The news today that Drama UK have finally disbanded is clearly no surprise to anybody in the industry. The writing was on the wall the moment RADA, LAMDA and all jumped ship a few months ago. Or if you were to believe me...the writing was on the wall even further back.
http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomasa-stamp-of-approval/
For the three of you that follow my blogs you'll know that I have never been a fan of this organisation. I've been appalled with their lack of guidance and indeed interest over the ever increasing Mental Health difficulties facing our colleges (which eventually grew into our #time4change initiative). I regularly put hand to keyboard to type my disgust at their latest initiatives e.g. going over to China to raise brand awareness for Drama UK? I mean what the hell was that about? Colleges paying a minimum of £6K a year for students to get a showcase in NY? That's right...because it's really easy for a UK resident to just break into the NY acting scene isn't it? Green card anyone?
In my blog the other day I noted how the drama colleges were taking in nearly three times the number of students than they had originally, yet the counselling provision in those colleges had remained the same. Where were Drama UK then? Why weren't they questioning the fact that a college could one day train 40 students, but the next day feel like they had the resources to train 120 students? Why weren't they limiting the number of courses colleges were running? Resources were getting diluted and Drama UK did NOTHING to stop it. Instead they took their 'subs' and ran....seemingly to China and New York to 'make connections'.
There's another part to this story though that maybe not everyone is getting. Yes, all of 'us' knew that the writing was on the wall for Drama UK (literally everyone would mention it to me whenever accreditation came up)...but actually Joe Public and their parents, those same people who felt like getting their child into an accredited college was the Holy Grail of training, didn't have a clue. Just last year I was challenged on a popular forum over the fact that we weren't accredited, and when I pointed out that we were vehemently against it, I was literally called a liar, and a 'parent' hypothesised that we must have tried but had been rejected. It was beyond the realms of their thinking that we wouldn't be aspiring to join this disjointed organisation.
So what happens now? Has it levelled the playing field for a new college such as ours? Well of course it hasn't as we don't have a track record on our side. We don't have decades of training to 'prove' the quality of our graduates. Here's the rub though - do we really know what's going on in all of these well established colleges? We know that Lord whoever trained at the Royal Wherever in the Year whatever but do we know what happened to last year's graduates. . . and I mean ALL of them?
We all hear the sound bites of X, Y and Z who all left 'established college' to walk straight into a Broadway lead (no Green card problem in this fantasy world), but do we know what happened to the other 95% of the students that graduated that year?
The only available stats that we've ever been given by Drama UK was a survey based on the graduates of 2012, but even that was diluted as it lumped together their 5 'best colleges' (which at the time would have really given me the goat if I was the Principal of one of the 'lesser' accredited colleges not mentioned in the survey. A hierarchy amongst the hierarchy it would seem). That survey might have been really unfair to college 'A' which had outstanding percentages, as their stats were watered down by college 'D' that had had a difficult year. Of course, good news for college 'D' though who suddenly weren't doing that bad at all.
Has a college's success been diluted since increasing its numbers? How would we know without regular stats?
Our industry needs to be regulated, I don't know what that should look like. I would like mental health to be part of the regulation e.g. if you're not offering the appropriate pastoral support you're excluded from 'the club' until you do.
I'd like it to cap numbers of students training - because there are too many colleges, offering too many students a false dream. That false dream has a hefty price tag attached to it. Our industry is saturated as it is. Controversial I know....but when have I ever said anything that wasn't ;-)
I would propose that we all start with transparency. Every year since we've had a graduating year group I've published our stats. That includes our industry 'drop out' rates. These stats are on our website for everyone to see. Imagine if we all did this, so that we could finally get a true picture of what's going on out there?
I know that this won't happen - it's too costly to be that accountable to the industry, and indeed to their 'business'. However we all want to see rogue colleges closed down. . . and complete transparency as the norm would do this quicker than you could say "Drama UK".
Showing posts with label Accreditation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Accreditation. Show all posts
Monday, 26 September 2016
Friday, 22 July 2016
Drama UK - it's #time4change
Wow what a difference a week makes. Last week Mark Shenton kindly 'launched' the #time4change Mental Health charter in a nicely worded piece in The Stage: https://www.thestage.co.uk/opinion/2016/mark-shenton-theatre-enough-protect-workers-mental-health/
Mark had visited The MTA a week earlier and as usual our discussion came around to Mental Health issues, as Mark has a well documented fight with depression, and he knows that I've been campaigning for a number of years to improve Mental Health education in drama colleges. In passing I had mentioned the Charter, and, given his history, was interested in his view on it. So we arranged for me to send it onto him. It was then a pleasant surprise when I found out that he was going to write about it in The Stage.
