kids that you've got to have elaborate technical support in order to do a Show. Indeed the big complaint we get when we talk to teachers in the high schools around the state is, 'I can't do much in theatre because my physical facilities are so bad, or because I don't have anybody to do sets for me.‘ And of course my reply to all that is, you don't need any of it. You need a black box, and some actors, and a script. So I kept wanting to teach the kids that, essentially, as did Anita. And Virginia didn't want that. So there was a degree of tension there, as to just what were the goals of the program and how we were going to achieve them. In his report evaluating the first (1981) theatre program, Dr. Hill stated that there existed differing opinions as to the phIIOSOphy of the theatre program and that all faculty agreed there was an "important discrepancy between philosophical intent and actual practice in the work we have done this summer; we disagree on how best to resolve this discrepancy." Acknowledging the lack of previous theatre training most SCGSA students had, members of the faculty were, nevertheless, committed to their initial goals of undoing bad habits and introducing these students to "the fundamentals of theatre art." Dr. Hill argued that Ms. 18 Uldrick's mandate to present a high-caliber production in the fifth week of the term was calling upon students to do something for which they were not prepared. Furthermore the part-time staff had not sufficient time to furnish the prOper technical results. Outfitting thirty actors required extra class hours for students to build costumes, thus taking time away from training. Trying to develop an effective teaching program while at the same time preparing for a full-scale production seemed impossible. A de—emphasis on production became the chief concern in planning the second (1982) season, and it would eventually re-shape the theatre program's overall structure. While a production was still mandated by the executive director for the 1982 season, the theatre faculty believed that emphasizing acting and script study would provide a more beneficial experience for the students. Thus, two alternative plans were presented by Dr. Hill as Options for the 1982 SCGSA theatre program: either 1) an elaborate production, with extensive technical support and guest actors performing with Governor's School theatre students, or 2) a sharply reduced emphasis on production. The latter plan provided for a more equitable distribution of acting opportunities for all thirty theatre students, thereby offering a better procedure for achieving program goals. Preferring that the program focus on training, Dr. Hill nevertheless believed that some sort of production should be included in the process, because, as he stated in his 1993 19 interview, "I think one of the best ways to learn theatre is to do it." However, Dr. Hill asserted this production should "focus on the ultimate confrontation among the actor, script, and audience. That is the true essence of theatrical art." In this latter approach, Dr. Hill suggested hiring two acting teachers who could also direct. He himself would supervise technical needs and two small- scale productions would be selected to provide "good acting challenges" for all the students. It was Dr. Hill's belief that this plan would "far better serve the educational needs of South Carolina's young people, a goal that occasionally got lost this summer (1981)." To round out the SCGSA actor training needs for its second (1982) season, at the urging of Anita Cowan a national search was conducted for a voice specialist. Barry Kur was selected. (Having served on the theatre faculty at Ohio University for five years, Kur had just been appointed to his current position as director of stage voice in the Department of Theatre Arts at Penn State University. Hill and Cowan were impressed with his background in two of the leading methods of theatre voice training--the Arthur Lessac System and the Kristin Linklater System. Kur had worked personally with both of these individuals.) In addition to Professor Kur, the 1982 full-time theatre faculty again included Dr. Anita Cowan in acting and movement, and Dr. Bill in script analysis, who also supervised the minimalized technical needs for the two final productions. The 1982 20 budget also allowed for only three full-time theatre faculty members; and, now with more training emphasis on acting, costuming was no longer a curricular priority. Helen Bray was not re-hired. Costumes were rented and two college students, Robert Boney and Anthony Sears, were brought on as technical assistants. Scheduled on‘a Monday through Friday timetable, mornings focused on skills classes, afternoons were concerned with both technical training and acting coaching as necessitated by production needs, and evenings were devoted to rehearsing two productions--Jean Anouilh's Rigg Round the Moon (directed by Barry Kur) and Moliere's The Learned Ladies (directed by Anita Cowan). The three full- time faculty taught specialized areas of performance, and the daily class schedule met approximately twenty-one and one-half (21%) hours per week, as follows: Voice and Speech for the Actor Barry Kur: 7% hours per week Movement and Physicalization of Character Anita Cowan: 7% hours per week Unarmed Stage Combat Barry Kur: 28 hours per week for 2% weeks Stage Dialect Barry Kur: 25 hours per week for 2% weeks Script Analysis and Theatrical Style Philip Hill: 4 hours per week Evaluating this second (1982) summer session, which now, with the addition of voice and speech, placed greater emphasis on actor training, Dr. Hill's year-end report stated, "the theatre faculty was extremely pleased with the 21 work that we were able to do this year. The improvements over what we did last year are very considerable." Unfortunately, despite two productions, a certain number of students still failed to receive substantial acting roles. In order to remedy this problem and thereby furnish all acting students with equitable performance Opportunities, a production of scenes was suggested for the following year's (1983) theatre program. Professors Cowan and Kur planned to arrive with certain materials in mind but would make final scene assignments after having worked with students for several classes. This approach placed intense focus on daily student training. In an effort to bring students a real taste of the professional arts world, at the behest of Executive Director Virginia Uldrick, in 1982 SCGSA established a practice of inviting guest artists to give brief workshops, informance lectures, and performances. Over the years this custom has attracted some very distinguished artists to the Governor's School, including actor Michael York, director Peter Sellars, actresses Anna Maria Alberghetti and Carol Lawrence, playwright/screenwriter Larry Ketron, musician/author Eugenia Zuckerman, dancer/choreographer Edward Villella, author James Dickey, and artist Christo. Several of these artists, among others, are listed on the School's Board of Visitors. In 1982 two young local artists pursuing professional careers, designer Christopher Smith and actor Nancy Ringham, led a discussion on theatre as a 22 career. In his 1982 year-end report, Dr. Hill called special attention to their visit as a welcome addition to the training in that they "reinforced what we (the faculty) had been telling the students." The practice of pursuing guest artists from the professional theatre was put forth as a desirable and productive supplement to the existing theatre program schedule. Overall, Dr. Hill concluded that the 1982 summer session was highly successful, stating in his report, "I personally felt more sense of accomplishment (in the best spirit of art being its own reward) than I have over any project I have undertaken in a number of years." While this study is limited to examining the SCGSA theatre program, it is interesting to note the relationship between the Furman University theatre program and the Governor's School. The only interaction between the Furman University theatre department and the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts theatre program has been the use of the Furman Playhouse Building: however, the residency of Governor's School has generated a welcome upgrade to the Furman theatre department's physical facilities. Although large-scale production was de-emphasized as part of the SCGSA theatre program, the smaller-scale performance showcase has benefitted technically with the replacement of out-dated sound and lighting equipment. The Playhouse Building itself needed to be made more comfortable for its day-long use as a classroom and rehearsal space. Recogniz- ing the efficacy with which Executive Director Virginia 23 Uldrick convinced Furman University's administration to air-condition the Playhouse building's secondary Lab Theatre, in his 1982 year-end report Dr. Hill prevailed upon Ms. Uldrick to exercise what additional influence she might have in securing up-dated lighting and sound systems for the primary lSO-seat Playhouse Theatre itself and for installing a new and more effective air-conditioning system in that part of the building. Albeit small in size and somewhat spartan in overall flexibility, the Playhouse Building, which houses the Furman University theatre department, has been renovated with state-of-the-art equipment to meet these needs. It now provides a more comfortable space for the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts theatre program to conduct its acting, voice, and scene study classes, and to present workshop-styled performances. Wishing to establish a stronger relationship between the Furman theatre department and SCGSA, Dr. Hill, in his 1982 report, also made the following suggestion: Furman might award a major scholarship to one or more of the theatre students at the end of each summer's program--a scholarship that would allow the student to come to Furman and major in theatre. Surely parents and students alike would perceive this was something well worth competing for, whereas Furman would gain some good students. This proposal, put forth again in Dr. Hill's 1983 year-end report, has not yet reached fruition. The 1983 full-time theatre faculty would again find itself limited to three full-time members. Barry Kur became unavailable and was replaced by Kathleen Conlin (a director 24 and, then, assistant professor of theatre at the University of Texas at Austin, who went on to teach at Ohio University and currently chairs the Department of Theatre at The Ohio State University). Again, production costumes were rented, and local talents Wanda Gregory, Barbara Smith, and Natasha Lazar hired as part-time staff to handle hair design, lighting design, and choreography, respectively. Essentially, the curriculum and schedule remained the same, with voice, movement, and script analysis as core subjects. Citing the 1983 theatre students as a group especially weak in theatre background, Dr. Hill's 1983 report justified the faculty's consideration for spending less time on voice and speech skills and more on acting basics--thus the course in Stage Dialects was removed in favor of a course in Improvisation taught by Kathleen Conlin. Dr. Hill further emphasized that this curriculum change "did not represent any change in our philosophy, however, and should not lead to any revision of our overall goals; we merely changed methods in response to new circumstances." Students would still be introduced to "the training demands of theatre as a profession" through the training of body and voice, and they would be given the Opportunity "to synthesize the elements of theatrical training and production in culminating public performances." While a production of selected scenes had been discussed as the most equitable form of production respecting student needs, actually two scripted productions were chosen, both a collection of scenes: 1) A Sound of 25 Harpstrings Breaking (a Chekhov montage, directed by Kathleen Conlin), and 2) Shakespeare's Lovers (a collection of Shakespearean scenes, directed by Anita Cowan). Costumes were again rented and, with limited technical demands, the two simple productions allowed students more rehearsal time to focus on the application of classroom training to performance. These scripts also provided an equitable number of performance opportunities for all students. On all counts this option appeared to serve effectively the program's goals. Dr. Hill's 1983 report first called attention to the fact that the presentation of scenes proved a more effective tool for realizing the program's goals and for "meeting students' educational needs than were the more conventional plays of past years." In an effort to "maximize the theatrical impact of these presentations," Dr. Hill's report further noted the faculty's suggestions for the following support staff to replace the current procedure of hiring college students as technical assistants: 1. An individual with graduate training in design and lighting to work with stock set pieces from the Furman inventory and to serve as technical director. 2. A costume and make-up supervisor to handle the rental of costumes--perhaps an experienced undergraduate or graduate student. 3. One Furman student assistant to handle props, function as a technical assistant, and maintain control of Furman theatre resources. (AUTHOR'S NOTE. This would eliminate the need to educate an outsider in the Operations of the Furman scene shOp, thereby allowing for increased attention to the training program 26 itself. The author can attest to this consideration as a highly desirable factor: for the past ten years, William Volz of the North Carolina School of the Arts faculty has assumed the duties of technical director for the SCGSA theatre program. Although not a Furman student, once on board, Volz developed a familiarity with the Furman theatre shop and technical resources, thus contributing immensely to the ease of Operation within the theatre program.) 4. AS has been the practice, a choreographer or other guest artist as needed. Second, although no visiting guest artists participated in the 1983 theatre program, the faculty hOped some would in future years. Dr. Hill's 1983 report indicated the following faculty support for visiting artists: We endorse the idea advanced this summer of bringing in a guest artist of national stature to do a performance. Simply allowing a professional actor to interact with the students, as was done last year, is of limited value, but a first-class performance followed by a master class or a discussion session should be most rewarding. Speaking for the 1983 SCGSA theatre faculty, Dr. Hill's report concluded: We continue to believe that the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts is a program of extraordinary impact and value in the lives of our students, and we pledge our continued devotiOn to assisting you in enlarging and improving it. It is a privelege to be a part of so important a project. It was at this point in the history of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts that the recruitment process for theatre students underwent a major change. Application procedures have always consisted of two parts: 1) the written completion of a detailed application form (SEE APPENDIX B), and 2) the presentation of an audition. 27 Originally the audition required both a classical and a contemporary monologue. For admission to the 1981 and 1982 sessions, students submitted a video-taped audition. According to the "1981 South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts Prospectus Report," this video-taped audition was reviewed by a screening committee made up of a "Director of Children's Theatre, an Artistic Director of a Community Theatre, a college professor, and an instructor of theatre for talented youth." Collectively, this committee evaluated the student's "vocal inflection, diction, articulation, expression, movement, and comprehension of characterization." Recommendations were then "submitted to the (executive) director for further evaluation." In preparing for the 1983 SCGSA summer session, this recruitment procedure was altered. In a 30 November 1993 personal interview, Executive Director Virginia Uldrick explained: After the second year (1982), we knew that it was important to bring students into a live audition, and that every student who applied would be given an opportunity, fairly and squarely, to come in and be heard--not only be heard in the audition . . . but also to be interviewed and to participate in a master class. In his 28 November 1993 interview, Dr. Hill explained that, considering the lack of formal theatre training high school students had experienced, live auditions suggested as a part of the application process for the 1983 summer session would serve little purpose. He argued that a 28 careful review of the completed application forms should prove satisfactory while saving the time and costs statewide auditions would require. Nevertheless, Dr. Hill allowed that live auditions held a certain value in that "they are so widely expected that it may be appropriate to do them as a public relations gesture." Thus, doing away with the 1981 and 1982 plan of requiring the submission of a video-taped audition, SCGSA prepared for its 1983 season by conducting live auditions during the winter months in Greenville, Columbia, and Charleston, respectively. Assessing this live audition process, Dr. Hill's 1983 end-term report Offered the following suggestions for future student recruitment: 1. Limit theatre students to rising seniors: do not admit rising juniors unless our quota cannot be filled from the more mature students. 2. Eliminate all references to technical theatre in the application materials, except insofar as students list technical experience. No student should be allowed to apply as a 'technical student;' all should be regarded as 'theatre students.‘ 3. Expand the audition procedure to include an improvisation or other immediate reactive exercise, as well as a movement/voice sequence administered to groups of ten or fifteen. Such work, to do any good, must be conducted by a well-qualified individual. Due to conflicting schedules with theatre faculty during the winter months, these and successive auditions were frequently conducted and subsequently evaluated by outside assistants. The third point suggested in Hill's 1983 report was put into practice in auditioning candidates for the 1984 theatre 29 program. Robert Francesconi, an acting and movement teacher at the North Carolina School of the Arts (NCSA), was hired by Virginia Uldrick to audition prospective 1984 SCGSA theatre students at appointed locales in Greenville, Columbia, and Charleston. (Robert Francesconi has been a member of the Menagerie Mime Company, a guest instructor at several universities throughout the USA and abroad, including featured guest teacher at the 1990 International Movement Symposium in Moscow. To date he has served on the faculty of the North Carolina School of the Arts for the past eighteen years.) During the audition process, Mr. Francesconi spent a good deal of time working with the students and giving them an indication of what to expect from the program. Up to 1984, SCGSA theatre auditions required the theatre candidate to present one classical and one contemporary monologue. Mr. Francesconi's contention that untrained high school students shouldn't be expected to meet the specialized demands of a classical selection substantiated in part Dr. Hill's argument regarding expectations of novice high school theatre students. In a personal interview on 14 March 1994, he stated his views regarding the type of materials student auditionees should present: two contemporary pieces, or the kind of material that they can readily identify with and personalize. I even move it away from monologues stamped 'monologues.' It can be two pieces of literature or things they've written themselves. 30 Mr. Francesconi elaborated on the critical need to make as much contact with the prospective student during the audition process, getting as good a sense as possible of how that young person thinks, feels, and what he/she aspires to. To this end he explained: And to me, what was more important in the audition process was the interview, more than the actual audition that you see. When I first got there, all they went by was the audition. And it, in my opinion, just had no bearing on the reality of making contact with younger students in terms of what I consider pre-professional actor training. Mr. Francesconi's "interview" included working improvisationally with prospective theatre students. The fourth (1984) summer session of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts found Barry Kur returning to the theatre faculty and replacing Kathleen Conlin as voice specialist, Anita Cowan continuing as acting and movement teacher, and Dr. Philip G. Hill of the Furman theatre faculty resuming his usual teaching duties. Admiring the professional training program offered at the North Carolina School of the Arts, and equally impressed with one of its most distinguished instructor's methods in auditioning prospective SCGSA students, Executive Director Virginia Uldrick asked Robert Francesconi to join the SCGSA theatre faculty and to replace Philip G. Hill as, what Francesconi referred to, an "unofficial chair." Assuming the duties as chair of the 1984 SCGSA theatre program, Robert Francesconi deemed it necessary to turn the program away from what he called "liberal arts orientation." 