SNAPPY OPERAS - mahoganyopera.co.uk Operas... · Snappy Operas roughly met its targets, with 24 schools/classes (target 50 across two years); 689 children (target 750 school children);

SNAPPY OPERAS EVALUATION REPORT

MAY 2017

Annabel Jackson Associates Ltd Evaluators The Priory

54 Lyncombe Hill Bath BA2 4PJ

Somerset Tel: 01225-446614

Email: [email protected] Website: www.AnnabelJacksonAssociates.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.annabeljacksonassociates.com/

2 | P A G E A N N A B E L J A C K S O N A S S O C I A T E S L T D

2 SNAPPY OPERAS EVALUATION REPORT

Contents SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 3

Background ............................................................................................................................. 3 Outputs .................................................................................................................................... 3 Evaluation brief ....................................................................................................................... 3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 3 Snappy Operas model ............................................................................................................. 4 Key findings ............................................................................................................................. 4

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 6 Background ............................................................................................................................. 6 The brief .................................................................................................................................. 6 Timetable ................................................................................................................................ 7

CONCEPTUALISATION ............................................................................................. 9 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 9 Explanation of logic models .................................................................................................... 9 Language ............................................................................................................................... 10 Logic model ........................................................................................................................... 10 The model ............................................................................................................................. 12

CASE STUDY: ST STEPHENS SCHOOL CORNWALL ......................................... 13 Teacher’s perspective ........................................................................................................... 13 Students’ perspective ............................................................................................................ 13

SURVEY OF CREATIVE LEADERS ........................................................................ 16 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 16 Process .................................................................................................................................. 16 Outcomes .............................................................................................................................. 28

SURVEY OF COMPOSERS AND LIBRETTISTS ................................................... 33 introduction........................................................................................................................... 33 Process .................................................................................................................................. 33 Outcomes .............................................................................................................................. 38

OBSERVATION QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................................................ 40 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 40 Delivery ................................................................................................................................. 40 Lessons .................................................................................................................................. 41

SURVEYS OF TEACHERS ........................................................................................ 43 Baseline survey ...................................................................................................................... 43 Project end questionnaire ..................................................................................................... 45

LOCAL PARTNER SURVEY .................................................................................... 56 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 56 The process ........................................................................................................................... 56 Outcomes .............................................................................................................................. 61 Overall views ......................................................................................................................... 61

STUDENTS LEARNING TEST ................................................................................. 65 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 65 Results ................................................................................................................................... 66

Copyright Annabel Jackson Associates Ltd. May 2017.

Not to be reproduced in part or whole without prior permission



SUMMARY BACKGROUND

Snappy Operas is an opera making project with young people aged 7-11 delivered in five regions of England between autumn 2016 and spring 2017. Teams of opera professionals worked with classes to create 10 minute operas, which were rehearsed and performed by a wider group of schools. The new commissions will be placed online and so made available for an even wider group of schools.

Mahogany Opera Group worked with, and was partly reliant on, local partners such as music hubs.

OUTPUTS

Snappy Operas roughly met its targets, with 24 schools/classes (target 50 across two years); 689 children (target 750 school children); 40 teachers and partners attending the CPD (target 50 across two years) and 1,925 audience members (target 4,000 across two years).

EVALUATION BRIEF

Annabel Jackson Associates Ltd was appointed in October 2017.

The evaluation brief was to help capture learning from the first year so that the model of Snappy Operas could be tested and refined; and also to build evaluative capacity in Mahogany Opera Group and strengthen its systems to improve project delivery and understanding of the impact of the work on audiences, participants, communities and the sector for funders and other stakeholders. As well as this report, we produced an evaluation note and delivered a training session.

METHODOLOGY

The evaluation methodology consisted of:

▪ Creation of a logic model with the team.

▪ Baseline survey of teachers.

▪ Creation of, and analysis of observation questionnaires.

▪ Project end survey of teachers.

▪ Case study of one school.

▪ Creation of, and analysis of, a learning questionnaire for pupils.

▪ Online survey of artists.

▪ Online survey of creative leaders.

This is a relatively detailed evaluation given the scale of the project and is designed to illustrate different methods for Mahogany Opera Group, to help with future learning.



SNAPPY OPERAS MODEL

The Snappy Operas model has these special features:

▪ Collaborative. Music hubs and other regional partners help select the schools and manage the relationship.

▪ Contemporary. The commission asks for an original work that is ten minutes long, without solos, with parts for three groups, scored for piano and up to two instruments. The commissions are intended to be scaleable for different group sizes, and assume low levels of existing musical training in the performers.

▪ Co-created. The artists observe and interact with the young people. Young people gain by seeing and being part of the creative process. Artists gain by seeing reactions from young people. Everyone gains from a higher quality product judged in terms of relevance.

▪ Experiential. Young people learn by doing. Creative leaders act as role models for creative teams: where different views are discussed robustly and respectfully, where individuality is celebrated, where the process embodies self-discipline, focus and concentration. The creative leader uses the language of the rehearsal room e.g. referring to the stage, cast.

▪ Accessible. The creative leader ensures that all young people in the class can take part. Everyone is equal.

▪ Reciprocal. The process is two way. Teachers gain CPD and also take over part of the work at the rehearsal stage.

KEY FINDINGS

The strengths of the project were:

▪ The objectives were clear and compelling.

▪ The creative teams were highly skilled and worked well together.

▪ The structure of working with local music hubs and other partners helped to make the best of the limited capacity of Mahogany Opera Group.

▪ The value to schools was high. 86% of teachers said that Snappy Operas supported their teaching of the curriculum. All teachers said that Snappy Operas increased students musical and drama skills. All teachers said that Snappy Operas strengthened students’ team working skills. All teachers would recommend Mahogany Opera Group projects to other teachers.

▪ The legacy of the project was strong. Children were excited by opera and more interested in attending performances. The online resources, including the new commissions, brought the potential benefit to a large number of additional schools.

▪ The project was very good value for money.

“Having participated in sessions delivered by other organisations in the past, this was, without question, the best I have been involved with. The team were excellent with the children and involved the children within the development of the opera, whilst still steering the children towards a performance.” Teacher survey



“We were so grateful and lucky to have been chosen to be part of this project - it was awesome and inspiring. what many officials don’t realise is that the impact of taking part in this performance has a massive effect on self-esteem and resilience, and therefore on their work in school.” Teacher survey

“We achieved a lot more than I expected. At first I thought it was hard but we still managed to do it. And we were relaxed while doing it.” Student interview

“I had no impression of what opera was. My mind was a blank. Once you know about opera, it is fun. Everything is fun: acting, props, costumes.” Student interview

The weaknesses of the project were:

▪ The partners tended to recruit schools based on their own objectives rather than those of Mahogany Opera Group.

▪ The partners and the teachers varied in their understanding of, and commitment to, the project. More could be done to communicate teachers’ expected role.



INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND

Snappy Operas is a nationwide project run by Mahogany Opera Group making opera with young people aged 7-11. Over a period of two years, ten regional partners will help 1,500 primary school children create and perform ten, 10-minute operas. .Between autumn 2016 and spring 2017, the project worked with 750 primary school children across five regions of the UK (Cornwall, Cumbria, Norfolk, Suffolk, and North Tyneside).

Each Snappy Opera is a 10-minute piece for children’s voices with flexible vocal parts and accompaniment developed with the benefit of intensive R&D workshops. The process is led by creative teams composed of leading practitioners who help the young people to understand the different crafts involved in making an opera. As well as supporting student learning, Mahogany Opera Group offers professional development and training for school teachers, music and drama practitioners from each region with the aim of sharing skills and knowledge and helping increase confidence in teaching about or with opera.

FIGURE 1: TARGETS AND OUTPUTS ACROSS THE TWO YEARS (10 REGIONS)

Number

of

schools

Number of

participants/

audience

per session

Length

of

session

Number

of

sessions

Total

attendees

Target

pro rata

year 1

Total

attendees

Actual for

year 1

R&D sessions 10 30 Full day 20: 2 per

school

150

Rehearsal

sessions

50 30 2 hours 250: 3

plus 2 by

the

teacher

per

school

750 689

CPD 50 10 2 hours 10: 1 per

region

25 40

Performances 50 200 20: 2 per

region (1

school

and 1

public)

2,000 1925

THE BRIEF

The evaluation brief was to help capture learning from the first year so that the model of Snappy Operas could be tested and refined; and also to build evaluative capacity in Mahogany Opera Group and strengthen its systems to improve project delivery and understanding of the impact of the work on audiences, participants, communities and the sector for funders and other stakeholders.



The specific tasks mentioned in the brief were:

▪ “Determine the types of data which Mahogany should be collecting, both qualitative and quantitative, utilising their knowledge of the evaluation requirements of current public and private sector stakeholders, and lead in the gathering of data across Snappy Operas.

▪ Write a comprehensive evaluation report which investigates the impact of the Snappy Operas programme.

▪ Explore fully the outputs of Mahogany’s MY Opera programme and determine the most effective means by which data could be collected to meet the needs of stakeholders.

▪ Formulate a low-cost high-impact evaluation model, which can be delivered by practitioners as part of their project delivery activities.

