In simple terms
A friendly intro before the formal notes — no formulas yet.
From Archive to Action: Mastering the Research Presentation
The Research Presentation is a solo project where you become both a theatre historian and a practitioner. You'll dive deep into a world theatre tradition, physically experiment with one of its performance conventions, and then present your journey of discovery, connecting your academic research with your practical experience.
Think of yourself as a culinary anthropologist. First, you are the researcher, studying ancient texts to understand why a culture uses a specific, rare spice (the performance convention) and the history behind the dish (the cultural context). Then, you become the chef, going into the kitchen to experiment with that spice yourself, feeling its texture and tasting its flavour (the practical exploration). Your presentation is the final 'tasting menu' where you not only serve the dish but also explain the story behind the spice, how you learned to use it, and how your practical cooking experience changed your understanding of the ancient recipes.
- 1
Select & Focus: Choose a specific world theatre tradition and a single, manageable performance convention within it. Formulate a precise research question that will guide your entire project.
- 2
Investigate & Embody: Conduct thorough academic research on the tradition's context and theory. Simultaneously, engage in practical, physical explorations of your chosen convention, meticulously documenting your process and discoveries.
- 3
Synthesise & Structure: Weave your research and practical findings together. Analyse how your practical work illuminated, challenged, or expanded upon your academic understanding, and vice versa.
- 4
Present & Persuade: Deliver a polished 15-minute presentation that articulates your research journey. Use clear signposting, integrated visuals, and precise terminology to justify your conclusions and demonstrate your depth of learning.
Explore the concept
Use the live diagram and synced steps — play it or tap a step card to walk through.
Full topic notes
Formal explanation with the rigour you need for the exam.
Deconstructing the Task: Beyond the Basics
The RP is a 15-minute solo presentation that must be delivered and recorded in a single take. Your task is to investigate a world theatre tradition you have not previously studied, select one specific performance convention from it, and explore it practically. Your presentation must then communicate your research journey, synthesising your academic findings with your practical discoveries. The choice of tradition and convention is yours, but it must be specific enough to allow for genuine depth in the time available.
Specificity is Key: A broad topic like 'Japanese Theatre' is unworkable. A strong topic is 'The role of the fan as a transformative prop in the Noh play Hagoromo'.
Researcher-Practitioner: You must embody both roles. Your research informs your practice, and your practice informs your research.
Process over Product: The assessment focuses on your learning journey. Your practical exploration is about experimentation and discovery, not about delivering a perfect performance of the convention.
Cited and Supported: All claims, both academic and practical, must be supported by evidence. This includes academic sources and documentation of your practical work (e.g., journal entries, photos, short video clips).
Criterion A: The Theatre Tradition – Achieving Depth and Insight
To score highly in Criterion A, you must demonstrate an 'in-depth and perceptive' understanding of the tradition's context. This means going far beyond surface-level facts. You need to connect the dots. How did the political climate, social structure, or religious beliefs of the time and place shape the very aesthetics and function of the performance? Your research should provide the 'why' behind the 'what'. For example, why does Kabuki feature such dramatic, stylised movement? The answer lies in its origins as popular entertainment in the urban centres of Edo-period Japan, its relationship with the ruling samurai class, and its need to create spectacle in large, noisy theatres.
Criterion B: The Practical Exploration – Documenting Embodied Learning
This criterion assesses the 'application' and 'appropriateness' of your practical exploration. Your goal is to gain embodied knowledge. You must choose exercises that allow you to investigate the core principles of your chosen convention. For example, if exploring the use of the neutral mask as taught by Lecoq, your exploration should not be about creating characters, but about achieving a state of pre-performative presence and economy of movement. Crucially, you must document this process. A journal with dated entries, reflections, photos of you attempting postures, or short, unedited clips of you working through an exercise are invaluable evidence of your learning process.
Focus on Process: Show your failures and frustrations as well as your breakthroughs. Learning happens in the struggle.
Link to Convention: Your practical work must be a direct investigation of the performance convention identified in your research question.
Reflect Continuously: Your documentation should not just show what you did, but what you thought and felt. Ask yourself: 'What did this exercise reveal about the performer's challenge? How did it feel physically and emotionally?'