31 In his March 1994 personal interview, he explained his artistic and educational vision in taking over the leadership of the SCGSA 1984 theatre program. This vision guided him in developing the program over the next several years. Briefly stated, he maintained the following: I felt that you needed to develop a program that is very specific, that trains students in the elements of the craft. And by Opening up elements of the craft, they will become more interesting people and able to ask questions from that point. Furthermore, I don't think that your focus is to demand that your students become actors. Your only demand is that they be available to become aware of the demands of the profession. And I think that our mission, as I see it, is to allow students the means to become aware of what the profession is all about. And for those chosen few, to give them very specific tools that they may use. In five weeks you will not train an actor to speak correctly or move correctly, but you will give them an awareness of what to look for as they move away into the next phase of their training. I think, above all else, if we teach them to think a little bit, to break the bounds a little bit, then we've done our job. Given the school's five-week time limit, Mr. Francesconi believed that these goals--congruent with Dr. Hill's goals of "introducing the students to the training demands of the theatre as a profession"--wou1d be better realized by focusing strictly on the process of actor training. AS he explained in his 1994 personal interview, "once you become Specific, it opens up the mind. And you're training a complete person, and you're opening up all aspects to them." In his March 1994 interview, Mr. Francesconi summarized his views regarding the ideal qualifications of the 32 prospective acting student. In recruiting potential candidates for the SCGSA theatre program from 1984 to the present date he has looked for the following individual characteristics: It's important that the student be available to be trained. They have to come in with, hopefully, a positive attitude. . . . They need to be, by nature, disciplined. You can't always tell that, but at least you let them know that's what you're looking for--people who are positive, who are disciplined, who have focus. They don't have to be actors, but just that they have a personal direction. We don't want anyone with deep psychological hangups, we don't want someone who's going there to prove their individuality. We want someone who is willing for five weeks to take a chance, and be fully committed. Now, out of thirty-six, you're lucky if one-third is all of the above. . . . the kind of students we were getting had no concepts about the craft, about the profession, about theatre at all. They did a high school play and wanted to be an actor. That has changed dramatically. Now, we are getting a very sophisticated student, very focused, very much knows what it's all about. And as a consequence, the audition process has changed dramatically. In 1984, '85, '86, we spent a great deal of time working with the student, and now we don't need to do that anymore. When questioned on what might account for this change, Mr. Francesconi noted: They have more direction, meaning the state of South Carolina has changed. There has been a huge influx of people there, and so it's become much more cosmopolitan. And the level of education in terms of the arts, in that ten year period (1984- 94), has risen dramatically, so that it's one of the few states in the Union that has a compre- hensive arts education program. And it's showing now in the students that are auditioning for the program. The outreach that we have, and all of those elements in preparing the students to come to the program or making them aware of the arts in general is something that very few states have. Commenting further on the type of ideal candidate for the 33 acting program, Mr. Francesconi was not impressed by high academic achievement alone: If anything, I'm looking for just the opposite. We're looking for someone who is a little bit of a rebel, who is a little out of the ordinary, who has a temperament, an actor's temperament. Oftentimes those are the students who don't fit into the average high school. . . . They're interesting to talk to. . . . Their aspirations may be a little different than ordinary. Oftentimes they are those students who have been separated out of the group in a traditional high school experience. Mr. Francesconi clarified his estimation of such students as not necessarily those labeled as "talented and gifted," but rather, he explained: Oftentimes they are social outcasts. . . . There is a temperament about them, an artistic temperament that is different. . . . We're not looking for polished performers. They don't need us if they have that. The above philOSOphies outlined by Mr. Francesconi were supported by Ms. Uldrick. She wanted the SCGSA theatre program to achieve what she considered the "professional" quality of actor training nationally recognized in such drama programs as those at the North Carolina School of the Arts and at The Juilliard School. Her support of his convictions guided Mr. Francesconi when, as its newly appointed chair, he endeavored to re-shape the SCGSA theatre program into a more skill-oriented actor training process, further de-emphasizing focus on production. Put simply, Mr. Francesconi stated, "I don't believe in presentation. . . . I immediately stripped out all of the public performance aspects of it." While an end-term scene workshop showcased 34 student work, Mr. Francesconi channeled his energies on developing a more structured classroom training process. Commenting on the previous production-oriented curriculum, he observed, "nothing was happening to train, to create a craft or a way of working. . . . There was no real structure." It may be interesting to recall that the idea of doing a production was mandated by the executive director during the program's inception. It was at this point--l984--that the theatre program began an intensive focus on conservatory-styled preéprofessional actor training, much like that found at the North Carolina School of the Arts, where students are trained in specific skills to pursue a career, rather than educated in a more liberal arts base of knowledge. The NCSA program had been visited and admired by SCGSA Executive Director Virginia Uldrick for its nationally renowned reputation in professional actor training. As a theatre professor in a liberal arts college, Dr. Hill believed this sort of curriculum design inapprOpriate for Governor's School. Citing the students' lack of experience, in his November 1993 personal interview he recalled his responses to this change in methodology, stating: . . . they're too young, and I think it's immoral. Because if you push them and encourage them to make a choice like that, in an environment where you know damn well they have one chance in a thousand to ever succeed, you are encouraging them to twist their lives. Dr. Hill noted that the remaining 1984 SCGSA theatre faculty took a more passive view, believing that--because the 35 students were young and with a very limited background--no matter what the curriculum claimed to be, their methods in the teaching of specific acting skills would remain the same. With two acting/movement teachers more courses were possible. As Dr. Hill observed in his 1984 end-term theatre report: Since Bob and Anita had similar backgrounds and training the most obvious instructional gains were in their areas, with students now able to enjoy nearly double the amount of work in movement and acting that could be Offered heretofore. Mr. Francesconi also brought in a number of visiting teachers from the North Carolina School of the Arts. In his March 1994 interview he explained this procedure as a means of exposing SCGSA to a broader outlook on the various aspects of actor training: I had a different guest every week, and in the schedule itself . . . we actually taught four days and one day would be special workshop days. And the guests that I brought in also did public performances. . . . it exposed the students and the school to a whole lot of people real quick. A core of four faculty members--Cowan, Francesconi, Hill, and Kur--now taught four days per week, with a fifth day reserved for guest teachers to conduct special performance workshops. The group of thirty students was split into subdivisions, "A" and "B," rotating throughout a morning and afternoon class schedule. Evenings were reserved for rehearsal of a workshOp production which showcased theatre students in a selection of scenes. Guest artists in the various disciplines also presented school-wide public 36 performances, thereby exposing the entire SCGSA student body, including theatre students, to an extensive variety of professional artists. Mr. Francesconi called for all theatre faculty to submit an end-term report on the 1984 summer session. Dr. Hill's report praised the outcomes of producing an end-term scene showcase as allowing each student: an Opportunity to focus on limited objectives that each might reasonably hope to accomplish. Serendipitously, it also allowed the students a great deal more free time to attend events in other art areas and, for those who would, to prepare their class work more carefully. It should be noted that at this point--l984--the theatre program at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts was solidifying its methodology for successfully meeting its original goals. Calling attention to the continued extensive technical support offered the 1984 theatre showcase by two highly qualified persons brought in to work full time for approximately one half of the term, Dr. Hill's 1984 end-term report stated that it has been "the unanimous judgment of every theatre faculty member in this and previous years that such elaborateness is not needed." Considering this effort as non-cost effective, it was Dr. Hill's contention that there is not sufficient time in the actor training program for students to properly benefit from technical work and that under the existing training and production practice they are "encouraged to believe that technical services should be provided by outsiders, instead of developing an 37 ensemble attitude toward production responsibilities." The elimination of students engaged in technical work clearly evidenced Hill's concern that such practice interfered with one of the program's original goals: "To synthesize the elements of theatrical training and production in culminating public performances" (15). Citing the numerous guest teachers invited by Francesconi from the North Carolina School of the Arts to conduct brief workshops, Dr. Hill further believed that the idea of commitment to professional actor training became the governing attitude of the program. Dr. Hill feared his philosophy for the theatre program was in jeopardy. He Opposed the idea of pushing students at this age to make commitments to pursuing a professional acting career. Because of the uncertainties of the profession, he expressed in his 1984 report that the "students would be much better served by a program that teaches them some of the arts and crafts of the theatre for the pure love of the art rather than for career decisions." His report further maintained: the vast majority of our students . . . are being fed false hOpes by even a suggestion of a professional career. . . . Actors need broad education, significant life experience, and a love of the whole theatrical art--there is then time enough for the most committed to begin professional acting training. Disagreeing with the more career-oriented direction that he believed the theatre program was taking as led by Robert Francesconi with the support of the executive director, in a 1 August 1984 letter to Virginia Uldrick, Dr. Hill withdrew 38 his candidacy "for any faculty position with the Governor's School for next year." Dr. Hill has not been associated with the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts since that time. From 1985 to the present date, under the Francesconi system the SCGSA theatre program has escalated to a core faculty of seven specialists. Individual subject matter may vary from year to year due to teachers' availabilities, but basic acting skills in voice, movement, and technique are always taught. The faculty usually includes three acting teachers who individually specialize in 1) Basic Technique (this includes an introduction to Stanislavski's elements of physical action, focusing on details pertaining to objective, needs, and range of given circumstances), 2) Scene Study (the application of basic technique to meet the demands of a scene regarding character needs, relationships, and subtext), and 3) Special Techniques (depending on the teacher present, the acting course in "special techniques" has varied to include improvisation, acting for the camera, or musical voice); two movement teachers, one to teach Mask, Mime, and Circus Skills, and a second to teach Tap and Modern Jazz Dance; a teacher of Voice and Speech; and a technical director who teaches a two-week course in Basic Stagecraft and who also provides support for departmental and all-school performance technical needs. The first two evenings of the program are reserved for student presentations of prepared monologues (usually the selections 39 students used to audition for the program). The author has Observed that this opportunity has proven an excellent "ice-breaker," quickly bringing faculty and students together as an ensemble. All performance core teachers are involved in evening workshops addressing specific acting needs such as "cold readings," audition techniques, and end-term scene showcase rehearsals and coaching. Mr. Francesconi strives to limit enrollment to a workable number of thirty-six theatre students which he divides into three groups of equal size: "A," "B," and "C." To keep these groups fresh, midway into the five-week schedule the groups are re-mixed. Classes are conducted between the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:45 PM with time Off for lunch. Skills classes are taught in the morning and acting classes are conducted in the afternoon. Special workshops and scene showcase rehearsals occupy evening hours. While most faculty members are involved in the evening coaching scenes, no one teaches both morning and afternoon. The basic curriculum structure has remained the same throughout Mr. Francesconi's twelve-year tenure. A calendar (APPENDIX C), outlining the timetable for the second week of the 1994 SCGSA theatre program, illustrates a typical teaching schedule for the period covering 1985 to the present date. In his 14 March 1994 interview, Robert Francesconi articulated his vision of pre-professional training and for identifying the prOper faculty to teach the more specialized curriculum that he had integrated into the development of 40 the theatre program at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts: You have to develop the faculty as you would a music program, where you have a specialist for each instrument. And it's my feeling that you shouldn't have theatre generalists that teach everything. You need the specialists for each area. And so that is the current system. . . . we have a voice and speech person, we have a dance person (which was unheard of before). I had singing at one point in the curriculum. Had various specialties in acting and in theatre movement. In 1985, '86, and I think '87, I still brought in guests to supplement the program, but . . . at that point, it became introducing the program to the outside world, and to get some feedback, back and forth, into the program. And now, at the end of my ten-year cycle here, bringing in no guests whatsoever, because we don't need it anymore. The program has matured. And now you are at the point of really wanting to focus. You don't want a lot of diffusion in the faculty, because the faculty themselves are guests. And there is only so much information you can assimilate in a given summer. The sign, for me, of the maturity of the program is . . . that the students have matured. The focus of the program has never changed since 1985, really, in theatre. It has always been the same. Faculty has changed. And with the faculty changing, maybe there have been several shifts in subject matter. But over that ten-year period, the program has matured to the point of where I really feel it is now on the verge of being truly process-oriented. . . . £13 finally understanding what that means. Beginning in 1988, Mr. Francesconi's conviction Of "bringing in no guests whatsoever" shifted a custom which had become a regular and effective procedure for the first seven years of the SCGSA theatre program. Francesconi believed that in the introductory years it was necessary to give the program visibility. He felt that a variety of visiting artists would offer a wider perspective on theatre arts for students and observers of the program to bring home 41 to their respective communities. This exercise also helped the program to find its own level and, thus, to develop fully. After four years of including visitors in the schedule, Francesconi now found the program reaching a point of what he called "maturation." He then began to concentrate on utilizing fewer guests and developing a core group of instructors that fit his idea of an effective faculty. It should be recalled that in conceiving the idea of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts, Executive Director Virginia Uldrick expressed the need to identify a non-traditional faculty (INTRODUCTION, 3-4). As she further stated in a 30 November 1993 personal interview: We believed, and still believe today, that talented young artists at the high school level must have the opportunity to study with a master artist, who may be a teacher also, but not in the traditional sense. As Francesconi mentioned regarding faculty, "you shouldn't have theatre generalists . . . You need specialists for each area" (41), so Uldrick claimed in her November 1993 interview, "traditional teachers are far more general in their instruction than specific." In his March 1994 interview, Mr. Francesconi described his vision of the ideal theatre faculty as follows: I think the true measure of a teacher is . . . practical experience that you're bringing to the subject of teaching makes you much more exciting. . . . You need people who are available, who will go the extra mile, who have wonderful experience and enthusiasm. You're looking for people who talk the same language, who have the same vision. I also think that, when I put together a group of 42 people, you're looking to give them the ball and let them run with it. Each person has got to be free to do what they do, and we try to eliminate as many barriers to that as possible. Owing to their enthusiasm in sharing a similar vision in theatre training and meeting his prerequisite of "practical experience," Mr. Francesconi has selected a core of regulars to return to the SCGSA theatre faculty over the past several years. In addition to himself as theatre program chair and instructor of mask, mime and circus skills, faculty members whom he has selected to return regularly to the SCGSA theatre program include the following: Ted Brunetti, Instructor in Scene Study. A professional actor with several New York stage and film credits. A graduate of NCSA and protege of renowned acting teacher Uta Hagen. Five years at SCGSA; Lucien Douglas, Instructor in Acting Technique. (SEE BIOGRAPHY IN INTRODUCTION, 8-10). Five years at SCGSA; Barry Kur, Instructor in Voice and Speech. Director of Voice and Speech in the Department of Theatre Arts at Penn State University and former President of the Voice And Speech Trainers' Association (VASTA). Nationally recognized expert in the Arthur Lessac system of vocal training, in addition to training under Kristin Linklater. Thirteen years at SCGSA. (Kur is the only member of Dr. Philip Hill's faculty to continue in the SCGSA theatre program after 1984); Marilyn McIntyre, Instructor in Special Acting Techniques. Extensive acting credits include Broadway, Off-Broadway, and regional theatre credits. Daytime Television contract 43 player for six years. Recipient of Dramalogue and LA Drama Critics' Circle Acting Awards. Member of theatre faculty at University of Southern California. MFA from Penn State University. Seven years at SCGSA; Mollie Murray, Instructor in Modern and Jazz Dance. Member of drama faculty at NCSA. Several Broadway musical credits. Professional dance training in New York. Master class teacher at major schools in Russia including the Moscow Art Theatre. Twelve years at SCGSA; and William Volz, Instructor in Stagecraft and SCGSA Technical Director. Professional technical director and consultant for numerous industrial shows, sports events, and symphonic concerts. An instructor in the Department of Design and Production at NCSA and North Carolina regional Officer in the stagehands' union, IATSE. Twelve years at SCGSA. Meticulous attention to teacher qualifications helped create for the SCGSA theatre program a faculty that Mr. Francesconi considers: the right mix in terms Of personality, we have especially the right mix in terms of subjects being taught. . . . And we're at a point where it is not so compartmentalized. . . . we do dance, we do voice and speech, we do acting, we do improv, we do masks--but the vocabulary is absolutely the same. A review of Mr. Francesconi's March 1994 interview lists the following teacher qualifications: 1. Practical experience in one's art. 2. An availability to go the extra mile. 3. Enthusiasm for teaching in a specialized area. 4. Shared vision and common language among colleagues. 5. A compatible mix of personalities among 44 colleagues. Having set a core faculty that has established an effective collaboration, Mr. Francesconi recognizes the danger that the program can become "complacent." As he stated in his March 1994 interview, "Sometimes it gets too comfortable, and that's when you probably need to bring in someone new. . . . there always should be an obstacle to overcome. In this regard, having avoided the practice of bringing guest artists into the program between the years of 1988 and 1992, Mr. Francesconi justified his 1993 decision to invite two distinguished theatre artists to visit in the fourth week of that summer's theatre program. He further explained: It wasn't that we were tired or anything, but we needed someone to come in and confirm what we do, because we've been doing it for a long period of time. And we needed someone to confirm it to the outside world. I wanted someone who was knowledgable about the business to say to everyone around us and ourselves, 'This is the way it's supposed to be.‘ Accordingly, Mr. Francesconi invited Gerald Freedman, Artistic Director of the Great Lakes Theatre Festival in Ohio and Dean of Drama at the North Carolina School of the Arts, and Robert Beseda, a graduate of The Juilliard School's Drama Division, former theatrical agent, and currently Assistant Dean of Drama at North Carolina School Of the Arts, to spend two days observing SCGSA theatre Classes, giving an informance lecture, and teaching a scene Study workshop. In discussing the art of acting and in Offering critical evaluations of SCGSA theatre students' 45 scene work, Freedman and Beseda frequently employed similar examples and acting terms used by SCGSA faculty. Students again heard terms such as "objective," "action," "physicalization of emotion," and "given circumstances." The author was present and can attest to the experience as especially enriching, as students quickly saw their SCGSA training quickly confirmed by two guests highly esteemed for their professional achievements. Specific responses that Freedman and Beseda had to the SCGSA theatre program are highlighted in respective interviews discussed in Chapter Four of this study. This sense of totality with various elements working together as a part of the whole defines the Francesconi philosophy of actor training. Dedicated to working continually to prevent classes from being "pigeon-holed," in future sessions Mr. Francesconi would like to see more class time discussion about the craft of acting. As the students continue to become more articulate about their work, he strives to cultivate this aspect of the training which helps the student to think. Briefly stated, Mr. Francesconi1 explained, "I want to see more awareness. Them being able to talk about the craft, about the process. I think that's the major goal." Francesconi's vision for the program's future extends the original goals of the SCGSA theatre program as set forth by Dr. Hill in 1981: To introduce the students to the training demands of the theatre as a profession. . . . students will have been introduced to theatre at a sophisticated level. . . . they will be able to 46 make considered judgments for themselves as to their future commitment to theatre. While methodologies have changed, actual program goals have remained the same. Desired outcomes have sought to leave students more cognizant of their individual potentials. They should leave the program with a stronger foundation for achievement, avoiding the trap of simple emotional gratification. In its questionnaire-based examination of student responses assessing the effects of SCGSA actor training on their academic and career choices, Chapter Three of this study offers insight into the philosophical concerns outlined in this chapter. 