▪ Create a standard analysis model that enables the core staff team to take raw data gathered and generate evaluation reports in future.

▪ Provide training to the core staff team and to practitioners so that they can implement the new evaluation model across future projects without needing additional support.

▪ Review whether the newly devised model is working effectively.”

TIMETABLE

Evaluation deadlines are in bold.

Pilot:

18 February 2016: Initial workshop in Aldeburgh to develop The Itch Witch Pilot.

7 April 2016: Follow-up workshop in Aldeburgh to hone ideas.

1 June 2016: Workshop performance of The Itch Witch with Pembroke Academy of Music, London.

Year 1:

Autumn 2016: Development of four Snappy Operas with four groups across the UK:

January 23: Becky to send out teacher’s baseline questionnaire, with deadline of 14th Feb, teachers to be told about learning questionnaire and asked to apply the baseline.

14th Feb+: Team to use and enter Observation Questionnaire.

February-March 2017: Performance - Work with local schools to prepare Snappy Operas for mass performances.

March/April 2017: Performance - Premiere performances of all five Snappy Operas.

Friday 24 March – Cumbria performances Tuesday 28 March – Suffolk performances



Wednesday 29 March – Cornwall performances Thursday 30 March – Norfolk performances Tuesday 4 April – North Tyneside performances

5th April 2017: Becky to send out Survey of Creative Leaders and Survey of Artists, and Teachers’ project end questionnaire, Teachers to be asked to repeat learning questionnaire.

After performances: two debrief sessions in two regions: group discussion about the roll out of the publication and independent use. Teacher questionnaires to be filled in at the end of the session.

March/April 2017: date and location to be decided: Annabel to interview five pairs of pupils at a selected school.

May 2017: Evaluation report.

Year 2:

Autumn 2017: R&D - Development of five Snappy Operas with five groups across the UK.

January-March 2018: Performance - Premiere performances of five Snappy Operas.

Summer 2018: Snappy Operas published.



CONCEPTUALISATION INTRODUCTION

Evaluation is composed of four interlinked strands:

▪ Thinking. Framing, focusing, conceptualising, interpreting, synthesising.

▪ People. Motivating, training, involving, reassuring, listening, informing, influencing

▪ Systems. Planning, gathering data, entering data on a computer, analysing data, disseminating information.

▪ Action. Making recommendations, implementing recommendation.

It is common for arts organisations and others to equate evaluation with Systems (methods) and not plan for the other crucial elements of the system.

Evaluative thinking has these benefits:

▪ Ensuring a clear direction. The process of creating a logic model helps to generate a group consensus about the precise intended outcomes.

▪ Creating a lean evaluation system. Being precise about intended outcomes and critical success factors helps evaluation to focus on key questions.

▪ Bringing the different elements of the evaluation system together. Articulating the theory of change helps test the implied connection between actions and expected outcomes, and results in a balanced evaluation system which covers both.

▪ Testing the logic behind the project. The logic model session helps check that the ideas behind the project are sound and it can identify potential hurdles in its delivery. Clear thinking strengthens not just the evaluation but also the implementation of a programme.

▪ Ensuring expectations are realistic. The logic model shows the chain of logic and therefore graphically illustrates the time lag between short terms outcomes, long term outcomes and impact.

▪ Customising the evaluation. The logic model helps ensure that the evaluation captures what is special about the organisation.

▪ Summarising the project. The logic model gives a concise description of the project in a form that shows its rationale.

▪ Providing a structure to capture organisational learning. Comparing what happens with what was expected or planned leads naturally to questions about organisational lessons.

EXPLANATION OF LOGIC MODELS

A logic model is a visual depiction of a programme or project. Logic models were originally developed and popularised by The Kellogg Foundation in the United States. By plotting the different stages in a programme – the actions and assumed consequences (outcomes) - logic models provide a simple but powerful way of interrogating the causality assumed by a programme. Logic models are read from left to right:



Your planned work Your intended results

LANGUAGE

This is our definition of the terms used in a logic model:

▪ Resources are financial and non-financial inputs for a project.

▪ Activities are the actions taken by the project.

▪ Outputs are measures of effort to show that the project took place, and can be defined from the supply side (number of events), or the demand side (number of participants).

▪ Outcomes are changes in the attitudes, behaviour, skills, knowledge, motivation, feelings, or aspirations of participants; or the culture, structures, systems, or processes of organisations.

▪ Impacts are the direct and indirect effects for society, the economy and the environment.

LOGIC MODEL

This is the logic model discussed in the group:

ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS SHORT TERM

OUTCOMES

LONG OUTCOMES IMPACT

Piloting

R&D sessions

Creative team

briefing

Online

resources

Rehearsal

sessions

New

commissions:

mini operas

(target 10)

Number of R&D

sessions (10

groups of

assumed 30

pupils x 2

sessions)

Number of

performance

Young people

develop their self-

expression, self-

discipline and

creativity,

confidence and

motivation in arts,

improve their music

and performance

skills and ability to

work in a group,

and increase their

curiosity about,

interest in, and

Mahogany Opera

Group builds

audiences for the

future

Repertoire is

performed by

schools and youth

groups

Learning is

disseminated

Mahogany

Opera Group is

seen as a leader

in participatory

opera

Schools have

stronger

infrastructure

for music and

opera activity

Activities

If you have access to resources then you

will be able to deliveryour planned work

Outputs

If you deliver the planned activities

then you will be able to give the planned level of service and

experience

Outcomes

If you deliver the planned service and experience then the

participants will benefit in specific

ways

Impact

If the benefits to participants occur,

then changes to society, the economy or environment will

follow



Performance

sessions

Teacher CPD

sessions (50

groups of

assumed 30

pupils x 3 two

hour sessions,

plus 2 sessions

run by the

teacher)

Number of

schools (target

50)

Number of

pupils (target

1,500)

Number of

pupils taking

ArtsAward

(target 1,500)

Learning

resources e.g.

composer led

tutorials and

performance

videos

knowledge of,

opera and the arts

in general

Teachers develop

their skills and

confidence, interest

in delivering

creative sessions,

and increase their

interest in and

knowledge of opera

and the arts in

general

Artists widen and

enrich their artistic

development

Schools increase

their interest in and

commitment to

opera and the arts

in general

Regional partners

increase their

awareness of the

demand and need

for opera projects

and their value

Mahogany Opera

Group strengthens

its local networks,

builds its pool of

creative leaders,

learns about how to

mobilise schools

and partnerships

and creates a

flexible model of

arts education

Assumptions:



Young people will be more inspired by and interested in opera if they meet opera professionals.

Young people will have a greater appreciation of opera, if they see the different roles and

elements of performance.

Young people will feel more ownership of the opera if they have taken part in and witnessed the

creative process.

Many people don’t know that composers are writing operas today.

Barriers to opera attendance are often perceptual and embodied in myths that need debunking:

families and teachers have negative preconceptions about opera.

Schools have sufficient capacity to deliver rehearsals and follow activity.

Participatory work helps build audiences for shows.

THE MODEL

The Snappy Operas model has these special features:

▪ Collaborative. Music hubs and other regional partners help select the schools and manage the relationship.

▪ Contemporary. The commission asks for an original work that is ten minutes long, without solos, with parts for three groups, scored for piano and up to two instruments. The commissions are intended to be scaleable for different group sizes, and assume low levels of existing musical training in the performers.

▪ Co-created. The artists observe and interact with the young people. Young people gain by seeing and being part of the creative process. Artists gain by seeing reactions from young people. Everyone gains from a higher quality product judged in terms of relevance.

▪ Experiential. Young people learn by doing. Creative leaders act as role models for creative teams: where different views are discussed robustly and respectfully, where individuality is celebrated, where the process embodies self-discipline, focus and concentration. The creative leader uses the language of the rehearsal room e.g. referring to the stage, cast.

▪ Accessible. The creative leader ensures that all young people in the class can take part. Everyone is equal.

▪ Reciprocal. The process is two way. Teachers gain CPD and also take over part of the work at the rehearsal stage.



CASE STUDY: ST STEPHENS SCHOOL CORNWALL TEACHER’S PERSPECTIVE

St Stephens made contact with Mahogany Opera Group through the local music hub. The teacher, Kari Gilbert, has a first degree in Music and English and Ethnomusicology, and plays the cello. So Snappy Operas was a chance for her to revisit her first love, to see her school value the arts at a high level, and to lay the foundation for future projects. Kari used Snappy Operas as a theme to integrate and contextualise different learning. In class she ran sessions to: make mini theatres (in which some pupils chose the operas performed by other schools); explore deforestation and extinction of species (which linked to the lyrics in their opera); to learn about bar charts through an exercise of where unicorns are found in the world; to make comments on the opera and turn them into poetry; and to add verses to the libretto.

The other rewards of taking part in Snappy Operas for Kari were: seeing three children who had been too disruptive to take part in a previous play drawn in by the intensity of the experience and fully involved; seeing the boys respond positively to having a strong role male model; hearing the beautiful voices of the Snappy Operas team; seeing how well opera suited this age group because of its repetition and themes; seeing techniques to teach opera, for example teaching the rhythm in a game before starting to sing it. Kari has used some of the games in music clubs (e.g. zip zap and the idea of planting your feet to prepare yourself for what you are doing).