The Charter, as seen by Mark, needed a little bit of refining, so Angie Peake (www.counsellingforperformers.co.uk) who had written the document hurried on with the edits so that I could send it out to the various people who had already committed to sign up to it.
Like with the fund raising the year before I remembered how much I hated emailing people asking them to do something so public, however if the truth be told, I'm getting really tired of the fight to get this matter 'out there', so this became the final push to make a small difference. The final mile of my own personal marathon if you like.
Fast forward a week and we have 19 agencies all signed up, which means if they only had 30 clients each - 570 performers this week have received a document, highlighting Mental Health issues. 570 performers have discovered that their agents take Mental Health and the welfare of their clients seriously. In addition to that we have the Theatre Royal Stratford East signed up...which means that every one of their visiting companies will have a Mental Health reference as part of their orientation package (including Well being/Mindfulness...as it's easy to think that the campaign is all about illness, as in reality it's about prevention).
6 production companies have signed up, meaning that everyone that works for them in future will receive the Charter, and will again be reassured that they're working for an employer who takes Mental Health seriously.
Finally, in the area where this whole bloody campaign started just one college has taken up the mantle. Rose Bruford, which already had a robust Mental Health policy and pastoral care system, led by the rather amazing Pat O'Toole. Pat came to the conference and has stayed engaged with the process ever since. She instantly went back to work and implemented just some suggestions that came up in the conference. Regardless of whether or not they officially adopt the Charter - they have, via Pat, attempted to do something above and beyond, which after all is what this Charter is really about.
In an ideal world of course I would have presented the Charter to Drama UK and asked them to make it mandatory in all of their accredited colleges. Sadly Drama UK has instead, resolutely refused to sit down and discuss the Mental Health provision all of their colleges currently provide. The creme de la creme colleges have no mandatory policies as dictated under the terms of their accreditation (which probably explains why the approach differs from college to college).
Once again back in 2014 I wrote about how I thought that the current system for accrediting colleges was outdated and irrelevant to today's industry http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomasa-stamp-of-approval/ Fast forward two years and 12 colleges have left (included the jewels in the drama college crown that are LAMDA, Bristol Old Vic and RADA) whilst the others limp home with the chocolate teapot that is Drama UK.
So how much longer do we all talk about accreditation in such glowing terms? How much longer before colleges get to throw away the shackles of accreditation and simply adopt a policy of transparency? How much longer do we pay for an antiquated system to dictate what is excellent in drama training in the UK? Those remaining colleges need to step out from the shadows, and declare exactly what it is they are providing, and what their results truly are. Maybe, just maybe, they could also be accountable for their pastoral care too?
The #time4change Charter in essence takes on a life of its own now - it has got nothing more to do with The MTA, we're merely passing the relay baton if you like, in a bid to get everyone running at the same pace. Why waste months debating policy....just adopt the charter...job done. The colleges that pride themselves on getting this performer into the West End and that performer into film, at some point will be accountable for the care that they've provided ALL of their students with along the way. Anecdotally at best this is haphazard, at worse it's downright dangerous. ALL staff need to be trained, cultures have to change to allow for curiosity to permeate throughout the seats of learning.
I have a handful of batons that I'm desperate to give out. Maybe a few more colleges could follow Rose Bruford's lead and realise that it's people that's important. . . not performers. Maybe they could also see that an addition to their policies could be a good thing, it doesn't say that they've got it wrong up until now - it just says that they want to be better from now on.
My idea? Save your Drama UK subs and put the the money you save into Mental Health ;-)
Mark had visited The MTA a week earlier and as usual our discussion came around to Mental Health issues, as Mark has a well documented fight with depression, and he knows that I've been campaigning for a number of years to improve Mental Health education in drama colleges. In passing I had mentioned the Charter, and, given his history, was interested in his view on it. So we arranged for me to send it onto him. It was then a pleasant surprise when I found out that he was going to write about it in The Stage.
The Charter, as seen by Mark, needed a little bit of refining, so Angie Peake (www.counsellingforperformers.co.uk) who had written the document hurried on with the edits so that I could send it out to the various people who had already committed to sign up to it.
Like with the fund raising the year before I remembered how much I hated emailing people asking them to do something so public, however if the truth be told, I'm getting really tired of the fight to get this matter 'out there', so this became the final push to make a small difference. The final mile of my own personal marathon if you like.