47 CHAPTER TWO SURVEY METHODOLOGY To fulfill this study's purpose of examining the effects of pre-professional actor training on students at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts, a survey was conducted. It utilized a specially designed questionnaire to survey longitudinally students from five of the fourteen theatre classes graduated from the School. Employing a triangulation process, the questionnaires were mailed to former students requesting their responses to participating in the SCGSA theatre program. In order to develop a reputable survey, the author followed the methodologies for questionnaire construction, procedures and mailings, and the determination of an acceptable response rate as outlined below. On conducting an effective survey, nationally recognized educational research authors Walter R. Borg of Utah State University and Meredith Damien Gall of Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development observe: As a rule, if careful attention is given to the design of the questionnaire, the letter of transmittal, and the follow-up letter, a sufficient percentage of subjects will respond. In cases where a very high percentage of response is required, it may be necessary to conduct further follow-ups using different approaches. A second follow-up letter will generally bring in a few percent of the sample but if a new approach is used, it might bring in the additional cases needed. .On some occasions as many as four follow-up letters are used (431). George J. Mouly of the University of Miami expresses the 48 need for the author to have a "thorough grasp of the field" (245) as the first step in creating a questionnaire. Given his extensive background as an acting teacher and his experience as a five-year member of the SCGSA theatre faculty, the author felt confidently prepared in this regard. Respecting the validity of the questionnaire, Mouly states, ". . . each question must be related to the topic under investigation; there must be an adequate coverage of the overall tOpic; the questions must be clear and unambiguous, etc." (254). Additionally, on the topic of validity, John W. Best, Emeritus of Butler University, and James V. Kahn of the University of Illinois at Chicago maintain: Basic to the validity of the questionnaire is asking the right questions phrased in the least ambiguous way. In other words, do the items sample a significant aspect of the purpose of the investigation (179)? In general, researchers call for the obvious need for the questionnaire to be attractive in its format, easy to read, unambiguous, and designed to minimize errors. It Should be easy to complete, hence, it should incorporate a variety of answer formats and include a sufficient number of open-ended questions to evoke personal and truthful responses. With these principles in mind, a questionnaire and accompanying materials were prepared (APPENDICES D and E). The questionnaire consisted of forty-one (41) questions printed in Times Roman typeface. Thirty-one (31) were closed-ended questions and ten (10) were Open-ended. To 49 maintain respondents' interest and to provide ease in answering, questions were arranged in groupings with a variety of answer formats: circling the best response, rating on a scale of one to ten, rating according to level of agreement, and open-ended questions interspersed throughout. The questionnaire was designed specifically to fulfill the purpose of this study, namely, to examine the effects of pre-professional actor training at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. Accordingly, question tOpics addressed the program's philosophy, teaching objectives, and projected outcomes (SEE INTRODUCTION, 2-4; CHAPTER ONE, 14-16). Questions essentially surveyed the following five principle areas: A. Student personal vitae. B. Theatre faculty and instruction. C. Visiting professional artists. D. The overall effect of the program on students' future academic and career choices. E. The overall effects of the program as a "non-traditional" learning experience. To reinforce the triangulation process, thereby validating the accuracy of the study, certain questions were repeated with a variation in phrasing. For example, to assess faculty impact on personal student growth, the topic was questioned in the following manner: QUESTION #202 On a scale of l to 10 (1 being “poor” and 10 considered 'excellent'), how would you rate . . . 50 Your instructors' dedication to helping you personally develop your arts ability? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 QUESTION #208 Overall, would you say you would have benefitted from: A. more individual instruction B. more group participation C. the balance was about right QUESTION #502 The instructors in the program made me feel my participation and development were important to them. A. Agree Strongly B. Agree Somewhat C. Disagree Somewhat D. Disagree Strongly Restated in these three ways, the question attempted to focus the respondent's attention on evaluating his/her personal development in direct relation to faculty instruction and guidance. Similarly, to appraise the value of supplementing core faculty by enlisting short-term visiting professional theatre celebrities, the following three questions were put forth: QUESTION #406 The presence of well-known professional theatre celebrities . . . A. made a big difference B. made some difference C. did not make much difference Why do you say that? QUESTION #503 A one or two-day Master Class with a visiting artist is significantly beneficial to the program as a whole. A. Agree Strongly B. Agree Somewhat C. Disagree Somewhat D. Disagree Strongly 51 QUESTION #505 A one or two-day Master Class by a visiting artist is good, but I still value more the regular faculty instruction over the term. A. Agree Strongly B. Agree Somewhat C. Disagree Somewhat D. Disagree Strongly Like strategy guided questions concerning the length of the program: QUESTION #403 I would say that the five-week term for the program was . . . A. too long (If A or B, go to B. too short QUESTION #404) C. just about right QUESTION #404 A better length for the program would be . QUESTION #506 A five-week program is just not long enough for lasting benefit. A. Agree Strongly B. Agree Somewhat C. Disagree Somewhat D. Disagree Strongly Additionally, three of the forty-one survey questions related the effects of SCGSA actor training to the student's academic performance and personal educational goals: QUESTION #302/303 No matter what your profession or course of study now may be, did your training and/or experience at SCGSA in any way influence your further academic and/or career choices? A. Yes B. No If yes, how so? . QUESTION #304 After your experience at SCGSA, would you say that your academic performance . . . A. Improved B. Went down C. Remained the same 52 QUESTION #604 As a result of your experience and training at Governor's School, would you say that your interest in furthering your education . . . A. was enhanced B. remained the same C. diminished Rephrasing questions around a similar theme allowed for a more thorough appraisal and validation of what were deemed especially critical tOpics. Questionnaire mailings were carried out according to the following steps. All related materials used in the mailings can be found in APPENDIX D. Step 1. On Monday, March 28, 1994 a mailing was directed to the one hundred twenty-four (124) combined alumni of the 1982, 1985, 1988, and 1991 theatre programs at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. This mailing contained two items: 1) a "pre-contact letter," and 2) a returnable "address correction postcard." The pre-contact letter explained that a doctoral dissertation researching the effects of pre-professional actor training on students' future academic and career path choices was being conducted by a PhD candidate in theatre at Michigan State University. Due to the candidate's affiliation with the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts, the risk of biasing potential respondents' comments necessitated the need for anonymity: therefore, albeit authored by the researcher with text appproved according to regulations by the Michigan State University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS), the pre-contact letter 53 was signed by Dr. Virginia Uldrick, Executive Director of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. Ms. Uldrick's name would be respected by recipients, thereby calling additional attention to the value of the study. Alerting these former theatre students to the forthcoming arrival of an "information request form," the pre-contact letter affirmed the value of alumni participation in the survey. It also requested the return of the enclosed, pre-addressed, stamped postcard on which potential respondents were to check one of two statements: either, 1) "I look forward to participating in this study, understanding complete confidentiality is assured me," or 2) "I do not wish to participate." The postcard also provided space to note necessary address corrections. Of the one hundred twenty-four (124) initial mailings, a total of twenty-four (24) postcards were returned. Of these, all twenty-four (24) indicated a willingness to participate, and twenty-three (23) specified address changes. No postcards were returned indicating "I do not wish to participate." Accordingly, this was accepted as an invitation to mail questionnaires to all one hundred twenty-four (124) potential respondents. Step 2. The first mailing of questionnaires began upon receipt of postcard returns, with all one hundred twenty-four (124) questionnaire first-mailings concluded on Friday, April 15, 1994. Included with the questionnaire was a cover letter accounting for this previously announced 54 survey and requesting a return of the completed questionnaire by Monday, April 25, 1994. Pre-addressed, stamped envelopes were also included for mailing the return. To maintain the researcher's anonymity, the cover letter was also signed by Virginia Uldrick, Executive Director of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. All questionnaires and return envelopes were identified by a numbering process. For example, number 8514 represented the first questionnaire mailing to the fourteenth student alphabetically listed on the 1985 class roster. Any required second and third questionnaire mailings to this individual were further identified by placing the numbers two (2) or three (3) in front of the initial identifying number. Hence, a second mailing to individual number 8514 became 28514; a third mailing to this individual became 38514. This procedure was repeated to identify all mailings. As of Saturday, April 30, 1994 the first mailing had elicited thirty-six (36) completed responses. Sixteen (l6) mailings were returned to the sender by the post office, stamped as either "Address Unknown" or "Forwarding Order Expired." Thus, as of April 30, 1994 it was estimated that of the one hundred twenty-four (124) questionnaires mailed initially, one hundred eight (108) questionnaires actually reached their destinations. With thirty-six (36) completed responses in hand, that left seventy-two (72) potential respondents remaining in the field. Step 3. As stated, on April 30, 1994 a postcard 55 "follow-up" was mailed to the remaining seventy-two (72) potential respondents. Considering the subjects are a specific market, prior to a second questionnaire mailing the postcard was employed for a follow-up. Its purpose could be readily determined by any reader: thus, it might speedily make up for lack of attention paid to all previous mailings. The postcard noted the initial questionnaire mailing, suggesting that a postal delay or lack of clarity in instructions may have prevented the individual from responding by the requested date of April 25, 1994. This return date was now extended to May 14, 1994. (This would allow time for any necessary forwarding of mail due to the likelihood of continued discrepancies in correct addresses as yet unknown to the researcher). Restating the potential value of this research, the postcard also pointed out acknowledgment of the study by the offices of U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley and South Carolina Governor Carroll A. Campbell, Jr., respectively. This follow-up generated nine (9) completed questionnaire responses and three (3) postcard returned stamped "Address Unknown." It was calculated that the first questionnaire mailing resulted in an overall response of forty-five (45) out of a potential one hundred five (105) respondents, thus equivalent to a first-mailing response rate of 43 percent. Step 4. A second questionnaire mailing was prepared for Monday, May 18, 1994. It incorporated the following professional considerations. Respecting questionnaire 56 returns, former Duke University professor Max Engelhart stated, "It is widely accepted that questionnaires sent to the alumni of a university are less likely to be returned by those who are relatively unsuccessful (97)." Although not a "university," the targeted market are indeed alumni of a rather sophisticated arts education program, in addition to being identified among the "gifted and talented" within the reach of their year-round secondary schools. The forty-five (45) questionnaires returned to date were noted to be completed by respondents who indicated that they either had attended or were currently enrolled in higher education programs and were intent on pursuing professional careers. Engelhart's statement and this current data were influential in devising tactics for the second questionnaire mailing. It was deemed essential that alumni of all occupations should recognize that each and every response was vital to the sum total of tabulated data. It was necessary to reaffirm the value of comments from all potential respondents. Therefore, all future follow-up cover letters would omit academic jargon in favor of a more down to earth approach. Letters would simply confirm the importance of learning the thoughts of all theatre program alumni. Accordingly, the questionnaire was mailed a second time on Monday, May 18, 1994 to all non-respondents. The re-worded cover letter also bore the signature of Virginia Uldrick. This second questionnaire mailing requested a return by Monday, May 30, 1994. Seventeen (17) responses indicated a 57 response rate of 28 percent. At this point, it is worth noting that the survey response rates to date (43 percent on the first questionnaire mailing and 28 percent on the second questionnaire mailing) closely mirrored an observation made by L. R. Gay of Florida International University: Research suggests that first mailings will typically result in close to a 50 percent return rate, and a second mailing will increase the percentage by about 20 percent (260). Step 5. A third questionnaire mailing was conducted on June 1, 1994. As a new tactic, a more casual cover letter bore the signature of Dr. John Baldwin, then Chair of the Department of Theatre at Michigan State University. Returns were requested by Monday, June 13, 1994. This mailing resulted in one (1) item returned stamped "Address Unknown" and one (1) completed response, thereby indicating a response rate of 2 percent. As of June 18, 1994, sixty-three (63) responses out of a potential one hundred-four (104) respondents registered a total response rate of 61 percent. An attempt was made to locate non-respondents. SCGSA newsletters listed the names of these individuals, requesting information leading to accurate addresses and telephone numbers. Governor's School office staff made additional eforts to secure correct addresses. The search offered no success. Regarding additional follow-ups, Borg and Gall note, "a few of the studies reviewed used four or more follow-ups, but this did not lead to a significant 58 increase in returns over three follow-ups" (432-33). Accordingly, Engelhart states: In many questionnaire studies less than 50 percent of the recipients complete and return the questionnaire received. Such a small percentage of return would not be so serious a matter if the sample of the respondents were representative of the population to which the questionnaire is sent. Unfortunately the representatives of the respondents is seldom known and one can usually safely assume that the sample is biased (96-97). In view of this concern for respondents to be "representative of the population to which the questionnaire was sent," Borg and Gall allow that a sufficient number of responses should transcend the 70 percent mark "unless evidence is presented to show that the respondents are representative of the population from which they are drawn" (433). Because prospective candidates for the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts are interviewed and/or auditioned from an elite group of gifted and talented students nominated by faculty and guidance counselors in their respective secondary schools, all respondents may be treated as representative of the survey population, thus lessening any degree of bias. The fourteenth summer program of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts was in session from Monday June 27, 1994 through Saturday, July 30, 1994. Thirty- six (36) theatre students were in attendance. To survey this most recent group, the following steps were taken. Step 1. On Tuesday, July 19, 1994, the thirty-six (36) students in the theatre program were given each a 59 personally addressed pre-contact letter informing them of this particular study and of the arrival in the mail of an information request form following their return home from Governor's School. To maintain the researcher's anonymity, the letter was again signed by SCGSA Executive Director Virginia Uldrick. The pre-contact letters were distributed by a theatre faculty member other than the researcher. Enclosed in each letter was a postcard requesting willingness to participate in the study and the need to note any address corrections. Of the thirty-six (36) postcards distributed, twenty-eight (28) were returned postcards. They all marked a willingness to participate. Step 2. On Monday, August 1, 1994 questionnaires were mailed to the thirty-six (36) 1994 theatre alumni. The cover letter, signed by Virginia Uldrick, indicated the previously mentioned form was enclosed, acknowledged the importance of student participation, and requested the return of the completed form by Monday, August 15, 1994. A pre-addressed stamped envelope was enclosed for returns. Of the thirty-six (36) potential respondents, thirty-one (31) completed responses were received, thus indicating a total response rate of 86 percent for the 1994 theatre students. Table 1 illustrates individual class response rates. (All-inclusive questionnaire mailing statistics can be found in Table 18, APPENDIX F). 60 Table 1. RESPONSE RATE PER THEATRE CLASS Class Responses Response Rate Per Class / Per Overall 1982 5 45% / 5% 1985 18 64% / 19% 1988 18 55% / 19% 1991 22 69% / 23% 1994 31 86% / 33% With regard to determining a credible response rate, various researchers offer the following Opinions. George J. Mouly of the University of Miami observes: Shannon (1948) reports an average of 65 percent return for 'reputable' questionnaire studies reported in a sample of theses, dissertations, and professional articles (256). Robert M. W. Travers of Western Michigan University notes: and, Best A questionnaire of some interest to the recipient may be expected to show only a 20 per cent return, even when the conditions are favorable. If nonrespondents are contacted a second and a third time, the return may be increased to 30 per cent. Only rarely does it reach the 40 per cent level (199-200). and Kahn state: It is difficult to estimate, in the abstract, what percentage of questionnaire responses is to be considered adequate. . . . Babbie (1973) suggests that a response rate of 50 percent is adequate, 60 percent good, and 70 percent very good (178). Overall, researchers referred to in this chapter have indicated the following figures as worthy response rates: Borg and Gall, 70 percent; Best and Kahn, 60 percent; Engelhart, 50 percent: Gay, 70 percent; Mouly, 65 percent; 61 and Travers, 30 percent. Calculating an average of these suggested rates would appear to signify a response rate of 58 percent as offering sufficient data for drawing estimable conclusions. The combined responses of ninety-four (94) out of a potential one hundred forty (140) respondents indicates a total 67 percent response rate from all five theatre classes surveyed. Based on the established data concerning mailed questionnaire survey statistics in the area of educational research, this percentage was judged highly respectable to complete the study and justify/validate its conclusions. 62 CHAPTER THREE SURVEY RESPONSES TO SCGSA ACTOR TRAINING The information gathered from the questionnaire survey is the focus of this study. All responses are to be viewed as descriptive statistics reflecting the effects of the pre-professional actor training utilized by the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts to introduce students to the training demands of theatre as a profession. As discussed in Chapter Two (50-53), to validate responses a process of triangulation posed questions relating to specific tOpics in a variety of ways. To employ this methodology to its best advantage, this chapter will organize all data for examination according to the five principal areas of investigation as outlined in Chapter Two (50). A sequential listing of all data can be found in Appendix G (164-211). Before inspecting the data concerning student responses to SCGSA actor training, some demographic information citing respondents' hometown size, age, and male/female ratio will be noted. DEMOGRAPHICS. Hometown size. Of the ninety-four (94) respondents, forty-two (42), or 45 percent, indicated a hometown population of 50,000 or more; twenty (20), or 21 percent, indicated a hometown population ranging from 10,000 to 50,000: twenty-four (24), or 26 percent, indicated a 63 hometown population ranging from 2,500 to 10,000; and eight (8), or 9 percent indicated a hometown pOpulation indicated a hometown pOpulation of 2,500 or less. Age range. Respondents ranged in age from sixteen (16) years old to twenty-nine (29) years old. Twenty-three (23), or 24 percent of all respondents, fell into the 25-29 year-old range; forty (40), or 43 percent, fell into the 19-24 year-Old range; and, thirty-one (31), or 33 percent, fell into the 16-17 year-old range. Male/female ratio. Of the one hundred forty (140) potential respondents, fifty-five (55), or 39 percent, were men; and eighty-five (85), or 61 percent, were women. Of these numbers, thirty-one (31), or 56 percent of all men, and sixty-three (63), or 74 percent of all women, responded to the survey. It can be calculated that, of these ninety-four (94) actual respondents, 33 percent were men and 67 percent were women. Table 2 (following page) shows a breakdown of demographics. 