Teaching MJ v Teaching in general

[Gus]

As an educator of some experience (though not in dance) I am disturbed by the attitude that students are either 'incapable' or 'not bothered'. The very high majority of people I see around me learning to dance are extremely bothered about whether they are doing it right or not, and I'm afraid that if they are judged 'incapable' by their teacher then they are hardly likely to learn :angry:

Learning any new concept takes time and though within any group there is always likely to be a small proportion who pick it up very easily, this is more due to their natural aptitude than good teaching. Good teaching lies in constantly reinventing methods of approaching concepts and in consolidation of concepts. One cannot expect to introduce something new and for it to be instantly assimilated into ingrained practice..

The quote above brought to mind a number of previous comments (both on the forum and in real life) re the transferability of real world teaching practice to MJ. Must admit that I'm far from convinced. Personally I feel that there is an important distinction between classroom training and dance training ... particularly when teaching the numbers that instructors have to deal with in a class. Even the basics of "tell them what you’re going to tell them, tell them , tell them what you've told them" is less of an axiom. I've done a fair bit of training in my line of work but find I need a different mindset to teaching MJ. Having said that I'm not a training professional and would deeply love to pick up new techniques to communicate and educate more effectively. Having seen a new model of teaching that Amir was employing at the weekend, I do believe that there are better ways of doing what we correctly accept as the standard teaching model.

[TheTramp]

Having seen a new model of teaching that Amir was employing at the weekend
Ah. Yes. But Amir is currently being trained himself as a dancer. If he wasn't bringing new ideas, and things that he's learning to the dance scene, then there'd be something wrong.

It's a huge advantage that he's got over just about everyone else - I certainly wish that I could go somewhere to be trained to dance in that manner. It's lucky that he is around for people to learn from.

Trampy

(13 to go!!)

[Gary]

Having seen a new model of teaching that Amir was employing at the weekend, I do believe that there are better ways of doing what we correctly accept as the standard teaching model.
Can you give a rough description of the "new model of teaching" for those of us who are geographically challenged, please?

[Gus]

Can you give a rough description of the "new model of teaching" for those of us who are geographically challenged, please?

I'm not sure that I've got my head round it yet .. but an element of it is about more DOING and less EXPLAINING, making the students do multiple repetitions of the move to build up muscle memory but still identifying the key points that need to be explained/illustrated in more detail. I've recently heard of a Mo'Jive teacher who employs a similar approach. Must confess, I haven't worked out how to incorporate such an approach into a standard MJ lesson ... but I was convinced enough by Amir's performance to want to give it a go.
The problem is that this method relies on the techer being able to distill a move into its core parts and be abe to identify where students are going to find difficulty and how to get them round this. I'm not sure that all MJ teachers have the experince and understanding of dance/body movements to be able to do this. Its one thing for a true dancer like Amir to do this ... its another thing for an amateur like myslef to try it :sick:

[Lounge Lizard]

I'm not sure that I've got my head round it yet .. but an element of it is about more DOING and less EXPLAINING, making the students do multiple repetitions of the move to build up muscle memory but still identifying the key points that need to be explained/illustrated in more detail.
is this not the method for teaching martial arts (or is it marital arts)

[Gus]

is this not the method for teaching martial arts (or is it marital arts)

:grin: ... funny you should mention that .....

The point I didnt make in my original satement is that where you have a physical activity that depends as much (if not more) on FEEL rather than technique, its hard to explain that in a classroom approach. Case in point ... nexct time you are at a MJ night, look at how many people do the Basic/Fisrt Move well ... i.e. smoothly, so that it flows and both partners look like they are actualy dancing not simply doing a series of arm and leg moves ... My guess that such dancers are in the minority despite the fact that this is a very common move. If we have challenges in getting dancers to do this move 'right' they must say something about our teaching technique ... or am I missing the point. JB ... liked what you said about bouncing hands, you must have a view on this.

[Emma]

Gus if you read my comment again I think you'll see I am talking about teaching theory not teaching method. As I have no experience of teaching dance I can comment upon it only from the perspective of pupil. However I do know quite a bit about the theory/psychology of teaching and learning, and am confident that this transfers across all areas, from dance to needlepoint to latin grammar.

