Technique in Beginners lesson?

[Gus]

Just for a change thought I'd post a thread about dance :rolleyes:

Esepcially since the advent of WCS and Jango becoming known to many MJ dancers, there has been a fair few comments made about 'we teach people moves ... THEN we teach them the basics". The principle that in MJ we teach people how to dance without teaching them dance basics has been an interesting concept, one which the (now departed) DavivB sagely commented on in times past.

The Ceroc(tm) model seems to work fairly well, but doesn't produce hordes of 'dancers', rather hordes of people who enjoy MJ. Without getting into the debate of 'why people do MJ', I was wondering whether there was room to incorprate more footwork and tension/compression within beginners lessons. This is more of an ODA thread as personally I think it confuses the whole concept (and also beginner men:( ). However, I'm ready to be challenged on this.

I was on a flying visit to Knutsford last week and saw Keith teaching his version of a beginners lesson. One of the differences I noted over a Ceroc(tm) format was the fact he was teaching a mambo step. I'm not sure how long Keith has been teaching beginners so I'm not sure if there is impirical evidence as to what benefits have been achieved, but its interesting to see someone challenging the 'accepted knowledge'.

[TheTramp]

(now departed) DavivB

I didn't realise that he was dead. Or Israeli.....

[Gav]

I probably wouldn't have kept going after the first 2 weeks if there had been too much emphasis on footwork and other basics etc.
For a beginner man, who's never danced in his life, it's quite a shock to suddenly find that it might be possible one day with relatively little work.

However, it should definitely be offered at a later stage as a natural progression. Without keeping your eyes open and looking out for the right workshops to attend, you could quite easily merrily carry on, never learning those essential basics and therefore never quite getting as good as you could have done.

I think this is where Ceroc and others are missing a trick.
I think that they should be watching their members carefully, picking out those that are progressing well and encouraging them to go to the right workshops where they'll learn the basics that they don't have time to teach in a normal lesson.

Currently, my experience is that it's up to the individual to find out about what's on and decide whether it's relevant to them or not. As most of us are pretty underconfident when we start out, it could be that we're not the best placed people to decide what would be best for us?

[TA Guy]

The basics are taught, some rudimentary connection is taught (take the ladies hand), some rudimentary footwork is taught (whatever feels best for you) etc. etc. at any Ceroc or MJ class night.

The higher you set the basics, the more people will not even give it a go, and the more people will be chased away. That is not good, because things like this are always a pyramid. The bigger your base, the better and higher, over time, will be the pinnicle.

That doesn't mean there isn't a place for alternative teaching methods of course, but they will only ever have a chance of survival if the Ceroc mountain/pyramid is there to support them. Would Jango and WCS be the up and coming fads if Ceroc/Modern Jive didn't exist ? In fact, what we want is a larger pyramid, more beginners sucked in to these easy learning methods as maybe then, more Jango type or advanced or alternative evenings would appear. What we truly want is ways to make Ceroc even easier to teach (actually don't think that's possible, but who knows) to get even more people thru the door and taking their first steps on the MJ road.

I am not a fan of DavidB and his attitude to what constitutes a dancer, as some may have read elsewhere LOL, it is too reminiscent of there being a standard you have to reach before you are bestowed that title. Not only counterproductive in the long run, but elitism, and kinda misses the whole point of dance to me anyway.

[timbp]

Maybe this is relevant: http://www.dance-forums.com/showthread.php?t=14850

[David Bailey]

I probably wouldn't have kept going after the first 2 weeks if there had been too much emphasis on footwork and other basics etc.

Mmmm... Good point. Ceroc is supremely good at setting up a structure that eases beginners into dancing, without setting the bar so high as to frighten them off. That's why it has a much much higher retention rate than other dance forms.

Anything that even hints at making life harder for beginners is a Very Bad Idea, from a business point of view, and I can't imagine Ceroc ever entertaining that notion.