64 Table 2 . DEMOGRAPHICS Demographic Pct. of Respondents Hometown Population Rural to 2,500 85% 2,500 to 10,000 258% 10,000 to 50,000 21% 50,000 to 150,000 45% Age range 25 - 29 years old 24% 19 - 24 years Old 43% 16 - 17 years old 33% Male/Female Ratio Men 33% Women 67% 65 Referring to the five principal areas of investigation, 'the following information was tabulated: A. STUDENT PERSONAL VITAE. This section includes Questions 101-108. Responses to Question 101, how students found out about the program, can be found in Table 3. Table 3. HOW RESPONDENTS LEARNED ABOUT THE PROGRAM Question Response/Percentage 101. How did you find out about the program? High School School SCGSA CLASS Teacher Counselor Graduate Other 1982 80% 20% -- -- 1985 61% 11% 5% 17% 1988 55% -- 28% 17% 1991 32% -- 55% 18% 1994 19% 10% 52% 23% Question 102 asked how students regarded the enrollment procedure and audition process. In answer, 98 percent of all respondents regarded the process as ”adequate," 1 percent registered it as "inadequate," and 1 percent left this question unanswered. The next three questions related to the respondents' current level of education, as follows: Question 103. Are you currently a student?; Question 104. If so, where?; and Question 105. If not, what was your last year of completed 66 education? Question 103, regarding student/non-student status, discovered of all ninety-four (94) respondents, seventy-one (71), or 76 percent, are currently students: while the remaining twenty-three (23), or 24 percent, are not. Referring to Question 104, thirty-one (31), or 33 percent of all respondents, are in high school: and forty (40), or 43 percent, are pursuing higher education. Referring Specifically to the twenty-three (23) respondents no longer in school, Question 105 revealed that all twenty-three (23) attended higher education. Of these, twenty (20), or 21 percent of all respondents, earned undergraduate degrees; and three (3), or 3 percent, went on to earn graduate degrees. (Career choices of these respondents are discussed in Question 303. As a side note to the current analysis, it is interesting to observe that twelve (12), or 60 percent of the twenty (20) college graduates listed degrees in theatre). Table 4 illustrates the current academic status of all ninety-four (94) respondents. Table 4. RESPONDENTS' CURRENT ACADEMIC STATUS Response Percentage High School Student (1994 SCGSA alumni) 33% Higher Education 43% Non-student (attended institutions 24% of higher education) 67 The next three questions referred to specific areas of study for the 76 percent of respondents currently in school. In response to Question 106, If in school, are you currently enrolled in an arts program?, twenty-one (21), or 22 percent of all respondents, indicated they are enrolled in high school arts programs; ten (10), or 11 percent, are enrolled in high school non-arts programs: nineteen (19), or 20 percent, are enrolled in higher education arts programs; and twenty-one, or 22 percent, are enrolled in higher education non-arts programs. Regarding the forty (40) students currently enrolled in an arts program, Question 107 asked, What art discipline is your particular area Of study? In response, twenty-one (21) high school students listed the following areas of artistic study: 12 in theatre, 4 in theatre and music, 2 in theatre and creative writing, 1 in theatre, dance and music, 1 in creative writing, and l in music. Nineteen (19) higher education students listed the following areas of artistic study: 13 in theatre, 2 in media arts, 1 in dance, 1 in creative writing, 1 in music, and l in film. SpecifiCally, nineteen (19), or 61 percent of all high school respondents, are studying theatre; and thirteen (13), or 33 percent of all higher education students, are studying theatre. Regarding those students 222 enrolled in an arts program, Question 108 asked, What is your particular area Of study? Ten (10) students currently in high school listed the following non-arts areas of study: 3 in general studies, 68 2 in biology and a foreign language, 1 in the honors curriculum, 1 in college preparatory, 1 in psychology and calculus, and 2 were unanswered. Twenty-one (21) students currently in higher education listed the following non-arts areas of study: 4 in English, 2 in business administration, 2 in law, 2 in marketing, 2 in psychology, and 1 each in accounting, education, industrial engineering, journalism, mathematics, medicine, nursing, sociology, and urban planning. Table 5 illustrates all respondents' arts and non-arts academic interests. Table 5. RESPONDENTS CURRENT ACADEMIC INTERESTS Academic Level/Area of Study Percentage High School 33% Theatre 20% Other arts 2% Non-arts 11% Higher Education 43% Theatre 14% Other arts 6% Non-arts 22% Non-students (all attended college) 24% Degree in Theatre 13% Degree in other areas 8% Left college 3% Summary. Of all ninety-four (94) respondents to the survey, approximately three-fourths are currently in school. The remaining quarter have all attended higher education. Nearly one-half of all respondents are currently enrolled in 69 arts programs; approximately one-third are enrolled in theatre studies; and about one out of every eight have earned a degree in theatre. B. THEATRE FACULTY AND INSTRUCTION. This section includes Questions 201-209 and 502. Respondents were asked a total of ten closed-ended questions evaluating theatre faculty. Additionally, Question 701, an Open-ended question asking for specific events, people, etc., that were of particular influence on students enrolled in the SCGSA theatre program, frequently elicited comments on theatre faculty. Questions 201-207 asked respondents to rate theatre faculty in various proficiencies on a scale of l - 10 (1 being ”poor" and 10 considered "excellent"). It is understandable that the 1994 respondents might be somewhat prejudiced in their responses due to having participated in the program only a few weeks prior to completing the questionnaire. Therefore--because faculty selection was a critical issue in designing the SCGSA theatre program--to further check survey reliability and validity, responses to Questions 201-207 were tabulated exclusive/inclusive of the 1994 answers. This information is found in Table 6 (following page). A detailed breakdown of this data as recorded per theatre class can be found in Appendix G (166- 7). 70 m x a lam Has AN \ mm me as .aamom cauaomam o>oaaum cu accommou maaxuos .hcm m \ 4 Ana may a \ ma mm mm .omauuooxo guacammoOoum .Go~ N \ m Ema has m \ AH om mm .xuo: new ammamaaoau .mcm m \ m lam may mm \ mm so am .aoau aooauon .mmmsmamH menu anon». on SDAHAS< .vom o x a 1mm Has am \ mm mm mm .50» on Hmauuoma on» munowcsaaoo O» auwawnd .mo~ OH x as law may mm \ mm as mm .saamaomuma so» mag (mum: 0» coaomuaoon .~o~ A \ H 1mm may mm x mm ma mm .mmm:o>auomoom Hamuo>o .Hom lemma m>amsaocH \ amma m>amsfloxmc mommucmoumm lzflmnufi Into: Aaumc Amie: Hoom\uwmm AUOSMAEOOV oOOO uamddmoxm OH i H oamom CO mafiumm wocmflowwoum uouoouumcH wUZHBo :Owuoswuncw huaooou Hoaomou man once ad we wmm mmo osam> Haauu H non .ooom ma umfiuun mcwuwmw> m an mumdu wouOMI zoo 03» no one < .mcm .Eoumoum ozu ou in wn mom mam Howowuocon haucoowmwcmwn ow unwoum maauama> a no“: «undo Hmummz hop 03» HO 0:0 4 .mcm xamcouum umczmeom umn3meom mamcouum omummmwo moummmao omumd omumm omnucoouom\mmCOQmmm SOADmosO mm copaomoco and mocmuwmmao nose uoz mmv mocmuwwmao meow mam mocmumuuan man a "Dona mowuwunmflmo ouummnu HOOOwnmmm loam :SOstHHwa mo mocwmmum was .wov mmmucmoumm mmcommmm “c0wummoo mmHBHmmmqu A .m OHDGB 81 D. THE OVERALL EFFECT OF THE PROGRAM ON STUDENTS' FUTURE ACADEMIC AND CAREER CHOICES. This section incudes Questions 302, 303, 304, 604. Question 302 asked, NO matter what your profession or course of study now may he, did your training and/or experience at SCGSA in any way influence your further academic and/or career choices? In answer, 86 percent of all respondents claimed that it did, 12 percent said it did not, and 2 percent withheld an answer. In regard to those respondents who believed their SCGSA experience HES influenced their academic and/or career choices, open-ended Question 303 asked, How 80?. Largely, recalling the limitations of their secondary school experiences, respondents' typical answers suggest that five weeks of residing on the Furman University campus provided a glimpse of college life. Participants generally praised the Opportunity for intense training and concentrated exposure to theatre arts. They also credited SCGSA faculty for teaching the importance of setting personal goals that challenge young people to achieve their potential. Beginning with their SCGSA theatre training, they recognize the need to broaden their education. Having sharpened their academic and career focus, respondents point out a strengthening of their individuality and an inspiration to "aggressively" pursue academic courses in order to "learn everything possible." Overall, participants in the program acknowledge not only an enhanced awareness of 82 the value of the arts, but also value of education. As one respondent replied to Question 303, "I am now willing to take academics more seriously so that a theatre career can be taken more seriously." Similar comments include: It recommended as broad of (an) education as possible in order to experience the world around me. I thought once I graduated I wanted to go straight to a conservatory--I learned that a broader education could be of more use, possibly then go to a conservatory. I've decided not to attend a conservatory school, like NCSA. I am pursuing a career in acting on daytime television; however, if that changes, I will always have the experience from GSA to push myself to my new goal and even beyond that. It also inspired me to aggressively pursue my academic courses and learn all I could to supplement my acting. Contemplating theatre arts as a possible career goal, respondents also credit their SCGSA experience for encouraging their pursuit of arts studies in higher education. In answering Opened-ended Question 303, 40 percent of all respondents elected to mention that, through participation in the SCGSA theatre program, they found confirmation of theatre arts as a viable career choice. Characteristic statements include: Before GSA, I thought I wanted to make a career in theatre. After, GSA, I was positive, and have not altered since. I'm more seriously considering studying theatre in college and I know what to look for in a program now . It has proven to me that I want to continue 83 studying theatre; hopefully to major in theatre in college. I'm definitely going to pursue professional acting. It helped to know what kind of options are out there as far as the dramatic arts field goes. . . . I plan on following through with it. It gave me a better awareness of the techniques of theatre and acting. It gave me a more professional and up front look at the art. Everything was right there in front of me, instead of it being distant and vague. The instructors made the ideas crystal clear. I am now sure I want to pursue acting and theatre as a career. On the other hand, 8% percent of all respondents accounted for a decision to change career plans. Among their explanations: The realistic picture I got from GSA helped me decide to put some unrealistic dreams aside for a while so I can broaden my experiences as a person. I realized, after SCGSA, that I had no interest in professional theatre work. The program is good at presenting the "job" side of theatre. I definitely realize how enormous the decision of a career in the theatre is and have decided to begin with a liberal arts education. I know now that I definitely don't want to be an actor. My training at Governor's School helped me realize that my real interest is in people and that English and creative writing suit me well. While respondents typically credit the program for preparing them to pursue theatre in higher education, in answering Question 303 they also acknowledged specific outcomes beyond artistic skills. Generally, these include 84 communication skills, social skills, and heightened self-confidence. Consider the following responses to Question 303: SCGSA opened my eyes to much more than theatre. It looks at people, the individuals, and you learn about working towards goals. I learned how to use my voice and body in ways that improve my overall appearance. But most importantly I learned how/why people think/feel the way they do--and how to respect that. Gave me ideas how to diversify my talents towards working areas in business and theatre. Helped me to focus and heightened my interest in a variety of areas--exposed me to more intense learning. and, representative of those students who attend SCGSA for reasons other than interest in an arts career, the following comment is especially worth noting: I've always wanted to become a lawyer, but I never had the drive until my summer at SCGSA. The Governor's School made me give my all, not only to theatre, but to everything I do. I'm a sophomore now at Wake Forest University, and I can tell you without any doubts that I will become a lawyer and SCGSA deserves some of the credit. As previously noted in response to Question 103 (67), twenty-three'(23), or 24 percent of all SCGSA alumni surveyed, are no longer in school. Of this number, in response to Question 303, twelve (12), or 52 percent of out-of-school respondents, state having earned a college degree in theatre. Of these twelve, Six (6) mention working currently in arts-related careers and six (6) mention working in non-arts careers. Involved in either professional or academic theatre work, those working in 85 arts-related careers highlight the following personal achievements: I helped in initiating the ABC (Arts in Basic Curriculum) program in South Carolina. This program is an effort to keep the arts alive in schools for all ages. In this program I aided in developing the theatre/drama curriculum. I recall(ed) things experienced at SCGSA almost everyday in high school and in college. I especially (now) use what I learned in my teaching (middle school art and drama). Due to the experience I had, I have now become part of the management team of the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theatre. My experiences at SCGSA . . . encouraged me to pursue a career in the arts. . . . AS a result, I am now teaching, performing, and helping to coordinate the Outreach Dept. of the McCarter Theatre Center for the Performing Arts in Princeton, NJ. The remaining six (6) out-of-school respondents, those holding college degrees in theatre and presently working in non-arts careers, honored their SCGSA training for boosting their professional efficiency. Generally these respondents referred to the acquisition of transferable skills as highly beneficial to their work. They include communication skills, self-confidence, and the ability to apply artistic creativity and talent in fields such as business. Accordingly, these respondents maintain: In my chosen field of marketing sales, my training at SCGSA prepared me with the communication skills I will need. I knew I wouldn't become a professional actor, but that I was talented and able to work well up front of an audience--I'm now a Youth Minister and Conference speaker. I majored in theatre in college and I am currently 86 an advertising executive. I am presently employed with a law firm where I am Public Services Coordinator. In this position, I am constantly writing proposals, making presentations, and coordinating special events. It is my opinion that without my experiences at Governor's School, I would not have acquired the self-confidence, artistic expression and public speaking Skills that are required in my position. Regarding studies beyond SCGSA, Question 304 asked, After your experience at SCGSA, would you say that your academic performance . . . improved, went down, or remained the same? In reply, fifty-five (55), or 59 percent of all respondents, maintained their academic performance "improved"; thirty-six (36), or 38 percent, stated it "remained the same"; and three (3), or 3 percent of all respondents, withheld a decision. These 3 percent accounted for respondents from the SCGSA class of 1994 who had not yet returned to high school, and, therefore, had no concrete way of measuring their subsequent academic performance. Of this 3 percent response to Question 304, one 1994 respondent noted, "I haven't started back to school yet, but I imagine it will." Taking into account that 50 percent of Open-ended respondents to Question 303 elected to mention a desire for continued study and training to broaden their education in general, it only can be conjectured that these thirty-one (31) participants from the class of 1994 might bring more committed efforts to their academic studies. A more proper analysis to this question lies in an examination of those sixty-three (63) respondents who had already returned to school (1982-1991). In this regard, the next youngest class 87 (1991) had been back to their academic studies for three (3) years beyond their SCGSA training. Table 10 gives a detailed look at per class responses to SCGSA influence on academic performance. Table 10. SCGSA INFLUENCE ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE Question Response/Percentage 304. After your experience at SCGSA, would you say that your academic performance . . . CLASS Improved Went down Remained No reply the same 1982 80% -- 20% -- 1985 44% -- 56% —- 1988 50% -- 50% -- 1991 50% -- 50% -— 56% -- 44% -- 1994 74% -- 16% 3% 59% -- 38% % An average of the figures for the years 1982-1991 (exclusive of 1994) indicates that 56 percent claimed their academic performance "improved," and 44 percent claimed their academic performance "remained the same." These figures are only a few percentage points removed from the all-inclusive figures of 59 percent and 38 percent, respectively. In 1982, when the arts were still in their infancy in South Carolina schools, 80 percent of respondents claimed an improvement in academic performance. In the following 88 years--during which the arts became more prevalent throughout the South Carolina school system, particularly with the introduction of the Arts in the Basic Curriculum Program (ABC) in l987--respondents register a near 50/50 split between an "improved" and "remained the same" status in academic performance. The 50/50 split may be deemed the most nearly estimable response to Question 304. Continuing on this line of inquiry regarding SCGSA influence on students' academic performance, Question 604 asked, As a result of your experience and training at Governor's School, would you say that your interest in furthering your education . . . was enhanced, remained the same, or diminished? The following responses were recorded: 72 percent stated their interest was "enhanced," 27 percent stated their interest "remained the same," and 1 percent withheld an answer. Responses that register an enhanced interest in furthering their education support the 86 percent response to SCGSA training/experience as having influenced future academic and/or career choices (Question 302). Table 11 illustrates the overall responses to the effects of SCGSA experience and theatre training on students' academic performance. 89 Table 11. SCGSA EFFECT ON STUDENT ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE Question/Response Percentage Influence of SCGSA experience and theatre training on . . . 304. Academic performance: Improved 59% Remained the same 38% No reply 3% 604. Interest in further- ing your education: Was enhanced 72% Remained the same 27% No reply 1% 302. Further academic and/ or career choices: Yes 86% No 12% Summary. All responses taken into consideration, respondents point to their SCGSA training as inspiring a healthy influence on their subsequent academic work. Generally, on the average 50 percent of all respondents believe SCGSA training had a positive effect on their academic performance. Some 72 percent registered an increased interest in furthering their education and 86 percent claimed that their SCGSA experience offered guidance toward future academic and career choices. 90 E. THE OVERALL EFFECTS OF THE PROGRAM AS A NON-TRADITIONAL LEARNING EXPERIENCE. This section includes Questions 301, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 501, 504, 506, 507, 601, 602, 603, 605, 606, 701. This fifth area of investigation actually encompassed four particular topics. Collected data was organized to examine l) respondents' satisfaction with the program, 2) the program's effect on furthering respondents' understanding of the arts and humanities, 3) the length of the term, and 4) the main effect the program had on former students, both in general and on their future career path choices. This section will examine these topics in that order. First, participants' overall "satisfaction" with the program will be reviewed, utilizing responses to Questions 301, 507, 601, 605, and 606. The questions will be examined in order of subject matter. Question 301 asked, Even if you have not pursued a career in the theatre and dramatic arts, how satisfied would you say you were with the program? Eighty-four (84), or 89 percent of all respondents, claimed to be "very satisfied" with the program: seven (7), or 7 percent, were "somewhat satisfied"; three (3), or 3 percent, were ”somewhat dissatisfied"; no respondents registered "very dissatsfied"; and one (1) respondent, or 1 percent, withheld a reply. These figures are illustrated in Table 12 (following page). Question 301 further asked respondents to elaborate on 91 their answers. The 89 percent of respondents who expressed they were "very satisfied" with the program gave the following typical reasons: The program taught me things I have carried through my life. Not just theatre, but it taught me a lot about myself. I learned more about myself and found more confidence within that program than at any other part of my life so far. Table 12. OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH SCGSA THEATRE PROGRAM Question/Response-Percentage 301. Even if you have not pursued a career in the dramatic arts, how satisfied would you say you were with the program? Very satisfied 89% Somewhat satisfied 7% Somewhat dissatisfied 3% No answer 1% GSA was one of the best experiences of my life. It opened up my world. It gave me confidence. The discipline and dedication learned at the program influenced me in other areas. The instruction was individual enough to help me grow both as an actor and as a person, but the structure was group-oriented, creating my first real friendships with artistically minded individuals. And, as indicated by one student from a hometown falling into the 2,500 to 5,000 population group: SCGSA provided an Opportunity to someone as myself to be exposed to the arts in a way that otherwise would not have been afforded to me. 92 The 7 percent who maintained they were only "somewhat satisfied" with the program, gave the following general observations: The instructors were very knowledgeable but worked with the group as a whole rather than helping develop individual talents. I didn't get the most out of it as I could have--I should have participated more. The program was extremely intense and serious. At the completion of the program, I realized that I did not want to act professionally. Finally, the 3 percent who expressed that they were "somewhat dissatisfied" with the program, offered the following explanations: The program was more professionally oriented than I had expected. I felt that some, not all, of the instructors played favorites among students, and least favorites. I feel at times the program was too intense: perhaps that was the intent so that those that were truly dedicated to study of the arts would benefit from instruction. Continuing to assess the program in general, Question 606 asked, Is a program such as SCGSA important? In answer, 100 percent of all respondents affirmed that a program such as South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts is "important." Question 606 also asked for an open-ended explanation. Respondents generally stated, there are "not sufficient arts programs in public schools." It is a big window in a little state for students to see the bigger picture in their areas of interest. For many, it is a door of Opportunity. The sentiment is seconded by yet another's comment: 93 It gives kids like me, who have the dreams and talent, the education that we would have been denied by virtue of being small town Southern residents. Additional comments valuing SCGSA's social Significance typically include: It's not the curriculum itself, but the whole community setting that's important to these kids. They need to see that the other people their age share their artistic sensibilities. For those talented kids with little or no resources, SCGSA is a wonderful opportunity. More important that any training is the hope and encouragement they receive in an environment like SCGSA. SCGSA opened a whole world to me. I never knew there were others my age who felt the way I did. SCGSA gave me the confidence in myself as an artist AND as a person. SCGSA is one of the most important programs, if not the most important, of my life. It offers a student to experience and interact with other peers who share common goals of achievement. Students who attend can see the art form for what it is, and, whether or not they enter it, the knowledge they gain is enriching. And, a former student from a hometown population in the 1.000 to 2,500 category expressed: All I knew about theatre in 1982 was what I had been exposed to in Goose Creek, SC. SCGSA Opened my eyes to possibilities and pointed me in several directions. It is interesting to note that particular respondent Offered that she holds an undergraduate degree in theatre and journalism. She further stated that her present work involves "managing over 200 volunteers, coordinating public relations, and speaking for my agency." She is also currently working toward a masters degree in business. 