Fast forward a week and we have 19 agencies all signed up, which means if they only had 30 clients each - 570 performers this week have received a document, highlighting Mental Health issues. 570 performers have discovered that their agents take Mental Health and the welfare of their clients seriously. In addition to that we have the Theatre Royal Stratford East signed up...which means that every one of their visiting companies will have a Mental Health reference as part of their orientation package (including Well being/Mindfulness...as it's easy to think that the campaign is all about illness, as in reality it's about prevention).
6 production companies have signed up, meaning that everyone that works for them in future will receive the Charter, and will again be reassured that they're working for an employer who takes Mental Health seriously.
Finally, in the area where this whole bloody campaign started just one college has taken up the mantle. Rose Bruford, which already had a robust Mental Health policy and pastoral care system, led by the rather amazing Pat O'Toole. Pat came to the conference and has stayed engaged with the process ever since. She instantly went back to work and implemented just some suggestions that came up in the conference. Regardless of whether or not they officially adopt the Charter - they have, via Pat, attempted to do something above and beyond, which after all is what this Charter is really about.
In an ideal world of course I would have presented the Charter to Drama UK and asked them to make it mandatory in all of their accredited colleges. Sadly Drama UK has instead, resolutely refused to sit down and discuss the Mental Health provision all of their colleges currently provide. The creme de la creme colleges have no mandatory policies as dictated under the terms of their accreditation (which probably explains why the approach differs from college to college).
Once again back in 2014 I wrote about how I thought that the current system for accrediting colleges was outdated and irrelevant to today's industry http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomasa-stamp-of-approval/ Fast forward two years and 12 colleges have left (included the jewels in the drama college crown that are LAMDA, Bristol Old Vic and RADA) whilst the others limp home with the chocolate teapot that is Drama UK.
So how much longer do we all talk about accreditation in such glowing terms? How much longer before colleges get to throw away the shackles of accreditation and simply adopt a policy of transparency? How much longer do we pay for an antiquated system to dictate what is excellent in drama training in the UK? Those remaining colleges need to step out from the shadows, and declare exactly what it is they are providing, and what their results truly are. Maybe, just maybe, they could also be accountable for their pastoral care too?
The #time4change Charter in essence takes on a life of its own now - it has got nothing more to do with The MTA, we're merely passing the relay baton if you like, in a bid to get everyone running at the same pace. Why waste months debating policy....just adopt the charter...job done. The colleges that pride themselves on getting this performer into the West End and that performer into film, at some point will be accountable for the care that they've provided ALL of their students with along the way. Anecdotally at best this is haphazard, at worse it's downright dangerous. ALL staff need to be trained, cultures have to change to allow for curiosity to permeate throughout the seats of learning.
I have a handful of batons that I'm desperate to give out. Maybe a few more colleges could follow Rose Bruford's lead and realise that it's people that's important. . . not performers. Maybe they could also see that an addition to their policies could be a good thing, it doesn't say that they've got it wrong up until now - it just says that they want to be better from now on.
My idea? Save your Drama UK subs and put the the money you save into Mental Health ;-)
Tuesday, 19 January 2016
2 birds with one stone AKA the blog that couldn't wait
So I appreciate that I usually only blog once a fortnight, however for the few of you that have followed my blogs over the past few years, you will know that I've had two rather loud bees in my tight fitting bonnet since opening The MTA back in 2009. The first one is the lack of Mental Health provision in drama colleges - which we're now doing something (hopefully proactive) about, in the form of running a sort of conference on March 16th https://www.facebook.com/events/911328365625354/ in a bid to get Mental Health higher up on the agenda of EVERY college. So the first bee has been swatted - and it's a huge congratulations to Actress Laura Darrall for her #itaffectsme campaign in a bid to raise awareness of mental illness and to raise some money at the same time for MIND. What's interesting is Laura's story (or at least what's known in the public domain)...and that is that she had a history of Mental illness (panic attacks, anxiety, OCD)..which sadly for Laura culminated in a breakdown last year. Now our campaign is. . . what if Laura's symptoms had been spotted and treated at college, would her story have been different? Now for all I know maybe they were, and the breakdown was heading towards her anyway as she had a susceptibility, that's for Laura to know actually not us, but somewhere in every drama college right now, there will be a Laura (or in our experience around 30% of Laura's). Suffering from an invisible but ever present illness at the more 'manageable' end of the scale, which our consultant is able to hit off at the pass before it builds up and up and heads towards a complete meltdown. In her blog Laura talks about the 'troop' that are now helping her fight the demons inside her head...but what if that troop had been on standby earlier, and had been able to diffuse the situation before it became a crises? What if there had been a class at college which had named some of the battles that were going on inside her head - maybe this would have allowed her to 'out' herself much quicker? So many what ifs, and all pointless because I don't know Laura - but here's a great what if...what if every college had Mental Health Awareness as a major topic throughout the course, one which was revisited after Freshers week, after you're told that 'we're here to listen to you', and 'what if' a Mental Health professional was so 'the norm' around the place, you instantly knew where to turn to when the battle was being fought? We are fighting for that 'what if'. With that in mind The MTA's approach is a little different. I won't bore you with it again...but here's a link that discusses what our take on it all is: http://www.thepublicreviews.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomas-mental-health-education-starts-at-college/
Our industry is slightly chicken and egg on this one. There's research that supports both the fact that the industry can hit on your susceptibility, and there's research that supports the fact that our industry particularly attracts the susceptible (as we have the elusive allure of escapism). Whichever it is, it doesn't matter - we need to raise awareness of Mental Health in education, so watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOMWvgYlj_M get yourself a post it note, write #itaffectsme on it, upload it, and knock yourself out and donate £3 to MIND. Then pop along to our discussion in March and lend your voice/support/argument...whatever it is, let's get the conversation started.