For instance - if a teacher believes his or her pupils are 'not capable' then they are far less likely to learn.

[mick]

There is absolutely no difference between teaching mj and anything else (except teachiing mj is much easier; very willing students!)
Real teachers have to teach all types of stuff from learning to read n rite to gymnastics.

[Andy McGregor]

Real teachers have to teach all types of stuff from learning to read n rite to gymnastics.

And, I think we'd have far better literacy levels if the taught both in the same lesson - who'd want to miss gymnastics?

[Gus]

For instance - if a teacher believes his or her pupils are 'not capable' then they are far less likely to learn.

Absolutely. Sorry, wasn't being critical of what you said ... thought it was an interesting comment. Re the above quote ... its not a case of believing that dancers aren't capable .... the lesson format is probably more 'entertaining' based than teaching based .... but you do aim ofr all your dancers to pick up the moves as taught. I think Messr Ceroc Metro has previously made a good comment re the entertain/teach balance ... but I think that debate is a thread all of its own. :sick:

[Gus]

There is absolutely no difference between teaching mj and anything else (except teachiing mj is much easier; very willing students!)


Sorry ... there is a very real difference between many subjects to be taught. You would teach surgery, languages, music theory, physics all very differently. Also the format of the presentation makes techniques and success criteria very different. Even talking about dance, the way I do one-to-one coaching is radically different to teaching a standard club night.

[mick]

Sorry ... there is a very real difference between many subjects to be taught. You would teach surgery, languages, music theory, physics all very differently. Also the format of the presentation makes techniques and success criteria very different. Even talking about dance, the way I do one-to-one coaching is radically different to teaching a standard club night.


How would you know?

Interests:
Teaching MJ, Baiting over-sized egos

[Gus]

How would you know?

Interests:
Teaching MJ, Baiting over-sized egos

Nice baiting ....

In the real world I done a fair bit of teaching/training. A lot of other MJ teachers do this teaching stuff professionaly. Although we dont profess to know it all, we stand of the shoulders of those who have come before us ... and we have benefited from the experinces and knowledge of those who have helped to develop the current teaching model ... and hopefuly, we can all contribute (both teachers and dancers) to continualy improving the way that MJ is presented/taught. Answer your question? How would you assert that all teaching is the same?

[Lounge Lizard]

There is absolutely no difference between teaching mj and anything else (except teachiing mj is much easier; very willing students!)
Real teachers have to teach all types of stuff from learning to read n rite to gymnastics.
Not all of us who get up on stage to show willing dancers new moves are experienced teachers.

I am a builder who happens to teach modern jive, I have taught to a class of about 1000 dancers at Camber - most seemed to think I was ok - belive me my ability to teach anything other than MJ would be limited

If I was put into a classroom enviroment where everyone was sitting down looking at me to impart knowledge I would be lost (and laughed at if I had to write on a board with my spelling!!!)
Dance is a physical thing, I teach a move I can see if my class has understood what I say and adapt accordingly, with maths, physics, english etc I would not be able to succesfully communicate any skills I had cos I had lost the visual feedback (the snoring would be a clue tho).

To a profesional teacher (Iwould imagine) it is easy to teach in both enviroments, for non teachers like me that stumbled into MJ teaching - this is the limit of our/my ability

For the record my co-teacher when I started teaching dance was Maria who lectures at Brighton University. It made my job so much easier having a real profesional next to me

[Gadget]

I'm not a teacher in any sense, but it seems to me that teaching MJ is vastly different from generic tutorage in the "real world":

- First of all, half of the "pupils" change every week. You have to include all the stuff for the new people, all the stuff for last week's new people, and all the stuff for people that have been there for a while.

- The teacher cannot assess the class's progress in any traditional way; it has to be a general visual observation based on in-depth knowledge of what you are teaching.

- The level/ability of the pupils may vary from novice to advanced; the classes and teaching must address points for all levels in-between.

