Schools

tagged

Study Guide

Welcome to YPT’s new study guide format!

As you scroll through the guide you will find the usual sections included in all our guides: curriculum connections, director’s notes, discussion questions, units of study and more. You will also be able to click on templates, worksheets and graphic organizers. If you wish to create your own lesson plan from the study guide copy, we have created a lesson plan template for your use. We hope you will find this guide to be a useful resource.

This guide was written by Amy Clausen for Green Thumb Theatre and adapted by Tanisha Taitt for Young People’s Theatre. Should you have any questions or feedback or have inquiries about the use of this guide, please feel free to contact Karen Gilodo, Associate Artistic Director, Education, for Young People’s Theatre at kgilodo@youngpeoplestheatre.org or Nadine Carew, General Manager, for Green Thumb Theatre at gm@greenthumb.bc.ca.

Download the Lesson Plan Template.

THE STUDY GUIDE

Thematic Overview

Online.  Out of line.

The anonymous online world gives us permission to say and do things we would never do in real life.   But where do we draw the line between fun and maliciousness?  The harsh realities of cyberbullying and what happens when we’re discovered come to a head in tagged.  As a police officer investigates Jerri and Webber, two young adults, regarding the incessant online harassment of a fellow student, not all is as it appears to be.

Do these teens actually understand the consequences of their actions? Do the police even have the right people?  How responsible are we for the words that we type and what they lead others to do?

Throughout this study guide you will find random quotes from the play.  These “conversation starters” are a great way to initiate student discussion, and to explore the play’s plot and its themes through the eyes of its different characters.

As you approach these exercises and discussion questions, it is imperative for students to understand that when discussing the impulsivity of the online realm, the natural tendency may be to be similarly impulsive in the things they choose to share.  They want to discuss circumstances from their own lives.  However, it is crucial that they be conscious and deliberate, as there is no confidentiality in the classroom setting.  Therefore, students should not disclose personal experiences – or those of others – in a way which may cause negative consequences for themselves or their classmates, or which will necessitate further action outside of the classroom.

CURRICULUM CONNECTIONS

Curriculum:

  • The Arts (Drama)
  • English (Writing, Media Studies)
  • Computer Studies (Ethical Issues, Computers & Society)
  • Social Sciences & the Humanities (Addressing Social Changes)
  • Physical & Health Education (Healthy Living – Substance Use and Abuse)  

Character Education:

  • Integrity
  • Respect
  • Honesty

Themes:

  • Societal Culpability
  • Risk/Reward
  • Online Fame/Infamy

PLAYWRIGHT’S NOTE

The landscape of bullying in this country has changed drastically with the advent and popularity of social media. Gone are the days of being bullied on the schoolyard but being able to go home to the safety of closed doors. The internet exists beyond doors, beyond walls, beyond structures of any kind.

So how to discuss that with a high school audience? As honestly and relatably as possible. The core of the piece, in its research phase and later in workshop was really about trying to honestly represent the way young people engage online and its implications. Rather than focusing on the sad realities of the prominent cyberbullying cases in Canada, my task became to look at the psychology behind online behaviour: the posting and subsequent reposting of images and text, the quest to be seen, or even to find fame through online activity, and the reliance on social media as the mouthpiece of this generation.

The play, tagged is a theatrical conversation about the here and now, which hopefully can introduce the possibility of frank and honest conversation in living rooms, classrooms and hallways. At least, I hope it does.

Dave Deveau
October 2013

PLAYWRIGHT’S BIO

Dave Deveau is an award-winning writer and performer whose plays and operas have been produced across Canada and in Europe. He is the Playwright in Residence for Zee Zee Theatre who have produced his plays Nelly Boy, Tiny Replicas (GayVancouver’s Top 10 Productions of 2011), the critically-acclaimed My Funny Valentine (Sydney Risk Prize, Jessie Nomination, Oscar Wilde Nomination – Dublin) and most recently Lowest Common Denominator. He works extensively for Green Thumb Theatre: Out in the Open, tagged (currently touring Canada) and Celestial Being (2015 Canadian tour, 2016 US tour). He is one of the Associates at Playwrights Theatre Centre where he is developing his play H(OUR). He is currently working on two new commissions for Zee Zee Theatre: Dead People’s Things, and Elbow Room Café: The Musical (with Anton Lipovetsky) which opens in March, presented with Studio 58. The feature film adaptation of his play Tiny Replicas goes into production in June. He was recently included in Xtra’s Top 30 Under 30 and OUTtv’s Queers of the Year and is the 2014 recipient of the Pride Legacy Award for Art. www.davedeveau.com

 