For a beginner man, who's never danced in his life, it's quite a shock to suddenly find that it might be possible one day with relatively little work.
But, the thing is, that's a lie. It's a con designed to ease you gently into partner dancing. Doing it well, like anything, takes time and effort, and there's no magic bullet to get there quickly.

(From a certain point of view, the whole Ceroc marketing is based on a myth.)

So, no - I don't think it's worth doing much technique in beginner's lessons.

[ducasi]

There is technique in Ceroc beginner classes.

There is footwork – e.g., in the first move the guys are told to step back to mirror the girls position.

There is tension/compression – e.g., the in-and-out, and the side-to-side shoulders. (Everyone in Dundee say "Mmmmm!!!!" ;))

Both these things, and other aspects of technique come up from time to time during beginners' classes. Maybe you don't remember them, maybe you didn't notice them but they're there.

I don't think there is a need for any more formality in their teaching to beginners.

[El Salsero Gringo]

There is technique in Ceroc beginner classes.

There is footwork – e.g., in the first move the guys are told to step back to mirror the girls position.

There is tension/compression – e.g., the in-and-out, and the side-to-side shoulders. (Everyone in Dundee say "Mmmmm!!!!" ;))

Both these things, and other aspects of technique come up from time to time during beginners' classes. Maybe you don't remember them, maybe you didn't notice them but they're there.

I don't think there is a need for any more formality in their teaching to beginners.This is a good point. It's not the absence or presence of technique that puts people off, it's the emphasis on technique to the exclusion of enjoyment that puts people off. I think there's room for a lot of technique in all classes if it's done thoughtfully.

[bigdjiver]

... the fact he was teaching a mambo step. I'm not sure how long Keith has been teaching beginners so I'm not sure if there is impirical evidence as to what benefits have been achieved, but its interesting to see someone challenging the 'accepted knowledge'.FWIW I regularly do Mambo step with beginners who I think will be able to do it if the track calls for it, also little walks in time with the music to emphasise listening to the beat, and basket walk-arounds, to chat. I virtually never do combs, except as a joke emphasising how easy and fun MJ can be. Just standing there wiggling "Hey, we're cool, we're dancing."

[mikeyr]

One of the differences I noted over a Ceroc(tm) format was the fact he was teaching a mambo step.

Coming from Dances where footwork is the norm (Salsa & Cha cha) I dont see what the problem is. Also in those particular dances emphasis is given to a clear lead from the start, particularly where it is being taught from IDTA syllabus.

The main difference as I see it is that old Chesnut, MJ is really just a social thing, a good night out where you can maybe get a dance or two. Without digging up the whole teacher thing again the CEROC (tm) CTA what is that, an accountancy qualification "Chartered Tax Adviser" or a franchise operaters attempt to give itself an air of respectability and method.

Basically we dont want to scare away potential newbies by teaching them to dance properly its just not good business, theres no money in it - look at the Ballroom dance school circuit.

[NZ Monkey]

To my mind it isn’t so much what is taught (or not taught) in beginner’s classes that make people keep coming back initially, as how much fun the class is.

That being said, teaching good technique and having fun are not exclusive either, but I get the feeling that many teachers consider that they are.

I don’t expect beginners classes go into any kind of fine detail about framing and posture but I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I’ve heard the words ‘’wait until the man leads you forward with a gentle pull before stepping’’ in any class, not just beginners ones. I don’t think I’ve ever seen returns taught in class so that any kind of connection can be maintained through the movement and they’re something that we do all the time.

My impression isn’t that the teachers don’t know how to do these things themselves (in my darker moments I have wondered sometimes though:devil:). My impression is that often the teachers just don’t think their students are capable of taking it onboard, making them at least mildly patronising in my eyes. At the very least many teachers seem afraid to introduce detail of technique for fear of a mass exodus of people who suddenly think it’s all too hard (not a likely scenario in my eyes).