- It is a social situation: There may be a lot of 'chatting' and disruption, and a lot of what is said may not sink in. {OK, so some teachers may think this applies to every teaching situation :rolleyes: - I'm just saying that it is probably more pronounced and harder to deal with in MJ.}

- You have to gain the respect and acceptance of an audience with a vast range of life-experience to draw upon and who may know more than you in every other aspect of life.

- Your class wants something different every night; you have to change what you teach on every occasion.


So to all the MJ teachers out there: :worthy::worthy:

All "teaching" is the imparting of knowledge from teacher to student. I'm sure that there are methods of teaching that are common between teaching martial arts and pre-school english and diploma neuclear physics. However it does not follow that all the methods used in one would be used in another to the same extent, or even used at all.

[mick]

There is absolutely no difference between teaching mj and anything else (except teachiing mj is much easier; very willing students!)
Real teachers have to teach all types of stuff from learning to read n rite to gymnastics.


I'm not a teacher in any sense, but it seems to me that teaching MJ is vastly different from generic tutorage in the "real world": What is this gobbledy gook supposed to mean?


- It is a social situation: There may be a lot of 'chatting' and disruption, and a lot of what is said may not sink in. {OK, so some teachers may think this applies to every teaching situation - I'm just saying that it is probably more pronounced and harder to deal with in MJ.} Do you really think it would be easier teaching French to 5J on a wet Friday afternoon?


Get real! Can anybody seriously claim that teaching modern jive is radically different (and harder) than teaching old fashioned jive, morris dancing, horse riding or Japanese, apart from the inflating effect it appears to have on the ego.

[Rachel]

I'm not a teacher in any sense, but it seems to me that teaching MJ is vastly different from generic tutorage in the "real world": What is this gobbledy gook supposed to mean?


- It is a social situation: There may be a lot of 'chatting' and disruption, and a lot of what is said may not sink in. {OK, so some teachers may think this applies to every teaching situation - I'm just saying that it is probably more pronounced and harder to deal with in MJ.} Do you really think it would be easier teaching French to 5J on a wet Friday afternoon?


Get real! Can anybody seriousl claim that teaching modern jive is radically different (and harder) than teaching old fashioned jive, morris dancing, horse riding or Japanese, apart from the inflating effect it appears to have on the ego. I'm with Gadget - agree wholeheartedly with his post above. Personally, give me the French class any day! Though who's asking which is easier/harder? We're just saying it's different, that's all.

Anyway, I'm only posting this to show support for Gadget's argument. Don't give a F*** if you agree with me or not.
Rachel

[Gus]

Get real! Can anybody seriousl claim that teaching modern jive is radically different (and harder) than teaching old fashioned jive, morris dancing, horse riding or Japanese, apart from the inflating effect it appears to have on the ego.

You obviously seem to have an insight that escapes some of us MJ instructors. Care to share with us your experise that gives such an insight? :whistle:

PS ... dont remember anyone saying it was harder ... just that different techniques may be applicable.

[mick]

You obviously seem to have an insight that escapes some of us MJ instructors. Care to share with us your experise that gives such an insight? :whistle:

PS ... dont remember anyone saying it was harder ... just that different techniques may be applicable.

Obviously, different principles apply to different things being taught, but there are elementary principles that apply generally. Some instructors seem not to have grasped the most basic of these.

[Gadget]

What is this gobbledy gook supposed to mean?
let me enlighten you...
I'm not a teacher in any sense,... I do not teach, have never taught and the closest I get to teaching is passing on some words of advice here. This part of the sentence sets up a covering premise for the remainder of the post. It indicates that my experience in the field is severely limited and that I will accept if the text following it is considered by those with the experience I lack, to be a load of manure.
... but it seems to me that teaching MJ... In my opinion, from my (all be it limited) experience, those who stand on stage and try to teach those who attend a modern jive class.
... is vastly different from generic tutorage... the difference between one concept (teaching MJ) and the other (teaching in general) is very large. The term "generic" means relating to or descriptive of an entire group or class; general in this instance, referring to "tutorage" which I admit was slightly miss-leading since it refers to the post of a tutor rather than the action of tutoring: I should have used the term "tutorship" which is the act of teaching pupils.
... in the "real world": a slightly flippant term which was meant to indicate that there is life outside of the relatively small circle of events and people who participate and involve themselves in MJ {:what:} and the preceding text regarding the general teaching of people referred to it.