Then my other bee has forever been the organisation known as Drama UK. I first wrote this
http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomasa-stamp-of-approval/ which simply explained why The MTA was going to remain independent. I then wrote this: http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomas-who-regulates-the-regulators/ as I had been reading things that were beginning to make me question the organisation as a whole. However nothing could have prepared me for this: https://www.thestage.co.uk/opinion/2016/susan-elkin-drama-uk-needs-to-sort-out-its-priorities-fast/ 18 months after I'd first blogged about it's value. Turns out some 6 months later they are down in their membership by just over 38%? What's even worse than that...they've lost their star players. RADA, LAMDA, Bristol Old Vic...and so it continues. Then it gets even more confusing, some players had left e.g. the RCS and RWCMD but they're no long accredited...but sort of on the side lines incase they're needed? I love how Drama UK always sends me into football analogies, yet the only thing that I know about the great sport is that it involves a round object and 2 nets (and be careful which pubs you go into on the Holloway Road on a match day).
Seemingly the problem is money? People aren't prepared to pay the joining fee and then the 'please keep me affiliated' fee. Well what a turn up? I've been talking about this for years? My favorite part of the article though (and keep in mind I've already made my opinion known about their U.S. showcases)...is seemingly now Drama UK is working hard to develop the brand in China? Now I am all about the 'one world' philosophy so maybe they should call themselves World Drama and be done with it?
So colleges are paying £6500 to stay in a club that barely has a local ground anymore - but instead you can watch them play in China?? I completely get the excitement of the Eastern market opening up for all aspects of the arts....but China? So those colleges still part of this organisation are what? Funding trips to China, or just the odd phone call? I have students working their finger's to the bone to be able to afford to train with me, I couldn't spend even one pence of their hard earned cash to support an organisation that wasn't working to support them directly (and efficiently). That said I wonder if Drama UK picked up the tab for the lunch...as I see my students coming in with their packed lunches, in a bid to save money, so once again I'd be uncomfortable asking them to fund my working lunch with a journalist...which seemingly culminates in a 'give us the answer' session (so maybe I'm being harsh, but then pay the journalist a consultancy fee on top of the lunch).
To tie all of this up nicely, I have been shouting rather loudly on social media for Drama UK to support out call for better mental health provisions in drama colleges. They told me that it was out of their remit to demand such a thing BUT they are supposed to be coming to the conference, along with Equity and Spotlight. So this year they might do something really positive for the UK drama student, then maybe they should also look to lower their fees, so that the colleges that are still affiliated to the organisation can put the 'saved money' towards the level of Mental Health provision we think is necessary in a contemporary drama college. Because Drama UK #itaffectsme/us not the 'brand' in China, which has got nothing to do with my students' training.
Now...go take a selfie. Mr Kellgren and Ms Tisdall....I shall be looking out for yours ;-)
Our industry is slightly chicken and egg on this one. There's research that supports both the fact that the industry can hit on your susceptibility, and there's research that supports the fact that our industry particularly attracts the susceptible (as we have the elusive allure of escapism). Whichever it is, it doesn't matter - we need to raise awareness of Mental Health in education, so watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOMWvgYlj_M get yourself a post it note, write #itaffectsme on it, upload it, and knock yourself out and donate £3 to MIND. Then pop along to our discussion in March and lend your voice/support/argument...whatever it is, let's get the conversation started.