I say again: it isn’t the difficulty of the class so much as how much fun it is that keeps people coming back and getting hooked. That’s an issue of personality and well structured teaching, not of subject material (well, up to a sensible point anyway, but I suspect that many if not most ceroc classes are below that point by more than a comfortable margin).


Vaguely relevant side ramble:
When I was in university I studied linear algebra. In my first year I thought it was the hardest thing in the world, and hated it. That was until I read a one-paragraph section of a text book that pointed out what I was leaning was just a bigger version of something we were all taught at the age of fourteen and had been doing for years, with a different notation to keep it all easy to visualise. After that it was a piece of cake. The problem wasn’t that the maths was hard, it was that it was being presented poorly.

Edit:

This is a good point. It's not the absence or presence of technique that puts people off, it's the emphasis on technique to the exclusion of enjoyment that puts people off. I think there's room for a lot of technique in all classes if it's done thoughtfully.:yeah:
Posted before I got in there :D

[El Salsero Gringo]

CTA what is that, an accountancy qualification "Chartered Tax Adviser" or a franchise operaters attempt to give itself an air of respectability and method.Do you not think it has any respectability or method then? Just curious.

[David Bailey]

Do you not think it has any respectability or method then? Just curious.
Now I'm curious, where does the "polyp" come from? :confused:

[Groovemeister]

What is technique? probably at the basic level there are things that have to be taught as has been said.

From there on in it is to do with how you want to progress. MJ has so many things influencing your dance style that to introduce a specific technique may be counter productive.

For me it would be to get more consitency in the instruction so that things didnt have to be re learned further down the line.

I also think what Gav said is a good idea as it is very difficult to get an idea of how you dance and where you have progressed to. If some one felt your general style of dance fell within learning a particular technique it would be benefical to all concerned to know.





I think this is where Ceroc and others are missing a trick.
I think that they should be watching their members carefully, picking out those that are progressing well and encouraging them to go to the right workshops where they'll learn the basics that they don't have time to teach in a normal lesson.

Currently, my experience is that it's up to the individual to find out about what's on and decide whether it's relevant to them or not. As most of us are pretty underconfident when we start out, it could be that we're not the best placed people to decide what would be best for us?

[El Salsero Gringo]

Now I'm curious, where does the "polyp" come from? :confused:a PM from Guffy. I'm saving the rest to share with you when I need another laugh.

[David Bailey]

a PM from Guffy. I'm saving the rest to share with you when I need another laugh.
A bit harsh. I mean, you're not that little.

[mikeyr]

Do you not think it has any respectability or method then? Just curious.

Its the quality of the dancers it produces that will gain it the respect in the Dance community as a whole. The method, well its a method! In the same way most companies have a method for producing a product., Again its the quality of the dancers produced that determines whether the method is seen as a good one or not.

Is Ceroc about producing dancers now?

[MartinHarper]

Especially since the advent of WCS and Jango becoming known to many MJ dancers, there has been a fair few comments made about 'we teach people moves ... THEN we teach them the basics".

There's nothing wrong with moves first, basics second. It's common across multiple dance forms, to the extent that the rec.arts.dance FAQ has a page on the topic:

http://www.eijkhout.net/lead_follow/teaching_misteaching.html

On the other hand, I find that intermediate MJ classes are, on average, just as move-focused as beginner MJ classes. There are some exceptions, though.


Would Jango and WCS be the up and coming fads if Ceroc/Modern Jive didn't exist ?

WCS does pretty well in the states, where MJ doesn't exist.

[Jhutch]

Well, i feel like i am over-reaching myself by trying to contribute to a technique thread, but i thought i would give my opinions anyway:blush:




To my mind it isn’t so much what is taught (or not taught) in beginner’s classes that make people keep coming back initially, as how much fun the class is.



What kept me coming back was not really the 'fun' element although it did help that a lot of people seemed friendly, especially the teachers and taxi dancers. Learning some moves was important though - if i had gone away having just done some technique stuff then it would not have been as good. But then i don't know how representative i am:sick:




I don’t expect beginners classes go into any kind of fine detail about framing and posture but I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I’ve heard the words ‘’wait until the man leads you forward with a gentle pull before stepping’’ in any class, not just beginners ones.