Obviously, different principles apply to different things being taught, but there are elementary principles that apply generally.
:confused: Isn't that what I said in the summary of my post?


Some instructors seem not to have grasped the most basic of these. Perhaps you would enlighten us as to which particular basic(s) you are referring to?

[mick]

let me enlighten you...
I'm not a teacher in any sense,... I do not teach, have never taught and the closest I get to teaching is passing on some words of advice here. This part of the sentence sets up a covering premise for the remainder of the post. It indicates that my experience in the field is severely limited and that I will accept if the text following it is considered by those with the experience I lack, to be a load of manure.
... but it seems to me that teaching MJ... In my opinion, from my (all be it limited) experience, those who stand on stage and try to teach those who attend a modern jive class.
... is vastly different from generic tutorage... the difference between one concept (teaching MJ) and the other (teaching in general) is very large. The term "generic" means relating to or descriptive of an entire group or class; general in this instance, referring to "tutorage" which I admit was slightly miss-leading since it refers to the post of a tutor rather than the action of tutoring: I should have used the term "tutorship" which is the act of teaching pupils.
... in the "real world": a slightly flippant term which was meant to indicate that there is life outside of the relatively small circle of events and people who participate and involve themselves in MJ {:what:} and the preceding text regarding the general teaching of people referred to it.


:confused: Isn't that what I said in the summary of my post?

Perhaps you would enlighten us as to which particular basic(s) you are referring to?

Not to use gobbledy gook!

[philsmove]

I have a little experience in teaching in two subjects

1 Sub Aqua diving (many years ago)

2 Ballooning

I do not teach dance but the teaching technique seems similar to the above

The instructor demonstrates and explains what he wants me to do and I copy him

But there is one very big difference

With diving and ballooning I am only teaching one or two students

My dance teacher at dance is trying to teach 60 students or more


It really does not matter how good he is at teaching, if I am at the back of the hall I cannot see him and he cannot see me. This means if I get it wrong he cannot correct me

My own solution is to attend special classes were I know numbers are limited

In conclusion the main difference in teaching MJ seems not what is being taught but the large numbers that are being taught at once

Incidentally does any of the classes use live Video cameras and Projectors?

A major problem even in medium size classes is being able to see the instructors’ feet


The following is a quote from someone at my local class


Of course they do not want us to learn the moves - if we leant the moves first time, we would not come back next week :rofl:

[Jive Brummie]

I can see a connection between teaching XYZ and teaching modern jive. But my experiences lie in the field of fitness instruction, and maybe this is where the connection really is, in that both 'disciplines' have a practical base.

My fitness instruction course/practise was pretty much as CTA, in that you display the move/exercise without verbal commands, then do it again verbally then teach them how to do it then 'tweak' and encourage as they try for themselves. Whether it's a first move or doing an inclined dumbell press the principles are the same.

As for the muscle memory thing, having 'sported' in different things and at varying levels, the muscle memory thing does make sense. I do have reservations though as to it's relevance here. I always believed that this only occurs with prolonged repetition and for the amount of times you'd do a move in a class, it wouldn't really work...it might do over a period of time but not one night....might do if you were doing specificity training, as in doing a particular movement with the body, either with or without a resistance for a designated number of sets and reps. But to translate that to a dance move, with loads of seperate components to the move would take a looooooooooooong time........i think.

Is anybody still reading this..........anyone......anyone

:whistle:

James

[Gus]

As for the muscle memory thing, having 'sported' in different things and at varying levels, the muscle memory thing does make sense. I do have reservations though as to it's relevance here.

Fair comment. I dont know if it will work ... but I think its worth trying. For anyone who has done combat training, even a simple thing like a reverse punch can take 6 months to get anywhere like right ... and thats just a '3 beat move' .. ish.

BUT ... think of the Octopus or the Pretzel ... they are 'muscle memory' moves. Once you've got it, its dead easy ... but try breaking a pretzel down to its component parts to teach and it can be very confusing ...