“Snappy Operas was quite fast paced. Children didn’t have time to think about anything else.”

STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVE

I interviewed ten children.

There were many aspects of the project the children enjoyed:

▪ Making their own costumes.

▪ Being able to sing out loud. “It felt amazing singing in a big crowd. I felt very proud.”

▪ Performing in a group. “I thought I would be really nervous, but I wasn’t. I didn’t realise beforehand that the lights are so bright you can’t see the audience.” “I liked having only children on the stage, we are in control.”

▪ Working with the Snappy Operas team. “They corrected us more than a teacher would. They understood us and wanted us to improve.”

▪ Firing notes at the audience.

▪ The warm ups.

▪ Meeting children from other schools.

“Snappy Operas are different from other lessons because you are not sat in a chair bored. You are working with people who give you nice warm ups and strategies such as how to make room on the stage without pushing.”



“The Snappy Opera facilitators were flexible, they were expanding their minds. They tried to help us, but not too much.”

“We achieved a lot more than I expected. At first I thought it was hard but we still managed to do it. And we were relaxed while doing it.”

“My singing has got better. Many levels better. I had never sung before. Now I am told I have one of the best voices in the school. And I didn’t know that before.”

“Snappy Operas was more enjoyable than other lessons where you have to write all day. We did actions, singing, got into our groups, and practiced separately, got to move about and play games. It was more about us as individuals. We don’t get to move about or play games. We are more individuals. Some people thought it is my time to shine.”

“Snappy Operas made me think that opera isn’t one type. I enjoyed it more than I expected. I am not a good singer. When we started singing it was fun. I liked the way we learnt the actions first.”

“I don’t generally like singing in front of my parents, but I nailed it, and felt I could do anything. I just enjoyed it. The action helped a lot. And being in groups so you weren’t alone on the stage.”

Generally speaking, children either had no impression of opera or a depleted impression from hearing it on the radio or seeing a performance on the television: that it consisted of one person singing loudly or very screechily, without distinguishable words. All the other elements of opera – the narrative, costumes, actions, the lighting, the humour and the range of singing – were new to the children. Another reason for increased interest in opera was that students felt they understood opera more from experiencing it. They appreciated the amount of work behind it.

“I always thought opera was just singing. Instead of plays and actions. I prefer this, you can understand it more. It is like a story. We weren’t too high pitched, so it didn’t hurt your ears.”

“You experience opera. I understand it a lot more. It is not about staying still. It is about working together, movement, and expression. I had never seen opera like that. In the Royal Albert Hall on television it is one person singing on dark stage. In Snappy Operas it is costumes, colourful, it brings everything alive.”

“I had no impression of what opera was. My mind was a blank. Once you know about opera, it is fun. Everything is fun: acting, props, costumes.”

After the project, the children were more interested in seeing opera, so long as it had the elements they liked, especially the narrative and the colour, and was on a subject in which they were interested.

“I thought opera was people singing really loud. But I found it was really fun. It was a play.”

“When I am older, I would definitely want to go and watch opera, just for the fun of it, even if my kids weren’t involved. It gives you a nice break.”



“I learnt that I have a very powerful voice. I thought I was rubbish. I made me feel strange. In a nice way.”

“I would be interested in seeing an opera. Because I would know how long they had had worked to do this.”

Children tended to think that their opera made sense but that other schools’ didn’t, which suggested that groups might have benefitted from more information on each piece. Interviewed children also said they would like more help with understanding which operas they might enjoy.



SURVEY OF CREATIVE LEADERS INTRODUCTION

We have 11 respondents.

The respondents have experience of different parts of the programme, except the pilot. And of all five regions.

FIGURE 2: WHICH PARTS OF SNAPPY OPERAS DID YOU WORK ON?

FIGURE 3: FIGURE 4: IN WHICH REGION(S) DID YOU WORK?

PROCESS

All respondents said that the objectives for Snappy Operas were clear from the start. Comments were that the intended outputs and process were clear, but less clear was the intended legacy and how to achieve it.

0

2

11

11

8

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Pilot

R&D workshops

Rehearsals

Performances

Networking e.g. 18th January

3

2

5

3

2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Norfolk

Suffolk

Cornwall

Cumbria

North Tyneside



FIGURE 5: WERE THE OBJECTIVES OF SNAPPY OPERAS CLEAR FROM THE START?

“I definitely understood the aim for us to produce a 10 minute opera with each school. I was less sure about what the aim with the operas was once we left the regions, or how the project was going to continue. Having said that, the residential nature meant we had a lot of time to talk about ways in which it could carry on amongst ourselves and with the hub. I also missed the induction when perhaps it would have been explained.”

“Objectives for the R&D were very clear but not all the composers met the deadlines for delivering sufficiently developed scores for exploration in the sessions.”

“The training day in January was particularly helpful.”

“The information from FWW about the ethos of Mahogany Opera was a good help.”

“A little more definition about the objectives for the workshops, in and of themselves, may have been useful - beyond just our aims for the final performance (which became our aims due to the pressurized situation of the limited contact time). An open discussion around this topic would be helpful in the future. I felt that because, time-wise, the pressure was on imparting just enough skills to be able to present a performance. There was perhaps not so much attention paid to what would be beneficial to a class of children who had never had this kind of professional encounter before. That having been said, I appreciated the freedom for us as a team to respond to this with each school group on its own terms. But I think there is some wisdom to be exchanged on this. For example, a little formalised feedback from the teacher after each session, on what the children had responded to most well, what changes they had seen in the class etc, would have been helpful in keeping a record as we came back each week.”

Ten respondents said that the roles for the team member were clear. Comments were that the roles were also flexible, and so allowed for flexing to fit the skills of the members in the different teams.

8

3

0

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 6: WERE THE ROLES FOR THE TEAM MEMBERS IN SNAPPY OPERAS CLEAR?

“Artistically, very clear. In terms of producing and stage managing, there was some confusion about who was responsible for what (e.g. booking pianos).”

“I think this hugely depended on the pairing and the placement. I know that my role switched between music and drama a lot.”

“They were clear for me as I knew the MD very well so we probably knew what would work anyway - I guess it would have been clear if I had not known the MD.”

“Yes, I appreciated the space given to us to work out how we would lead the workshops together. I felt that it was good to have a team mixed of men and women and would encourage this in the future. I found it important also, in the final presentation, that all the members of the team were visible and given space for introducing themselves and the pieces to the audience, so that there was not just one voice dominant - and that the children could see how important each member of the team was. It was also important to me that we make clear the ongoing presence of stage management backstage etc.”

The creative leaders said the teams worked well together.

7

3

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 7: DID THE CREATIVE TEAM WORK WELL TOGETHER?

“I had slight reservations about the preparedness of some members of our creative team, but the results were good.”

“I had a great time with our team, we had a lot to do and we all pulled together to work hard and to achieve a huge amount in a short amount of time.”

“I couldn't have wished for a better team to work with.”

“In terms of non-hierarchical, supportive, collaborative approach, I couldn't have asked for a better experience. Nicky and Greg were hugely intelligent, supportive, energised and engaged. We never met with a challenge which they did not immediately and positively seek to overcome. This made the task of taking on a different school group of various ages and skills with all sorts of experiences and issues, much less daunting than it could otherwise have been.”

Nine leaders said they had enough information about Snappy Operas at the beginning.

“I had the scores early enough to learn the operas fully before we started in the regions. The website went live just before we started so I could look at the synopses.”

“It was a huge task to bring so many creative teams together. Most information was provided on schedule, but it would have been better to meet earlier (with the new commissions) as improvements took time and final scores were rather late to arrive.”

“I think the vision was made very clear. The nature of the engagement was always going to feel a bit 'experimental' at this stage and that’s to be expected.”

8

3

0

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 8: DID YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION ABOUT SNAPPY OPERAS AT THE BEGINNING?

Ten of the 11 creative leaders said that communication from the central team was appropriate. Comments were that the team was extremely helpful and supportive.

“Even the week before the performance, I was unsure as to which instruments played in each piece. A full (orchestral) score would have been helpful from the outset.”

FIGURE 9: WAS COMMUNICATION FROM THE CENTRAL TEAM OF MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP APPROPRIATE?

All creative leaders said they got the support they needed from Mahogany Opera Group.

8

1

2

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

9

1

1

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 10: DID YOU GET THE SUPPORT YOU NEEDED FROM MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP?

“Travel/accommodation smooth, and I had a score well in advance.”

“As I took on a consultative role, I felt connected to both the central Mahogany Opera Group team and our creative team.”

“Ally and Alison were brilliant in sending materials and helping with travel and accommodation.”

“It was very clear that we only needed to pick up the phone or email and advise would be at hand.”

“When we were needing extra support with one school, I was able to have an exchange with Ann, Stephen and Freddie - each very helpful in their own ways. I also drew support from other directors on the project, and felt that we were able to communicate openly as peers which I liked a lot. We could have used much more support from the Cornwall Hub.”

Respondents said they were satisfied with the contractual arrangements.

9

2

0

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 11: WERE YOU SATISFIED WITH THE CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENTS WITH MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP?

