PDA

View Full Version : Assessing Teachers' Level?



David Bailey
27th-April-2005, 08:30 AM
I doubt I would be up to intermediate teacher. Beginner or Progression (or whatever its all called in the UK :grin: ).
I believe the technical grade names for teacher levels are:
- Crap
- Clone
- Good
- Excellent
- Amir

:grin:

EDIT: Split from the "Working and Cerocing in the UK" thread.

Simon r
27th-April-2005, 08:38 AM
I believe the technical grade names for teacher levels are:
- Crap
- Clone
- Good
- Excellent
- Amir

:grin:

I am sure the teacher you demo for occasionally would love to hear your grade names ......
please explain a clone to me .....

David Bailey
27th-April-2005, 09:04 AM
I am sure the teacher you demo for occasionally would love to hear your grade names ......
please explain a clone to me .....
Errr, I think I'm probably in enough trouble already, I'd never dare insinuate that some teachers sound and look alike... But, are you saying that there are no bad teachers?

Of course, my teacher (!) is lovely - I should add that in as a category :)

Simon r
27th-April-2005, 09:38 AM
Errr, I think I'm probably in enough trouble already, I'd never dare insinuate that some teachers sound and look alike... But, are you saying that there are no bad teachers?

Of course, my teacher (!) is lovely - I should add that in as a category :)

Nope i would say some have diffrent teaching methods from others but that must appeal to diffrent people otherwise they would not last as a teacher.....
so i think the names that you have used are not only rude and insulting but also wrong.....

David Bailey
27th-April-2005, 09:52 AM
Nope i would say some have diffrent teaching methods from others but that must appeal to diffrent people otherwise they would not last as a teacher.....
so i think the names that you have used are not only rude and insulting but also wrong.....
I guess it's just my week to be insulting... :sad:

I do apologise, it was meant as a throwaway humourous comment, to praise Amir rather than insult anyone else. Certainly didn't mean to offend.

Having said that, it's raising an interesting question - I assumed that there are indeed levels of teacher, which was the original question, both in a formal (trained) sense, and in an informal (ability / popularity) sense. Surely in every profession, there are differences in ability?

So, as a rule of thumb, is it reasonable to assume that (in a standard Ceroc venue), better teachers draw in more punters, all other factors being equal? Or is it just silly to try and say that some teachers are better than others?

Perhaps I should have phrased my post as:
- Novice
- Standard
- Intermediate
- Experienced
- etc.

But that just measures experience, surely - what about this mythical X factor? If some are "good", then some must be "not good", I'd imagine, or "less good than the good ones" (this is me being diplomatic - it won't last :) )

Again, apologies for any offence.

Gus
27th-April-2005, 12:31 PM
Nope i would say some have different teaching methods from others but that must appeal to different people otherwise they would not last as a teacher.....
so I think the names that you have used are not only rude and insulting but also wrong.....Nope .... sorry Simon but there really are some lousy teachers on the circuit ... whether they be 'qualified' or not. I wouldn’t use the work 'cr*p' but there are definitely teachers whose performances would earn them at least a written warning if they were employed by an organisation that assessed performance.

There are about 120 CTA teachers (NOT picking on Ceroc ... just using them as an example). Do you think that ALL these teachers are performing at 'above average'? Years back I heard mention of all past teachers being re-assessed to see if they were still up to standard .. wonder if anything actually happened. There is a certain Northern MJ organisation that trains its own teachers. The standard is well above that of the local amateurs ... but in turn its well below the standard of Ceroc. Want to assess how many of their teachers could be put in the cr*p category?

Just because somebody clambers on stage and calls themself a teacher does not make them good. Additionally, just because you did your CTA training 5 years ago doesn’t still mean you are up to standard. I had a real wake up call recently when I looked at a video of me teaching a beginners lesson .... some basic mistakes made. Its a bit like passing your driving test ... then being faced with doing it again 10 years later. still think you would pass? :sick: I think there is a real call for teachers to be re-assessed and brought back up to standard again. If there was such an opportunity I know that I for one would be very interested in such a course.

El Salsero Gringo
27th-April-2005, 12:34 PM
Certainly there will be different levels of experience amongst teachers, but since customers are looking for a very wide range of things from their classes I think it's a little unfair to try to sum up someone's Ceroc (or other dance) teaching ability in one or two words.

Teachers vary in their charisma, clear explanation, choice of lesson content, sense of humour, rapport with the class, approachability and so on. I don't think I've ever met one who unarguably combines all of these desirables together.

I do know the the teachers I worship aren't the ones who get the biggest classes and arent the ones with the best reputations, so I know straight away there's a lot of personal choice involved.

El Salsero Gringo
27th-April-2005, 12:40 PM
There are about 120 CTA teachers (NOT picking on Ceroc ... just using them as an example). Do you think that ALL these teachers are performing at 'above average'?Could we please distinguish between 'average' - representative of the group, and 'mediocre' or 'adequate'?

To answer your question explicitly and to reinforce the point about how you're just playing with an ambiguous usage: it's possible (if unlikely) for all but one teacher to be above average performance depending on how you choose to measure performance and define 'average' (arithmetic mean, geometric mean, median, mode, or something else?)

On the other hand, it's certainly possible for all 120 CTA teachers to be performing above the level of 'mediocre' or 'adequate'.