Then my other bee has forever been the organisation known as Drama UK. I first wrote this
http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomasa-stamp-of-approval/ which simply explained why The MTA was going to remain independent. I then wrote this: http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomas-who-regulates-the-regulators/ as I had been reading things that were beginning to make me question the organisation as a whole. However nothing could have prepared me for this: https://www.thestage.co.uk/opinion/2016/susan-elkin-drama-uk-needs-to-sort-out-its-priorities-fast/ 18 months after I'd first blogged about it's value. Turns out some 6 months later they are down in their membership by just over 38%? What's even worse than that...they've lost their star players. RADA, LAMDA, Bristol Old Vic...and so it continues. Then it gets even more confusing, some players had left e.g. the RCS and RWCMD but they're no long accredited...but sort of on the side lines incase they're needed? I love how Drama UK always sends me into football analogies, yet the only thing that I know about the great sport is that it involves a round object and 2 nets (and be careful which pubs you go into on the Holloway Road on a match day).
Seemingly the problem is money? People aren't prepared to pay the joining fee and then the 'please keep me affiliated' fee. Well what a turn up? I've been talking about this for years? My favorite part of the article though (and keep in mind I've already made my opinion known about their U.S. showcases)...is seemingly now Drama UK is working hard to develop the brand in China? Now I am all about the 'one world' philosophy so maybe they should call themselves World Drama and be done with it?
So colleges are paying £6500 to stay in a club that barely has a local ground anymore - but instead you can watch them play in China?? I completely get the excitement of the Eastern market opening up for all aspects of the arts....but China? So those colleges still part of this organisation are what? Funding trips to China, or just the odd phone call? I have students working their finger's to the bone to be able to afford to train with me, I couldn't spend even one pence of their hard earned cash to support an organisation that wasn't working to support them directly (and efficiently). That said I wonder if Drama UK picked up the tab for the lunch...as I see my students coming in with their packed lunches, in a bid to save money, so once again I'd be uncomfortable asking them to fund my working lunch with a journalist...which seemingly culminates in a 'give us the answer' session (so maybe I'm being harsh, but then pay the journalist a consultancy fee on top of the lunch).
To tie all of this up nicely, I have been shouting rather loudly on social media for Drama UK to support out call for better mental health provisions in drama colleges. They told me that it was out of their remit to demand such a thing BUT they are supposed to be coming to the conference, along with Equity and Spotlight. So this year they might do something really positive for the UK drama student, then maybe they should also look to lower their fees, so that the colleges that are still affiliated to the organisation can put the 'saved money' towards the level of Mental Health provision we think is necessary in a contemporary drama college. Because Drama UK #itaffectsme/us not the 'brand' in China, which has got nothing to do with my students' training.
Now...go take a selfie. Mr Kellgren and Ms Tisdall....I shall be looking out for yours ;-)
Saturday, 28 November 2015
Well, Well, Well,
After a long deliberation I have decided to continue with this blogging malarkey. To be honest it's because there's just so much say....and so little time to say it. So this way I get to waffle on and people get to chose when and what they listen to. Of course it also gives me the perfect procrastination tool whilst writing shows etc.
So this week The Stage ran this headline https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2015/uk-drama-training-faces-crisis-after-mass-exodus-from-accreditation-body/?utm_content=bufferb0bce&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=bufferwhich basically stated that the UK accreditation system for drama schools (run by Drama UK) was in crises. Why had it hit this point I hear you cry? Well quite simply they had, seemingly overnight lost their proverbial jewels in its crown. In other words...RADA, LAMDA, BOV had joined the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland and the RWCMD and had left 'the establishment'.
Now The MTA had always been very clear about wanting to stay independent - hell I'd even written a blog last year explaining our thinking: http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomasa-stamp-of-approval/ As you can see in that article I clearly named at the time that I could see no merit at all in paying all that money to essentially join a club. Silently lots of people applauded this decision, and agreed with the logic, but publicly our decision raised a lot of eyebrows. Just last week I found myself debating this choice on another website, where someone had inferred that we had made the decision to stay independent because we just weren't good enough to actually 'join the club'. The person debating the issue with me, felt that my clear statement of 'we have no interest in being part of that system', was in some form me 'fudging the real issue'. A strange standpoint given quite how much I shout about how inept I find the whole Drama UK scene, and a simple Google search would see countless articles by myself stating why we opted to remain independent.