CURRICULUM EXPECTATIONS

In addition to the Arts (Drama), this study guide connects to the English, Computer Studies, Social Sciences & Humanities, and Health & Physical Education curriculum. 
By participating in the exercises in this study guide, students will:

  • Apply the creative process to drama and the development of dramatic works, using the elements and conventions of drama to communicate feelings, ideas, and multiple perspectives. 
  • Apply the critical analysis process to communicate feelings, ideas, and understandings in response to a variety of drama works and experiences.
  • Use a variety of presentation techniques and technological tools to enhance the impact of drama works and communicate for specific audiences and purposes.
  • Reflect on and identify their strengths as media interpreters and creators, areas for improvement, and the strategies they find most helpful in understanding and creating media texts.
  • Generate, gather, and organize ideas and information to write for an intended purpose.
  • Draft and revise their writing, using a variety of literary, informational, and graphic forms and stylistic elements appropriate for the purpose and audience.                      
  • Use editing, proofreading, and publishing skills and strategies, and knowledge of language conventions, to correct errors, refine expression, and present their work effectively. 
  • Describe legal and ethical issues related to the use of computing devices.                                                                                                                                                           
  • Identify the major factors (e.g., environmental influences such as peer pressure, media influences, adolescent attitudes) that contribute to the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. 
  • Identify the school and community resources involved in education, prevention, and treatment with respect to alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs.     
  • Demonstrate and use both decision-making and assertion skills with respect to media influences and peer pressure related to alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs.

PRE-SHOW QUESTIONS

Ask students:

  • How do you define fairness?
  • Is there a difference between the law and justice? Explain.
  • What do you consider to be the obligations of a close friend?
  • What would be the potential benefits of a world without the digital media?
  • How does the internet impact your feelings of safety and security?
  • How would your relationships be affected if there was no online realm?

PRE-SHOW UNIT

Warm-up: ATOM

Objective:This game combines the theatrical elements of improvisation and tableau.  It engages the students in physical activity and collaborative, spontaneous creation, while also asking them to interpret words and themes related to the play in the imagery they create.

Materials:

  • Space in which the students can walk around freely.

Directions:

  1. Ask students to begin walking around the room, using the entirety of the space.  There does not need to be uniformity of direction and they are free to walk at various speeds.
  2. After about 30 seconds, call out the word “Atom” followed by a number between 2 and 6.
  3. Students then stop walking and quickly form groups of the specified number. (e.g. If there are 25 students and you call “Atom 5”, the students must gather into five groups of five.  If the number of students is not evenly divisible, a group may have one more or one fewer member.)
  4. Once students are in groups ask them to create, with their bodies, images related to the play.  Each student must be physically connected to at least one other member of the group. (Begin with concrete things like “cell phone”, “party”, “computer”, and “chatroom”.)
  5. Give students one minute to create an image  of the specified object.  After 50 seconds, give the students a 10-second countdown in which to complete the image.  When time is up, call “Freeze!”
  6. Walk around the room and look at each group’s interpretation of the word.  Have one member of each group explain the components of their image.  (Most of the groups will be able to see each other.  If a group is in a position where they cannot see another, they may break their freeze for a brief moment to look at another group’s image, but must then immediately return to their own formation.)
  7. After each group has explained its images, have them resume walking around the room for about 30 seconds, then call “Atom” followed by a different number.  After one minute, repeat the same procedure.  Each time, make the images that the students must create increasingly challenging, evolving from objects to concepts.  In later rounds, ask them to use their bodies to create images for “judgment”, “fair”, “privacy”, “viral”, and “indifference”.

Debriefing Questions:

Ask students:

  • What was the greatest obstacle you faced when playing this game?  Why do you think that is?
  • How much a part of your lives are the objects and concepts you were asked to depict?  Explain your answer.
  • How did it feel to have to be physically connected to another person?
  • In what way did depicting something tangible with your bodies differ from depicting a concept? 
  • Did having to interpret these words with your bodies make you think about their meanings in a new or different way?  Explain your answer.

Exercise: ONLINE CODE OF ETHICS

Objective:The purpose of this exercise is for the students, based on their knowledge and understanding of the online and digital realms and their own views about personal responsibility and online accountability, to draft for themselves a mutually agreed upon Code of Ethics with regards to digital media and internet activity.