Ten respondents said they had the resources they needed.

FIGURE 12: DID YOU HAVE THE RESOURCES YOU NEEDED TO CARRY OUT YOUR ROLE ON SNAPPY OPERAS?

Ten respondents said the amount of travelling was reasonable.

10

1

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

7

3

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 13: WAS THE AMOUNT OF TRAVELLING ON SNAPPY OPERAS REASONABLE?

“I think working in hard to reach areas is important, so am always happy to travel. I don't think north Tyneside was particularly difficult to reach, however the R&D in Cornwall was.”

“R&D travel times were pretty harsh, given the nature of the geographic spread, but I can't see anyway around this if Mahogany Opera Group are to continue to provide such an ambitious outreach offer across the UK.”

“We knew what we were signing up for!”

All those who attended the events thought the networking part was useful.

FIGURE 14: WAS THE NETWORKING PART OF SNAPPY OPERAS (E.G. 18TH JANUARY MEETING) USEFUL?

“This was a fantastic opportunity to meet everyone on the project and to learn more about the operas themselves. It was a lovely, happy room full of people with great energy and

7

3

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

8

2

0

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



enthusiasm for the project. Fantastic to be able to socialise with everyone afterwards too to get to know more of the team better.”

“Incredibly useful. But I would recommend meeting earlier next time.”

“Exchange of workshop skills was very important. I used several of the games. Meeting everyone was lovely - there was a lot of talent and positivity in the room. It would be nice to meet as a team again to exchange ideas and work together again.”

Only four respondents said the role of teachers was clear. Comments were that teachers didn't always seem to understand what they were expected to do, or were too busy to engage.

FIGURE 15: WAS THE ROLE OF TEACHERS CLEAR?

“Personally I wasn't sure exactly what teachers had been told, and how much they were expecting to contribute. This may have been discussed in induction. However, we ascertained how much they would be willing to help when we arrived and worked with that.”

“It was clear to us that there might be a range of expected participation from the teachers. In reality they all surpassed our expectation in Tyneside.”

“I knew what they were supposed to do- some were incredible but some were not adequately equipped to deal with situations.”

“Some were stars and joined in every step of the way. Others we never even met! As a result, sessions were far more productive and creative with the former.”

“The teachers were not always clear on their role, or did not always assume it.”

“Some teachers were more active and involved than others - whether this had anything to do with communication of their role, or whether some of them were just too boring to get involved, I couldn't say.”

2

2

5

1

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



“Teachers are busy of course and have different priorities, but it would be great if we could reinforce their collaboration with us, by encouraging their presence 'in the circle' rather than as outsiders. As a team we could have made this clearer at the beginning, but there was so much to 'read' in the first sessions that this slipped through the net a bit. Also, it’s difficult to insist something with teachers who you have just met.”

Teacher participation varied widely and is an area of potential improvement in the future.

FIGURE 16: DID TEACHERS MAKE A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE DELIVERY OF SNAPPY OPERAS?

“Some went well beyond what was expected whereas others did not contribute at all.”

“Some were amazing and clearly loved it, were incredibly supportive, made notes, talked to the children, encouraged, spoke to us. Some sat and said absolutely nothing, nada, zero, zilch, for the entire c.12 hours we were in their presence. When I mean nothing, I mean absolutely nothing - not even hello, not even once.”

Seven of the creative leaders said the children were easy to engage. They attributed this to the project model and the calibre of the Mahogany Opera team. One comment was that the project worked better in schools that already had some experience of arts projects.

3

2

6

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 17: WERE THE CHILDREN EASY TO ENGAGE?

“I think this is a combination of material, opportunity, but significantly down to the quality of the creative deliver teams.”

“All of the schools loved singing and acting and for the most part were really engaged with the material. We had one school where they had obviously less experience of singing and drama and their teacher was less confident but they still pulled together to present a lovely showing on the day.”

“Some were very engaged and others more difficult.”

“Mostly. One school in particular was quite hard work in terms of apathy. The others were enthusiastic but sometimes naughty, but that's fine - its apathy which is the death of a project like this.”

Seven respondents said the repertoire was appropriate for the children. They mentioned specific challenges for different pieces.

“The material itself our kids were able to learn, and we're vocally strong enough for. Perhaps two groups might have made the singing stronger. We did edit some harmonies out too.”

“With a few exceptions - Lighthouse still met with significant technical challenges, and Itch Witch suffered from clear dramaturgical function, and a more singable response to the lyric.”

“Again - mostly yes. The Lighthouse Wave should have perhaps been given to a slightly older class, but all worked well in the end.”

“Mostly. Some pieces are better written than others.”

7

0

4

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 18: WAS THE REPERTOIRE APPROPRIATE FOR THE AGE OF CHILDREN?

Five respondents said they used the online resources for Snappy Operas. Comments of the value of the online resources had these themes:

▪ Backing tracks. “I used the synopsis and the tracks to hear what the kids learnt. It was fab for the kids to have backing tracks, and great for less confident teachers. However, it did mean that it was very difficult to teach the kids to sing anything differently from the tracks. on balance, I would definitely rather that the kids did have the backing tracks than not.”

▪ To structure rehearsals. “They were generally used by participants in between rehearsals as a learning tool.”

▪ To give background. “Interesting to read the design pack etc. but this was more for reference and helped me gain a better idea of the overall picture.”

▪ For legacy. “I know one school performed the opera for the other classes when we were not there, and I think other schools would do the same if they had access to a track without singing.”

Ten of the respondents said the project was well organised overall. The exception was providing a guidance on details of aspects of the project, such as the operation of the hub and the arrangements for the performances.

“I was booked with plenty of notice and had the music in good time. Accommodation and travel was all smooth and I felt I could always ask any questions I needed to.”

“Considering how complex the project was, it worked very well.”

“Mostly - nothing was badly organised, there were just some clerical errors (I think my first contract was for staging director...!) But nothing which really mattered and all the important stuff was totally fine.”

“Naturally it is the local engagement that felt the least well structured. Perhaps a few more guidelines would have been useful, or a bit more clarity about the nature of the event - how

5

2

4

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



to seat the children and their parents etc. In the end it was my call to sit all 120 kids and make it a performance for and by them first and foremost. This was a little contentious on the day as the seating then was laid out in a way that the adults were far away in the hall, and there weren't enough seats.”

FIGURE 19: OVERALL, WAS SNAPPY OPERAS WELL ORGANISED?

OUTCOMES

Ten respondents said the project was enjoyable. One respondent said it was too stressful.

FIGURE 20: WAS YOUR WORK ON SNAPPY OPERAS ENJOYABLE?

“I had a great time with the creative team and such wonderful schools.”

“So much fun and so rewarding.”

6

4

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

9

2

0

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



“I loved it! I can't say enough positive things about the music and the team and the project and the ethos of the company.”

“It was a hugely enjoyable and challenging experience. A lot of the enjoyment was in the challenge it presented, zooming from school to school, dealing with new piece after new piece. Trying to get a hold on the material and the class and the potential all at the same time. Quite often the challenges were non-creative. i.e. how to divide up the groups when you don't know them and the teachers are absent (this happened only once). How to proceed with the class when you are not there to marshal them, but to create with them, but teacher support is lacklustre. This was a big learning curve. Having quality accommodation to stay in also made it more enjoyable an experience, as we could properly relax as a team afterwards.”

Ten respondents were proud of the quality of the process and product.

FIGURE 21: WERE YOU PROUD OF THE QUALITY OF THE PROCESS AND PRODUCT FOR SNAPPY OPERAS?

“Yes. It's a format that with some honing I think could be taken on by music hubs and disseminated in primary schools. It was exciting being a part of the first batch!”

“Its ambition, coupled with the delivery of some of the more complex/technical/less clear works, and within the time constraints for in-school delivery, made for some very tense, rapid and full-on sessions.”

“Incredibly proud.”

“I'm sure this was, in part, down to how well the creative team worked together.”

“Very much so, especially with the most enthusiastic schools (I would regularly well up in their rehearsals). I can't say I was proud of apathy primary school, but I am still proud of what we did and am sure it would have benefitted them overall.”

8

2

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



“Yes. I think with a little time compression and more support from the hub, we could have gone a step further with both process and performance. However, given the circumstances and the realities of what we had to work with I am very proud of what we were able to achieve as a team and what the young people were able to deliver onstage. I always felt clear that our focus must be on delivering a strong workshop, rather than sacrificing the groups’ overall enjoyment of the session for the largely unpredictable 'outcome'. As it was we treated them on the day in a very professional manner and they responded really well to that. Again I felt very lucky to have Erica and Nick's support, also the support from the technician who provided excellent lighting without needing any conversation with me at all. It really lifted the audience experience.”

“It was very challenging teaching and staging in only six hours contact time. I feel the experience could have been much richer with more time, less different works, more children involved in less pieces. I feel we could have offered a far more in depth and quality experience in this way.”