However the fact remains that parents have been using the accreditation system as a guide to 'what are the good colleges' - so what happens now? RADA is still as amazing as it was a month or two ago before it jumped ship, similarly LAMDA is still offering a course of world class standing, but will those parents now think that these two vast institutions have suddenly slipped through a substandard net?
I'm aware that every time I challenge or question 'the establishment' I instantly get challenged for being negative against the other colleges. As soon as I say what The MTA's stance on a topic is, everybody else reads into that, translating it into saying that all the others have got it wrong. Strange that isn't it? This free world that we live in, seemingly doesn't allow us to make stand alone statements, or indeed challenging statements. I wonder why that is?
When I first made our viewpoint public about our feelings about Drama UK the onslaught was bewildering - yet nobody could tell me what Drama UK was actually contributing to the training of the students..other than maintaining a standard. Yet to this day, my fundamental question of 'did all the NCDT colleges get re-assessed in order to join Drama UK' has never been answered? I wonder why? What exactly is the 'standard' that they're maintaining.
The last set of statistics to come of Drama UK were based on a survey of their 2012 graduates (& I should add that wasn't a complete survey ie not every graduate has answered it). So how do we know what the standard really is?
Recently I've been banging heads with Drama UK over my campaign to get a professional Mental Health practitioner into every UK drama college as a key member of the faculty. Now again The MTA has always taken a unique response to Mental Health during training (best described here: http://www.thepublicreviews.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomas-mental-health-education-starts-at-college/) then last December I started an active campaign to see if I could convince other colleges to join us in thinking a little bit differently about their approach to Mental Health matters during training (http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomas-support-each-other-in-2015/) If you've read any of my other articles/blogs this past year, you will be aware of my growing frustration as in spite of a few positive public tweets...not one college has actually approached us to discuss this model. Equity acknowledges that colleges should do more to help students' mental well being during training, The Stage acknowledges it...yet interestingly Drama UK the one organisation that could make a massive difference failed to even enter a meaningful dialogue over the issue. Instead they tweeted (so you can check this out for yourselves)...that they were not in a position to enforce a particular pastoral care package on any of their colleges (I am paraphrasing...so please feel free to check their exact wording), yet they were keen to point out that they took pastoral seriously.
So this 'almighty body'...the ONLY coherent organisation within the UK Drama college world, in reality had no powers to insist that students got a coherent, reflexive pastoral care package that included good mental health provision. A few people shouted from the rooftops that their colleges had a mental health policy, or had access to mental health resources...and hurrah for those pieces of paper that no doubt ticked a box. However in reality what did that mean?
We were campaigning for staff to be trained in mental health issues. We want the onus to be on the colleges to spot the problems and to have the resources to instantly deal with the issues, and yes, ideally we'd like mental health welfare to be at the centre of a training programme. In the end my desperation at the lack of movement within any of the powers that be resulted in us now running our own Mental Health Awareness day https://www.facebook.com/events/911328365625354/, where we're looking forward to not only discussing our model, but also listening to the other models that are genuinely operating out there. To their credit, Equity YMC and Spotlight have already agreed (in principle) to come and hear what we have to say...and indeed to add their take on proceedings. We've also had a dialogue from one of the still accredited colleges agreeing to come over and join in the discussion. Eventually even Drama UK said that they'd turn up (date permitting of course).
Publicly we've taken a lot of flak about this, with people slating us for daring to suggest that we have it right, whilst others have it wrong(which I should add we have never actually said...we have just challenged people to look at their current models to see if they can be improved upon). Those people that have entered a dialogue with us, have all clearly seen that this isn't our position at all...our position is that we're desperately trying to get it right...but let's get all of us together to see what more we can do. Privately the support has been overwhelming. The horror stories that I've been told in the last few weeks alone about how certain situations have been dealt with, within policies that seemingly met Drama UK's stringent standards have been terrifying. The amount of emails I've recently received from performers who don't even know me asking for help because they don't know where else to turn, is staggering.
I am not a Mental Health expert, however we have been able to guide all these people to the right resources in order for them to get help (in some cases urgently).
Drama UK charges their members around £6000/yr in order to stay as a part of their club. How about the rest of the colleges all jump ship and put that £6000/yr directly towards providing their students with a better mental health provision?
We definitely need our industry to be regulated (there are too many rubbish colleges both accredited and non accredited, taking money off people that the staff know will never work). There definitely needs to be 'a standard' that all decent colleges adhere to. A standard that is regularly spot checked to ensure that it's being maintained all year around, every year. My point all along though, is that part of that standard should comprise of an inclusive Mental Health policy, which attempts to head off future issues right from the start.