[MartinHarper]

for the amount of times you'd do a move in a class, [muscle memory] wouldn't really work

(potentially dubious memories follow)
That's certainly true of my limited experiences with Ceroc. However, at Fernhill Heath in Worcester, the first beginner lesson in the term was on the "First Move", and that being the only move taught. We did a lot of first moves! :)

Another lesson at the same place, this time for beginner intermediates, we learnt triple steps for about 20 minutes at the start (maybe it just felt that long! :)). It was pure triple steps: so, rock left-right, triple left, triple right, repeat, mirror image for the women. The teachers slowly build up a routine over the course of the class, and the routine in this class started off with two sets of triples. Must have done that little section of dancing around thirty times over the course of the lesson, each time to music.

[Andy McGregor]

even a simple thing like a reverse punch can take 6 months to get anywhere like right ... and thats just a '3 beat move' .. ish.

When I did it there were only two beats: if you counted the preparation. In freestyle there's only one very fast one (think Boogie Woogie Choo Choo Train). Any more time than that and it's all over...

[bigdjiver]

The "muscle memory" is not just built up in the class, but in the practise in freestyle afterwards, assisted by your partners. The problem is that it is very difficult to unlearn, bad habits tend to persist. The other aspect is that one does not just learn from the teacher, who may be remote and only partially visible. Partner and those next to you are often very important in the process.

One deviancy from good teaching practise is that the intermediate moves are taught so infrequently, with no reprise. If you don't get it in the lesson, that's it. There are no checks that you have "got" one series of moves, you just move onto a new batch next class.
Good teaching practise might be to just use on tune per class, so that you are always doing the same move to the same music. This would help to fix the routine in the mind, and to be able to reproduce it when that music came on. Once the move is learned it can easily be done to different music. However, MJ is, in general, about enjoying the evening, not about how quickly and well you can learn the moves and techniques.

[DavidB]

[Extract from "Spurious Justifications for Minimalistic Dancing" by O. Racle]
If you use less muscles when you dance, you have less to remember (and less to forget when you get it wrong).

[Yliander]

I'm not a teacher in any sense, but it seems to me that teaching MJ is vastly different from generic tutorage in the "real world":

having been a teacher in the "real world" and teaching MJ - I don't think they are vastly different - it does depend to some extend what you teach in the real world - but all teaching requires you to share knowledge in a coherent way - this is the key in MJ or anything you may be teaching.

my teaching experience has been in practical class's getting students to achieve something specific - not something theoretical like physics - and I think that the experience and skills I have from that teaching has assisted me in my MJ teaching

[mick]

having been a teacher in the "real world" and teaching MJ - I don't think they are vastly different - it does depend to some extend what you teach in the real world - but all teaching requires you to share knowledge in a coherent way - this is the key in MJ or anything you may be teaching.

my teaching experience has been in practical class's getting students to achieve something specific - not something theoretical like physics - and I think that the experience and skills I have from that teaching has assisted me in my MJ teaching

I have taught physics and dancing and the principles are the same.

[Gadget]

Not to use gobbledy gook!
:confused: do you mean that the basic teaching concept that MJ teachers omit is not using gobbledy gook? Or were you referring to my post again?

I would imagine that the principles of physics - especially in motion and energy - would lend themselves to MJ. So I could see how some of the teaching methods would cross over between these two disciplines.

Same with any martial art or physical instruction. Especially martial arts: The basics are drilled again and again untill they are embedded. Then the actual 'fight'{or dance} involves putting these basics together in a pattern dictated by your 'opponent' {or the music}.

Perhaps it should be compulsory for people to do the beginners class before they can do the intermediate one: work on getting the basics spot on.

idea: If you had the taxis (or a second teacher) walking the floor and giving direct feedback to dancers during the beginner lessons it would offer an opportunity for the more experienced dancers to get more from the beginner lessons.
Or would it disrupt the class too much?

[Simon r]

One deviancy from good teaching practise is that the intermediate moves are taught so infrequently, with no reprise. If you don't get it in the lesson, that's it. There are no checks that you have "got" one series of moves, you just move onto a new batch next class.
Good teaching practise might be to just use on tune per class, so that you are always doing the same move to the same music. This would help to fix the routine in the mind, and to be able to reproduce it when that music came on. Once the move is learned it can easily be done to different music. However, MJ is, in general, about enjoying the evening, not about how quickly and well you can learn the moves and techniques.