Respondents were asked if their work on Snappy Operas gave them any insights of value for their participative work. Responses had these themes:

▪ The importance of the work. “Visiting Cornwall really made me remember how vital this type of engagement is. The school there was really lacking in any type of positive musical creative opportunities. Also, the importance of teaching good habits both in movement, and also in singing and using the voice.” “It showed how important creative activities (music/acting etc.) are for children and how much they get out of it. It also showed some of the school teachers how valuable it is from seeing the transformation in some of their students.” “It confirmed how valuable music and theatre and singing is for every child. But all of us in the creative team (perhaps unsurprisingly) already knew this.”

▪ How much could be achieved. “I greatly underestimated what we could get done in the time limits and the impact that the teachers could have in our absence. This feels very much a learning opportunity.”

▪ Value of creative teams. “The creative team bounced ideas off each other at every step.”

▪ Co-creation. “In some ways it reinforced my view that the best way of working with young people is to have them generate the material WITH you. The most rewarding participation was when the kids created movements or verbal interjections or ideas themselves. I felt I was able to respond to what they wanted to do.” “It's amazing how much can be created from such a small idea if you allow the young people to run with it, with only gently steering needed. I'm guilty of often feeling the pressure of time and wanting to work as efficiently as possible. This was an opportunity for me to re-evaluate my methods of working and 'do' less for the children - but encourage it out of them.”

▪ Taking time. “Getting the mix right is delicate. You need to provide a strong framework but encourage invention from the participants at all times. Towards the end, with time running out, I was aware that the best ideas were not able to come up, because I didn't have time to seek genuine reflective responses from the kids. Although the most confident would always speak up and suggest, and felt free to do so. It would be fun to have them engage a bit more with the music in ways other than singing. For example, coming up with percussive parts, workshopping that, so that you could have a bit more variety to the sessions, would be interesting.”



Respondents were asked if their work on Snappy Operas gave them any insights of value for their creative work. Responses were essentially about how to write for children, for example:

▪ “What works well musically and dramatically, what engages them, what is easier/more difficult for them to sing (especially certain things which professional musicians will do easily but some children find incredibly difficult). I also learned a lot about which instruments accompany children's voices well.”

▪ “I think it reminded me in my interest in visual theatre, spectacle, event and ritual. I felt each piece had something very ritualistic about it - always culminating in a breakthrough moment, in which everyone would sing together and something would be changed or restored. I loved the surreal qualities of discussing on a mythic level, the characters of mice, cats, hens, sausages, unicorns, fish out of water, etc and think this artificiality worked brilliantly to tap into all those fairy story themes of fear, discontent, trauma, abandonment, loss, which are part of what we are drawn to learning about in childhood.”

Respondents were asked what, if anything, is special about Mahogany Opera Group. Responses were:

▪ Absolute commitment to new opera.

▪ Geographic reach.

▪ Value for money.

“The artistic ambition of this project out-paces the financial and administrative resources held by MOG, by a long way. It is, as I see it, unparalleled within modern UK opera based outreach. Bravo, Brava, Bravi, as we say in Cumbria.”

“It felt big in scale yet also very tailor made to the children's needs and the particular styles of our team.”

“I can't think of another company that could actually pull off Snappys successfully.”

▪ Ambition.

“Giving life-changing opportunities to children who otherwise wouldn't have experienced such a creative process and high level of achievement. Amazing for the young people to work with three professionals, as opposed the usual one or (max) two. Possibilities are endless as a result.”

▪ Culture.

“Mahogany Opera Group is friendly, hands-on, innovative, and fun.”

“Mahogany rejects standard hierarchical bullsh*t that surrounds and mystifies opera. Opera is a word that they feel happy to throw out to children to respond to and define. It is not some precious concept. It is there to be invented and reinvented. I always feel I am engaged in making theatre when I work with MOG. I don't ever have the feeling of something rarefied and exclusive. I am not from a musical background, but a theatre background and I always feel prized for those qualities I have. It's very encouraging. And I think that translates for



everyone who gets involved with the company. The friendliness and approachability is also one of the best things about MOG. And its youthfulness.”

Creative leaders were asked if here was anything that Mahogany Opera Group should change about Snappy Operas. Responses were:

▪ Adapt the concept to special schools.

▪ Expand to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

▪ Increase the time with schools and reduce the gaps so that involvement is more intensive.

▪ Make scores available earlier.

▪ Be stricter with the composers so that they stick to the brief more.

▪ Meet before the networking meeting to ensure objectives are being met.

▪ Being more selective in recruiting instrumentalists who reflect the ethos of the project.

▪ Strengthen hub support.

▪ Encourage the teachers more formally to participate.

▪ Clarify rules over social media postings.

▪ Add professional singers, within the works, so they can form strong relationships with the children.

▪ Allow time for proper music call for instrumentalists.

▪ Ask all five composers to orchestrate for similar forces so that rehearsals can work more smoothly.



SURVEY OF COMPOSERS AND LIBRETTISTS INTRODUCTION

We had five responses relating to three of the regions.

FIGURE 22: IN WHICH REGION(S) DID YOU WORK?

PROCESS

Three artists said the creative team worked well together. One felt that they couldn't comment on the whole process.

FIGURE 23: DID THE CREATIVE TEAM WORK WELL TOGETHER?

Three artists said that the commission brief was clear and attractive. One said there were too many limitations on creativity.

1

3

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Norfolk

Suffolk

Cornwall

Cumbria

North Tyneside

3

0

2

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



“A very interesting idea which made me think about drama, pacing and staging for professional opera as well.”

FIGURE 24: WAS THE COMMISSION BRIEF CLEAR AND ATTRACTIVE?

Four artists said communication was appropriate. There are no comments to explain the mixed response. Throughout the survey, three of the respondents were extremely positive, and two were more ambivalent.

FIGURE 25: WAS COMMUNICATION FROM MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP APPROPRIATE?

Four artists said they got the support they needed.

3

0

1

1

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

3

1

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 26: DID YOU GET THE SUPPORT YOU NEEDED FROM MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP?

As above, three were very satisfied with the contractual arrangements and two had reservations.


Four respondents thought the amount of travelling was reasonable.

3

1

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

3

0

2

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 28: WAS THE AMOUNT OF TRAVELLING ON SNAPPY OPERAS REASONABLE?

All respondents thought that the Snappy Operas project was well organised.

FIGURE 29: OVERALL, WAS SNAPPY OPERAS WELL ORGANISED?

Three thought the work was enjoyable, one partly so and one probably not.

3

1

0

1

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

3

2

0

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 30: WAS YOUR WORK ON SNAPPY OPERAS ENJOYABLE?

Four artists said the R&D sessions were useful. One said that the timing didn't work for them creatively as it was much too early and another said it too late. All said that the R&D process changed their commission, but none explained in what way.

FIGURE 31: WERE THE R&D SESSIONS USEFUL TO YOU?

Respondents were asked what advice they would give to another artist working on Snappy Operas. Responses were:

▪ “Put the children first.”

▪ “Be bold with a single idea at the core of the piece.”

▪ “Listen to the team. But don't be afraid to defend an idea if you believe in it.”

Respondents were asked what if anything, is special about Mahogany Opera Group. Only two artists replied, with responses being:

3

0

1

1

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

4

0

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



▪ “The scope of the project was brave, but that bravery put the creative teams on their mettle.”

▪ “The combination of friendliness, professionalism and openness to experimentation.”

OUTCOMES

Only one respondent hadn’t work with mainstream state schools before.

FIGURE 32: HAD YOU WORKED WITH MAINSTREAM STATE SCHOOLS BEFORE?

Three of respondents are now more interested in creating work with participants.

FIGURE 33: AS A RESULT OF WORKING ON SNAPPY OPERAS ARE YOU MORE OR LESS INTERESTED IN CREATING WORK WITH PARTICIPANTS?

Respondents were asked whether their work on Snappy Operas give them any insights of value for their participative work. The two comments were:

1

1

3

0 1 2 3 4 5

No

Yes, once

Yes, more than once

3

0

1

0

1

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Definitely more interested

Probably more interested

No change, already interested

No change, not interested

Probably less interested

Definitely less interested



▪ The core idea has to be within the imaginative parameters of the age-group.

▪ The way in which one piece could generate five different interpretations.

Respondents were also asked if Snappy Operas gave them any insights of value for their other creative work. Comments were:

▪ “I am much more aware of what to expect from children who have never had formal musical training.”

▪ “I would like to collaborate further with my composer.”

▪ “The idea that shorter pieces can produce a focus which is strong. The insight that kids will respond to music that is quite complicated as long as they see the point.”

“Working with opera professionals on a project that had such great outcomes for so many children was a pleasure.”



OBSERVATION QUESTIONNAIRE INTRODUCTION

We have 20 observation forms, concentrating on two of the regions.

FIGURE 34: REGION

DELIVERY

Observers generally rated the delivery as satisfactory.

The only negative comments were about poor engagement of teachers:

▪ Behaviour management. “Very low teacher motivation / input despite encouragement. Also had to ask teachers to stop letting children go to the toilet.” “The group were 15 mins late. Teachers did not offer behavioural management during the session.”