94 To appraise the uniqueness of SCGSA, Question 605 asked, In a few words, what do you believe SCGSA offers a student that a regular high school curriculum does not? Representative open-ended comments specified that SCGSA theatre training offered a "better trained faculty," "specialized instruction," "higher standards," an "intensified study of the arts with focused people," and "challenges--to excel in everything you do." Additionally, survey participants consistently distinguished SCGSA as Offering the following: First of all, an intense education! Secondly, art doesn't always receive the respect it deserves. The Governor's School reinforces the strong feelings we all feel about our art. It says, 'Yes you are doing something important!‘ And that's important when you're young and impressionable. The support to succeed--the program is very intense, but it's never intimidating because everyone (students and faculty) are so supportive. There is no fear of failure. Respondents further distinguished their SCGSA experience apart from high school as offering a "stimulating atmosphere for learning with professional educators": SCGSA offers the Opportunities that no where else can. Students think freely, opening the mind to so many opportunities. There is no longer the 'memorization for the A.‘ At SCGSA you really learn. It requires a discipline level that cannot be realized in a high school. This discipline helps the student to become more focused on his/her art and better trained. My high school had no program for drama, and returning to my final year was difficult! SCGSA treated you like a professional and pushed you to your best, never once treating you like a child. Refreshingll 95 It gives students a chance to come into contact with professionals, who become role models. Open-ended responses to Question 605 continue with such comments as, "the freedom to be oneself while exploring the fine arts," "peers with similar interests, motivated and eager to learn," "increased focus on the arts," and "experience of real theatre training in a college environment." Question 507 asked respondents to "agree/disagree" with the statement that, As a result of the program, I am better able to designate and reach goals for myself. In answer, fifty-four (54), or 57 percent, "agreed strongly"; thirty-three (33), or 35 percent, "agreed somewhat"; five (5), or 5 percent, "disagreed somewhat"; and two (2), or 2 percent, "disagreed strongly." It can be calculated that 92 percent of all respondents believed they left the program with an enhanced ability to designate and reach goals for themselves. Question 601 stated, Interacting with students who shared similar career interest backgrounds with me was . . . very important, somewhat important, not too important. Seventy-four (74), or 79 percent, considered this opportunity as "very important"; sixteen (16), or 17 percent, considered it as "somewhat important"; two (2), or 2 percent, believed it was "not too important"; and two (2), or 2 percent, withheld a reply. Question 602 stated, Being in the program challenged me to broaden my experience in my artistic field . . . a great 96 in: W ii. at of es I0 to la pr A: deal, somewhat, only a little. In reply, eighty-two (82), or 87 percent, believed they were challenged "a great deal"; nine (9), or 10 percent, believed they were challenged "somewhat": two (2), or 2 percent, felt challenged "only a little"; and one (1), or 1 percent, withheld an answer. The three questions--507, 601, and 602--indicating totalled positive responses of 92 percent, 96 percent, and 97 percent, respectively, suggest a reputable level of increased motivation-based outcomes from participation in the SCGSA theatre program. Table 13 (following page) illUstrates the overall effects of the SCGSA program. Summary. Overall, highly satisfied with their SCGSA experience, respondents consider the program an important offering to South Carolina high school students. They especially appreciate the experience as an opportunity to work intensely in a specific area of art interest with a focused group of peers and working artists. This, and the lack of pressure in working for a grade, distinguishes the program from the more traditional high school experience. As a result, students sense an increased motivation to learn --both in their art and in their academics. 97 mm mud wan ucmquOEH ucmuuomEa ucmuuome >uw> uoz umn3oeom >um> wm woa mum mapped >um> umn3meom Homo ummum a . . no: we saws mocooumxomn and tumucw umouou unafiawm pounce 0:3 nucoooun Honuo saw: mcwuoououcn .Hoo . . . odmww oaunwuum as aw oocowuomxw as coomown on we ommcmaHono aoumoum us» ca mcwom .Nco ommucmoumm\mmcommom COaumooO wm wm wmm mum umnzoeom amazoeom unnameom wamcouuw mwummmao moummmao mmumd wwumd .mamuha MOM numom nooou ocm ouncmwnoo Ou Dunn Hmuuon an H Emumoum onu mo adomou o n< .hom mmmucmoumm\omcommmm coaumooo Edmoomm 0 .MH OHQMB 98 The second topic analyzed in this fifth principal area of investigation concerned an overview of respondents' heightened awareness of the arts and humanities as a result of their participation in the program. Specifically, a triangulation explored the possible enhancement of the participants' 1) interest/understanding of arts areas beyond their theatre arts discipline (Question 401), 2) ability to focus on the development of personal arts interests (Question 405), and 3) the role of the arts in society as a whole (Question 501). Question 401 stated, The program helped me expand my interest/understanding of other areas within the arts/humanities . . . a great deal, somewhat, or very little. Of all respondents surveyed, fifty-six (56), or 60 percent, believed their interest/understanding increased "a great deal": thirty-five (35), or 37 percent, believed it increased "somewhat": and three (3), or 3 percent, believed it increased "very little." Question 405 inquired, As a result of participating in the program, I am better able to focus on the development of my arts/humanities career/interest. In answer, sixty-two (62), or 66 percent of all respondents, believed their ability was increased "a great deal": twenty-five (25), or 27 percent, believed it increased "somewhat": two (2), or 2 percent, believed it increased "very little", and five (5), or 5 percent of all respondents, withheld an answer. Question 501 asked respondents to "agree/disagree" 99 that, As a result of the program, I have a better understanding of the role of the arts and humanities in society as a whole. Fifty-eight (58), or 62 percent of all respondents, "agreed strongly"; thirty-four (34), or 36 percent, "agreed somewhat"; and two (2), or 2 percent, "disagreed somewhat." Overall, the positive responses totalling 97 percent, 93 percent, and 98 percent for the triangulation of Questions 401, 405, and 501, respectively, would appear to confirm that participation in the SCGSA program has generated a marked enhancement of arts and humanities awareness among respondents. It is of merit to take notice of these triangulation responses in view of responses to Question 602 (96-97) assessing participants' challenge to broaden their experiences in their chosen artistic field. All four questions relate to the enhancement of students' awareness of the arts, and should be studied collectively. In so doing they indicate an average of 97 percent total enhancement of arts awareness. The introduction of Question 602 into the description increases the triangulation four fold, thereby strengthening the validity of responses. Table 14 (following page) illustrates an overview of student responses to increased arts/humanities awareness. 100 .odwfiw mm woa who oaumfluuo donono cw mocowummxm Hooofl>wocw cooooun ou muwnwo .Noo II. .nowuwcoao: wm mum mom \nuuo on» cw momma Hmnuo no one locoumnmo:9\umououcw omocomxm .Hov .unououcw\umouoo mowuwcoas: am mam wmo \uuum «0 acoaooHo>oo or» :0 maven O» Suwafinm ooocmncm .moe . . . cw mcwuaomou .ucooouu on» manuaa >uw> umnzmeom Homo umoum d ommcwddono Edumoum muuowzv one .OHOnz o no aumfluoo cw moan“ in am mmm mmm nomads oco ovum «0 OHOH can no mafiocounuwoco Houuon < .Hom umnzmeom umn3oeom amazoeom wamcouum . . . Ou ucoooun on» omchHHmno commando mmummmflo mmumm mmumm can panama Emumoum ouunonu 0:9 mmmucmoumm\omcoommm COHumoso MBMHUOm ZH mBmfl hO mmmmeflBd ZO mBUmmmm .vH OHDOB 101 Participants were also asked to rate the degree to which the progarm helped them expand their interest/ understanding of other areas outside the arts (Question 402). Respondents were nearly equally divided three ways in their answers. Twenty-six (26), or 28 percent, claimed the program helped their understanding "a great deal"; thirty-seven (37), or 39 percent, claimed they were helped "somewhat"; and thirty-one (31), or 33 percent, felt they were helped "very little." Summary. The program indicates a strong impact on enhancing students' interest and awareness of the arts. Of particular note is a marked increase in the desire to broaden individual experiences in the chosen art field. The third tOpic in this section examined all respondents' thoughts regarding the length of the SCGSA summer term. Considering the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts' projected plans to institute a year-round arts high school, this topic evaluating student responses to the length of the program is of particular interest. Questions 403, 404, and 506 employed a triangulation process to appraise program length. Reflecting on the length of the program's term, Question 403 stated, I would say that the five-week term for the program was . . . too long, too short, or just about right. NO one claimed the program was "too long." However, respondents were almost equally divided as to whether the five-week term is sufficient in length or too short. 102 Forty-one (41), or 44 percent of all respondents, believed the program length was "just about right"; fifty-two (52), or 55 percent, believed it was "too short"; and one (1), or 1 percent, withheld an opinion. Pursuing this inquiry, Question 404 requested suggestions for a better length for the program. The following was revealed: twenty-four (24), or 26 percent of all respondents surveyed, suggested a better program length as "6-8 weeks": six (6), or 6 percent of all respondents, suggested "10 weeks/all summer"; and twenty-two (22), or 23 percent of all respondents, suggested "year-round." To complete the triangulation, Question 506 asked respondents to "agree/disagree" that, A five-week program is just not long enough for lasting benefit. In response, twenty-six (26), or 28 percent, "agreed strongly"; twenty-four (24), or 26 percent, "agreed somewhat"; thirty-one (31), or 33 percent, "disagreed somewhat": twelve (12), or 13 percent, "disagreed stongly": and one (1), or 1 percent, withheld an answer. Collectively the triangulation figures for Questions 403, 404, and 506 validate each other: Question 403 shows a 55 percent total agreement that the program should be longer, Question 404 shows 55 percent of all respondents suggesting longer sessions, and Question 506 shows a 54 percent total agreement that the program should be longer. Table 15 (following page) gives an overall look at responses to the program's current five-week length. 103 Table 15. OVERALL EVALUATION OF FIVE-WEEK LENGTH TERM Question: Response Percentage 506. A five-week program is not long enough: Agree: 54% Disagree: 46% 403. The five-week length term was: Too Short: 55% Just About Right: 44% 404. A better length would be . . . 6-8 Weeks: 26% 10 Weeks/Full Summer: 6% Year-Round: 23% In the more recent years of SCGSA history, plans for a year-round program have been highly advertised. In 1994, the South Carolina legislature accepted a proposal for plans to establish a year-round program. Anticipating the effects of this publicity, it was the opinion of the researcher that respondents in more recent years (particularly 1994) might be prejudiced in their evaluation of the SCGSA program length. As a member of the SCGSA theatre faculty, the researcher has observed that SCGSA students in the 1990's were encouraged by administration to support a year-round program. Accordingly, having assessed an average of all responses to program length (Questions 403, 404, 506), Table 16 (following page) offers a more detailed look. 104 Table 16. DETAILED EVALUATION OF PROGRAM LENGTH Question/ Overall & Per Class Response Percentage 506. A five-week program is just not long enough for lasting benefit. Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Overall: 28% 26% 33% 13% 1982: 20% 40% 20% 20% 1985: 28% 17% 44% 5% 1988: 5% 22% 56% 17% 1991: 36% 32% 18% 14% 1994: 35% 26% 26% 13% 403. I would say the five-week term for the program was: Just Too Too NO About Right Short Long Reply Overall: 44% 55% -- 1% 1982: 60% 40% -- -- 1985: 50% 50% -- -- 1988: 56% 44% -- -- 1991: 50% 50% -- -- 1994: 29% 71% -- -- 404. A better length for the program would be: 6-8 10 Weeks/ Year-Round Weeks Full Summer Overall: 26% 6% 23% 1982: 40% -- -- 1985: 28% 11% 11% 1988: 39% -- 6% 1991: 18% 14% 18% 1994: 19% 3% 48% 105 IE IE 51 Referring to Question 404, respondents from the classes of 1982, 1985, 1988, and 1991 indicate relatively small percentages suggesting a year-round program (0.0, 11, 6, and 18 percent, respectively). However, the class of 1994 indicates that 48 percent of its respondents suggested a "year-round" program length. This might indicate some prejudice on their part, having been exposed to SCGSA publicity promoting a year-round program. Relating to Questions 403 and 404, analysis reveals that thirty (30)--32 percent of all ninety-four (94) respondents surveyed and 58 percent of the fifty-two (52) respondents who felt the five-week term was "too short"-- suggested six to ten (6-10) weeks as a better program length (this would continue to keep the program on a summer schedule). Twenty-two (22)--23 percent of all ninety-four (94) respondents surveyed and 42 percent of the fifty-two (52) respondents who felt the five-week term was "too short"--suggested that the program operate on a "year-round" basis. 106 Summary. From an examination of Table 17 (below), re-capping overall suggested program lengths, it may be calculated that seventy-one (71), or 76 percent of all respondents, appeared satisfied with a five to ten (5-10) week summer term; and twenty-two (22), or 23 percent of all respondents, favored a year-round term. Table 17. OVERALL SUGGESTED PROGRAM LENGTH Summer Weekly Session vs. Year-Round Session Summer Weekly Suggestions Overall Preferences 5 Weeks 6-8 10 Weeks, Summer Year- (Current) Weeks Full Summer only Round Overall: 44% 26% 6% 76% 23% 1982: 60% 40% -- 100% -- 1985: 50% 28% 11% 89% 11% 1988: 56% 39% -- 94% 6% 1991: 50% 18% 14% 82% 18% 1994: 29% 19% 3% 52% 48% The fourth tOpic, completing this fifth area of investigation, utilized two open-ended questions--Questions 603 and 701--to examine the specific effects that the SCGSA experience had on participants. Question 603 asked respondents, What was the main effect(s) that your experience at SCGSA had on you? Working in a community of peers that fostered personal acceptance, students claimed for the first time they were not made to 107 feel like a "freak" due to their arts interests. As one student put it, "More than anything else, I value being accepted in a place where my individuality is nurtured." Typical responses to Question 603 referred to the SCGSA environment and work ethic in stating that the program's main effect offered: Living in an artistic environment with people who shared a common interest was stimulating. I've really grown from the experience. I became more focused and more observant of myself and my surroundings. I became more focused and more specific with what was going on around me. The five weeks of being with extremely talented students was a dream. (Inestion 603 also elicited responses that mentioned the (development of skills and the application of those Skills in (one's daily life. Typically, respondents stated that the SCGSA program resulted in the following: That I have to discipline myself before I do anything and also do my research. The main effect that SCGSA had on me was that it taught me to be more responsible and self-disciplined. In my chosen field of marketing sales, my training at SCGSA prepared me with the communication skills I need. .And one respondent, now a current middle school art and drama teacher, claimed that SCGSA, "Gave me the complete theatre experience on which I base my teaching." Overall, respondents to Question 603 highlighted their SCGSA experience as a time of personal growth in which their self-knowledge increased along with a better understanding 108 CT 31-! 'C) of society in general. As stated: It made me see the world in a new light. No matter how different people are, there is always something that everyone can relate to. Everyone has talent, but you must have the opportunity to express it. I began to think globally. I valued diversity and also recognized my limitations. Most importantly I realized the importance of simply trying and practicing. Finally, Question 701 asked, We would like you to to describe the three most important people, events, etc., that influenced your future career path as a result of attending the SCGSA. As previously noted in this chapter (74), 61 percent of all respondents elected to answer this Open-ended question by crediting the SCGSA theatre faculty for providing an important influence on their career paths. Additionally, in answer to Question 701, respondents credited SCGSA for their personal development, the growth engendered from peer support, and specific individuals encountered during their stay at Governor's School. Acknowledging their sense of personal development from participating in the program, typical comments included the following: I went to SCGSA on scholarship. It was the first time I'd ever been away from home and I learned I could pursue a talent that I loved and use it successfully in my life as a whole. I feel it reaffirmed my interest in personalities and possibly directed my career to medicine so I could deal with people on an intimate and analytical basis and help them. When I was on stage doing the monologue for the 109 ar and, final showcase, all I could see was one woman smiling. I communicated! I touched someone's life! Wow! It was not a feeling of power nor control, but, at that moment, everything made sense, everything was alright. I realized the importance of communication and not hiding in your own bubble. GSA allowed me to take my guards down, and instead of getting hurt, I grew stronger. The whole experience gave me strength not to be afraid to be true to myself and my art. It was one of the most important experiences of my life. I'm not fond of my body, so the movement class was very impportant. It let me be free and speak with my body, and learn to shape space . . . very important! The opportunity for focused intensive work among a "community of peers" who have a "shared commitment to the arts" challenged students to achieve their potential. Attention to peer support typifies responses to the SCGSA experience, as emphasized in the following comments: Other students who attended in my area and other art areas. We learned from each other and grew together as a whole. My peers, who, though they will never know how much, changed my life. I realized that there are people like me, who are willing to work hard to achieve success, and who realize their talent(s) and want to share this with others. The final theatre showcase really inspired me because it showed me that when a group of people are serious about something, they can make magic. In addition to referring to the theatre faculty, respondents frequently mentioned visiting guest artists as individuals who influenced their personal outlooks: Michael York, Anna Maria Alberghetti, and Edward Villella were the most inspiring elements of SCGSA. They were all down-to-earth . . . they 110 seemed just as excited to see us as we were to see them. Gerald Freedman said something about a 'lifetime of doubts.’ This is a relief to know that it's okay to doubt my talent as long as I don't doubt my goals and ambitions. . . . my chance to interview the famous actor Michael York . . . as well as have a theatre master class with him and the other theatre students. He was a very positive and encouraging man. Overall responses assessing the wide-ranging outcomes of the SCGSA theatre program are well-articulated by the following two comments: and, I think the incredible friends I made (who were always there for me), my instructors (who never gave up on any of us and truly wanted us to learn, understand, and feel secure), and curriculum itself (which stretched our physical and mental capabilities regularly but never made us feel defeated) were the most valuable aspects of the program for me. My real talents lie in engineering, not drama. However, I think GSA influenced my life. GSA created an awareness in me of how the arts can contribute significantly to quality of life. The richness of the experience there will always be fondly remembered as a wonderful time for me. I still support the arts by my patronage today. Summary. The opportunity to work along side other students who shared similar career interests is regularly referred to as an exceptionally important attribute of the SCGSA experience. Respondents place special value on the development of lasting friendships and strong meaningful relationships with other artists. The word "goals" is used in relation to newly develOped personal philosophies. Whether referring to the pursuit of an arts or non-arts 111 career, respondents regularly cite the theatre faculty for having "encouraged the setting of realistic goals and pursuing them full force." 