Us colleges are in the most unique place to transform lives. Many colleges ask for a physical assessment prior to accepting students, what if we could all offer the same level of support with our students' mental health too?
Let's face facts...we haven't got it right yet. Too many young performers are struggling with Mental Health issues, the stats prove it. This is not a UK problem, this is a worldwide problem in the arts. Why be dogmatic in our thinking that 'we already have it right'...why not remain curious that there's a better way to approach this, that could make a real difference to peoples' lives, and in turn a real difference to our industry.
The MTA still has a long way to go to 'get this right'...but at least we're acknowledging that.
So is drama training in the UK in crises? Actually I don't think that it is. I think that Drama UK is in crises, but that's a different matter altogether. Drama UK started working too closely with establishments and lost touch with the people that really mattered...the students. Some (definitely not all) colleges have made the same mistake, thinking that 'their name' was more important than 'their students'. However in every single one of those establishments there are a body of staff who care so much about their students, and are desperately trying to make it OK for them. They are fighting against the increase in numbers, they are fighting with the mounds of paperwork that prevent them from connecting with their students as much as they would like to, in order to deal with the red tape and various hoops that they suddenly have to jump through. Take away some of that admin, let the staff do what they do best (train students)...and just add a bit of mental health education along the way. What a difference that could make, and what an exciting place to start 2016 from.
Every college offers something so different, there is no competition. It's about what works for you...which method you think that you'll thrive in. However it would be amazing if the one 'constant' amongst us all, was a stringent Mental health policy.
So this week The Stage ran this headline https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2015/uk-drama-training-faces-crisis-after-mass-exodus-from-accreditation-body/?utm_content=bufferb0bce&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=bufferwhich basically stated that the UK accreditation system for drama schools (run by Drama UK) was in crises. Why had it hit this point I hear you cry? Well quite simply they had, seemingly overnight lost their proverbial jewels in its crown. In other words...RADA, LAMDA, BOV had joined the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland and the RWCMD and had left 'the establishment'.
Now The MTA had always been very clear about wanting to stay independent - hell I'd even written a blog last year explaining our thinking: http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomasa-stamp-of-approval/ As you can see in that article I clearly named at the time that I could see no merit at all in paying all that money to essentially join a club. Silently lots of people applauded this decision, and agreed with the logic, but publicly our decision raised a lot of eyebrows. Just last week I found myself debating this choice on another website, where someone had inferred that we had made the decision to stay independent because we just weren't good enough to actually 'join the club'. The person debating the issue with me, felt that my clear statement of 'we have no interest in being part of that system', was in some form me 'fudging the real issue'. A strange standpoint given quite how much I shout about how inept I find the whole Drama UK scene, and a simple Google search would see countless articles by myself stating why we opted to remain independent.
However the fact remains that parents have been using the accreditation system as a guide to 'what are the good colleges' - so what happens now? RADA is still as amazing as it was a month or two ago before it jumped ship, similarly LAMDA is still offering a course of world class standing, but will those parents now think that these two vast institutions have suddenly slipped through a substandard net?
I'm aware that every time I challenge or question 'the establishment' I instantly get challenged for being negative against the other colleges. As soon as I say what The MTA's stance on a topic is, everybody else reads into that, translating it into saying that all the others have got it wrong. Strange that isn't it? This free world that we live in, seemingly doesn't allow us to make stand alone statements, or indeed challenging statements. I wonder why that is?
When I first made our viewpoint public about our feelings about Drama UK the onslaught was bewildering - yet nobody could tell me what Drama UK was actually contributing to the training of the students..other than maintaining a standard. Yet to this day, my fundamental question of 'did all the NCDT colleges get re-assessed in order to join Drama UK' has never been answered? I wonder why? What exactly is the 'standard' that they're maintaining.
The last set of statistics to come of Drama UK were based on a survey of their 2012 graduates (& I should add that wasn't a complete survey ie not every graduate has answered it). So how do we know what the standard really is?