Gus
27th-April-2005, 12:48 PM
Could we please distinguish between 'average' - representative of the group, and 'mediocre' or 'adequate'?Lack of clarity in my statement accepted. Based on my limited knowlegde of the CTA workforce the vast majority of the teachers peform at least to adequate levels of delivery. However, I've seen some that maybe don't. I've also seen teachers for other organisations who are WELL below minimum acceptable standards (and yes ... you have can have a whole debate just on the subject of what is 'acceptable').

There can never be an absolute rating of standard as different people look for different things. Some teachers have the personality of an accountant yet are technicaly superb, othera have great presentation but no substance to their teaching. The trick is to put the right teacher at the right event with the right crowd. The success of Simon B at ISH is one such example of getting the mix right. :clap:

El Salsero Gringo
27th-April-2005, 01:03 PM
... I've also seen teachers for other organisations who are WELL below minimum acceptable standards ...
There can never be an absolute rating of standard as different people look for different things. So what I think you're saying is that there's an objective scale at the bottom end (at its simplest, 'acceptable' vs. 'unacceptable' standard) but above that the whole thing disolves into discussion and personal opinion. If that *is* what you're saying, then I agree with you.

David Bailey
27th-April-2005, 01:15 PM
On the other hand, it's certainly possible for all 120 CTA teachers to be performing above the level of 'mediocre' or 'adequate'.

Indeed, and I'd say the strengths of the Ceroc teacher-training approach pretty much ensure a minimum standard of teaching ability - I'm sure most (all?) Ceroc teachers are at least competent.

However, I think this boot-camp approach can also crush a lot of individuality and creativity underfoot :whistle:, This may be why one reason why many (possibly most) of the Teaching Gods seem to be more freelancers / running their own setups.

(Hoping I haven't offended anyone, yet again)

Another point is that MJ teaching is way more consistent, and definitely the average level of teaching is higher than some other dance styles - I've been to some seriously sh*t salsa classes in my time, sometimes run by people "known as Salsa Gurus"... Hell, I've taught salsa classes, that shows how low the bar is set.

El Salsero Gringo
27th-April-2005, 01:20 PM
However, I think this boot-camp approach can also crush a lot of individuality and creativity underfoot :whistle:This is oft-heard from all and sundry, but I'd be more inclined to believe it if it were oft-heard from people who had been through CTA training. Assuming they can get to work their gags loose enough to speak ;-)

TheTramp
27th-April-2005, 01:23 PM
However, I think this boot-camp approach can also crush a lot of individuality and creativity underfoot :whistle:, This may be why one reason why many (possibly most) of the Teaching Gods seem to be more freelancers / running their own setups.

Hmmmm.... Interesting point here.

Who are the 'teaching gods'?

I ask. Because the ones that seem to be the most populer - Nigel, Viktor, Mick (Wenger) - and the ones that I'd rate as among the better teachers I've seen - Emma Pettitt stands out here, and Mr. CerocMetro as well - were all Ceroc trained and worked for Ceroc at one point (or still do).

On another comparison point, the others that are definitely worth a mention :devil: - Amir, Nina - are actually dance trained, so have the huge volume of knowledge of what they are being (or have been) taught themselves to draw upon. Which has got to help them a lot. So they've been trained too. Albeit with different sources of training.

How did all these people manage to retain their individuality and creativity?

MartinHarper
27th-April-2005, 01:30 PM
please explain a clone to me .....

Dictionary malfunctioning?

A clone teacher is one who does not distinguish themself from other teachers, with respect to their teaching.

spindr
27th-April-2005, 01:35 PM
I think that a better "teaching scale" is based on the "W" method -- excerpted with permission from elsewhere (http://www.afterfive.co.uk).



A reasonable teacher will be able to explain a move in terms of the three W's:

* What…
* …goes where…
* …and when.

Better teachers will remember that there is also potentially a fourth W:

* Why?

Being able to explain why a move is danced in a particular fashion is a great help in being able to explain good technique to students.

The best teachers will remember that there is also potentially a fifth W:

* Wow!

Being able to explain how to dance a move with style, and in particular being able to analyse your own movements and be able to break them down for students to be able to understand easily.

(c) Neil Matthews 2005.


I certainly know teachers who would only score say 2 W's -- they tend to miss out the "when" -- especially when they try to add syncopated moves.
Personally I wouldn't score a teacher with a "W" from say a higher category if they don't fulfill the earlier ones.

Aside: had a great MJ class, where the teacher inspired by SDF was trying to teach MJer's the New Yorkers move from the Cha-Cha-Cha -- the count he was calling was (1 2) (1 2 3) (1 2) (1 2 3), etc. the first time I've known it taught with what appeared to have 5 counts which was sort of bad enough -- but the fact that they were trying to call the 3 steps of the cha-cha-cha with the exact same timing was probably worse.

SpinDr.

Gus
27th-April-2005, 01:35 PM
This is oft-heard from all and sundry, but I'd be more inclined to believe it if it were oft-heard from people who had been through CTA training.My own experince was that it took about 6 months learning how to dance again after going through CTA training. The need to clearly demonstrate the 'right' way to dance cuts across dance style and individuality. Having said that, once the basics are understood, they make an excellent platform for further development.

