Devising a Six-Minute Concept Piece with an Absent Performer

The biggest risk is not Mere’s absences by themselves; it is that the group has not yet made and documented deliberate choices that realise the concept. At Achieved, a group can show a concept through a series of scenes. At Merit and Excellence, the evidence needs to show control and coherence: techniques, conventions and technologies should be selected because they build the idea, not because they fill time. The run-through shows a clear opening image, but the talking-heads middle replaces dramatic action with explanation, and the ending abandons the concept. That is a conceptual problem, not a rehearsal-attendance problem. Mere’s absences make it harder, but a group can work around them if her function is clear and repeatable. The process journal also matters: without a record of problems, options and decisions, the teacher cannot see the devising thinking behind the performance. So the highest risk is that the group performs some dramatic moments but cannot show intentional realisation of the concept.

First, replace the middle talking heads with a repeated physical motif that carries the algorithm idea: for example, all four performers freeze in a shared gesture whenever a phone notification sound plays, then repeat fragments of overlapping text. This gives the group a convention that is repeatable, works without one performer being present at every rehearsal, and makes the concept visible through movement and sound rather than explanation. Second, give Mere a structural role that can be learned independently - a movement chorus or a recorded voice that interacts with the live performers - and rehearse it in short, scheduled segments. This uses her availability realistically and prevents the group from treating her absence as an excuse to abandon staging. Both changes produce evidence of deliberate control: the group can explain why the motif, sound and role were chosen and how they shape the audience’s understanding. The teacher should not design the motif; the group should test two options, record the choice in the journal, and justify it.

From this point, the journal should record decisions, not just events. For each significant choice, the group should note the problem they faced, the options they considered, the option chosen, and the effect they expected. For example: “Problem: middle section explains the concept. Options: voice-over, repeated movement motif, direct address. Chose repeated motif because it lets the audience feel surveillance rather than hear a definition. Tested in rehearsal; it slowed the pace, so we cut two repeats.” This is assessable because it shows the devising process behind the performance: the group can demonstrate that techniques and conventions were selected for a purpose and refined after testing. Attendance notes and prop lists do not show that thinking. The journal should also include dated photographs or short video clips of rehearsal experiments, but only where they are annotated with what the group learned. The teacher can then triangulate the journal with the performance and with questioning, rather than relying on a polished final product alone.