▪ Organisation. “Teachers had been well briefed but were not in attendance and there was a lot of confusion. The school expected us in the morning but we were clearly scheduled for the afternoon. The music teacher (our main contact) was not in and we were left on our own with no member of staff. We were asked to move between spaces but this hadn't reached staff or children so no one showed up for first 15 minutes (think this was playtime). The head teacher joined us and freed the hall up for the end of our session but it was still short of the two hours. Lots of children left during the session for 'intervention'. I have been told this won't happen next week but is very hard for them to then get up to speed.”

▪ Equipment. “The Casio keyboard (that the school provided) wasn't suitable for the job.”

There were also positive comments about support from teachers.

“Teachers have worked incredibly hard to support their young people. Any finished props were brought into the space and teachers sat with Freya to chat through where they were and what was still needed.”

1

0

1

9

9

0 2 4 6 8 10

Norfolk

Suffolk

Cornwall

Cumbria

North Tyneside



FIGURE 35: DELIVERY

LESSONS

The team members were asked whether there were any other lessons for Mahogany Opera Group. Responses were:

▪ Introduce props early. “We need as many props/costume elements as possible by our

second visit to give the children a chance to play with them, experiment and get them in the body and then back into the voice. Introducing this later would have a huge effect on the singing as lots of them stop singing when props get introduced.

▪ Avoid splitting into many groups. “Splitting into three vocal parts is difficult if we want them to engage in movement and theatre as well because its only eight singers per part

16

19

18

19

18

2

17

18

20

18

9

18

17

19

19

19

19

20

2

16

15

4

0

2

0

2

18

3

2

2

2

0

2

0

0

18

2

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

3. Did the teachers seem well briefed?

4. Was the session well structured?

5. Did the session run according to plan?

6. Were the appropriate health and safety regulationsfollowed?

7. Did all the participants turn up on time?

8. Did any participants leave early?

9. Did the teachers stay for the whole session?

10. Is the venue/space appropriate?

11. Was access good?

12. Was all the equipment that was needed there?

13. Were the props supplied appropriate/undamaged?

14. Was the session pitched at the right level?

15. Was the number of participants right?

16. Did all members of the group participate?

17. Were the participants on task during the session?

18. Did the answers suggest the participants understood whatthey should do?

19. Did the session give insights into opera?

20. Did the team work well together?

21. Where there any incidents, injuries, child protection issuesor unusual events?

22. Did the session meet its learning objectives?

23. Did the session showcase Mahogany Opera Group at itsbest?

Yes No



and often these are mixed ability. We feel that the pieces which are mainly unison (Lighthouse Wave) and then split into two or three parts occasionally create a stronger and more exciting musical world and support the children better than the pieces which are entirely split into three and strong unison singing is rare.”

▪ Having two classes together can work. “Having two classes in one school doing Snappy Opera is creating a real buzz around the school and between them. This is an unexpected but nice element.”

▪ Having different ages gives a rich experience but takes more organisation. “This is the only school not using a single class but pulling kids in from across KS2 to take part. In many ways this is lovely and to have kids working across ages is a great experience. However this makes ongoing rehearsal very tricky and takes a lot of coordination which I am not sure is happening yet. Class teachers aren't involved in the project.”

▪ The score and the recording should match. “Things we have chosen to simplify have now been added in such as additional verses and harmonies. This takes longer to then unpick in rehearsals.”

▪ The music hub can help with engagement. “On this project there was a contact from the music hub which made a significant difference to the session. The teachers were also fully engaged which made the session run very smoothly.”



SURVEYS OF TEACHERS BASELINE SURVEY

We have 20 respondents from 19 schools. Respondents have been teachers for two to 28 years, an average of 12 years.

In the last term (before Snappy Operas) respondents said that the school took groups of students to see a performance in an arts venue (e.g. theatre, dance, music, opera) in 12 schools. The total number of students who took part was 852.

All schools had some extra-curricular activity for the performing arts before Snappy Operas.

FIGURE 36: IN THE LAST TERM (BEFORE SNAPPY OPERAS), DID YOUR SCHOOL HAVE ANY EXTRA CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS?

0

16

9

7

4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

No

Yes, choir/singing club

Yes, drama club

Yes, dance club

Yes, orchestra/band



FIGURE 37: HAS YOUR ORGANISATION HAD A PROFESSIONAL PERFORMING ARTS ORGANISATION COME INTO THE SCHOOL TO RUN WORKSHOPS FOR PUPILS?

The schools reported no lack of enthusiasm or senior level support, but rather a lack of knowledge of opera, lack of time and money.

FIGURE 38: ARE THERE BARRIERS TO RUNNING OPERA PROJECTS IN YOUR SCHOOL?

Only one school offered ArtsAward.

6

10

5

1

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

No

Yes, theatre company

Yes, dance company

Yes, opera company

Yes, orchestra

10

5

0

1

6

4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

No

Yes, lack of time in the curriculum

Yes, lack of teacher enthusiasm

Yes, lack of senior support

Yes, lack of knowledge of opera

Yes, lack of resources



FIGURE 39: WHAT IS YOUR SCHOOL’S APPROACH TO ARTSAWARD?

Teachers were also asked if they had any concerns about Snappy Operas. Eighteen said no or skipped the question. One said they were concerned about the lack of space and one about the lack of information about the performance and learning materials.

PROJECT END QUESTIONNAIRE

INTRODUCTION

We had 15 replies. The average length of time respondents had been a teacher was 12.7 years.

Only one respondent had attended the rehearsal workshops, so we have not analysed this set of questions.

REHEARSAL SESSSIONS

All respondents had attended Snappy Opera rehearsal sessions.

Views of the rehearsals sessions were generally positive.

1

6

5

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

The school offers ArtsAWard

The school has not and is not planning tooffer ArtsAward

The school is planning to offer ArtsAward

Not considered/decided



FIGURE 40: VIEWS OF THE REHEARSAL SESSIONS RUN BY MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP

“Great after school session. Really inspiring.”

“Having participated in sessions delivered by other organisations in the past, this was, without question, the best I have been involved with. The team were excellent with the children and involved the children within the development of the opera, whilst still steering the children towards a performance.”

“It was a pleasure to work with the Snappy Opera team and their enthusiasm was infectious.”

“Preparation for each session could have been outlined in greater detail for staff before the session started.”

“The team were extraordinarily motivating, enthusiastic and inspirational.”

Most schools ran two rehearsals sessions (two skipped this question).

15

13

11

11

5

9

0

2

3

2

7

5

0

0

1

2

3

1

0

0

0

0

0

0 5 10 15

Enjoyable

Inspiring

Relevant to your teaching

Clear

Well explained in advance

Well communicated within your school

Yes, definitely Yes, probably Mixed Probably not Definitely not



FIGURE 41: DID YOUR SCHOOL RUN REHEARSAL SESSIONS FOR SNAPPY OPERAS?

CPD SESSION

12 respondents attended the Mahogany Opera Group CPD session.

Views were generally positive.

FIGURE 42: VIEWS OF THE CPD SESSION

“Had a great time and it will be useful in my teaching.”

“A really enjoyable session. It gave me lots of ideas.”

The session was at the right level. Most respondents said it was at the right level and those who thought it wasn’t had different views.

1

2

10

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

No

Yes, one

Yes, two

5

7

7

8

9

8

10

11

8

7

7

5

5

3

3

3

3

3

2

1

3

5

4

6

1

2

2

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

New in content

Enjoyable

Inspiring

Relevant to your teaching

Clear

Authoritative

Practical

Sufficiently participative

Well structured

Well organised

Useful

A good use of your time

Yes, definitely Yes, probably Mixed Probably not Definitely not



FIGURE 43: WAS THE CPD SESSION AT THE RIGHT LEVEL?

Respondents came away with a clear understanding of what they needed to do or, as one person said, a clear idea of the issues they still needed to resolve.

FIGURE 44: DID YOU COME AWAY FROM THE CPD SESSION WITH A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT YOU NEEDED TO DO IN THE SNAPPY OPERAS PROJECT?

The CPD was somewhat useful for networking, but could have benefited from more time for networking and more information on who the other participants were.

“I did not make the most of this opportunity and could have done with some more time to speak with other staff.”

“It was lovely to get to chat to staff from other local schools and some other members of the Mahogany Opera team. As a small school, these opportunities are vital in our own development and progression.”

10

1

0

1

1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Yes

No, a little bit too detailed

No, much too detailed

No, a little too basic

No, much too basic

6

5

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 45: WAS THE CPD SESSION USEFUL FOR NETWORKING?

ONLINE RESOURCES

13 of the respondents looked at the Snappy Operas online resources. Most used the printed scores, lyric sheets, performance tracks and backing tracks in class.

FIGURE 46: DID YOU USE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING?

“The backing track changed to original score, which made it a tricky resource for the children to use.”

“I probably would have used more of these given more time and also if we weren't getting assistance from a vocal coach.”

3

4

4

1

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

7

4

3

2

4

13

12

2

1

2

0

1

0

0

4

8

8

11

8

0

1

0 5 10 15

Snappy Operas introduction video

Printed scores

Lyric sheets

Performance tracks

Backing tracks

Warm up videos

Composer introduction videos

No Used to plan class Used in class



OUTCOMES

86% of teachers said that Snappy Operas supported their teaching of the curriculum.

FIGURE 47: DID SNAPPY OPERAS SUPPORT YOUR TEACHING OF THE CURRICULUM?