Personal observation is that style and impact have been developed in spite of teacher trainig rather than as a result ..... but then again is that such a bad thing. CTA training is there to produce a homogonous product and training process. The need for indivisual style etc porbably only interest 10% or less of the target market. My observation is that Ceroc Empire Ltd is less concerned these days about a strictly enforced presentation these days which has allowed teachers some latitude. The question is how will these teachers find/develop this non-standard style.

David Bailey
27th-April-2005, 01:36 PM
Who are the 'teaching gods'?
Dunno, it's ESG's phrase, ask him :)


How did all these people manage to retain their individuality and creativity?
Well, I hope I didn't imply that creativity would always be permanently crushed for all people for all time by just going on a Ceroc training course. :rolleyes:

But surely any system that enforces standardisation will necessarily discourage experimentation, pretty much by definition?

And I'd guess (just a guess, I have no idea if it's true, hence lots of caveats in previous posts) that some teachers, once they get to a certain stage, would want to be able to teach their own thing, in their own way.

Doesn't mean that they can't learn from Ceroc, of course, it's a good training organisation. And it doesn't mean that you can't get superb teachers within Ceroc, either. But it may be that there are more Teaching Gods (whatever that means, note I never name names) outside of Ceroc than inside.

All IMHO, all guesses, and please note all caveats.

Nick M
27th-April-2005, 01:48 PM
A clone teacher is one who does not distinguish themself from other teachers, with respect to their teaching.

As in Wordsworth's Poem

"I wandered loudly as a clone"

Simon r
27th-April-2005, 01:53 PM
Nope .... sorry Simon but there really are some lousy teachers on the circuit ... whether they be 'qualified' or not. I wouldn’t use the work 'cr*p' but there are definitely teachers whose performances would earn them at least a written warning if they were employed by an organisation that assessed performance.

. Want to assess how many of their teachers could be put in the cr*p category?

Just because somebody clambers on stage and calls themself a teacher does not make them good. Additionally, just because you did your CTA training 5 years ago doesn’t still mean you are up to standard. I had a real wake up call recently when I looked at a video of me teaching a beginners lesson .... some basic mistakes made. Its a bit like passing your driving test ... then being faced with doing it again 10 years later. still think you would pass? :sick: I think there is a real call for teachers to be re-assessed and brought back up to standard again. If there was such an opportunity I know that I for one would be very interested in such a course.

Once again you are giving your opinion on one persons teaching, my argument still stands just because you or any individual feels the teacher is below standard or does not like that teachers style in no way quantifies that teachers ability the only true indication is if people still return week on week to that class.

Simon r
27th-April-2005, 01:57 PM
Dictionary malfunctioning?

A clone teacher is one who does not distinguish themself from other teachers, with respect to their teaching.

but that would imply that every teacher has exactly the same sense of humour dresses the same picks the exact same moves and uses the exact same phrasing .....
nope never seen that have you....

Northants Girly
27th-April-2005, 01:58 PM
the only true indication is if people still return week on week to that class.Maybe in somewhere like London where there is a good choice of alternative venues maybe - but in many areas it would be a choice of going dancing or not going dancing at all :(

alex
27th-April-2005, 02:08 PM
the only true indication is if people still return week on week to that class.Not sure i agree. Returning week after week is perhaps an indication that the teacher is a good entertainer. Surely a better indication of teaching ability is whether people learn anything?


Time for a Harperlink to the Teachers vs Entertainers thread.

(A harperlink is like a hyperlink, but Martin Harper finds it for you.)

ChrisA
27th-April-2005, 02:42 PM
Once again you are giving your opinion on one persons teaching, my argument still stands. Just because you or any individual feels the teacher is below standard, or does not like that teachers style, in no way quantifies that teachers ability

I think it's certainly true that there's a great deal of subjectivity in people's assessment of dance teachers. Their style of learning, desire for entertainment, tolerance of difficulty, etc, will all affect who one finds to be a "good" teacher.

FWIW, my completely subjective opinion about David's original list:



- Crap
- Clone
- Good
- Excellent
- Amir


...I can think of one teacher from some time ago, that I would describe as 'crap' (my personal opinion, admittedly, but based on the fact that this individual would demonstrate something completely different from what was being said, and then do it (and say it) differently every time, leaving complete confusion in the class. It was invariably done to a fast count when it was described as a slow count, thus never giving people the chance to learn because it was always too fast.

Now, on to clones. I've encountered lots of clones over the years.

Which isn't for a moment to say they were bad teachers - quite the reverse. I've said many times that the Ceroc format is probably one of the very best compromises between actually teaching people to dance and giving them a good time (and without the latter they'll never get to the former) - and also that to execute that "very best compromise" requires considerable skill and personal qualities that not everyone has. :flower:

But those I would put in this category were all very similar in style and outward personality. No bad thing, as I say - consistency is a very big plus.

Out of the rest, I've encountered quite a few good, not so many excellent, and I'd certainly agree with David, Amir is IMHO totally unique in the UK MJ world - but I would say that wouldn't I, because he is my favourite teacher by miles.

Not that I don't hugely enjoy learning from others, but Amir's ability to actually put what he's teaching in a way that I find accessible is amazing, not that I learn everything he teaches :tears: .

And it it weren't for him, I'd no longer be dancing. But that's another story...

MartinHarper
27th-April-2005, 03:16 PM
That would imply that every teacher has exactly the same sense of humour dresses the same picks the exact same moves and uses the exact same phrasing .....