I have heard it plenty of times :)





Vaguely relevant side ramble:
When I was in university I studied linear algebra. In my first year I thought it was the hardest thing in the world, and hated it. That was until I read a one-paragraph section of a text book that pointed out what I was leaning was just a bigger version of something we were all taught at the age of fourteen and had been doing for years, with a different notation to keep it all easy to visualise. After that it was a piece of cake. The problem wasn’t that the maths was hard, it was that it was being presented poorly.



I have done some maths and physics during University and often had equations thrown at me, sometimes with little explanation of what the terms in it were. I struggled with a lot of this at first. However, I found that things became a lot easier by breaking equations down into little bits. Like you, i thought that better presentation would have made things a lot easier for everyone :)

[El Salsero Gringo]

A bit harsh. I mean, you're not that little.I think he meant intellectually little.

[El Salsero Gringo]

Again its the quality of the dancers produced that determines whether the method is seen as a good one or not.Depends on who's doing the 'seeing', I think. There are sections of the dance community that would judge a teacher to be a complete success by training one ballroom world champion, even if there were only three students in total. Naturally in Ceroc terms that wouldn't work.
Is Ceroc about producing dancers now?I don't disagree with you on what the focus of Ceroc is at all.

[David Bailey]

I think he meant intellectually little.
Well, that's fair enough then.

I now have an image of a donkey crossed with a polyp. Good thing I've had lunch already.

[mikeyr]

http://www.eijkhout.net/lead_follow/teaching_misteaching.html

"beginners feel that dancers just happen to be holding on to each other as they trace out memorized step sequences with their feet"

On the other hand, I find that intermediate MJ classes are, on average, just as move-focused as beginner MJ classes. There are some exceptions, though.

I dont know many/or that "move" From the beginner followers I expect to hear this, but I am finding it to be an increasing excuse for Intermediate followers too.

Of course it could be my bad lead...... But lets just for a moment, assume its not.

[El Salsero Gringo]

Here's a comment from MartinHarper's linked webpage that says what I was trying to say above (probably read it quoted before on the forum but never really thought about it)

"The trick is to overtly teach dances while covertly teaching dancing."

[mikeyr]

"The trick is to overtly teach dances while covertly teaching dancing." By putting a lot more emphasis on technique ceroc could do just that.

[David Bailey]

By putting a lot more emphasis on technique ceroc could do just that.
And, err, go out of business... AT classes (the good ones) are almost all technique, and numbers are tiny.

I think Ceroc do OK with beginners, and I very much doubt they'll make beginner classes more difficult somehow.

My beef with them is what happens after the beginners classes - there's no good mechanism in the UK for providing a "OK, now we've got you hooked, we'll let you see how you can use this technique stuff" class.

[Tessalicious]

By putting a lot more emphasis on technique ceroc could do just that.By putting a lot more emphasis on technique in beginners lessons, Ceroc could become just another one of many dance forms that only really attract people who are convinced they will be good dancers and are prepared to put the effort in - and if you are that kind of person, why do Ceroc when you could do Ballroom or Latin or Lindy or Tango?

On the other hand, by not putting a lot of emphasis on *precise* technique (it's still there, it's just that it is more flexible) Ceroc can attract all the people that wouldn't do those other dances, and so, as TA Guy mentioned, widen the base of the pyramid of people who enjoy dance. That doesn't mean that the people who want it can't get it in Ceroc - there are even a few people on this very forum that started off in Ceroc because it was welcoming and not too terrifyingly complicated and - shock horror - are actually quite good!

Is that so wrong?

[Gav]

And, err, go out of business... AT classes (the good ones) are almost all technique, and numbers are tiny.

I think Ceroc do OK with beginners, and I very much doubt they'll make beginner classes more difficult somehow.