All teachers said that Snappy Operas increased students musical and drama skills.

FIGURE 48: IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT SNAPPY OPERAS HAS INCREASED STUDENTS’ MUSICAL AND DRAMA SKILLS?

All teachers said that Snappy Operas strengthened students’ team working skills.

6

6

2

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Probably not

Definitely not

10

4

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 49: IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT SNAPPY OPERAS HAS STRENGTHENED STUDENTS’ TEAM WORKING SKILLS?

“As I am relatively new to the school and given that it was in dire straits a few months ago, the teamwork of the children was something I had been focusing on. It was truly wonderful to see a group of mixed age children, participating wholeheartedly in something as a team. They developed confidences in themselves and others.”

“The different parts made team work - listening to each other a must.”

87% of teachers said that Snappy Operas strengthened students’ self-discipline.

FIGURE 50: IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT SNAPPY OPERAS HAS STRENGTHENED STUDENTS’ SELF-DISCIPLINE?

“90% of children practised at home using the backing tracks of their own accord.”

“Children had to be organised, dedicated and enthusiastic.”

11

4

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Probably not

Definitely not

6

7

2

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Probably not

Definitely not



“They had to observe each other and move, sing, respond, react appropriately.”

All teachers said that Snappy Operas increased student’s interest in opera.

FIGURE 51: IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT SNAPPY OPERAS HAS INCREASED STUDENTS’ INTEREST IN OPERA?

“Some have joined performing arts groups as a result and others have booked to see live theatre outside of school.”

“Children want to do it again.”

“One of my children in particular has developed a love of opera as well as a talent for performing (which even his mum didn't know was there!) Such was his love of the opera, that his neighbour bought him an opera CD so that he could listen at home. Many of the children also practised the songs voluntarily at home.”

Four schools have either decided to offer, or increased their commitment to ArtsAward as a result of Snappy Operas. Five don’t know what will happen about ArtsAward.

9

6

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 52: WHAT IS YOUR SCHOOL’S APPROACH TO ARTSAWARD?

The main barrier to running opera projects in school are lack of time in the curriculum.

FIGURE 53: ARE THERE BARRIERS TO RUNNING OPERA PROJECTS IN YOUR SCHOOL?

“I am head teacher and music specialist - would like to do more but I do not have time. Need to inspire younger teachers but they are all very busy!”

“We also have very few staff and since I am the teacher and head teacher, time is an issue.”

“We loved it and would move any potential barriers.”

5

3

1

0

1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

The school has not and is not planning tooffer ArtsAward

The school is planning to offer ArtsAwardbecause of Snappy Operas

The school is planning to offer ArtsAward butnot because of Snappy Operas

The school already offered ArtsAward andnothing changed because of Snappy Operas

The school already offered ArtsAward butincreased its commitment because of Snappy

Operas

4

6

2

0

4

2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

No

Yes, lack of time in the curriculum

Yes, lack of teacher enthusiasm

Yes, lack of senior support

Yes, lack of knowledge of opera

Yes, lack of resources



OVERALL VIEWS

Teachers were asked what they thought were the strengths of Snappy Operas. Responses had these themes:

▪ Professionalism. “Amazing venue. Well prepared on the day.” “Working with outside agencies, engaging with new people. Working on a project with an end result.” “Support of professionals, inspire children, delivery by professionals and theatre staff, such a fun activity the children were engrossed in their learning.” “Was conducted in a professional way and allowed the children to perform on stage.” “Amazing, talented staff delivering it.”

▪ Special experience. “Gave children experience of another musical genre. Experience of working with professional musicians and directors. Experience of performing on stage in front of a large audience.” Seeing students take to Opera - a medium they had not been involved in before.” “Something new for the children to experience.” “The sense of a team effort for the children and producing something so wonderful! They loved making the simple costumes and putting movement to music. It changed their perceptions of opera!” “A wonderful, rich experience for the children exploring sound and music and giving a valuable opportunity to perform and build confidence and completion of projects.” “A fairly unknown arts genre to most of our pupils- the offer of a different experience.”

▪ Skill development for students. “Team-working and performing in public.” “Children's enthusiasm and development of singing, dance and drama skills. Developing children's team work and listening skills.”

▪ Impact on children. “Seeing children develop into more confident performers - having outside professionals who challenged and supported them.” “Expertise, encouragement of the children, giving the children a sense of self-esteem and an experience they wouldn't otherwise have had.”

▪ Suitability for the students. “Appropriate sessions for the children- the group encouraged them appropriately and disciplined where needed. Content was alternative to "traditional" operatic stories and really appealed to the students.”

▪ Relevance to schools. “Covered the music curriculum.”

▪ Value for teachers. “Building teacher knowledge of how to organise and develop a Snappy Opera.”

“So many strengths that I cannot possibly list them all, but: engaging, inspiring, confidence-boosting, children realising a talent in themselves, excellently delivered, well organised, fun...the list is endless!”

Teachers were asked what they thought were the weaknesses of Snappy Operas. Responses had these themes:

▪ None. “Not any really - I think it was a really well-run operation with a significant result from a concise but extremely valuable input.”

▪ Want more. “That we couldn't do it for longer. It would be lovely to be involved earlier on in the development process in future projects.”



▪ Communication. “Some communication was poor but it all worked out in the end.” “A couple of weeks of uncertainty of parts.” “A bit vague on some of details of organisation e.g. mix up on "holding activities" in between rehearsals.” “At times, due to the time constraints and pressure of the curriculum, there were a couple of misunderstandings and miscommunication.” “We need clearer communication on what is needed in terms of props and costumes.”

▪ The structure of rehearsals. “I would have preferred a faster pace and more rehearsals.” “Children found two hour rehearsals very long and tiring! Possibly four shorter rehearsals plus dress rehearsal, rather than three.”

▪ Organisation of the performance day. “Quite far for my schools to travel. A more central location would have been preferable.

▪ Too much for teachers to do. “Too high a demand on staff to make props.”

All teachers would recommend Mahogany Opera Group projects to other teachers.

FIGURE 54: WOULD YOU RECOMMEND MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP PROJECTS TO OTHER TEACHERS?

“A fantastic experience, we would love to be involved in any future projects.”

“We were so grateful and lucky to have been chosen to be part of this project - it was awesome and inspiring. what many officials don’t realise is that the impact of taking part in this performance has a massive effect on self-esteem and resilience, and therefore on their work in school.”

14

1

0

0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Probably not

Definitely not



LOCAL PARTNER SURVEY INTRODUCTION

We have five respondents, from each region.

THE PROCESS

Three partners said they had enough information. Two said one mixed: one because they already knew Mahogany Opera Group so had the information; and one because they would have liked the information earlier.

FIGURE 55: DID YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION FROM MAHOGANY OPERA GROUP ABOUT SNAPPY OPERAS?

No partner said that recruitment was difficult. One commented that they have lots of interest for future projects with Mahogany Opera Group. One said that initial interest didn't always translate into signing up for the project, for example if the staff member left.

2

1

2

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 56: WAS THE RECRUITMENT OF SCHOOLS TO SNAPPY OPERAS EASY OR DIFFICULT?

Partners used criteria around engagement with the arts, as well as seeking a geographical spread. In their comments, two said they that socio economic background was a factor in the choice.

FIGURE 57: WHAT CRITERIA DID YOU USE TO RECRUIT SCHOOLS FOR SNAPPY OPERAS?

All partners said that Snappy Operas was a close fit with their strategic objectives.

“This provided an excellent complement and extension to our current singing strategy work.”

“This was a close fit: not only working with children but also opportunities to engage with teachers, some of whom were definitely non-specialist music teachers, and the wider community.”

1

1

3

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Very easy

Easy

Mixed

Difficult

Very difficult

0

2

1

1

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Low socio economic background

Geographical spread

Low engagement with the arts

Previous relationship with the school

Likely ability of the school to participate



“This project was very much a development of previous work with Mahogany which some of the schools had been a part of. It also developed on from other projects we had delivered with other participating schools. It has helped to extend our relationship with all participating schools.”

FIGURE 58: HOW WELL DID SNAPPY OPERAS FIT YOUR STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES?

The four partners who responded to the question were satisfied with the contractual arrangements with Mahogany Opera Group. One respondent commented that they were not sure who was responsible for the practical arrangements for the performance.


Those who attended the workshops thought they were high quality.

3

2

0

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Very close fit

Close fit

Mixed/don’t know

Weak fit

Very weak fit

4

0

0

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 60: VIEWS OF THE SNAPPY OPERAS WORKSHOPS IN SCHOOLS

“Feedback was very positive from schools.”

“In my opinion it is imperative that the Mahogany staff take the lead from schools on the children that they are working with. Ours absolutely did but it’s worth considering in the future.”

“R&D team led v. high quality workshops that both engaged and were effective. Creative team delivered high quality workshops, well-paced, engaging, and with clear expectations for continuation between visits.”

“The workshops were excellent and well pitched. The practitioners were all very professional in their delivery and approach. They engaged the students very well and the response from schools has been very positive. There was a lot that the practitioners had to get through in the short space of time that they had and it would have been useful to have full day workshops.”