No it wouldn't.


Clone (4): One that copies or closely resembles another, as in appearance or function: “filled with business-school clones in gray and blue suits” (Michael M. Thomas).

Lory
27th-April-2005, 03:54 PM
Time for a Harperlink to the Teachers vs Entertainers thread.

(A harperlink is like a hyperlink, but Martin Harper finds it for you.)
Very good! :rofl: I even got it without the explaination! :D

David Bailey
27th-April-2005, 04:35 PM
the only true indication is if people still return week on week to that class.
Well, popularity is certainly one of the main indications. If (hypothetically :) ) one had two different teachers teaching on different days at the same venue, one day crowded, the other not - yep, that'd be a very good indication.

However, I don't believe it's the only criterion - a "niche" teacher can be very good, but he/she may only appeal to a smaller audience, by the nature of the topic. Also, venue location, local competition, marketing and other external business factors affect attendance, it's not all down to the teacher.

David Bailey
27th-April-2005, 04:39 PM
(A harperlink is like a hyperlink, but Martin Harper finds it for you.)
:rofl: :rofl: Excellent :)

Andreas
28th-April-2005, 12:28 PM
Nope .... sorry Simon but there really are some lousy teachers on the circuit ... whether they be 'qualified' or not.


Couldn't agree more! :yeah:

Gus
28th-April-2005, 12:47 PM
Was giving this topic more thought overnight. I think my original analogy re needing to take your driving test again is flawed concept. Look at some of the better known teachers. It may well be that some of there ‘basic’ techniques could do with refining, that some of their words may be more clear … BUT, would you focus on this to sacrifice the experience they have of knowing how dancers will typically go wrong, being able to present the moves in a dynamic, entertaining and memorable way?

There are many ‘soft’ attributes that teachers develop over the years that make them ‘non-clone’. The basics are still important (and some instructors have forgotten that) but many other have become so much more than their original training. Now how you assess that I would love to know.

Russell Saxby
28th-April-2005, 02:16 PM
I guess it's just my week to be insulting... :sad:

I do apologise, it was meant as a throwaway humourous comment, to praise Amir rather than insult anyone else. Certainly didn't mean to offend.

Having said that, it's raising an interesting question - I assumed that there are indeed levels of teacher, which was the original question, both in a formal (trained) sense, and in an informal (ability / popularity) sense. Surely in every profession, there are differences in ability?

So, as a rule of thumb, is it reasonable to assume that (in a standard Ceroc venue), better teachers draw in more punters, all other factors being equal? Or is it just silly to try and say that some teachers are better than others?

Perhaps I should have phrased my post as:
- Novice
- Standard
- Intermediate
- Experienced
- etc.

But that just measures experience, surely - what about this mythical X factor? If some are "good", then some must be "not good", I'd imagine, or "less good than the good ones" (this is me being diplomatic - it won't last :) )

Again, apologies for any offence.


For the record I found the use of "crap" insulting aswell.

And of course these so called Gods

- never get the teach wrong
- are always engaging
- always pitch the routine at the right level for the class

I think not

MartinHarper
28th-April-2005, 03:52 PM
For the record I found the use of "crap" insulting as well.

This is interesting. David comments that some teachers are "crap", mentioning no names, and you and Simon, as teachers, decide to take offence. You've not really explained the reasons - simply stated that it's insulting somehow.
On other threads, we have folks commenting that some dancers are "crap", mentioning no names, and this apparently doesn't bother either of you.

How come?

David Bailey
28th-April-2005, 04:37 PM
For the record I found the use of "crap" insulting aswell.

And I apologized for the word, oh, way back when.



And of course these so called Gods
- never get the teach wrong
- are always engaging
- always pitch the routine at the right level for the class
I think not
Possibly, I dunno. Everything's subjective, but I got a lot out of a class with Amir, that's why I named him. I usually find it's better to name good examples and not name bad ones.

Anyway, my point was that there are different levels of teacher - there must be, surely - teaching Modern Jive isn't unlike every other activity known to humanity, is it?

So yes, some teachers will be Gods (again, not my term, but hell, I like it), some will be less-than-Godlike (!), and most will be in-between.

I'm amazed, gobsmacked and astonished that this fairly straightforward and commonsensical observation is seen as controversial. :what:

If I'd said "XXX is a crap teacher" in a public forum, of course I'd deserve to be hounded and abused - same as if I'd insulted anyone in a public forum. But I didn't, I made a general observation. So why all this fuss?

For what it's worth, I'm sure all Forumites are lovely teachers and dancers.
:flower:

TheTramp
28th-April-2005, 05:36 PM
For what it's worth, I'm sure all Forumites are lovely teachers and dancers. :flower:
I'm not lovely!! :mad: :rolleyes:

Jive Brummie
28th-April-2005, 06:21 PM
As much as I am loathed to respond to this thread...I just can't help myself.

I've a feeling I may know why 'people' take offence at such comments made. As a comparative 'newby' teacher myself, I want to ensure that my 'students' are happy with the service I provide. To the extent that I am happy to plan routines for class nights well in advance, going through all the possible mishaps that may or may not happen. I am happy to come in from a full day at work and then spend the night on the laptop working out new stuff, be it workshops or normal classes, and I am happy to self promote! Then I look on-line and see what appears to be a throw-away comment made by someone who I've never met and have no knowledge as to who this person is and what social standing they have or even to what degree people actually read their posts and believe them...saying that in their opinion teachers fall into these brackets....blah blah blah!