112 CV 1”“ 3.. CHAPTER FOUR VISITING ARTISTS' RESPONSES TO SCGSA ACTOR TRAINING Celebrated visiting artists have continually played an advisory role in helping the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts to fine-tune its professionally-oriented standards. While many distinguished artists have observed the theatre program over the past fifteen years, four particular artists have been recurring visitors to the theatre program. These artists include professional actor Marilyn McIntyre, who has also served on SCGSA theatre faculty since 1989; actor/singer William Warfield, who has been an adjunct professor at the University of Illinois; director Gerald Freedman, Dean of Drama at North Carolina School of the Arts (NCSA); and, former talent agent Robert Beseda, currently Assistant Dean of Drama at North Carolina School of the Arts. All have enjoyed accomplished careers in the professional theatre, and all have been been involved in the training of performers. Given their availability, each of these four artists extended the courtesy of granting the researcher a personal interview. This chapter will take the Opportunity to record the responses of these four artists to the level at which the SCGSA theatre students are introduced to the training demands of theatre as a profession. First, a review of SCGSA goals is in order. At the program's 1981 inception Philip G. Hill stated the central goal of the SCGSA theatre program is "to introduce the 113 students to the training demands of theatre as a profession;" therefore, SCGSA students would be "introduced to theatre at a sophisticated level" (CHAPTER ONE, 14-16). Robert Francesconi elaborated on this goal in a 1994 interview, saying, "I want to see more awareness. Them (SCGSA theatre students) being able to talk about the craft, about the process. I think that's the major goal" (CHAPTER ONE, 46). In establishing a program that would enforce these standards, Executive Director Virginia Uldrick sought to assemble a "non-traditional" faculty. As she explained in a November 1994 personal interview (INTRODUCTION, 3): The concept of having these students working with traditional teachers just would not work, because traditonal teachers are far more general in their instruction than specific; and, therefore, the philosophy that I believed in . . . is to bring an artist in touch with an aspiring artist, or student artist, and give that student the opportunity of learning the craft that the great artist could communicate. Given these philOSOphies which constitute the pre-professionally training focus the program, it seemed an obvious benefit to test the observations of artists who have substantial experiences in the professional theatre and who also have had the opportunity to observe SCGSA theatre activity. Do the Observations Of these artists indicate that SCGSA training goals are being realized? In answer, the following questions must be considered: 1) How do these certain artists working in the profession view training and faculty selection? 2) Is there evidence that students 114 workii sophi the c INTEl "PM: for 193' Joe and a 1 si working in the program are being "introduced to theatre at a sophisticated level?" and, 3) Can the students "talk about the craft, about the process?" INTERVIEW: WILLIAM WARFIELD “This is what I call the great school of apprenticeship.“ William Warfield, actor and singer, is distinguished for creating the role of Porgy in George and Ira Gershwin's 1935 opera Porgy and Bess, as well as for his performance of Joe in the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer movie version of Jerome Kern and Oscar Hammerstein's musical Showboat. He has served as a guest master teacher for musical voice students at SCGSA since 1985. As a member of the SCGSA Board of Visitors, Mr. Warfield has been an annual observer of theatre program classes and scene showcases. In a 23 July 1993 personal interview, Mr. Warfield expressed his ideas on the importance of peer support, artist-teachers, and "apprenticeship" in actor training as a characteristic of SCGSA. As to the artist-teacher and apprenticeship, he explained: There is no such thing as going to a book and reading about how to go on stage and perform, and then standing up there and doing it. It has to be taught to a person who has a quality of talent by someone who has the same sort of discipline and same sort of interest. . . . There is a great deal to be learned from books, but when it really comes down to it, . . . the actor has to get it from somebody who is doing it, and knows how to do it, and knows how to tell you how to do it. This is what I call the 'great school of apprenticeship.‘ You work with someone who is a talent, and they help you to bring out your talent. And this school (SCGSA), particularly, is an epitome of that. 115 Regarding faculty and training, Warfield summed up his ideas with the belief that the artist's work comes full circle when he/she teaches from experience: I believe this thing that is given to us is not for us to keep. It's for us to pass on and to enrich the lives of others . . . getting out there and helping youngsters to learn how to do this thing that we know how to do, and to inspire them to do it. And that is why I come here. It's really a selfish reason--it enriches me! In his experiences across the country, Mr. Warfield states that, more than anywhere else, he has observed at SCGSA "children taking on the challenge, taking on the commitment, . . . that's what is unique about this school." His observations underscore two words that survey respondents typically used in assessing personal growth from their SCGSA theatre experience: "challenge" and "commitment." Warfield regards education in "all of the cultures that leave to do with the arts" as the "things that make it Exossible for us to then make this a better world to live .111." He particularly values the opportunity for peer ESIJpport, and credits the Governor's SchOol for providing an environment conducive to discovering artistic diversity. Acknowledging that the artistically gifted student may find 1‘lim/herself somewhat of a social outcast in his/her hometown l'ligh school, he points out that upon their arrival at Governor's School: . . . they meet people of their own age who are their peers. And suddenly they realize they are a community of effective peOple . . . And they get a sense of belonging to something . . . There are a 116 lot of Others and they get that communication. That gives them a strength. Warfield further stressed the arts as a means of building community spirit and bringing together factions, because, ". . . we are dealing with intellect, with the mind, with the emotions." He touched on his own experiences having traveled with the State Department: I have been able to bring together factions just because they were coming to hear me sing, and they got to know each other . . . So it is so much more important than just standing up there and singing . . . It's a way of life. Warfield's words recall those of one survey respondent who stated: SCGSA offers the opportunities that no where else can. Students think freely, opening the mind to so many opportunities. . . . NO matter how different people are, there is always something that everyone can relate to. Everyone has talent, but you must have the Opportunity to express it. Referring to the SCGSA theatre students' work, particularly in culminating performances, Warfield said: What strikes me about the drama students' work here is the naturalness in which it all comes about. . . . It's as natural as you would see peOple acting on the street. . . . it's not, 'Stand! Now I'm a drama student!’ . . . And that's what I particularly notice each year when I watch the showcases and see how it comes out as a natural thing. And yet still,the timing--all of the aspects that we look for in good acting are there. INTERVIEW: MARILYN MCINTYRE 'The seven faculty members . . . have a common vision, a common goal. We speak a common language . . . we support each other's work in our different classes.“ Marilyn McIntyre holds an MFA in Theatre Arts from Penn State University and a career that embraces over twenty 117 years of professional acting credits in all the media. She has been featured on Broadway in Albert Innaurato's Gemini and in Elan Garonzik's Scenes and Revelations. Ms. McIntyre has worked under contract on four daytime television series and has also held a recurring role on the primetime television drama L.A. Law. A 1995 winner of the Los Angeles Dramalogue and Critics' Circle awards for her performance in the Interact Theatre Company's (Los Angeles) production of Elmer Rice's Counsellor at Law, Ms. McIntyre has also enjoyed numerous university guest artist positions, including visiting instructor in acting at the University of Southern California for the 1995-96 school year. She has brought her extensive background and enthusiasm for teaching to the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts Theatre Program from 1989 to 1995. In a 25 July 1993 interview, Ms. McIntyre cited two considerations that attracted her to working in the SCGSA Theatre Program. First, she explained: I was so impressed by how the faculty worked together in the theatre department. . . . we all supported each other in what we were trying to accomplish with the students. and, secondly: I was really impressed by the commitment that these students made. And some of these students had virtually gg_experience. Ms. McIntyre believes a significant part of acting training rests on the efforts of each faculty member to focus his/her classroom instruction on the rudiments of one basic acting technique. SCGSA training relies primarily on 118 the Stanislavski System of employing the elements of physical action. As McIntyre noted, voice, movement, improvisation, and acting classwork deal essentially with "bringing the text to life." Ms. McIntyre attributes the SCGSA theatre program's success to the diligent collaboration among its faculty members: . . . even with our own different techniques and our own personal differences . . . we still have a common vision, a common goal. We respect each other's work and we are going for the same kind of truth and reality and honest behavior on the stage . . . We speak a common language, our vocabulary is similar, we support each other's work in our different classes. McIntyre recalled that her ideas on actor training stemmed from her own experiences as a student. She noted: I had come from a situation where I was very confused by my acting training, and (then) I went to a place where the acting training was much more cohesive. . . . as a student, I was really aware of the importance of that. Calling on these earlier student experiences and her more recent background as an actor and teacher, McIntyre confirmed the importance of a faculty working together: "I don't think it's a good idea to have a department in which you do not have a Common vision. It gets confusing." Summing up her thoughts on actor training and education, Ms. McIntyre Observed two essentials: I think it's important to focus on a particular technique . . . making sure the students understand there are other techniques, but to have them have a very good grasp of one, and they can then expand into others. and, I think it's so important for actors to not forget 119 the importance of a good liberal arts education, also. She believes SCGSA students are enlightened in both these areas. Additionally, McIntyre emphasized the more far-reaching effects of the training as students acquiring not only "discipline as artists," but also "discipline socially." She explained: . . . not only are their imaginations expanded, physically they have been pushed to the limit. I constantly hear from students, 'I never knew I could do this much.‘ While students have experienced this level of disciplined actor training, Ms. McIntyre expressed her views on the most desirable program result: Whatever they go into, you hope they are going to apply themselves to their fullest as they did in these five weeks. . . . what I hope they hold onto is the ability to push themselves or gather together and help push each other. I mean, we all need that. That's why the faculty comes back here. INTERVIEW: GERALD FREEDMAN 'If a young person has this much focus . . . then they should be treated like professionals.“ Gerald Freedman, Obie Award-winning director and co-founder with Joseph Papp of the New York Shakespeare Festival, has been Artistic Director of the Great Lakes Theatre Festival since 1985 and Dean of Drama at the North Carolina School of the Arts (NCSA) since 1991. He holds a Master of Arts degree from Northwestern University and has taught at Yale and The Juilliard School. One of the most distinguished directors in today's theatre, Mr. Freedman's credits also include artistic directorships with the The 120 Acting Company and the American Shakespeare Theatre. Highlights of his career include the New York productions of Hgig and West Side Story. He has been a visiting artist conducting two-day scene study workshops in the theatre program at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts since 1993. Given the scope of his academic and professional theatre background, Mr. Freedman offers a highly develOped perspective on effective actor training. He recognizes that SCGSA students are young with a great deal yet to accomplish; nevertheless, after directing them in a two-day scene study workshop during their fourth week of training, in a 17 July 1993 interview, Mr. Freedman made the following observations: They seem to have a real grounding and familiarity with the terminology and the ability to act upon that terminology in so short a time . . . using words like action and need, relationship, environment, all of which are common to us. But when I asked them to read back to me what we had accomplished in the two days, I felt they did in a very intelligent manner, making the language their own. I didn't feel they were parroting my phrases, ever. I thought that somehow you had prepared them deeply enough so they could absorb what I said (and Obviously you were speaking the same language), and come back at me with summations that were there own. That impressed me greatly. And it meant that something you're doing in these four weeks . . . is extraordinarily specific. . . . a basic through- line of what acting is about, I feel, had been accomplished. I was very impressed and stimulated. Considering the faculty as integral to the level of training achievement, Mr. Freedman outlined how he believed an ideal acting faculty should function: 121 This sounds Obvious, but an agreement on language and terminology and point of view. Everything in an actor training program has to reinforce a vision. . . . I firmly believe they have to have 223 way of going at it so that they can clearly see other ways--not so that it limits them, but so they can understand other ways. . . . If you have a totally freestyle way of going at acting, as Opposed to a disciplined (way) . . . they end up understanding nothing. . . . So, cohesion and common language among the faculty is really necessary. And, of course, you are really lucky here, and it is totally appropriate that most of the faculty . . . are working professionals. 80 they come at it from having done it. That sounds so obvious, again, it does not to be repeated. But it is rare. It is rare. And you cannot know what any of these things mean unless you have gone through it. . . . someone who has come at it, let's say, from a more academic point of view or even from a lab or workshop point of view does not understand what a working professional does, who has done it over and over again and has been rejected because of it, admired because of it, praised because of it, laughed at because of it. That conditions the process. It is still a hand- me-down master craftsman to journeyman process. Mr. Freedman's belief in the "master craftsman to journeyman process" echoes William Warfield's idea of "the great school of apprenticeship." He also reiterates Marilyn McIntyre's requirements that an acting faculty "speak the same language," and teach "one specific technique. All three artists confirm the value of the master artist-teacher that SCGSA Executive Director Virginia Uldrick insisted upon as critical to setting the standards for the program. When asked what he thought a student Should take away from an acting program, Mr. Freedman said: That it's work. It's work, and a process. . . . acting is neither spontaneous nor just an entertainment. It is a craft. People are attracted to theatre and working in theatre because of, often, the feeling it gives them. It's a release of some sort, it's joyous fun. And 122 they don't understand that it is a result of joy in the work, not in the thing itself. So, if they go away with any one thing, it would be that you have to work. When asked if he felt that the SCGSA students were beginning to understand that sense of artistic process, Mr. Freedman replied, "That's what impressed me so much." Mr. Freedman underscored the need for "stimulating them (students) tOward a process, which includes self-discovery and how to engineer a process for and by themselves." He was impressed that SCGSA theatre students were making that discovery at so young an age, as he explained: I never dreamed that they would have as mature an approach, or could, in so short a time! . . . I never doubted that you (the faculty) had something to contribute. But I didn't anticipate that it could be on what seemed to be such a basic level. They really have a healthy approach. . . . just the fact that they truly, I think truly understand what it means to come from somewhere, to have that opening moment have begun offstage--just that is an achievement. Concerning the scene study work he did with the students, when the interviewer suggested that he seemed very comfortable directing them, as if the students themselves were professional actors, Mr. Freedman affirmed: Totally. And it wasn't fake. I just felt I was responding to their ability. . . . that's what I mean--when you get a cohesive faculty, they already are in the mood. It is all process. It is all work. Mr. Freedman further stated, "I assume that if a young person has this much focus . . . then they should be treated like a professional." 123 INTERVIEW: ROBERT BESEDA 'They seemed wonderfully focused . . . I loved hearing them put it all together, in their own words.“ Robert Beseda, Assistant Dean of Drama at the North Carolina School of the Arts, has been a regular visitor to the SCGSA theatre program since 1992. A 1974 graduate of The Juilliard School, training under John Houseman, he has worked professionally in New York and regional theatre as an actor and director. He was assistant director to Gerald Freedman for the New York Shakespeare Festival's Hamlet, Broadway's The Robber Bridegroom, and the PBS-TV pilot of The Adams Chronicles. As a former talent agent with the New York offices of Coleman-Rosenberg, Mr. Beseda represented a number of celebrated actors, directors, and designers in the worlds of television, film, and theatre. Mr. Beseda visited the theatre program at the end of the fourth week of training. In a 17 July 1993 personal interview, he summed up his impressions of the SCGSA acting students: . . . working for two days with the students and seeing their work, and then getting them to respond and getting a dialogue going back and forth--I am so impressed with where they are at this point. They seem to be very involved with the process Of acting. They seem to know what they're doing and how to talk about it on a level that I really wouldn't normally expect sixteen and seventeen-year-old kids to be able to. Mr. Beseda also admired the students' capacities to articulate the training received in their voice and movement classes as it relates to application in their acting scene work. He further praised the level of maturity with which 124 the students conducted themselves during the scene study workshop that he and Gerald Freedman conducted: They seemed wonderfully focused on what we were doing, and stayed with it. Their minds didn't wander. . . . I was amazed that they could be that concentrated, that we could be in a room for three hours together and work constantly. . . . I loved hearing them put it all together, in their own words. Recognizing the specific vocabulary the students used when discussing their work, Mr. Beseda credited the faculty for laying the foundation of a common language. He elaborated on the need for ensemble in working, as he explained his concept of the ideal theatre faculty: The faculty should be, sort of obviously, in three parts: acting teachers . . . movement teachers . . . and then voice and speech work. . . . I think it's really important that all of these teachers . . . share a point of view and have a Similar way of Speaking about acting. . . . that kind of harmony is really important in terms of the students developing a way of working, a way of communicating with each other, rather than people coming away confused by what one person is saying. Relating his thoughts on the type of background that suits the ideal acting teacher in a professionally directed program, Beseda expressed the following: Someone who has been in the profession (and it doesn't really matter where they got their training) and knows what is expected of an actor brings so much to the training. If you are trying to train professionals, . . . I think it's important that your teachers know what the real world is like and what is expected. . . . It is such a difficult world to function in, to make a living in, that I think it's really important that there are people around them that will give them a sense of what it's going to be. The philosophy behind Mr. Beseda's statement is not unlike the beliefs of Ms. McIntyre, Mr. Warfield, and Mr. 125 Freedman--the idea of apprenticeship to a professional artist who has a facility for teaching. The value of artist-teachers is also reflected in one surveyed respondent's comment: It helped to know what kind of options are out there as far as the dramatic arts field goes. I have so many different things I can do with this career and I plan on following through with it after high school. In reference to questions put forth at the beginning of this chapter regarding 1) faculty and training, 2) notice- able level of students' work, and 3) students' ability to talk about their work, comments from visiting professional artists would seem to indicate an effective meeting of program goals. All four artists interviewed touched upon the importance of defining a proper faculty. They all value actor training under the supervision of a teacher who has worked in the profession, citing that the experienced artist can better inform the student in the discipline and commitment required to pursue a professional career. This calls to mind the Executive Director's idea of a non-traditional faculty, a faculty of artist-teachers. Ms. McIntyre, Mr. Beseda, and Mr. Freedman all stressed the importance of teaching one technique and the necessity for all faculty to speak the same language so that students could begin to grasp a specific method of working. In their observations of SCGSA theatre students--in the classroom, by teaching workshops, or in scene showcase 126 I HU. 6C th- presentaions--all four visiting artists expressed the level of sophistication with which the students tackled their craft. They all stated that the SCGSA theatre students appeared to understand the rudiments of a very specific acting technique. Mr. Freedman and Mr. Beseda both noticed the ability with which the students could articulate the work process in their own words. Overall, the above comments would seem to indicate growth in the area of Robert Francesconi's main concern: that the students attain "more awareness" and become "able to talk more about the craft, about the process." 