The idea is also to keep the intrest of the class..

Do you not think this might be a bit boring, i have put a set routine to music but only once or twice during my time teaching and to be honest it made no diffrence in the speed or the retention of the moves taught..

[Emma]

One deviancy from good teaching practise is that the intermediate moves are taught so infrequently, with no reprise.At Greenwich Russell regularly consolidates by repeating one move the next week :)

[The Pilgrim]

idea: If you had the taxis (or a second teacher) walking the floor and giving direct feedback to dancers during the beginner lessons it would offer an opportunity for the more experienced dancers to get more from the beginner lessons.

I agree with everything in your post except this 'idea'!

Forget taxi dancers - most of them are worse than useless as teachers/tutors. Lovely people, well intentioned etc etc but they are given little instruction in how to teach MJ. The whole raison d’être behind taxi dancers is flawed, apart from as cheap labour for the franchise/club owner. :whistle:


----------------
"A seeker of truth is no stranger to controversy."

[Gadget]

I agree with everything in your post except this 'idea'!
Would the idea have merit to you if it were teachers or "qualified" people that were dishing up advice?


Forget taxi dancers - most of them are worse than useless as teachers/tutors. Lovely people, well intentioned etc etc but they are given little instruction in how to teach MJ. The whole raison d’être behind taxi dancers is flawed, apart from as cheap labour for the franchise/club owner. :whistle:
You're just baiting now... but I'll bite anyway :D

How much instruction do you need to show people completley new to MJ, enough of the basics to get them started? I think that the concept behind "taxi dancers" is really good. (every MJ organisation I have heard of has the equivelent - can they all be wrong?)

However I do conceed the point that some could be better trained/guided/supported by the teachers. {<- note the "some" and "could"; this is based on nothing more than hearsay}


One deviancy from good teaching practise is that the intermediate moves are taught so infrequently, with no reprise. If you don't get it in the lesson, that's it. There are no checks that you have "got" one series of moves, you just move onto a new batch next class.
{Missed this first time :blush:}
But the "intermediate class" is not about teaching moves: it's about teaching how moves interact with each other. Admittedly, if there is something you have never done before {eg an elbow-roll or lay-back}, then it's a new bit to a move. But the rest of the routine is only an example of how these bits can be joined together. In this, they are taught with regularity and lots of repetition.

Sure, if you are only there to learn moves I would agree, but you are learning to dance. And that comes from joining moves and puting them to music.

[Dreadful Scathe]

But the "intermediate class" is not about teaching moves: it's about teaching how moves interact with each other.

So is the beginners class surely? A lot of the time, especially with a lot of new intermediates, the only difference between beginners and intermediate is the complexity of the moves. It takes a lot more than moves to be able to dance well :)

[RobC]

But the "intermediate class" is not about teaching moves: it's about teaching how moves interact with each other.
Since when ? I've only ever seen Intermediate classes aimed at 'move collectors' with the difficulty levels of the moves varying according to the general competency levels of the class.

As JiveBug, this was a gapping hole that we identified, and is why we started teaching an improvers class, teaching nothing more than combinations of basic beginners moves and variations, but taught in such a way that it encouraged people to think about how moves could be strung together, lead clearly and followed smoothly. One of the best comments I had from people in the class was along the lines of (can't remember the exact wording) "I really enjoy the lessons because you teach moves I can actually use in freestyle".

Unfortuantely the class was canned at the beginning of the year when we became Ceroc, in favour of Adam & Tas's Jive Fusion class. :tears: Seven months on and I am still getting people asking me when we are going to start teaching another Improvers class - definitely a gap in the market there !

[mick]

Perhaps it should be compulsory for people to do the beginners class before they can do the intermediate one: work on getting the basics spot on.