Funnily enough, it then feels like all the hard work I've put into creating new ideas, classes or workshops are then suddenly shot down in flames because of an idle comment made by a stranger.

All teachers I know, do it because they love it. It's a commitment none of us take lightly. We've been through the 'Ceroc-boot-camp' of which you sound like you have knowledge of :rolleyes: and we've come out the other side, at what I will obviously say, is to a high standard. The long and short of the matter is, as teachers we all work hard and endeavour to give our level best whenever we can, and yes, it is a little insulting to hear that someone thinks that some teachers are crap because that's what they think....ah well, it must be true.

James (a little dissapointed Ceroc teacher - who loves what he does as much as Simon Rich and would rather negative comments came more constructively than offensively...ta :cheers: )

David Bailey
28th-April-2005, 07:12 PM
I'm not lovely!! :mad: :rolleyes:
OK, now that I can believe...

"Everyone except TheTramp is lovely"

How's that?

David Bailey
28th-April-2005, 07:25 PM
I've a feeling I may know why 'people' take offence at such comments made.

< snip >

Well, I make it a rule never to apologise twice, but I have to say, in my Real Life profession (I'm involved in technical communications), I certainly wouldn't take offence if I read a comment that "some technical communicators are crap", because I know they are. I know that I'm not, so I don't worry about it, just nod, move on, or get into a discussion of how to assess "quality of teaching" (hint - look at thread title).

I'm glad you spend time and effort on teaching, great - but I'm still puzzled why you take it personally... I didn't even slag off Ceroc teaching (well not too much :) ), certainly no more than others have at least.

I could certainly understand it if you were insulted personally - but I'm making a general observation (admittedly poorly expressed), that in all fields of human endeavour, some are better, some are worse.

My opinion may well be worthless, and like most members I'm a stranger, but no personal insults were meant or intended. I never said that "a lot of teachers are crap", or that "XXX is crap", all I ever said was that there are different levels of teaching.

If you have "superb" teachers, it's not unreasonable to expect there to be, well, Less-Than-Superb ones. How many LTS teachers there are, dunno - hopefully very few.

And no forumites are ever LTS, naturally...

El Salsero Gringo
28th-April-2005, 07:28 PM
As much as I am loathed to respond to this thread...I just can't help myself.

{etc. etc.}

Firstly, well done on becoming a Ceroc teacher, whenever it was. I have no doubt it's a considerable hurdle, and you have every right to be proud of it. {much other praise heaped upon you here for lesson prep. and for caring what your students think etc. etc.}

Now, a couple of questions: why, if David is (as you say) a stranger to you, should it feel like it's your hard work that he's shooting down?

Are you saying that *no* Ceroc teachers are crap?

Between your opinion of Ceroc teachers in general, and David's opinion of Ceroc teachers in general, I'd (gently) suggest that his is the one that counts for more, since he's a paying customer. If he thinks there are crap teachers, wouldn't it be more constructive not to bridle in hubris at the thought of your colleagues being insulted, but to enquire which teachers he thinks are crap, and if not to mention them by name then to ask what it was about them he found crap?

I still don't see that you've explained what there is to take offence about.

David Bailey
28th-April-2005, 07:48 PM
If he thinks there are crap teachers,
Actually, I've been thinking about it, and mmmm, I'm not sure I can think of any... :blush: I can think of some "OK" ones, but I'd be pushed to find a terrible Ceroc teacher.

But there may well be some, and I'm vehemently defending the right of them to exist. Or something. Dunno really, it's not my thread, honest.

I tell you, I can think of some truly awful, genuinely crap salsa teachers though. If that helps...

DavidB
28th-April-2005, 07:51 PM
I wasn't offended by the remark. I thought it was meant somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and I'm as surprised as DavidJames by the reaction. (And I've no idea who DavidJames is)

Even if it wasn't meant in a light-hearted way, then I still don't have a problem. If you pay for a class, then that gives you a right to comment on the class. You don't need any qualifications to rate a teacher - all you need to do is go to a class.

If someone thought I was a crap teacher, or had taught a crap class, then I'd rather know about it than that someone worrying about being polite. I can't change their opinion. All I can do is try to find out why, and see if I can do anything about it. Fortunately several people have given me plenty of feedback on my classes.

It is the same when you do a cabaret or a competition - you have to expect people to comment on what you do, even if they couldn't do it themselves.

There are good and bad teachers. There are good teachers who have taught a bad class, and visa versa. There are teachers who have an out-of-date reputation (ie almost all teachers get better with experience, but some still have a reputation based on one class a few years ago.) There are teachers who are hopeless with beginners, but excellent with advanced dancers.

I've never taught a class that I've been happy with. I've taught plenty that I've been very unhappy with, and "crap" is a word I've used a lot to describe what I've done. So it would be a bit hypocritical for me to take offence to someone else using the same word.

But given that some people do find it offensive, then perhaps "poor" or "below average" might be safer in future...

David

Gus
28th-April-2005, 07:52 PM
Now, a couple of questions: why, if David is (as you say) a stranger to you, should it feel like it's your hard work that he's shooting down?