127 CONCLUSION The purpose of this study has been to examine the effects of the pre-professional actor training offered to students participating in the theatre program at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. Given the positive responses of the five classes surveyed and the comments of distinguished artists, it may be concluded that this training, following the executive director's plan for a program of "differentiated studies," has reinforced the conviction that training under professional artist-teachers will challenge minds and talents to new heights of understanding, perception, and personal growth. Although faculty and training procedures have changed, throughout its fifteen-year history the goal of the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts theatre program has essentially remained the same: "to introduce the students to the training demands of theatre as a profession." In this study's description of the develOpment of the SCGSA theatre program, three formative issues have emerged: 1) production vs. non-production as the basis of training, 2) the concept of differentiated studies under a faculty of artist-teachers, and 3) visiting professional guest artists. The first formative issue concerns production vs. non-production as the basis of training. While the core curriculum in voice, speech, movement, acting, and an end-term performance remained standard, two very different approaches to training were entertained: a) production- 128 based, in which the presentation of a full-length play became the focus of the program, and b) process-based, in which a workshop presentation of scenes evolved from classroom training. Because he believed that students "learn by doing," Dr. Philip G. Hill favored a simple, black box-styled production, and under his leadership (1981-1983) the program first sought to combine the elements of theatrical training and production in culminating performances. Starting in 1984 when theatre chair Robert Francesconi de-emphasized production, he replaced Hill's approach with intensive training in the elements of acting. Given the five-week SCGSA program, Francesconi recognized that de-emphasizing production frees students from concentrating solely on the end-product performance and allows them to focus greater attention on develOping specific skills. This change suited Executive Director Virginia Uldrick's desire for a non-traditional program of differentiated studies. Additionally, while 5 percent of all respondents singled out production as an influential program experience (QUESTION 701, 74-76, 109-111), 61 percent of all theatre alumni surveyed appraised the intensity of SCGSA pre-professional actor training as an exceptional experience beyond their regular high school theatre Offerings (QUESTION 605, 87-88; APPENDIX G, 195-201). The second formative issue concerns the concept of differentiated studies under a faculty of artist-teachers. 129 Although Hill and Francesconi held different views on teaching, their basic philosophies for program objectives were quite similar. They agreed on the following: 1. The SCGSA theatre program should introduce students to the demands of theatre as a profession. 2. Thorough training could not be accomplished in five weeks. 3. Students should leave the program better prepared to go on to more advanced study of theatre. Students generally appreciated the opportunity for working with a professionally experienced faculty. Survey responses supported Virginia Uldrick's conviction that a faculty of artist-teachers offering training in specific skills allowed students "to maximize their potential and be challenged." These responses to SCGSA teaching by artist-teachers are particularly significant in light of views expressed by Charles Fowler, the nationally recognized scholar in the arts and editor for Musical America magazine. The best arts educators are skilled both in their art and in education. . . . Whether educators like it or not, there are certain aspects of the arts that artists convey better than anyone. They can illuminate the creative process in their art form, demonstrate the quality involved in professional production, and give students the real-life experience of the arts as they exist in society. Without artists, arts educators would be hard put to accomplish such objectives (58-60). The third formative issue concerns the role of visiting professional artists. Because the program is professionally 130 oriented, professional theatre artists are invited to observe training procedures and to teach master classes. Learning from distinguished artists was valued by approximately 80 percent of all respondents (Questions 406, 503, 505, 77-81). While guest artists have always participated, it was not until 1993 that Robert Francesconi elected to invite Gerald Freedman, the first nationally recognized professional artist, into the program. After observing and teaching students, Freedman complimented the program for its effectiveness in introducing students to the training demands of profesional theatre. Student responses to the three formative issues examined above, respectively, indicate the following: 1) Students value a curriculum of pre-professional actor training as challenging and instructive beyond the capabilities of their regular high school curriculum; 2) they value the intensity of training and theatrical knowledge gained from working under a faculty of experienced artist-teachers; and 3) they value visiting professional artists, claiming their presence and instruction validate both the program's importance and its professional level of training. In fact, all guest artists interviewed commended both the students and faculty for the level of professional achievement they had demonstrated in working together. These three issues, in support of each other, constitute a solid means of assessing the effectiveness with 131 which the SCGSA theatre program meets its pre-professional training goals. Educators typically value the arts in education for producing such desirable outcomes as an increased level of self-discipline, heightened communication skills, and the personal growth realized through peer support. Students become more focused, recognizing the need to designate and achieve specific goals for themselves. The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts meets these training expectancies. Eric Oddleifson, Chairman of the Center for the Arts in the Basic Curriculum, Washington, DC, states: Not only do the arts enable students to achieve academically at the rates far beyond what might be expected of them (in subjects such as math and science), but other marvelous things happen as well. Students who study the arts respect their peers and treat them well. They become motivated to learn. They enjoy coming to school, working hard, and succeeding. Through the arts, the whole school 'ecology' changes. High standards become the norm in all subjects. Relationships between students and teachers improve (447). Similarly, this study has shown that 24 percent of all respondents, now in non-arts careers, value their SCGSA actor training for developing the self-discipline, communication, and inter-personal skills that are essential to their chosen careers. This study has utilized both quantitative and qualitative research to provide a descriptive examination of the effects of pre-professional actor training on especially talented high school students selected to attend the 132 five-week program offered by the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. It is especially noteworthy that students value the challenges offered by an in-depth approach to pre-professional actor training as an opportunity not only for expanding their theatre arts interests beyond the scope of regular high school curriculum, but also for developing skills essential to non-arts careers. The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts offers a special, intensive program in arts training. Stephanie Perrin, Headmistress of the Walnut Hill School, a private performing arts high school in Natick, Massachusetts, states: . . . intensive training in the arts is not widely offered in U.S. schools. The truly talented are not identified, nor are the bulk of students given access to this avenue of learning. America is full of unidentified and therefore unused talent (453). Clearly, this is not the case in South Carolina. Finally, this study has shown the following: 1) Survey responses confirmed the achievements recognized by distinguished arts educators as benchmarks for an effective program; 2) Students credited working in an intensive program with a professionally experienced faculty as highly contributive to their personal growth; and, 3) Visiting professional artists acknowledged the professional-level achievements of SCGSA students, faculty, and program. Accordingly, SCGSA offers an effective program in pre-professional actor training which might serve as an V 133 example for similar programs. And, given the extensive originality of research involved in this study, I hOpe additional value of it may be perceived in its potential use--in whole or in part--as an acceptable procedure for systematic assessment of similar programs. I would encourage future research to pursue curriculum development and the advisabilty of extending the role of the artist-teacher in secondary theatre programs, thus expanding upon the aformentioned formative issues which emerged in this study. Given the apparent large-scale effects of the SCGSA pre-professional actor training program, future studies might help to develop an exemplary curriculum in secondary school theatre education by making a comparative analysis of the long range effects of programs concentrating on a production-based curriculum versus those programs focusing on acting skills training. Additionally, because many theatre programs currently seek to include on their faculty individuals with professional credentials (this has become a particular qualification in the hiring of faculty by institutions of higher education), future studies might also examine both the means of identifying professional artist-teachers and an assessment of their work in existing programs. An investigation into ways of involving more professional artists in educational theatre programs might suggest possible means for expanding the role of the arts in education and increasing working relationships between the academic and professional theatre worlds. 134 APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX A LETTERS OF INTEREST 97 . - '\ wa-‘fi’ :24" 1 ~ ‘ :7, f‘ a I " .\ -7 “I: (v , \ .\ :7\.‘ ‘,."/' \l‘ur/ State of final; QIarnlina Office of tip ‘ohernsr CARROLL A. Gaul-ELL. JII. Poor Ounce lea nus mo. COLUMBIA 8.8:: June 28, 1994 Mr. Lucien Douglas Department of Theatre Michigan State University 149 Auditorium East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1120 Dear Mr. Douglas: ‘Ihank you for your recent letter concerning your doctoral dissertation on the Governor'sSchoolfortheArts. Iwaspleasedtolearnoftheprogressyouare making. As you may know, the South Carolina General Assembly passed legislation that addresses the establishment of a year-round Governor’s School for the Arts and Humanities. The legislation requires that a study be conducted on the feasibility and desirability of creating a year-round school. I know that yourfindingswiflbeofintaesttomembenservingonthestudyoomnfittee, andIhopethatyouwillsharethemwithus. Again, thank you for your continued interest in the 60st School and the educational opportunities it provides for our young people. If I may ever be of assistance to you in the future, please let me know. Sincerely, Carrol! A. Campbell, Jr. Governor 135 THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION WASHINGTON June 17, 1994 Mr. Lucien Douglas Department of Theatre Michigan State University 149 Auditorium East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1120 Dear Mr. Douglas: Thank you for your thoughtful letter regarding your dissertation about pre-professional theatre training at the secondary school level at the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. I appreciate your kind comments. I'm delighted that this program has proven to be productive and beneficial for both its students and teachers and am grateful for your support of this school. I look forward to reading your complete research and dissertation. It was nice to hear from you, and I hope you will continue to keep in touch. Yours sincerely, M ' Richard W. Riley 136 APPENDIX B APPENDIX B SCGSA THEATRE APPLICATION FORM . . . I . . . I ‘ . O THEATRE ‘ Mfié’aflw ‘ ‘ ‘ 0 THE SOUTH CAROLINA O I . l I C o v E R N o R ' s 9 SCHOOL FOR THE . CREATIVE WRITING VISUAL ARTS- MUSIC I THEATRE-DANCE O . - IMPORTANT DATES - . Application Deadline December 3. 1993 Audition Dates 8: Locations January 15. 1994 Columbia College January 22. 1994 College of Otarleswn January 29. 1994 USC Spartanburg 1994 SCGSA Honors Program June 26 - July 30. 1994 . 137 SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR’S SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS 1993-94 PO. Box 2848 Greenville. South Carolina 29602 (803)250-1030 Fax 250-1015 The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts is a summer residential honors program for artistically gifted and talented high school students. The School provides intensive study and arts experiences for a limited number of rising high school juniors and seniors from throughout the state who have demonstrated exceptional aptitude. significant potential and outstanding achievement in the literary. visual and performing arts. Rising sophomores. juniors and seniors are eligible to apply in dance. Additionally. a three-week dance preparatory program is available fcrrising 7th. 8th and 9th grade students who show outstanding promise. OFFICIAL RULES AND APPLICATION FORMS FOR USE BY TEACHERS. GUIDANCE COUNSEIDRS. PRINCIPALS. AND ALL APPLICANTS IMPORTANT DATES December 3. 1993 - Postmark deadline for Submission of Application Form. Fee(s). and Other required materials. December 22. 1993 - Candidates Notified of Location and Tune for Mid State Auditions. January 7. 1994 - Candidates Notified of Location and Tune for Lower a Upstate Auditions. January 15. 1994 - Auditions for Mid State - Columbia College January 22. 1994 - Auditions for Lower State - College of CharIeston January 29. I994 - Auditions for Upstate - USC Spartanburg February 5. I994 - lncleurent Weather Auditions only March 1. 1994 - Norification of Student Selecrions June 26 - July 30. 1994 - 1994 SC Governor's School for the Arts Honors Program June 26 - July 16. 1994 - 1994 Preparatory Dance Program 138 Audition Locations Many scheduling conflicts occtn in the lives of young artists. therefore the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts will try to collaborate with all other arts agencies so that audition and program dates do nor overlap other arts programs. In all cases. it is urgent that you let us know any conflicts you anticipate when you apply to the SCGSA so we may resolve them for you. Please do nOt request changes except in extreme emergencies We Eianm reschedule for personal or social events. Mld State Columbia College January 15. 1994 (Aiken. Barnwell. Calhoun. Chesterfield. Clarendon. Darlington. Edgefield. Fair-field. Horenoe. Kershaw. Lee. Lexington. McCormick. Marlboro. Newberry. Orangeburg. Richland. Saluda and Sumter) ‘Lower State College of Charleston January 22. 1994 (Allendale. Bamberg. Beaufort. Berkeley. Weston. Colleton. Dillon. Dotehester. Georgetown. Hampton. Harry. Jasper. Marion and W‘tlliarnsbtn'g) Upstate USC Spartanburg January 29. 1994 (Abbeville. Anderson. Cherokee. Greater. Greenville. Greenwood. Lancaster. Laurens. Oeonee. Pick- ens. Spartanbtn'g. Union and York) ’StudentsputicipatinginAll-StateshouldbeawarethattheF’malAudidonsareonthesamedateasuieSCGSA GmksmnaudinonsPleaaektusbmumupoasiblemwemymheduleywmdingly. 'C 139 SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR’S SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS WHEN COPIES ARE MADE. PLEASE GIVE STUDENTS COMPI.ETE INFORMATION INCLUDING APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS AND IMPORTANT DATES READ ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS IN THIS PACKET. NOTE: TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS PROGRAM. YOUR COMPLETE APPLI— CATION AND ANY ACCOMPANYING MATE- RIALS REQUIRED MUST BE POSTMARKED ON OR BEFORE DECEMBER 3. I993. YOU MAY XEROX THE APPLICATION. OR ORDER ADDITIONAL APPLICATION FORMS FROM THE SOLTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR'S SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS oAanduandhtslhapuentsmbelegal mdSouhlehacap-uuiam ataSCmilttl'yb-a. oTheqplie-ttmustbaarising'piiworaeu'er “matte—eludmapubhccmvuigh school. ommmmwummi mmwuumw—u Minimum-dyer“ diaeipl‘ne Althoughselocriontanothaaadon 'Noudnt may applywbohamy MWMWWa SMIorttneAmceeptr-oneaAead-y “Mummmw Mrs. OFFICIAL RULES AND APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS: Fa- ammonia-ducal“ PumaZ'aJ'mdy-w. m-WMDRHL unawatwmam admmdlormaloeallia’nonm man-MW , . NW. | I . mm-AmmApplieatinuFat-Iarrha mum-thmh “dunno-aim infill. "hem-um“ ”but. Afloflreuusmumlamtanonmew awlieatinnieewtththeapplieauumor theeompleaedloewarvatormwrthrqu'rodat- tantra-Ia. WMw-mymmh “mantles-0mm. aor'aSehooHorfieArI. 'I'heqpliuuiaugodtoqply‘nhischer wrmlloveverJnid-Imayapplym mmummh dike-em mmMmua-hnmadwithm WIuFamhebdebeyeoud “imam-emu“ hmlymeareaofaudyinmusic.) ltiapotarredthatalllonnsand’ulauinnyou std-nithatypad. Howevcdlth'lisnotponble. sien(anema.ete.)maybapmudc ebulyvr'men. Yoquliednndm- ‘mgmauialswillbanataduaw-utnd wbwwmanhoolia‘aumamle “Whammywn euagorymetheApplie-ionmloryou manna-anew: 'Pordolbotu-t'orta aretobebroogbtlotbemmafl “dam-alum hrCreflveWrMQm-afladm Their-MC.“- Gov-It'sSehollutheM [0.30am maniac-uh 29602 JUDGES’ DECISIONS AND SELECTION “unwashed-mm Mammoth-LSB-tnm dorkvuhuhfl-dbyqplie-Iwilh ‘hmdmm Thamollbm'nllbo-undu allfleuby “.6le RETURN OF MATERIALS Montana—Id. Dow-Id puma-cum hmmumuuw Andlm0.L93-$79).fla-abadvhdu bikes: I. Emma-inmate Win-inst”. iii 140 l mmmwtumm ammo-menin- Govcrlrr'sSehoolIortheArrs. '3. Palmtoamplataalldlbam “Wuhan“ mmammum '4. bought-Momentum TUITION Title ”SO-Five Wot Progr- 'TalhnFoaszleWahod-aflorhp-til Mmuwmummmu “CauliflOov-nnr'asaoolfabm Noamdmtwillhedafiedrhamtyol mguumumw otnfihomummmm mWaSMIorltem Io “Maul-reentry.” “to“. 'CWMAHPm-uh-b- munchIoIeAprIBJ’MhHW hem fin'aetTfllonPay-aum mdhsmtluaadaw mos-mum nan-mum Murmur-e) ‘Fonumhuoflieauted-em mum-manque“; W W W W W fiwmummmu. Immhhe-aderthlllo‘danh. cutouts-urgency. ‘l'hlulflWaSehflhIe Ant-numb... mmcwm'isewuu Mohamdiuwae‘nubim- “kaviulorismhh “moth-quiche“. Tb smcmmmwwu-ma WhMb-aduhbm “WdTaI-mm 'Stflyw THEATRE PART I - PERSONAL AND GENERAL APPLICATION FORM Clip Check or Money Order and 2" it 3" Photograph to BACK of Application. Postmark Deadline for The Completed W Application Form and Accompanying Non- Date Received Refundable Fees or Fee Waiver Form ls Application Fee Received December 3. 1993. Fee Waiver Application with Documentation Rec‘d —-_ _— ...a SECTION I - PERSONAL INFORMATION (Type or trim lczibly) 1. Legal Name —_ Last Name Firsr Middle Nickname 2. Permanent Mailing Address _ Zip Phone County 3.Sex A._Male B._Female 4.SoclSeco 5. Check response“) that best describe 6. Nune of School: yourself. Street Address: A. _ Afro American B. _ American Indian or City/Smelly Alaskan Native C. __ Asian Pacific American Phone: D. _ Hispanic American E. _ Caucasian School Districr: F. _ Other G. _ Disabled Superintendent: 7. Age__ Dareof Birth Principal: MolDay/Y r. Arts Teacher: 8. Name of Parentismuardiam: Arts Teacher Address: 9. Parentts) Wont Address(es): 10. Father's Work Phone: ll. Mother's Work Phone: 12.Areyoualegalresidentofs.Corisoneofyourparents A._Yes B._No melted at a SC military base? l3.lnwhichCaigressionalDistriadoyoureside? Greleil.2.3.4.5.6 l4.DidyouattendanOutreaehWorkshopdtis fall? A._Yes B._No 15.naveyouanendedtheSCGSAAcademyatConverse? A__Yes B._No Byrnysignantrebelow.llumbygiveSCGSApemwmmmleasdumfomaiongivenabovemcdkgeamrsidu. gmagawiamduamuppmuammmommzmuWmepufinngmgm artists. x Signature of Applicant 141 16. For purposes of publicizing you. you work and the Governor s School for the Arts. please give names and addresses of the following in your area. a. TV Station b. Radio Station c. Daily and Weekly Newspapers d. Other Media ‘17. Please give the name (s) and address (es) of the instructors andlor arts professionals who have had the most significant influence on you development as an artist: (a) Name: Title: School or Organization: Address: Zip: Phone: Years Snidies: (b) Name: Title: School or Organization: Address: Zip: Phone: Years Studies: 18. Indicate offices held. awards. honors. and other achievements. l9. lnthespaeeprovided.briefl describewhat ouconsiderthesin emostsignificantexperience havehadto datewhich has profoundly aI‘fected you life. y ‘1 you 20. lnthe aeebelow. indicatewh areinterestedin n intheSouthCarolinaGovemorsSchoolfor the Art?in Greenville. Be specifyic. you WP“ g 142 “PARENT PERMISSION FORM l. the parent 1 ardian) of permit him/her to be nominated and. if selected. attend the 1994 South Caro tna Governor's School for the Arts. a summer residential honors pro- gram for artistically talented high school snidents. l have read and understand the dates and rescheduling proce- dure for auditions and have indicated the date and city my child will audition below. Should an extrerne emer- gency occur l/my child will notify the SCGSA as soon as possible. January 15. Columbia College. Mid State January 22. College of Charleston. [outer State January 29. University of South Carolina Spartanburg. Upstate I understand. if helshe is selected to articipate in the SC Governor's School for the Arts Honors Program June 26th - July 30. 1994 or the SCGSA aratory Dance Program June 26th - July 16. 1994. that room and board will be provided and that he/she will reside in a dormitory at Furman University as assi ed by the Governor‘s School. 1 also am aware that my child cam arrive late to or leave early from the l Governor's School pro- grams. 1 further understand that the application fee. tuition (unless waived). transportation to and from the school and money for personal expenses will be the responsibility of the students and their parents and that failure to abide by the rules and regulations oftheachool and to make a comitrnent to the program will be just cause for immediate dismissal. Date Signed Poem/Guardian ” Read carefully & sign. This form is very important and strictly enforced. 