From the Inside Out: The aim is to understand the convention from the perspective of the performer, not the audience. What are the internal dynamics, physical demands, and psychological states required?
Criterion C: Synthesis – The Heart of the Investigation
Synthesis is the most challenging and most heavily weighted criterion. It is not enough to present your research and then present your practical work. You must demonstrate how they are in constant dialogue. How did a specific academic article give you a new idea for a practical exercise? How did a physical discovery in your workshop force you to re-read and re-interpret a theoretical text? A top-scoring presentation will be structured around these moments of connection, where theory and practice illuminate, challenge, and transform one another.
Criterion D: The Presentation – A Performance of Research
Finally, your insights must be communicated effectively. This criterion assesses the structure, clarity, and engagement of your 15-minute presentation. Think of it as a piece of solo theatre about your research. It needs a clear beginning (introducing your research question), middle (developing your argument through evidence from A and B and synthesising them in C), and end (a powerful conclusion that summarises your key learning). Your use of media—images, short video clips, sound—should be purposeful and fully integrated, not a decorative afterthought. Rehearse extensively to ensure your pacing is perfect and your language is articulate and precise.
Worked examples
See the formulas applied — reveal one step at a time, like the exam.
A student is researching the stock character of 'Il Dottore' in Commedia dell'arte. How can they elevate their analysis from descriptive to 'perceptive' for Criterion A?
- 1
A mid-band response might say: 'Il Dottore is a stock character from Commedia dell'arte. He is an old, pompous doctor or lawyer from Bologna who speaks in a mix of Latin and local dialect and is meant to be funny.'
A student has researched the concept of yūgen (subtle, profound grace) in Noh theatre and practically explored the stylised walk, hakobi. How can they demonstrate synthesis?
- 1
An effective statement of synthesis in the presentation might sound like this: 'My initial reading of Zeami's treatise described yūgen as the highest aesthetic goal of Noh. However, this concept remained purely abstract until I began my practical exploration of hakobi, the sliding walk. My first attempts felt clumsy, a mere shuffling of feet. But through documented practice [show a brief clip or series of photos], I discovered that the key was not in the feet, but in maintaining a completely still and level torso, as if floating. This physical discovery was a revelation. It allowed me to embody the principle of 'stillness in motion' that my research had described. Suddenly, yūgen was no longer an abstract term from a 700-year-old text; it was a tangible physical state, a feeling of profound grace generated by immense core control. My practical work did not just illustrate the theory; it translated it into a kinaesthetic understanding, proving that for the Noh actor, yūgen is achieved not just intellectually, but muscularly.'
How it all connects
The big idea sits in the middle — tap a linked idea to explore the link.
Tap a linked idea to see how it connects back to the main topic — that connection is what examiners reward.
Glossary
Try to recall each definition before you reveal it.
Quick check
Answer in your head first — then tap to check. No pressure.
Revision flashcards
Flip the card. Test yourself before the exam.
World Theatre Tradition
A significant performance practice with a recognised history, theoretical basis, and set of conventions, situated within a specific cultural context (e.g., Kabuki, Commedia dell'arte, Kathakali).
Key takeaways
Review these before you close the topic — retrieval beats re-reading.
- ✓
Specificity is Key: A broad topic like 'Japanese Theatre' is unworkable. A strong topic is 'The role of the fan as a transformative prop in the Noh play Hagoromo'.
- ✓
Researcher-Practitioner: You must embody both roles. Your research informs your practice, and your practice informs your research.
- ✓
Process over Product: The assessment focuses on your learning journey. Your practical exploration is about experimentation and discovery, not about delivering a perfect performance of the convention.
- ✓
Cited and Supported: All claims, both academic and practical, must be supported by evidence. This includes academic sources and documentation of your practical work (e.g., journal entries, photos, short video clips).
Practice — then mark it
The whole point: a real Cambridge question, marked mark-by-mark.
Test Your Knowledge
Test Your Knowledge
Extra simulations & links
PhET, GeoGebra and other curated tools — open in a new tab.
Frequently asked
Checkpoint
One marked question is worth ten re-reads — close the loop before you move on.
Reading it isn’t knowing it — prove it.
Before you move on: do Test Your Knowledge on paper, snap a photo, and get examiner-style feedback on exactly where you win and lose marks.