Are you saying that *no* Ceroc teachers are crap?First to put things in perspective. I've seen JB develop from a beginner to a serioiusly good dancer and I know that he will take his teaching a serious as other areas of his life. I've only recently met Ruseel but have to say he has impressed me with his teaching style and innovation. Nether of these two fine fellows have any fear of being in the "worse than average" catefory.

Why the defence? Well you DO get a bit evangelical about being CTA qualified. Its a very tough course and it stays with you. even when I was teaching for the blitz organisation I alwys maintained I was CTA trained ... as I saw that as being an importnat differentiator. So, plesae understand that any critisiim of 'one' can be seen as a critisim of 'all'.

HAVING SAID THAT {ODA Momement} I would venture that Russell and JB maybe need to look past the words and into the meaning of the topic. Whilst some teachers do put in a lot of work to maintain standards ... there are many MJ teachers who dont. I could name several who use the teaching merely as a way of keping their bed warm ... and it is an indictment of a (hopefully small) proportion of the women who think that being a MJ teacher is sufficient reason for sex.

So ... yup .... there is great deal of pride in beimg a MJ teacher (and rightfuly so) ... no all teachers are equal (IMHO).

David Bailey
28th-April-2005, 08:03 PM
I could name several who use the teaching merely as a way of keping their bed warm ... and it is an indictment of a (hopefully small) proportion of the women who dance that being a MJ teacher is sufficient reason for sex.
Good God, I never even thought of that one (smacks forehead, walks away, shaking head ruefully)

Probably a good thing I'm not a teacher really :)

El Salsero Gringo
28th-April-2005, 08:12 PM
But given that some people do find it offensive, then perhaps "poor" or "below average" might be safer in future...
... fear of being in the "worse than average" catefory.OK. I think I've just discovered my Forum obsession That is, the topic that just forces you post on a thread, where you lose control of your fingers and don't even bother to read what you've written before with trembling with righteous indignation you hit the "Submit Reply" button. Everyone has one, even if they don't know what it is yet. (Hell, Andy McGregor has three.) And mine is.... the (mis)-use of the word average.

Please if you want to say low quality, or mediocre, or "just about acceptable" - then say so, but leave average with its "representative of the group" meaning. Under which proper definition I'd be quite pleased to be an "average" Ceroc teacher.

David Bailey
28th-April-2005, 08:16 PM
OK. I think I've just discovered my Forum obsession That is, the topic that just forces you post on a thread, where you lose control of your fingers and don't even bother to read what you've written before with trembling with righteous indignation you hit the "Submit Reply" button. Everyone has one, even if they don't know what it is yet. (Hell, Andy McGregor has three.) And mine is.... the (mis)-use of the word average.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

So does Andy have an average number then?

MartinHarper
28th-April-2005, 09:26 PM
But given that some people do find it offensive, then perhaps "poor" or "below average" might be safer in future...

Also, we mustn't talk about "yankers" and "stinkers" - only "fragrant people" and "dancers who cause an above average level of pain".

DavidB
28th-April-2005, 10:05 PM
Please if you want to say low quality, or mediocre, or "just about acceptable" - then say so, but leave average with its "representative of the group" meaning.Don't worry - I fully understand the term 'average' (vague as it is), and the difference between quantitative and qualitative measures.

"Poor" and "Below average" mean completely different things, but both are acceptable in this context - ie as replacements for "crap" as the lowest level of ranking teachers.

"Below average" is safer than "poor", as it makes no judgement on whether the teacher is good enough.

Minnie M
28th-April-2005, 10:41 PM
Time for a Harperlink to the Teachers vs Entertainers thread.

(A harperlink is like a hyperlink, but Martin Harper finds it for you.)
:rofl: :rofl:

ChrisA
29th-April-2005, 12:01 AM
Even if it wasn't meant in a light-hearted way, then I still don't have a problem. If you pay for a class, then that gives you a right to comment on the class. You don't need any qualifications to rate a teacher - all you need to do is go to a class.

Absolutely.

What is going on here?

In EVERY walk of life you will find an ability range. There will be the excellent, the very good, the good, the 'ok', the 'not really acceptable', the 'pretty poor' and, let's face it, the ****ing awful.

IMO, it's a tribute to the Ceroc organisation that in my experience over, gawd, nearly 8 years, I've encountered only one teacher that was, IMO, crap. This individual was in many ways (IMO), truly dreadful. Inconsistent, confusing teaching, utterly resistant to feedback, rated by several people as a pretty dodgy dancer as well.

If not crap, then definitely well below acceptable.

Sorry. :flower:

Every other Ceroc teacher in my experience has been fantastic in comparison. Come on, Ceroc teachers out there, no one is tarring you all with the same brush by referring to an extreme example as crap. Get over it, guys... it's not you that anyone's talking about.

Just for the record, recently qualified teachers are among the least likely to be crap. They are usually exceptionally keen to do well, motivated to help, improve their delivery, their dancing, give people a good time, support the organisation, and just be the best they can be.

This is so unlikely to be crap by anyone's measure that I have just one thing to say to any newish teachers who worry about how they measure up:

Worry not :flower:

But to the experienced teachers out there, I'm a little conerned at this 'feeling insulted' thing. No names have been mentioned, no specifics about organisations, regions, or venues. So what's with feeling insulted by what must surely be a self-evident truth, that at the bottom of the bell-curve (and well below-average :wink: ) there must be a few people, sadly, who are the worst?