My beef with them is what happens after the beginners classes - there's no good mechanism in the UK for providing a "OK, now we've got you hooked, we'll let you see how you can use this technique stuff" class.

:yeah:

[mikeyr]

And, err, go out of business... AT classes (the good ones) are almost all technique, and numbers are tiny.

I think Ceroc do OK with beginners, and I very much doubt they'll make beginner classes more difficult somehow.

My beef with them is what happens after the beginners classes - there's no good mechanism in the UK for providing a "OK, now we've got you hooked, we'll let you see how you can use this technique stuff" class.

You are right of course, I was just getting a little utopian. However it has been my sad experience that generally the teaching at "intermediate level " still has the fear of alienating the client base with anything too technical and by technical I dont mean complicated.

[Gav]

You are right of course, I was just getting a little utopian. However it has been my sad experience that generally the teaching at "intermediate level " still has the fear of alienating the client base with anything too technical and by technical I dont mean complicated.

Of course, I'm not at your utopian standard yet :na: , but it is more than a little distracting when in the Intermediate class they're teaching variations of basic moves that would be sooo much easier/better if everyone had been taught proper "techniques" at some point in between (myself included!).

[David Bailey]

I agree with both of you - but look at the title of the thread... especially the penultimate word...

[NZ Monkey]

By putting a lot more emphasis on technique in beginners lessons, Ceroc could become just another one of many dance forms that only really attract people who are convinced they will be good dancers and are prepared to put the effort in - and if you are that kind of person, why do Ceroc when you could do Ballroom or Latin or Lindy or Tango?

On the other hand, by not putting a lot of emphasis on *precise* technique (it's still there, it's just that it is more flexible) Ceroc can attract all the people that wouldn't do those other dances, and so, as TA Guy mentioned, widen the base of the pyramid of people who enjoy dance. That doesn't mean that the people who want it can't get it in Ceroc - there are even a few people on this very forum that started off in Ceroc because it was welcoming and not too terrifyingly complicated and - shock horror - are actually quite good!

Is that so wrong?Not wrong at all. A good thing in my opinion.

I’d rather not do Ballroom, Latin, Lindy or Tango because I don’t like the look of them or don’t like the music. I think that was meant to be a rhetorical question though :blush:

After a little more thought, there probably isn’t too much more that Ceroc can realistically do *at the beginner level* to teach technique. This is in large part due to the ‘’6 week policy’’ that’s become so famous on the forum. You’re really not going to get that much solid technique teaching (that gets retained) in a total of 4 ½ hours over 6 weeks no matter what you do. Change that 6 week policy and it could be a different story I guess.

I’d never suggest being heavy handed about teaching good technique from the very beginning, but if I had my way I’d at least make sure the same details about waiting for leads (and leading – and what that actually means) were mentioned in *every single beginners and intermediate class*. Preferably in a loud confident voice. Ditto for the grip, and not bouncing (in my perfect world anyway, where that’s considered a Sin of Great Proportions :devil:). It should only need to take a single minute of every class, but stuff like that needs reinforcing. Since doing that with a big stick wouldn’t be great for class numbers….

I’d also like to point out that having a wide base on a pyramid doesn’t tell you anything about the gradient of its sides and it’s height :devil:

[ducasi]

[...] This is in large part due to the ‘’6 week policy’’ that’s become so famous on the forum. You’re really not going to get that much solid technique teaching (that gets retained) in a total of 4 ½ hours over 6 weeks no matter what you do. Change that 6 week policy and it could be a different story I guess. [...]
It's 12 weeks, and has been at least since I started. ;)

[mikeyr]

The Ceroc(tm) model seems to work fairly well, but doesn't produce hordes of 'dancers', rather hordes of people who enjoy MJ.

And so we come full circle. At the risk of being labelled niavely simple If you want to learn to "dance" or become a "dancer" dont look here.