Those who attended said the CPD session was useful. Comments were that providing information earlier might have increased attendance; and that having more detail on the performances would have increased the value of the day.

“This wasn't communicated at the outset to schools and therefore was difficult to get them to commit. It is increasingly difficult to get teachers out of school during the school day.”

“The session helped to set out the expectations of school staff and level of commitment that they needed to give to the project. It would have been useful to have the designs pack available for the CPD session so that we could have gone through these with the teachers and answered any queries that they may have had.”

3

1

0

0

0

1

0 1 2 3 4 5

Very high quality

High quality

Mixed

Poor quality

Very poor quality

Didn’t attend any of the workshops in schools



FIGURE 61: WAS THE CPD SESSION USEFUL?

The respondents said that the performance was high quality, with quality being judged in terms of attendees’ comments, distance travelled, and the different elements.

FIGURE 62: WHAT DID YOU THINK ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE SNAPPY OPERAS PERFORMANCE?

“It was well received by parents, children and teachers.”

“The staff and pupils made amazing progress with outstanding results in the short time allocation. This was helped with the Hub support to schools between visits. “

“Not surprisingly, quality varied. Much depended upon the circumstances of individual schools, groups of pupils and teachers, etc. Overall, quality was always evident in one or more aspects!”

2

2

0

0

0

1

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

Didn’t attend the CPD session

2

2

0

0

0

1

0 1 2 3 4 5

Very high quality

High quality

Mixed

Poor quality

Very poor quality

Didn’t attend either of the performances



“The performances were fantastic and very high quality and the response from teachers and audience members was really positive. I liked the simple approach to staging which enabled the focus of the workshops to be on performance.”

“All departments from stage management, design, production, to music were first class.”

OUTCOMES

All partners said there is evidence that Snappy Operas increased schools’ interest in the arts. The evidence was in the form of increased interest from parents, teachers and schools.

Four of the partners said they had worked on opera projects before. One respondent clarified that this was only using traditional operas.

One partner said that Snappy Opera increased their priority to opera projects. Three already had a high priority; and one judged each project on its merits.

FIGURE 63: DID SNAPPY OPERAS CHANGE YOUR ORGANISATIONAL PRIORITY TO DELIVERING OPERA PROJECTS?

OVERALL VIEWS

Respondents were asked what advice they would give another regional partners involved in Snappy Operas. Answers were:

▪ “Be very clear from the outset who is responsible for what and have very clear commitment from the schools what is expected from them in terms of staff engagement as I don't think this was communicated clearly enough at the point of recruitment.”

▪ “Ensure that a vocal tutor is assigned to support the rehearsals and work with the schools between the sessions. Also for school staff to read and discuss the story before the project begins to completely immerse the children in the story.”

1

0

0

3

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Definitely higher priority to opera projects

Probably higher priority opera projects

No change, have other priorities

No change, already higher priority to operaprojects

Probably lower priority to opera projects

Definitely lower priority to opera projects



▪ “Children are open minded and have little / no prejudice other than that put there by 'frightened' adults for whom 'opera' already symbolises a set of values. The planning of the creative process, including mundane issues such as scheduling of the day, expectations of its concern, etc. must be undertaken collectively across all providers, i.e. Mahogany Opera, composers/directors, company manager, venue, and crucially those other local specialists providing support throughout, etc. Schools cannot cope with uncertainty and change, particularly when transport, meals. performing licences, absence from school all needs careful planning and budgeting. Could these projects also incorporate Discover and/or Explore Arts Award as an outcome?”

▪ “Develop good communication with all schools and support them as necessary, but particularly with the design packs as this was an area which some of our schools found tricky. Attend all workshops if possible as this will enable you to support the schools and the Mahogany artistic team as needed and ensure smooth running of the project. It is a wonderful privilege to see how the children develop from the start of the project to the performances!”

▪ “Encourage other teachers to get involved not just the specific class teachers.”

Respondents were asked what, if anything, is special about Mahogany Opera. Respondents suggests Mahogany Opera Group has a clear niche.

▪ “The children loved the unusual topics of the operas, the workshop deliverers were great and the performance was fantastic.”

▪ “The relationships we built with the staff form the project both on the ground and behind the scenes. Our team enjoyed working with your team and I feel that we all benefited from each other’s expertise.”

▪ “Commitment to 'inclusive working', i.e. the pupils' voice, all children, in the classroom, involving everyone, a practical and effective way into the world of imagination and feeling - not just musical techniques! Opportunity to work with experts, and to experience (professional) venues beyond school.”

▪ “Mahogany Opera’s creative ideas and energy and the ability that you have to enthuse and engage partners, participants and audiences in opera.”

▪ “Making opera accessible to children.”

Respondents were asked if Mahogany Opera Group should change anything about Snappy Operas. Comments were main about earlier and more precise communication – of arrangements and outcomes:

▪ “The communication needs to be clearer and less last minute. There were several instances when we were expected to reply very quickly which wasn't always possible because of other work commitments.”

▪ “More central initial training sessions and perhaps more notice for required information for programmes, press releases etc. as sometimes it was difficult to fit this in the time frame along with other Hub duties.”

▪ “Whilst fully understanding the need to secure practical arrangements / resources that acknowledge professional performers' integrity, needs, and their seeking of artistic perfection, the over-riding consideration throughout, e.g. planning the schedule for the performance day, must be 'outcomes for children': that is the only reason we engage with Mahogany Opera.”



▪ “I would be tempted to increase either the length of the workshops or number of them. I felt that the artistic team had a lot to do within two hours (although we did stretch the time slightly) particularly if they are having to travel between schools. I would have liked to be able to support schools better with the making and design packs and if the design packs had of been available sooner, I could have arranged to go into schools to work with the children on the making which would have worked well, perhaps this is something to discuss with future partners and whether that is something that they could offer in support of the project. It would be nice for partners to be able to work on the second 5 Snappy Operas in the future so that they have worked on all 10.”

▪ “Deliver a CPD project to music service/ music hub staff in a shortened version.”

Four of the five said that Snappy Operas definitely met their expectations.

FIGURE 64: OVERALL, DID SNAPPY OPERAS MEET YOUR EXPECTATIONS?

Four partners would recommend Mahogany Opera projects to schools and partners.

4

0

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not



FIGURE 65: WOULD YOU RECOMMEND MAHOGANY OPERA PROJECTS TO SCHOOLS AND LOCAL PARTNERS?

4

0

1

0

0

0 1 2 3 4 5

Yes, definitely

Yes, probably

Mixed

Probably not

Definitely not

STUDENTS LEARNING TEST INTRODUCTION

We created a short learning test for schools to apply before and after the project.

PUPIL FEEDBACK

1. Have you ever been to a live performance

of opera?

2. How interested in opera are you, where 1

is not interested at all, and 10 is very

interested?

3. An opera is: A performance with music and drama

A long running television programme

A biscuit

4. What is the difference between a

conductor and a composer?

5. What is a chorus? The star of the show

A group of performers who play the same

character

A company that puts on operas

6. What does a librettist do? Write the words you sing in an opera

Tidy books

Plays a trombone

7. Who is the most important person on

stage?

The conductor

The stage manager

The performers



8. How should students behave during a

rehearsal?

Completely quiet and still

Paying attention but lively

Ignoring all the students around them

9. What is a Snappy Opera? (programme end

only)

A short opera that children can perform

An opera around an argument

An opera that has spiky music

Four schools completed the test before and after Snappy Operas.

RESULTS

The percentage of students who had been to a live opera before varied from 4% to 85%.

The interest in opera increased significantly in every school.

Students already had some understanding of opera as music with drama.

Two schools improved their understanding of the roles of composer and conductor.

Two schools improved their understanding of a chorus.

Three schools improved their understanding of the role of a librettist.

All schools increased their understanding of the importance of the performers.

Three schools increased their understanding of the appropriate style of a rehearsal.

A high percentage of the schools who asked the question received a strong understanding of the meaning of a Snappy Opera.



REGION NUMBER OF

STUDENTS

SURVEYED

1. % OF

STUDENTS

WHO HAVE

BEEN TO A

LIVE OPERA

BEFORE

2. AVERAGE

SCORE FOR

INTEREST IN

OPERA

3. % TICKING a

performance

with music

and drama

4. % GIVING A

GOOD

ANSWER

5. % TICKING A

group of

performers

who play the

same

character

6. % TICKING

Write the

words you sing

in an opera

7. % TICKING

The

performers

8. % TICKING

Paying

attention but

lively

9. What is a

Snappy

Opera?

BASELINE Cumbria 27 62 6 96 19 59 51 33 56

PROGRAMME

END

28 97 8 100 61 57 75 64 71 89


PROGRAMME

END

26 100 8 100 100 97 57 97 92 100


PROGRAMME

END

6 100 7 100 0 66 83 83 50 N/A

BASELINE North Tyneside 54 4 4 96 100 50 67 41 57

PROGRAMME

END

50 100 7 100 60 95 80 85 73 100

SNAPPY OPERAS - mahoganyopera.co.uk Operas... · Snappy Operas roughly met its targets, with 24 schools/classes (target 50 across two years); 689 children (target 750 school children);

Documents