If you're worried that you might be among them, you probably aren't. In my experience, the people that care about how they're performing are likely to be among the better ones. The worst are typified by an arrogant lack of interest in feedback, coupled with an assumption that they're doing really well.

El Salsero Gringo
29th-April-2005, 12:01 AM
Don't worry - I fully understand the term 'average' (vague as it is), and the difference between quantitative and qualitative measures.

"Poor" and "Below average" mean completely different things, but both are acceptable in this context - ie as replacements for "crap" as the lowest level of ranking teachers.

"Below average" is safer than "poor", as it makes no judgement on whether the teacher is good enough.I don't think "below average" is acceptable as a replacement for "crap": I'm sure I don't need to point out to you that (if the distribution is symmetric, or close to it) half the teachers in the group must by definition be below average. That's very different from saying half the teachers are 'crap'.

OK, now I get it. you knew that all along and you *want* to use a senseless term ("average") in order to render the question meaningless and so avooid having to address it in any substantive way. A cunning strategy.

ChrisA
29th-April-2005, 12:08 AM
OK, now I get it. you knew that all along and you *want* to use a senseless term ("average") in order to render the question meaningless and so avooid having to address it in any substantive way. A cunning strategy.
You can't infer this at all, ESG.

Because David used the term "safer" without offering an opinion on whether "safer" is good or bad :innocent:

El Salsero Gringo
29th-April-2005, 12:20 AM
You can't infer this at all, ESG.

Because David used the term "safer" without offering an opinion on whether "safer" is good or bad :innocent:OK Chris. I'll 'see' your quibble, and raise you a "ner ner nah ner ner!"

Simon r
29th-April-2005, 07:51 AM
I'm amazed, gobsmacked and astonished that this fairly straightforward and commonsensical observation is seen as controversial. :what:

If I'd said "XXX is a crap teacher" in a public forum, of course I'd deserve to be hounded and abused - same as if I'd insulted anyone in a public forum. But I didn't, I made a general observation. So why all this fuss?
:

Ok as much as i have tried not to respond to this,

I know of many teachers (personal friends) who are there own biggest critic, after teaching they will sit and dissect there teach to the nth degree,
(now in my opinion there teach was of a fair/ good /excelent standard and all aspects were covered and the class would have achieved the lesson and had fun doing so)....

But still the teacher will ponder on items and feel that there teach could be improved.....

No matter how much you praise this type of teacher they will still feel they could do better and that there standard of teaching is not good enough....

Right now imagine reading this thread were a group of individuals generalise all teachers under groups, two of these being very harsh. Some will take your general comments to heart and feel they fall in to these groups you have so pleasently named,
Do they (of course not) will they be hurt (proberbly, yes).

Just for the record i also question every teach and always feel i could improve on asspects of my teach, but for me your unqualified comments are like water off a ducks back. The problem is i can only think of a few that are as thick skinned as myself.......

Last the clone thing....

I still take exception to this, i can only speak for CTA,
so we are all given the same basic tools to complete our job. the training is broken down to give each teacher the same building blocks of dance that then can be passed to you....
And you will be shown the same move at any Ceroc venue that you go to
That is it ....

We are not groomed in any other way and i think those who suggest we are are have other aggenda's...

I think you will find school teachers are given basic training, and then given a syllabus to follow. Fireman are given set proccedures to follow, nurses and GP's have strict guide lines they must follow.....

I could go on are all these profesions going to fall in to the clone catagory or are these measures put in place to insure conformity nationwide.

Piglet
29th-April-2005, 09:02 AM
You all need to come up to Aberdeen cos all our teachers here are FAB!!

:clap: :clap: :clap:

David Bailey
29th-April-2005, 09:16 AM
You all need to come up to Aberdeen cos all our teachers here are FAB!!

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Well, have to say I'm disappointed by that comment.

I mean, here we are, great flaming argument going, lots of vitriol pouring out, mortal enemies being made, eternal feuds starting, and then someone comes along and thoughtlessly interjects a post with some warmth, humour and normalcy into it.

Is the typical sort of behaviour we can expect from Scottish people? :whistle:

El Salsero Gringo
29th-April-2005, 09:25 AM
Well, have to say I'm disappointed by that comment.

I mean, here we are, great flaming argument going, lots of vitriol pouring out, mortal enemies being made, eternal feuds starting You forgot to mention the sound of egos being gently bruised over an open fire. Anyway, it sounds like an average thread to me.
and then someone comes along and thoughtlessly interjects a post with some warmth, humour and normalcy into it.

Is the typical sort of behaviour we can expect from Scottish people? :whistle:I'd say that was pretty average behaviour for the Scots.

Piglet
29th-April-2005, 11:04 AM
I believe the technical grade names for teacher levels are:
- Crap
- Clone
- Good
- Excellent
- Amir

:grin:

I shall have to meet Amir I think! :)

bigdjiver
29th-April-2005, 11:06 AM
Ceroc is a franchise organisation.
Franchise: a right or license that is granted to market a company's services in a particular territory under the company's trademark that often involves the use of rules and procedures designed by the company.
It follows that Ceroc teachers will have a bit of "clone" about them, but it is a clone of a good standard. I have only known two Ceroc teachers who I considered performed below an acceptable level. In one case, soon removed, it was because of sometimes drinking too much.