Recently I've been banging heads with Drama UK over my campaign to get a professional Mental Health practitioner into every UK drama college as a key member of the faculty. Now again The MTA has always taken a unique response to Mental Health during training (best described here: http://www.thepublicreviews.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomas-mental-health-education-starts-at-college/) then last December I started an active campaign to see if I could convince other colleges to join us in thinking a little bit differently about their approach to Mental Health matters during training (http://www.thereviewshub.com/blog-annemarie-lewis-thomas-support-each-other-in-2015/) If you've read any of my other articles/blogs this past year, you will be aware of my growing frustration as in spite of a few positive public tweets...not one college has actually approached us to discuss this model. Equity acknowledges that colleges should do more to help students' mental well being during training, The Stage acknowledges it...yet interestingly Drama UK the one organisation that could make a massive difference failed to even enter a meaningful dialogue over the issue. Instead they tweeted (so you can check this out for yourselves)...that they were not in a position to enforce a particular pastoral care package on any of their colleges (I am paraphrasing...so please feel free to check their exact wording), yet they were keen to point out that they took pastoral seriously.
So this 'almighty body'...the ONLY coherent organisation within the UK Drama college world, in reality had no powers to insist that students got a coherent, reflexive pastoral care package that included good mental health provision. A few people shouted from the rooftops that their colleges had a mental health policy, or had access to mental health resources...and hurrah for those pieces of paper that no doubt ticked a box. However in reality what did that mean?
We were campaigning for staff to be trained in mental health issues. We want the onus to be on the colleges to spot the problems and to have the resources to instantly deal with the issues, and yes, ideally we'd like mental health welfare to be at the centre of a training programme. In the end my desperation at the lack of movement within any of the powers that be resulted in us now running our own Mental Health Awareness day https://www.facebook.com/events/911328365625354/, where we're looking forward to not only discussing our model, but also listening to the other models that are genuinely operating out there. To their credit, Equity YMC and Spotlight have already agreed (in principle) to come and hear what we have to say...and indeed to add their take on proceedings. We've also had a dialogue from one of the still accredited colleges agreeing to come over and join in the discussion. Eventually even Drama UK said that they'd turn up (date permitting of course).
Publicly we've taken a lot of flak about this, with people slating us for daring to suggest that we have it right, whilst others have it wrong(which I should add we have never actually said...we have just challenged people to look at their current models to see if they can be improved upon). Those people that have entered a dialogue with us, have all clearly seen that this isn't our position at all...our position is that we're desperately trying to get it right...but let's get all of us together to see what more we can do. Privately the support has been overwhelming. The horror stories that I've been told in the last few weeks alone about how certain situations have been dealt with, within policies that seemingly met Drama UK's stringent standards have been terrifying. The amount of emails I've recently received from performers who don't even know me asking for help because they don't know where else to turn, is staggering.
I am not a Mental Health expert, however we have been able to guide all these people to the right resources in order for them to get help (in some cases urgently).
Drama UK charges their members around £6000/yr in order to stay as a part of their club. How about the rest of the colleges all jump ship and put that £6000/yr directly towards providing their students with a better mental health provision?
We definitely need our industry to be regulated (there are too many rubbish colleges both accredited and non accredited, taking money off people that the staff know will never work). There definitely needs to be 'a standard' that all decent colleges adhere to. A standard that is regularly spot checked to ensure that it's being maintained all year around, every year. My point all along though, is that part of that standard should comprise of an inclusive Mental Health policy, which attempts to head off future issues right from the start.
Us colleges are in the most unique place to transform lives. Many colleges ask for a physical assessment prior to accepting students, what if we could all offer the same level of support with our students' mental health too?
Let's face facts...we haven't got it right yet. Too many young performers are struggling with Mental Health issues, the stats prove it. This is not a UK problem, this is a worldwide problem in the arts. Why be dogmatic in our thinking that 'we already have it right'...why not remain curious that there's a better way to approach this, that could make a real difference to peoples' lives, and in turn a real difference to our industry.
The MTA still has a long way to go to 'get this right'...but at least we're acknowledging that.
So is drama training in the UK in crises? Actually I don't think that it is. I think that Drama UK is in crises, but that's a different matter altogether. Drama UK started working too closely with establishments and lost touch with the people that really mattered...the students. Some (definitely not all) colleges have made the same mistake, thinking that 'their name' was more important than 'their students'. However in every single one of those establishments there are a body of staff who care so much about their students, and are desperately trying to make it OK for them. They are fighting against the increase in numbers, they are fighting with the mounds of paperwork that prevent them from connecting with their students as much as they would like to, in order to deal with the red tape and various hoops that they suddenly have to jump through. Take away some of that admin, let the staff do what they do best (train students)...and just add a bit of mental health education along the way. What a difference that could make, and what an exciting place to start 2016 from.
Every college offers something so different, there is no competition. It's about what works for you...which method you think that you'll thrive in. However it would be amazing if the one 'constant' amongst us all, was a stringent Mental health policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)