Materials:

  • Writing Utensils
    Everything gets tagged, so what?
    – Jerri
  • Paper
  • Flowchart paper
  • Marker

Directions:

  1. Have students get into groups of between 4 and 6.
  2. Define “ethics” and write the definition in a place where the class can see it.
  3. Ask each group to assign a scribe.
  4. Ask students to have discussions in their groups (discussion length is at the discretion of the teacher) about their feelings with regards to online conduct and responsible use of digital media.  They should consider the following questions:
    1. Is there a difference between what is legal and what is right? If so, what is it?
    2. Is there a difference between the ethics one should practice online and the ethics one should practice in the “real” world?
    3. Are the ethics one practices dependent on whether one’s actions will remain private or become public?
  5. The discussion should result in students coming up with a list of “behavioral best practices” for the use of the web and digital media.  As the group agrees on each item on the list, the scribe writes it down.
  6. When the groups have finished making their individual lists, have the class reassemble. 
  7. On two large pieces of flowchart paper, create a master list.  This list will be your class’ Online Code of Ethics.
  8. Post the paper somewhere prominent in the room as a reminder to the students of the ethical standard they are pledging to uphold in the digital and online realms.

Debriefing Questions:

Ask students:

  • Was it daunting to create a code of ethics for online behaviour? Why or why not?
    • I’ve got tons of Facebook friends.
    I didn’t even know he was one of them.
    I don’t keep track of that kind of thing.
    – Webber

  • In a public forum (such as the internet) is it possible to maintain a code of ethics? Explain.
  • Are there circumstances in which it might be justifiable for items in the code to be amended? Explain.
  • Has this exercise changed any of your opinions on what is or is not ethical? If so, how?
  • Why is it easy to behave unethically in the online world?

Extension:
Send a copy of your class’ Online Code of Ethics, signed by the students, to Green Thumb Theatre and Young People’s Theatre!

Culminating Exercise: DEBATE

Objective:  The purpose of this exercise is to develop the students’ oratory and reasoning skills, as they clearly and confidently deliver a message in support of an ideological position.  In addition, debate increases students’ ability to weigh and consider opposing viewpoints as well as their own, and effectively construct and state a case in defense of one side of an argument.

MOTION:  Be it resolved that a person who engages in social media should expect his or her life to become public.   

Materials:

  • Writing utensils
    • Do you have any idea how hard
    people try to get their faces
    all over the internet?
    – Jerri
  • Paper or notebooks
  • Space in which to hold the debate

Directions:

See below for links to three debate formats.  Choose the format that best suits your classroom.

Debriefing Questions:

  • Is it safe to live in a world where so much of our lives are online?  Why or why not?
  • Did debating this issue change your views about the issue of online privacy?  Explain.
  • With our pictures and posts readily available for viewing on social media, even when      we are logged out, are we ever really offline?
  • Is the internet an invasion of privacy?

POST-SHOW QUESTIONS

Ask Students:

  • Why do you think that Sam posts the photo of Webber?
  • What is your duty to a person who has become unconscious at a party?
  • Do you believe Jerri’s claim that Sam’s video is a bid for attention?  Why or why not?
  • What is the significance of Jake’s character to the story? 
  • What do you think of how the constable interacted with Jerri and Webber? 
  • What are the commonalities, if any, between substance abuse and addiction to popularity?

Extension:

After participating in this debate, is there anything that you, as a class, would change in your Code of Ethics?  If so, revisit it and make the amendments.

 

POST-SHOW UNIT

Warm-up: STAND THE LINE

Objective:

This activity provides an opportunity for students to explore and share their opinions on some of the themes in the play in a structured and non-judgmental setting. By using general statements and quotes from the play, students will examine their beliefs, hear alternate points of view, and have an opportunity to rethink their position on some of the major themes of the play.

Materials:

  • A space in which to move.

Directions:

  1. Ask students to imagine a line running along the length of floor.
  2. Explain that a series of statements and quotes from the play will be read out loud and it is the students’ job to agree or disagree with the statements by choosing their position on the line on the floor.
  3. Define with the class the end of the line which represents “strongly agree” and then indicate that the opposite end represents “strongly disagree”. The midpoint of the room is a neutral position where students can stand if they neither agree nor disagree with the statement.
  4. When each statement is read aloud, students decide which place on the line represents their own opinion. They can stand anywhere on the line, near either end, or somewhere in the middle.
  5. After each statement is read, pick a few students to explain their choice of position. This is not a debate. The students’ viewpoints should not be judged, just shared.

After a number of viewpoints have been shared on each statement or quote, offer students the chance to move to a new position on the line if they have changed their mind, or if they feel differently about the statement.

Statements:

  1. If you let yourself get drunk, anything that happens afterward is your fault.
  2. It is irritating when people deliberately seek attention.
  3. In the online world, there are no rules.

