Devising Assessment: Five Performers, One Missing Rehearsal
A Year 11 Drama class is preparing the internal assessment in which students devise and perform a group drama. The group of five has chosen a 6-minute piece about a family tangi, and three weeks remain. One student, Mere, has missed two of six rehearsals for a regional sports tournament and will miss one more. Another student, Josh, has taken over directing and now speaks most of the opening scene's lines. The teacher has one scheduled observation of a full run in week two. The group's rehearsal log is a shared online document, and almost every entry is written by Josh. The teacher must decide what evidence to collect, how to make each student's contribution visible, and what to do if Mere's contribution cannot be verified before the assessment deadline. The school allows one further assessment opportunity for internal standards, but the teacher is unsure whether that applies to group devising.
1. What evidence should the teacher collect in the remaining three weeks to make a valid individual judgement for each student? Explain how each piece of evidence addresses authenticity and individual contribution.
Read the worked answer
The teacher needs evidence that is authentic, sufficient, and attributable to each student, not just to the group. A defensible evidence set would include:
- Teacher observation notes with timestamps from the week-two run and the final performance. The notes should record specific choices by named students, e.g. 'Mere changes level on the line "ko wai koe?" and holds the pause for two seconds', rather than 'group used levels well'.
- Continuous, unedited video of at least two rehearsals and the final performance. Video allows repeated viewing and lets the teacher check whether a student's contribution is consistent, not a one-off.
- Individual student journals or short written reflections, kept separately from the shared log, in which each student explains two devising decisions they made and why.
- A short structured conversation (2–3 minutes) with each student, asking them to identify a moment they shaped and what they were trying to communicate. This is not a memory test; it tests ownership of the work.
- A group contract or role map showing agreed responsibilities, updated as roles change.
The shared log alone is weak evidence because Josh writes it, so it documents his perspective, not the group's. For Mere, the teacher should create a targeted opportunity to capture her work: record a rehearsal of her scenes, ask her to annotate her blocking and character notes, or hold a short video call. If Mere's contribution still cannot be verified, the teacher must not infer a grade from the group's performance. The teacher should check the school's assessment policy and NZQA requirements before offering a further opportunity, because a further opportunity is not automatic and must still produce authentic evidence.
2. The teacher notices Josh's dominance. Draft feedback that redirects the group without penalising Josh's initiative. Include specific drama vocabulary.
Read the worked answer
Feedback should name the problem as a group dynamic and performance issue, not as Josh being 'too bossy'. A workable draft:
'Josh, your leadership has given the opening a clear shape, and the audience can see the status relationship between your character and Mere's. The issue is that the group is now relying on you for blocking, offers and most of the spoken text. For assessment, each performer needs to show their own use of role, status, space and voice. In the next rehearsal, I want you to hand two of your opening lines back to Mere's character, move your focus to her on the line "ka mate", and take a low-status position on the mat while she speaks. That does not reduce your role; it gives the scene a stronger ensemble balance and gives the assessor evidence of both performers' choices.'
The reasoning matters more than the wording. Josh's initiative is valuable, but it is currently masking other students' contributions. The teacher should redirect him through performance tasks - handing over lines, changing status, shifting focus - rather than telling him to 'do less'. This preserves his confidence while making individual evidence visible. The teacher should also set a group rule that every member leads one rehearsal task and that the shared log must have entries from at least three different students. This turns the feedback into an assessment-validity action, not a punishment.
3. If Mere misses the final run, what are the defensible options? Explain what the teacher must not do.
Read the worked answer
The teacher's first step is to check the school's assessment policy and the current NZQA rules, because the answer depends on what evidence already exists and what the school permits. The defensible options are:
- Reschedule the final run within the assessment window if the group and venue allow it. This is the cleanest option because it produces direct evidence of Mere performing her role in the devised piece.
- Use existing evidence if it is sufficient. If the week-two video and teacher observation notes show Mere performing the whole piece to the required standard, and the teacher can verify that the final version has not changed substantially, those records may be used. The teacher must be honest about what is missing - for example, if Mere was absent when the ending was changed, the earlier recording may not cover the final piece.
- Offer a further opportunity only if the school's policy allows it and the conditions can be made authentic. A further opportunity is not a free pass; it must be a genuine assessment event under the same conditions.
- Report Not Achieved if no sufficient evidence exists. This is not a punishment; it reflects that the assessor cannot verify the student's performance against the standard.
The teacher must not award a grade based on the group's performance, on Josh's log entries, or on an assumption that Mere 'probably' met the standard. Group work does not justify a group grade. The teacher also should not ask other students to certify Mere's ability in place of teacher observation. If a further opportunity is offered, it should be documented so that moderation can see why it was needed and how authenticity was protected.