143 PART II - INFORMATION FOR THE LOCAL LIAISON PERSON The LOCAL LIAISON PERSON IS the coordinatnrot theGovernor's School forthe Arts program fa mch high school. Applies. tion materials are distributed to students md canpleed manuals are renewed md tooled bythisperson. Thelocalliataonpersonisre- sponsibleforrecetvtngfmmthesttmnthial hercompletedappliauonformsmdthe mmwuionfeeordoctmof feewarver.Refaera:eslecollecmdand hnerted.asisuiermdent'soansuipt.1'he totalpackageistnailedbythelnsall‘nison pardon: Dr.thiiiaUIthick.Eaectm~IeD'Iector 'l'heSouthCarolirnGovernor‘sScimolIor theAns P.O.Bu2848 Greenville.SothCaolirI 29602 (303)250-1030 and Recommendation Forms SEE CHECKLIST BELOW AND IN- STRUCTIONS BEFORE MAILING AP- PLICATION. All application notable must be received by the Governor's School fortheArtsoaor before December). I993. Materiak may be mailed or deliv- ered in person. THE STUDENT IS RE- SPONSIBLE FOR MAILING COSTS. Viaoalartsstudentswill hr'mgandpreernt that patfolios at the audition interview. Portfolla should not be mailed to the Governor’s School. Art work should be mounted approprimely with artist’s name on each piece of at work and "melted at the audition canton mmallltareaswillaoditiona maportt’olioinVisualArts-Id int-viewinmeofthefollowingcutns: Columbia-Comm CollegeJmuay IS. 1994: Chateau: - College of Chrlestrat. Jury 22.199tSpananburg-USCS. Jenny 29.1994. Suidenn willbearsigned touditioncencrsatthediscrenonofthe Goverrior'sSchool. Cenresaasignmentsue aubjecttoehangedqrmdingupontheotanbcr ofqplicmn5nidentsmanenddie nidioonmnertnwhichtheyarematgned mksdteyhaveerttentmingcirm. meillthenbemade. ifpoaaihle. Coorea'ngalocalacremingconanineecotno “drummer-Jasmine- mum-imam matheGovernor'sSehoolfordie Artsiseaiaideredmeflectivewayto THE APPLICATION PACKET MUST BE COMPLETE AND INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: Pleasedieckandattachinm _Photographattached _ Partl-PeraonaldtGeneralApplicationInfornntioncompletedandanacbed __.-Part1] RecommendationFormscompletedandattached _A.ArtsTeacheeromrnendation _B. Oneothertcacherreconnnendation _CIJaisonOfficer/Principalrecornnnndation __Transcript attached _PartIIl- ArtsDisciplineApplicationcompletedandattached _ —PartIV ApplicationFee(s)orFeeWaivaApplicatiooDoannentation 1W __ GeativeWritingMaaniaIsanachedwreariveuitingapplicantsonly) _ PlentPermiasionFormSignedbyParentorGuardian (pach) INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. ‘Noreapoodbilitywfllbea-ornedbytheSoothCarolhaGovernoHsSchodIortheArtslflheapplkatioohhlththe IllPleaaeheepaeopyoftheapplieationforyourtllea. 144 RECOMMENDATION FROM THE APPLICANTS ARTS TEACHER (Please be candid and seem) This page is to be completed bv a who has taught or so 'sed the a _licant‘s work in the arts within the put two years. When completed. this orm should be rennned tot designated Eamon person. The South Carolina Governor’s School for the Arts offers five arts disciplines: CreativeWriting. Dance. Music. Theatre. and Visual Arts. The Governor's School is designed for students of high arnstic ability and/or who have demonstrated exceptional talent in one of these areas. Your assessment of the student‘s porential for productive par- ticipation in an intensive. fast-pawd program of study in one of these areas will be an important element in the total screening process. Ihave known for __ years. (Name of Nominee) Helshe completed the following courses and/or participated actively in the following prograrns/acrivitics under my supervrsion: CotnselActiviry Year Grade This is my candid assessment of his/her aptinide and ability. both intellecmal and artistic. with respect to partici pation in the Governor s School for the Arts subject concentration in Creative Writing. Dance. Music. Theatre or Visual Arts as I understand them: A. Please estimate the extent to which the nominee has demonstrated in your classes the qualities listed below. when comparedwrthothersuperiorstudentsyouhavetaught: Scale: (Amongorhersuperiorstudents)$-excellent.4-verygood.3-good.2-average.lubelowaverage intellectualcuriosity 5 4 3 2 l independenceofthought 5 4 3 2 l originalityofideas 5 4 3 2 l creativeimagination 5 4 3 2 l artisticnlent 5 4 3 2 l consistencyofeffortinstudies 5 4 3 2 l attinidetowardothersnidents 5 4 3 2 l attitudetowardtheteacher 5 4 3 2 l attitudetowardlearning S 4 3 2 l dedicanonandcommitment 5 4 3 2 l B. Pleasecommenton 'eularcontributionsandleadershipfotenoal' .workhabimpenonalnaitaattimdeand conmunnenttoworkpftrsebacltofpageforyotnconnnents. C. Pbamwfieaddidmflmmenuwhkhymfalwmflbeklpfidmduehvdvdhmhgandubcfing candidatesforparticipationin apropamdesignedforardsdcauynlenmdsmdmnmsebackofpageforyom comrnents).Pleaseinclude anyunusualcircumstancesorbehavior. Date Signed HomeAddreas Home Phone 5 145 SECOND TEACHER NOMINATION FORM his page should be completed by a teacher of your choice who knows you best The student may choose the teachers to whom lie/she will give the recommendation forms. but they must be teachers with whom helshc has snrdied within the past two years. This form should be returned to designated liaison person. Teachers are urged to become familiar with the characteristics of the gifted] talented before completing the form. I. (TOBE COMPLETED BYTHETEACHER) Teacher's Name Sclnol PrincipalSubject(s)Taught hasbeeneruolledasastudentorunderrny __W supervision in the following classtes). independent study. studio or performance. A. mmmnmuusmmmmmmmwmummmmmmm? 2. Heaecommuummficducmihrdanuflkadenfippomnnd.wmtmu&pamnflmmm commitmenttowork. 3. mammmm'smmmmmmmmmmaam mdasaperaon? Bespecineplease. MM 146 RECOMMENDATION FROM THE APPLICANTS PRINCIPAL. COUNSELOR OR LIAISON OFFICER To be completed by the applicant‘s principal. headmaster. counselor. or Liaison officer. This recommendation should be inserted' III the total package of application materials to be mailed by the liaison Person to the Govemor’ s School for the Arm- WW I recommend as a superior student worthy of consideration for selec- tion to the 1994 Governor's School for the Ans in Greenville. a summer honors program for artistically talented high school students. From our records the following information is provided with regard to the measured ability and achievement of this student: (Used only in making prognosis for success.) A GPA for previous year __ B. Additional Cornmenrs: C. PLEASE ATrACH A COPY OF THE STUDENTS HIGH SCHOOL TRANSCRIPT. This student is recommended and endorsed by: Title Name School 147 South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts Program: The Theatre Program is My an inten- nvera'e-professiaial Actor Trainingpro- gram. Stagecraft classes re also taught. Acting students with talent and interest me auditioned totorticipate in acornwehensive program of acting. voice. speech and move- ment. The progrun is designed to wide masterclasses with master wofeesional artists. teachers and guestartists This five-week trainin' ' gwogramwillenlarge thestudent's experiencesotlnt helshe beginstounderstandthenanrreofthe professionmndhowindividualaspimions careepondtospecil’rcgoals Application Meterlale to Submit: Your awlication must include the following: I. AcompleaechrsonaldeeneralAppli- cuienFortMPartI) 2. A completed mplicaion for Theatre (Pl! III) APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS: THEATRE . Arecornmendationfromyouprincipal. corntaelaorliaison. (SeePersonaland GeneralApplicaionFarn-Pml) . Arecommenduionfromyoormeure tacherfifyoudonorhaveathmtre ”.mmymam dliontrotnanycsMordirecmrwho knowsyourworkinthenre.) . Arecornmendationfromadirecuhhcr tI-ayouercherlunderwhom youlnveplayedoneamaeroluor huexperienceintechnicalmmnework. (Ifyoohavehadeapaienceundrronly medicamenyoumaysubeuttnea mom-wanna: wlnhiowsyotaworkbest.) . Areeeotphoeographefyonraelf-aat aceempaaytheapplieuioa-atahls. Phomgraphsshouldbeanhonestrqrre- aeraarionoftheappliant. Pleasedonot willaotherettaned. maybeuedfor Audltlon Requirements: I. Two anotionally cumin manlogues. Plemetrsecontmmmary menial. Eachmonologucshouldbe mdeapenmce Plemedonotuse accents.dialectsorstyliaedchuactcris- tics. Donetaoditionwithclassical mid. Chooeernaterialthlallows heurtyands‘aicerirytobehighlighred. 2. smmdamw 3. Permmlinarrview. OnsileAudithnSwiIIbeevaIMmlhe uphotographstlumis-repreaeraerthat basisoftheactor'aiaaatetaleonm- areeamasivelystylistic'l'hephoropmh stratedsltlllmdaeriomoeasefperpose. 148 South Carolina Governor‘s School tor the Arts Put Ill - APPLICATION FOR THEATRE NAME I. Lisr any theatre courses you have taken in school. begirming with the most recent: Ntnnber of classes Title of course per week Grade If you have had any organized theatre training outside of school. describe it below. beginning with the most recent activity: Organization offering Course orprograrn couseorprogrun Teadter's narne.address. andtaiorem. Listbelowthemlesyouluveplayedinplaysprodwedfwdcpublicweghningwimdnmonmz ‘ Producing organization _ Play title Role (with address) Director Lisrmydenncflexpenuteyouhavehaduhadmacnngbemmmmosmz Producing orgariizanon Play title Role (with address) Director 149 5. Lisr briefly any artistic acuvrties other than theatre in which you have engaged. 6. Describe briefly any extracurricular activities other than those mentioned above. 7. Please list each audition piece that you plan to present. Give title of play/song and author/writer. a. Audition Selecrion #l: b. Audition Selection #2: c. Song: 8. List briefly any work you have done in technical theatre. 9. What are your career goals in relationship to theatre? (Please answer in 3 lines only.) 10 150 South Carolina Governors School for the Arts PART IV - APPLICATION FEEIFEE WAIVER INFORMATION YOU MUST COMPLETE EITHER SECTION A OR B Section A - PAYMENT OF APPLICATION FEEIS) a. Enter number of art areas in which you are applying. b. Multiply the total number of art areas checked in a. by $40.00 for Application Fee (3). AMOUNT c. Total amount enclosed TOTAL _ (NON-REFUNDABLE) Make certified check or money order payable to South Carolina Governor’s School for the Arts (Do NOT mail cash). Attach to back of page I ofapplication. Section B ~ APPLICATION FEE WAIVER INFORMATION nore: This section is to be completed only ifyou arerequest- ing an application fee waiver. AsnnllnumberoftheflOappIicationfeewaiversflimited to one discipline or discipline category per eligible individ- ual) are available for applicants who cannot afford the Appli- cation Fee. Ifyou wish toapply foran application fee waiver. please provide the information requested below for the calendar year 1992. ENCLOSE A COPY OF YOUR 1992 incometaxretttrn(1040F0tm)andsignbelow.IFYOUARE APPLYING IN MORE THAN ONE DISCIPLINE OR DIS- CIPLINECATEGORY. YOU MUST ENCLOSEA CHECK FORTHEADDITIONAL FEES. ONLY ONE DISCIPLINE OR ONE DISCIPLINE CATEGORY CAN BE WAIVED. ‘Pleasenotethatfinancialinformationwillbekeptcoofi- dentialandwillbeusedonlyforpurpoeesrelateddirectlyto lbeSCGSAm 151 Eligibility for a fee waiver will be decided according to the following table: INCOME CHART Effective from July 1. 1993 to June 30.1994 Household Size Annual Month Week 2 17.446 1.454 336 3 21.997 1.834 424 4 26.548 2.213 511 5 31.099 2.592 599 6 35.650 2.971 686 7 40.201 3.351 774 8 44.752 3.730 861 Forachadditional family umberavereighthdd «.551 +380 +88 Estimated family incomefromall sorts-es for 1993. 3 Number of family members totally supptated by family income— _owmmmmmnammmrm are unusual circumstances which you feel may influence dea'sionsregarding youreligibility forafee waiver. SIGNATURE OF PARENT OR GUARDIAN IhuebydeclaretbatpaymentoftheApplicationFeewould beaaignif'aranthardshipformeandmightpreventmefrom enteringtbe SCOSApmgIm SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT 11 APPENDIX C APPENDIX C SCGSA WEEKLY THEATRE SCHEDULE u m m | m: I 2 max JILY HEY 9 ' run: m m . "N mar j m l WY | 9:“ . WICB: B WICI: A WIG: C WIG: B WIG: A l EFE KEEPS REEFE KEEPS KEEPS ‘ | PLAYHCRSE PLAYIDUSE PLAYl-DUSE PLAYHOUSB l , i on: B nan: A m: C area: B I ; ':;3 WY MURRAY MURRAY MURRAY - ; PIELDHOUSE PIEIHIOUSE PIELDHOUSE rtmouse FIELDHOUSE l . l ‘ M: M: B ml: A M: C l CAMERA: m3A1) (CAMERA: C2) (CAMERA: 32) (CAMERA: A1) (CAMERA: C2): NCIN'I'YRE HCIN'I'YRE HCINTYRE HCIIITYRE HCIN'I'YRE ‘ STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO .m (mmzm) Human (nnnan (mm a) VOLZAZ VOLZ VOLZ VOLZ VOLZ ! SRJP SOP SHOP ’ 10:” r ‘ m 10:45- 1 W16: C W1C: B W16: A W16: C WIG: B KEEPS KEEPS KEEPS m KEEPS PLAYHOUSE PLAYIOUSE PLAYIDUSE PLAYIDUSE PLAYIRRJSE am: A on: c m: B m: A m: C MURRAY HURRAY WAY IIRJRRAY MURRAY FIEDHOUSB “ FIW FIELIBDUSE FIELIBOUSE Hm “I”: B m: A m: : B : A (CAMERA: Bl) (CAMERA: A2) (CAMERA: C1)( :31) W”) RC HcIII'I'YRB Hem It: IbIII'I'YRE STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO (TECH: BZ) (TECH: AI) (m: C2) (TECH: BZ) (TI-:01: A1) VOLZ VOLZ VOLZ VOLZ VOLZ SD? SDP SOP SOP EDP 12:15]:- I'll- . m1: B rum-1: A ammo-1: C m1: B ”I: A DOUGLAS MAS MJGLAS 2:“.- PLAYI'DUSE PLAYIIIJSE PLAYIIOUSE PLAYIDUSE PLAN m2: c acme-2: B norm-2: A ram-2: c ammo—2: B rm: YOIM YUJNG YCRJNG routs YOIM'G STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO S‘I'UDIO m m:am:cm:am:nm:cmm FRANCISCO“ WI WI WI PW Hm FIELD-DUES Elm TIM 3: (II- 3:18- norm-1: C m1: B m1: A m1: C “I: B DOUGLAS DOIHAS WAS WAS PLAYIDUSE PLAYIRXJSE PLAYIKRJSE PLAYIIISB PLAYERS! ‘ . m2: A lm—Z: C m2: B earn-2: A ammo-2: C YOUNG 5 rows YONG YGBIG route STUDIO . STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO STUDIO : B m: A man: C morn: B m: A PRANCESGJII m1 FRANCESCO" ram ”W PIW PM ”W W 4:48- 5 tit-Ia heart more. 1 can run mama 1mm I PLAYHOUSE 1M5 HCCALISTER ‘1'. B. A. j mum mtlzntsmden scenecoachingarid block. the Student Grow as also divided. 3. Stinent Group Stine sale subheading. ntGrorpmgaclnnpe. PridayJulyBat9:.00ara 152 Maurie reheat began this week: ‘I'. B.A than both "Canon" and "'l'edtrucal Theatre" classes are listed Proceed to the class antheemtne indicatedbythe REVISED 6/30/94 APPENDIX D APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY RESEARCH MATERIALS BOARD OF DIRECTORS Hm CW 11‘: Han-able Carroll A 0-1:“. It. Governor at South Cad-Ia O.lew\V|Ison.Ches-_I WHMJLV-am WSW ChlioTCoIeJr MWCWWJr MUM ShebMH-w Retail-bead WE M.” WulhamPJawtlel Jehnfilohns Thu-Elissa iambic-um Palmer Means»- LsoETwI-s ”AND OF VISITORS Eden mods! Ede-d Vuflella Wilma Waileld ”CUT"? DIRECTOR Venus UN DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT knee I’m DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS Dabs Glam: DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEU OPERATIONS/FINANCE Rachel Matthew! THE SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR’S SCHOOL FOR THE ARTS March 28. 1994 Miss Caroline Lawton 109 Leete Hall University Park. PA 16802 Dear Caroline: In partial fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theatre. a student at Michigan State University is preparing a dissertation on The South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts. Centering on the Drama Program. this study will seek to define the process of creating an effective pro-professional theatre arts training program on the secondary school level. I am certain that you will recognize your participa- tion in this project is of special importance in recording the influence that South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts has on its students' lives and future academic careers. Within the next two weeks you will receive an information request form in the mail. Although Governor's School is not directly involved in this study. when the form arrives I encourage you to take a few minutes to kindly complete and return it. at no cost to you. Your responses will remain strictly confidential. In the meantime. please drgg the self- addressed s tcard IE-khe mail indicat- igg 1295 wiIIIngness to -I51 te and max! any necessary corrections in your home ad ress. I appreciate and thank you for your support of this highly important project. Sincerely. Virginia Uldrick. DMA encl: 1 PO. ”X M IGWVILLE. soum CARGJNA 29632 803050-1030- FAX Ell/2501015 153 SCGSA/SURVEY P.O. BOX 27369 LANSING, Ill 48909 Ilookforwardtoputicipatingindfissmdymndermading oomplocconfidmtiafityisassmedm _ Idonotwishuopmicipac. Mynooessuyadchessomoctionsm: Name Cuy Sue 74cm: 154 THE SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR’S SCHOOL [OR THE ARTS April 15. 1994 OFDIRECTORS 4m kaWAc-uw.h. Miss Lindsay M. Graham C-*~ 1251 Mathis Road . Apt. 09 EhH hmJLVKeOIl-‘I Greenwood. SC 29649 Dear Lindsay: Enclosed is a copy of the information request form you were notified of receiving. As I mentioned in my recent letter to you. this information is being collected and requested from you for a dissertation study on South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts by a student at Michigan State University in partial fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theatre. Centering on the Drama Program. this study will seek to define the process of creating an effective pro-professional theatre arts training program on the secondary school level. Although Governor's School is not directly involved in this study. 1 am grateful to you for recognizing its importance. Recalling that all responses are strictly mwm”m confidential. I encourage you to take the few minutes required to complete this for. and to 355552223”“‘“”*EN7 8310!! It II TB: IICLOSBD SILP-ADDIBSSID. StAlPlD memes B! may, APRIL 25I 1994. :muxntmcwsmxmuJeonrns °*"°"”' Thank you for your help. Your willingness to plmnoppgmm participate makes a very special contribution to OPERATIONS/FINANCE ' this project. hd-eM-ean Sincerely. Virginia Uldrick. DNA encl: 2 '0. ”X 2948- GREENVILLE. SOUTH CAROLINA 29602 ”31250-10”. FAXWSOJOIS 1.555 SCGSA/SURVEY PO. BOX 27 369 LANSING. Ml 48909 Du MWMmWMmemmmmmmmmmWs sandman: MWaMmmW. thissaadyismiqueonn- mmmmmmmMm MoMofMWNWmM “muvmammwymwnuwmomemw Wylhisfludy- W— —anm&eammmbudmmdefiddo{medm 'mAmenca thhadflaymMmmflmdemmmmmmmdxm bylbtreguesmddae. mmmmdmmumahmmmuuum milky UmbveMamsmmWoopy.Myubrmhdp. “Incubation-dammit)“: My. luwypwhmmwmdfismmmulouBmmmymum Sisal-sly. “I I . Ull’l WMSCGSA 156 WdlmPJatotlel Ichnilohfu Thom-Elton Eta-elbow Maynard’s” “MAIShee' MET-u WARD OF VISITORS Roben EXECL I WE DIRECTOR Vegans U“ DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT m I“! DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS Debs Gveene DIRECTOR OF PERSONNHJ (NmRKHONyHNANCE Rxhdflumnn May 16. 1994 Miss Elizabeth Butler Brion 1 Ellen Avenue Mt. Pleasant. SC 2946‘ Dear Miss Brion: Your gainions help us grow . . . but only if we now what you c and what you think. To better serve more young people with as wide a variety of career interests as possible. we need 0“! i“ "I: “'0'“ PM "”W -——-——I- an vocations as possib e. in the arts. arts reIated :ields. and other career tracks. Your GSA drama class is one of onl five selected for input. Your thoughts and ideas. oSservations and comments are invaluable to us. and I would like for you to respond as soon as possible. A second co of the surve reviousl mailed to you is enclosed. Please hel us b takin 10 minutes to lete EEIs encIoE=3 for. :33 return it In the seII- amessa sta- enveI b MOfiY MAY SD 199‘. I extend to you my very best wishes and appreciate your assistance and support. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Virginia Uldrick. DMA Executive Director encl: 2 PO. ”X 2848 I GREENVILLE. scum CAROLINA 29602 ”30504010. FAX NJRSOIOIS 1557 Mmemammumm MICHIGAN STATE u N l v E R s I T Y June 1 . 1994 Greetings from the Department of Theatre at Michigan State University! As you know from Virginia Uldrick's recent letters to you. a student of mine is preparing a dissertation on the South Carolina Governor's School for the Arts Theatre Program that you attended. The most important--and certainly the most interesting-~part of this study is a collection of observations by select former students such as yourself. We'd love to hear from you and to learn your thoughts and ideas about the program. Only a few of you are pursuing the arts. while most of you are working in many other fields. This makes our study all the more interesting and valuable: comments from ever typg of occupation imaginable. We realIy need yo . I'm certain you're busy with summer plans. but if you would take just a few minutes to complete the enclosed form and--using the self-addressed. stamped envelope--dr0p it in the mail by Monday, June 13‘ 1994. you would do us a great service. I appreciate your time and help. and I hope to hear from you shortly. Please accept my very best wishes for a great summer. onu BALDWIN. Chairperson Department of Theatre Michigan State University encl: 2 158 APPENDIX E APPENDIX E SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE nnmuanmmaumammnmw OPTHE INKHEKEBDUEMHRREBNORSSCEOOLPORTEEAREB Chdetlmm'wfleh MIN mmmzmsgunum I”: 1935 I” 1991 199‘ mama's: “*Wdhmkmmqfia 101. 192. I”. I“. 195. I”. flwflpehldabeattem? A. “and“ B. wm C. GSA,“ 0' WW!) Wesflyaenpethemsleeehe-e-flhmu... A. Men: I. hing-e Anyone-nuns“ A. Ye B.No men-m A. Muted B. Cults C. (he Umwflnnhpdmehemhe? Samuel 1 2 3 4 Cola: I 2 3 4 unheated l 2 3 4 "hummMMh-nm? A. Y. B. No Bummdfihhmwudflfl Beyer-lbw ”music. Hammett) Ummumh-nmdhmmhmMndm-dfl (Ex-It MW.FIM.¢¢.) 159 Twammsmnmmwwmmm GasmanmlO!)Mu'm'mleM'aaflw').bww-Umm... m. 101. mmummz l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 no Ynm'Mbbebhgyeesmse-Uymywnm l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO Yemhmramen'blkymmlhemmne? I 2 3 4 s 6 ‘l 8 9 10 mmdmme'm‘tm-M'mmu- ”maximums-mm? l 2 3 4 5 6 7 I 9 l0 OelhewheleJewwdyul-meyetMMHOehwmh? l 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 IO Oahwhhkwwuflnsmyerw'm-penh? l 2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 lo PmneratSCGSAIewweddyemmtheueth-s’mm mwmmwmw l 2 3 e 5 6 7 8 9 no Muddyeenyyeeweddhevewm: (Chateau-moves”) karma-1m Emmemm Chaim-newsman: Ileesdlhehmmdydhebwmteu... Amman museum-um cm ups-human: BmflmmsumswhfieMdt-dtnhwm'eflyeam yewwevewflhthemram? A. messusfied emu-sea 6mm D. mew Aadwtydeyeenytht? NemammwhuyacpeI-Isewmdmdysw-ybmfldmmflgflm’wmmmuu SCGSAh-ynyMyeuWaad-kasdwwdehm? A. Yes B.No limbs-es? WWWISCGSAJeaHyeerMyauWeab-eea... A. W tweeter-we C. Milanese 160 Hennafewgeahmoehowtheprommyhswm’dedyesism: ‘01. mmmmmmybmmUdemmihuu/m... Lapemdeei mm Quaylsde 402. Tbsmheipedmeesflmyf; __L‘ ‘ ‘ " _eleiherareumaemts... Legumes] mm C. veryiiule 663. leash-ythsiIAeflve-weekimmieflhemwas... A. melee; > m-A'as'.pno-eheee) B. mm Chmabsmnun (II‘CJt'meee‘mm Abemeriemnhhrihemeeddbe 0i. “8. Msmthhml-maflebhuhmdmy Lauemdeal mm avenue 06. mmdmmmw... Lalbabigdifleenoe museum Cflmnmbmchdiflmme Whydeyaemylhet? mmwwwmmamsaflyfisprknldmeflmewamm. AGREE AGREE ”AGREE moan mm! W W W Si. Assteeaheflhemlheveabm asdemseeiegenbereleefiheamesd A B C D memes-u. 92. The m h the m made me feel my participation sad development were A B C D hem-ht ie them. ”3. AemeerieedsyM‘erChwiihavfli- martinismsmbesefleislieihe A B C D masawheie. at. [Ruben-tumumm hummus-cumin. A B C D as. AesemlwodsyMamm-Cubysvmkhg “BMMImilvabemereihengs- A B C D hheehyi‘rsmieeeveriheierm. 506. Afive-weekmisj—eeiioegeeean bunnies“. A B C D ”7. AsanuhdlhemJ-bemerabie hdedp‘eaedreacbpshtormyselt. A B C D -3- 161 601. “I. 791. hmmahumedeemwhudhhwmw-ifimeu... A. seam tenement-puns Cum-spam: “bmmehhpduhm-ywmmyww... Lamas! I.” Culyaiinie mute-heMIIMye'WuSCGSAhd-yee? MarddmmfiudmfihngsSfiefie-fly-mymy-mm A. new Ides-Juan: CW hahmwubyubeflneSCGSAaU-samuamhfibmhedmtd-demmm? normal-SCGSA“ A. Y3 I.No Whydeyee-ylhi? We—MfleyumemuibememmmuhpuumpushemMMFh-ew pub-amdeSCGSA. W: Ile- “ye-Mysmrhs-ebem‘s! __ntw _mu-nm _lem _Mmm _mmim _lmmm _m-m _mm "MMfiy-dm memmbWflI-MWWMMZSJMD m ens-um mild” 162 APPENDIX F APPENDIX F QUESTIONNAIRE MAILING STATISTICS Table 18. who u|\w~ i|\wm~ Il\amn amm\wmm oumuceouom Decommos va un\H un\n~ uu\m ~n\om ecusuom uncommon ova eucoocomnom deduceuom Heads «\c --\~e --xoo --\mo omxmoa assentedeoe Hunueouom Aaeuoso om: nu\Hn uu\uu uu\mu nn\o~u carcass: anemone. oucwsuom cod ouaueucou unecoubqocn deuce mmm --\me --\oo --\~n om\v~s mundane: no noses: dauuopo mq