Quotes from the Play:

  • “When a girl passes out at a party, it’s pretty important to sort out why.” – Constable
  • “Friends keep friends safe.” – Constable
  • “Just because one person passes out it doesn’t mean everything stops immediately. It’s not the end of the world.” – Jerri

Exercise: BEHIND CLOSED DOORS… The Forgotten Scene

Objective:

You’re all so brave online.
But it just ends there.
– Constable

This exercise gives the students an opportunity to put themselves in the role of playwright.  It also explores how conversations differ based on the means of communication.  Students are asked to contemplate in greater depth the relationships between some of the characters, and to create exchanges between people who do not interact in the play.  Based on the insight into each character from the script, what would the content and tone of these conversations be?  An emphasis should be on the accountability of each character for their actions, or their inaction.

Materials:

  • Writing Utensils
  • Paper
  • Space to perform
  • 2 cell phones (optional, as props)
  • 2 chairs

Directions:

  1. Place the two chairs at the front of the class, facing toward each other. 
  2. Divide the class into groups of four.
  3. Assign one of the following conversations to each group of four:
    1. Constable and Sam
    2. Constable and Jake
    3. Jerri and her father
    4. Constable and Jerri’s father
    5. Jerri and Sam
    6. Jake and Webber
    7. Jake and Jerri
    8. Sam and Jake. 

    All of the conversations are between people who do not actually speak to each other in the play.

  4. The first group goes to the front of the class.  Two of the students sit facing each other in the chairs.  The other two students stand directly behind the chairs, facing forward.
  5. The seated students improvise a short conversation between the pair they were assigned. (For example: How would Jake and Webber relate, if they talked? What might they discuss?) Each conversation should last approximately two minutes.
  6. As the seated students converse, a few sentences at a time, the standing students, using cellphones as props if they so choose, then recreate the conversation verbally, but as if they were texting.  (For example the conversation might be: “I can’t believe that actually happened! It was the most hilarious thing ever! She does the most outrageous stuff!”  and the texting might be reduced to “OMG! LMAO! #crazygirl”)
  7. The first group sits down.  The next group of four comes up and does the same thing using the characters they have been assigned.  Repeat until all of the groups have done the exercise.

Debriefing Questions:

Ask students:

  • Why do you think people choose to text people instead of phoning?
  • Do you think that the text messages did justice to the conversation they were supposed to be representing?  Why or why not?
  • Would you prefer to have an extremely serious conversation in person, on the phone, or via texting?  Explain.
  • As an audience member, what was your level of engagement when watching the in- person conversation as compared to the texted one?  Explain.

Culminating Exercise: THE NEWSPAPER

This exercise develops students’ research skills, as they investigate the differences between journalistic news reports and editorial opinion pieces, and offers insight into the different styles and political stances occupied by different news publications.  This activity also gives students the opportunity to co-write either a news story, or an op-ed, and to contemplate the impact of anonymity by creating their own Comments section.  As the exercise requires research, comparative analysis and writing components, it will likely need to be completed over a few days.  The first link below provides some context regarding newspaper definitions; the second is an example of how a major newspaper approaches and regulates its readers comments.  The final link is to a website that features the front pages of hundreds of different daily newspapers.

Materials:

  • Writing utensils
  • Lined paper
  • An overhead projector (if possible)
  • Screen or projection surface (if possible)
  • Flowchart paper
  • Markers

Directions:

  1. Provide the students with a dictionary definition for the words “journalism”, “bias”, “op-ed”, and “sensationalism”.
  2. Ask students to research the journalistic writing styles and sociopolitical biases  (e.g. conservative vs. moderate vs. liberal) of different newspapers, as well as their op-ed pages.
  3. Have them choose three newspapers that occupy three different spaces on the ideological spectrum. (i.e. Toronto Sun, Toronto Star, NOW Magazine)
  4. Divide the class into five groups. 
  5. Groups will write an account of what transpired at the party in tagged, each from a  different viewpoint. Each front page news article should be 300-500 words. Each op-ed should be 500-700 words.  Each group will be assigned one of the following.  (This should be done quietly so that none of the groups knows what has been assigned to the others.)
    1. a front page news story with the bias of the liberal newspaper
    2. a front page news story with the bias of the “middle-of-the-road” newspaper
    3. a front page news story with the bias of the conservative newspaper
    4. an op-ed that views the happenings at the party as very serious
    5. an op-ed that views the happenings at the party as not serious
  6. One person in each group will be chosen as the scribe.  That person will type the story (outside of class) and submit it in class as a Word document.
  7. Photocopy each article onto an overhead transparency.  (If a projector is not available, maximize the font size and print each story on an 11×17 sheet of paper.)
  8. When the exercise resumes in class, have each group sit together.  Each student must have lined paper and a writing utensil.
  9. Show each article on the overhead projector, one at a time, and let the students read it.  (If you do not have an overhead projector, tape the articles up on the wall/chalkboard.) After the sharing of each article, give students two minutes to write, on one of the pieces of paper, their comments on the piece.  Students are not to identify themselves in any way.
  10. When all five groups’ articles/op-eds have been shown and commented on, collect each group’s comments.  Then distribute the piles randomly, so that each group now has another group’s comments to read. 
  11. Have the students discuss amongst themselves their reactions to the comments.  Allot 10-15 minutes for this discussion, then reconvene as a full class.