Perhaps a bit extreme, but agree with the concept; imperative to know the basics (why are they called beginner moves? everybody uses them) before trying intermediate (for most mortals).

we started teaching an improvers class, teaching nothing more than combinations of basic beginners moves and variations, but taught in such a way that it encouraged people to think about how moves could be strung together, lead clearly and followed smoothly. One of the best comments I had from people in the class was along the lines of (can't remember the exact wording) "I really enjoy the lessons because you teach moves I can actually use in freestyle".

Sounds sensible.

[Gadget]

Since when ? I've only ever seen Intermediate classes aimed at 'move collectors'
Then perhaps it's the teaching that should change? *: Tell me, what exactly is the difference between the "move collection" and the "joining moves"?

Most/all intermediate classes I have attended consist of at least two, (normally three, often four) moves that are a hybrid of basic (or "classic intermediate") moves. As you see more and more moves, you come to realise that they all have the same component parts. They are even taught this starts like xxx but changes to end like xxx with a xxx in the middle. Don't the names of the moves give an even bigger hint?

I propose that it's not the class or the lesson that is different, but the pupil's perception of it. This could be the teacher's influence.*



But the "intermediate class" is not about teaching moves: it's about teaching how moves interact with each other.So is the beginners class surely? A lot of the time, especially with a lot of new intermediates, the only difference between beginners and intermediate is the complexity of the moves.
True, except that the intermediate moves consist of the beginner moves chopped and changed: The beginners class is for getting the building blocks formed so that the intermediate class use them to build with. The actual intermediate class is not (/should not) be about creating more bricks, but how to put them together.
{well, I think so anyway}

It takes a lot more than moves to be able to dance well
:yeah: amen to that.

* I have no idea about the teachers, what they teach or how they teach it; my point is meant to illustrate that intermediate classes should be more than just moves.

[Sal]

Having seen a new model of teaching that Amir was employing at the weekend, I do believe that there are better ways of doing what we correctly accept as the standard teaching model.

I saw Amir teaching at Beach Boogie, and to my mind they were some of the best classes. (I know, difficult to compare as I did not go to all the others!)
He started with a warm up that was aimed at getting you to move your body in new and interesting ways. This was repeated and extended each day to help build up the "muscle memory" We were encouraged to experiment with the ideas in our own time, and incorporate them into our dancing style.
He then taught moves, both MJ and tango, incorporating elements of the style from the warm up. This helped to emphasise the points already made and to show how simple exercises can improve your dancing.
I realise he had the advantage of an 1.5 hours per day for five days, but I found this method of teaching much more valuble.

[RobC]

Then perhaps it's the teaching that should change? *: Tell me, what exactly is the difference between the "move collection" and the "joining moves"?

Personally, I would have to say it's the level of detail given (mainly to the guys) about how the basic moves are lead, and how to vary that lead to make it into a variation of the basic move, and with more emphasis on the component parts of a "combination move", rather than rushing through the complete move without even pausing for a breath when demonstrating it.

Unfortunately (and you may think it is unfair for me to generalise like this, but this is based on an observation not an assumption) there will always be a percentage of people who don't necessarily care about breaking a move down to it's component basic moves and learning to dance the moves they already know better / 'properly', but want to feel they have done something new and got their money's worth from a lesson. (Or maybe they have other motives, who knows ??)

As I said, this is based on observation of class numbers from when JiveBug used to run it's improvers class concurrently with the intermediate class. We would often has as many people in the improvers class as was downstairs in the main intermediate class, but that said, there was always a number of people who stuck in the intermediate class, struggled with the routine, caused their partners to stuggle as they rotated because they were getting it wrong, and quite frankly would have benefited by learning how to 'walk before trying to run' by spending a few weeks in the improvers class getting the basics nailed.

[RogerR]

There is a difference in the teaching model required to suit various classes. In full time compulsory education the structure expects the class to attend all the lectures, in FE the pupils can leave if they feel, in a recreational class there will always be a mixture of participants from today's newcomer to a seasoned pro. Maintaining interest in this situation takes a lot of thought on behalf of the teacher, giving out snippets which each group can comprehend. Having taught MJ as a night school subject, being able to structure a class as part of a term for people who are at the same developmental stage is much easier than trying to teach a mixed, multi start-date class.

As one regarded teacher says, "I'm giving you a lot to take in, but take some of it and add it to your existing style"