[NZ Monkey]

It's 12 weeks, and has been at least since I started. ;)..In Scotland ;)

[ducasi]

..In Scotland ;)
And the rest of Ceroc-land. Some isolated parts of the UK may have not caught up yet... ;)

I expect there's a reason why there are 12 different beginner routines taught across the UK, and shown on the Ceroc beginner's DVD. :)

[El Salsero Gringo]

By putting a lot more emphasis on technique ceroc could do just that.It's there - just sufficiently covert to need some sensitivity to detect it :wink:

[El Salsero Gringo]

This is in large part due to the ‘’6 week policy’’ that’s become so famous on the forum. It may be famous on the forum, but I'm not sure it's famous anywhere else. I've certainly not heard it once at any beginner's class I've been to over the last six months.

[Cruella]

It may be famous on the forum, but I'm not sure it's famous anywhere else. I've certainly not heard it once at any beginner's class I've been to over the last six months.

How many have you attended, that you haven't been teaching at?

[El Salsero Gringo]

How many have you attended, that you haven't been teaching at?See? You *are* only pretending to be fick.

[Stuart M]

As ducasi pointed out, given that the Ceroc DVD has 12 routines, it'd be strange to talk about 6 weeks at one lesson a week being enough for a beginner. I've never heard that in the last 3 years.

One thing we (Claire and I) started doing at JJ's - which probably goes on elsewhere too - we split the taxi refresher class up according to experience. So the newbies in their first four or so lessons go with taxi dancer X, the others go with Y. We don't set out to do the refresher class any differently for each group, but inevitably they diverge.
The more experienced group are much more prepared to ask questions, since they've begun to think about their dancing. Plus, they are beginning to join the dots of the moves a bit quicker, so there is more time to look at details. You can even risk mentioning words like frame without scaring them off (if they've got to their 5th lesson, I think it's safe to say they're willing to learn...)
Conversely, the early group are still joining those dots, so you know to avoid "the science bit" and just focus on getting them moving.

I think we both feel this makes the refresher more useful/enjoyable for the beginners, and it makes things easier for us too.

[NZ Monkey]

And the rest of Ceroc-land. Some isolated parts of the UK may have not caught up yet... ;)

I expect there's a reason why there are 12 different beginner routines taught across the UK, and shown on the Ceroc beginner's DVD. :)

Fair enough, my little corner of London must be just a little hard for news to get to :whistle: :wink:

Seriously though, it's likely that regardless what the party line actually is there is a fair bit of variety between the franchises if they even mention it at all.


It may be famous on the forum, but I'm not sure it's famous anywhere else. I've certainly not heard it once at any beginner's class I've been to over the last six months. I've heard it at the end of virtually every beginners class I've been present at in my local area, by teachers who are not very active on the forum. I *think* I've heard it at a couple of central venues as well, but haven't been to enough of them to really say one way or the other.

*NZ Monkey shrugs*

Either way I think we can agree that beginners don't stay in the beginner classes for long. As to whether they should...that's a whole other debate.
Edit: I should point out that I think 12 weeks is much more reasonable if it's stuck to.


It's there - just sufficiently covert to need some sensitivity to detect it Call me crazy, but I'd have thought teaching that was a little more overt may be a little more accessible. Again, leave the big sticks at home and make sure everyone’s having a good time, but more overt would be more useful in my opinion :wink:

[MartinHarper]

It'd be strange to talk about 6 weeks at one lesson a week being enough for a beginner

http://www.ceroc.com/nonmembers/whathappens.htm


We normally recommend that it takes about 5 or 6 beginners classes to master the basic moves and feel comfortable to join in at Intermediate level.

[Tartaniad]

Going back to what Stewart said.I have to agree with the way it is taught in JJs maybe because I myself go there,but as a brand new taxi dancer myself I dont think you should teach to much technique just more of the basic move.Ultimately you should try to make it as much fun as you can because im sure thats what brings people back.(FUN NOT SERIOUS).

And as someone else said after 5 lessons you can be sure they enjoy it and are willing to learn more.I know I did