Debriefing Questions:
Ask students:

  • What did you discover about bias in journalism from doing this exercise?  Explain.
  • Do you think that opinion pieces on major news stories should be permitted in newspapers?  Why or why not?
  • How did you approach having to comment on your own piece?  Did you exaggerate your enthusiasm for the opinion expressed?  How were your comments affected by your own bias?
  • Did this exercise impact how you will approach reading articles, op-eds, and comments in the future? Explain.
  • Given the choice between reading a front page article about a story in the news, and an op-ed, which would you gravitate towards and why?
  • Different parts of this exercise gave you different degrees of privacy.  Everyone knew that everyone else was writing a piece, but only your fellow groups members knew which piece you were a part of writing.  When it came time for comments, no one knew which comments were yours.  How did it feel going from a public portion of the exercise, to one which offered complete anonymity? 
  • Do you think that the possibility for anonymity on the internet is more of a benefit or a detriment? 
  • Which newspaper and which op-ed do you think came closest to reporting fairly? Can a newspaper article ever be completely fair, unbiased and objective? Why or why not?

Extension:

The students have read articles, op-eds and comments that have taken the events of the party and interpreted them in a myriad of ways.  Keeping these in mind as well as what they have gleaned from previous exercises, have them compose – as a class – a letter to Sam in response to her video.

TIPS FOR STUDENT REVIEWERS FROM JON KAPLAN

Jon Kaplan’s Introduction to Student Reviewers

Theatre is, for me, an art form that tells me something about myself or gets me thinking about the world in which I live.
Whether going to the theatre as a reviewer or simply an audience member, I think that watching a play is an emotional experience and not just an intellectual one. I always let a show wash over me, letting it touch my feelings, and only later, after the show, do I try to analyze those feelings.
That’s when I start to think about some of the basic questions you ask when you’re writing a review – what did I see (story, characters, themes); how did I respond to what I saw; what parts of the production (script, performances, direction, design and possibly other elements) made me feel and think what I did; why was I supposed to respond in that fashion?
When you go to the theatre to review, take a few notes during a show if you feel comfortable doing so, but don’t spend your time writing the review during the show; you’ll miss what’s happening onstage.
Writing a review doesn’t mean providing a plot summary. That’s only part of the job; you have to discuss your reaction to what you saw and try to explore some of the reasons for that reaction.
I don’t believe that there’s any such thing as a totally objective piece of criticism. We are all individuals, bringing our own backgrounds, experiences and beliefs to a production. In some fashion, every one of us sitting in the theatre is a critic, no matter whether we’re writing a review or not; we all react to and form judgments about what we see on the stage.
When I go to a production, I always keep in mind that the people involved in putting it on have worked long and hard – weeks, months, sometimes years – getting it onto the stage. Even if I have problems with the result, it’s important to respect the efforts that went into the show.

Jon Kaplan is senior theatre writer at NOW Magazine, where he’s worked for the past 34 years.

RESOURCES

TORONTO PUBLIC LIBRARY RECOMMENDS…

The Toronto Public Library has created supplemental reading lists to help our audience connect with and explore more deeply the themes found within each of our 2014/15 season productions. Click on the titles below to link to the Toronto Public Library website.

BIFF:  quick responses to high conflict people, their personal attacks, hostile media and social media meltdowns, 2nd ed. by William A.  Eddy.  Scottsdale, Arizona, Unhooked Books, c. 2014. (For Ages 13 and Up)

Social Media and the Value of Truth, edited by Berrin Beasley and Mitchell Haney.  Lanham:  Lexington Books, c. 20013. (For Ages 13 and Up)

Lightweb Darkweb:  three reasons to Reform Social Media B4 it reforms Us by Raffi.  Saltspring Island, BC.   Homeland Press, c. 2013. (For Ages 13 and Up)

Unfriended by Rachel Vail.  New York, Viking (Penguin), c.  2014. (Ages 13 and Up)

Tell Everyone:  why we Share and why it Matters by Alfred Hermida. Toronto:  Doubleday Canada, c. 2013. (Ages 13 and Up)