Individuality curbed? Last night our teacher said she had been teaching this move for seven years, but now it had been made "official".

"Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud." Theodore Sturgeon

Maybe I have just been fortunate, maybe my standards are too low, but more likely because it is a profession for the dedicated, I have never had a dance teacher, in any form of dance, that I would describe as anything like crud. Even the one that went I always enjoyed, and learned a lot from. I am sure my teachers have had much more justification for using such language. :tears:

"90% of everything is crud." is known as Sturgeons law.

Russell Saxby
29th-April-2005, 11:10 AM
I believe the technical grade names for teacher levels are:
- Crap
- Clone
- Good
- Excellent
- Amir

:grin:

Sorry David, I thought you did start this thread - yours is the first post after all??? And on a thread entitled Assessing Teaching Levels I think the first post should have had more thought put into it - but your apology is accepted :grin:

... I do not think I come in the bottom 2 catgeroies, but if you want to come visit Ceroc Greenwich you can make your own assessement. Will cost you £6 though :whistle:

One question though - how am I supposed to progress from Good / Excellent? Presumably become more like Amir - or will I then be accused of being a Clone :confused:

As for my own teaching Yes I do have 'Crap' nights and I will be the first to admit it. But trying to teach a class that is not too challenging, not too simple, fun, technical, not too technical, the list goes on.... is not always going to be possible. As you know DJ's have the same problems.

I would suggest if there is a teacher you think is 'crap' you speak to the Franchise Owner. Maybe they can get a suggestion box on the front desk. If enough people comment on the same thing, the teacher may take these comments on bored and refine there teaching to try and keep everyone happy.

What I do find annoying is when I sit at the back of the room to anonymously watch another teacher, and pick up some pointers. The number of times there will be a couple sitting down next to me slagging the teacher off for one reason or another - in my mind there was nothing wrong with the class, they either just could not get it or maybe it was not to there style of dancing - so try as hard as you like, you will never keep everyone happy.

A bit side tracked now - the other week I covered at another venue. Had never been there before and did'nt know anyone in the class. I do not think the Intermediate class I taught was that difficult, but mid way through this male voice popped up - I was going to fast, could I slow down - you can imagine the thoughts of self -doubt going through my head, and I slowed the class down, and it over-ran. Anyway a short while after this he dropped out of the class. I managed to speak to this guy a bit later on in the class. He pretty much repeated what he said from the floor, and I took it on the chin, until I asked out of curiosity how long he had been dancing. Guess What 3 weeks!!!!!! :eek:

Well I did learn one thing - I now put even more empahsis on beginners waiting 6 weeks before stepping up to the Intermediate class.

If you are going to the champs see you there. :cheers:
Good luck if you are competing :clap:

Russell

David Bailey
29th-April-2005, 12:09 PM
Sorry David, I thought you did start this thread - yours is the first post after all??? And on a thread entitled Assessing Teaching Levels I think the first post should have had more thought put into it - but your apology is accepted :grin:

Actually, I originally posted that post as a throwaway comment in the Working and cerocing in the UK (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5183) thread, then it got mysteriously moved, and became the first post in this "Assessing Teacher's Levels" thread which we know and love so well.

Dunno who did the move (personally, I blame the Tories), but that was why I absolved myself of responsibility...

Certainly, if I'd started a new thread, it would be much better thought out, and not at all controversial (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5210) ... :whistle:


but if you want to come visit Ceroc Greenwich you can make your own assessement. Will cost you £6 though :whistle:

Well, I'm amazed I'd be let in, perhaps I could wear a mask, that wouldn't be obvious... :)



Well I did learn one thing - I now put even more empahsis on beginners waiting 6 weeks before stepping up to the Intermediate class.
:confused: I thought it was officially 12 weeks now, or does that vary from franchise to franchise?

Franck
29th-April-2005, 12:09 PM
But surely any system that enforces standardisation will necessarily discourage experimentation, pretty much by definition? That's only true in the first year of teaching, and it does so for very good reasons:
It is important to include all the foundation basics before you start adding technique. The most common mistake in 'untrained' teachers is to focus on what currently pre-occupies / interests them, at the expense of the crucial. The Ceroc training course ensures the basics and important rules are so ingrained that you don't forget them.

The CTA teacher training course does not aim to standardize the teaching style / dance, its aim is to make sure that any CTA qualified teacher will be able to deliver a solid, well presented and covering all important points from day one.

And I'd guess (just a guess, I have no idea if it's true, hence lots of caveats in previous posts) that some teachers, once they get to a certain stage, would want to be able to teach their own thing, in their own way. That's true, and they can within Ceroc. There used to be a time when 'new' ideas were difficult to introduce (at least officially), but these days, all teachers are encouraged to bring new concepts (and share them with other Ceroc teachers), develop new workshops and even introduce footwork, lead/follow, technical classes etc... The strength we have is that adding new stuff does not prejudice the strong basics as taught in the Beginners class.

Doesn't mean that they can't learn from Ceroc, of course, it's a good training organisation. And it doesn't mean that you can't get superb teachers within Ceroc, either. But it may be that there are more Teaching Gods (whatever that means, note I never name names) outside of Ceroc than inside.That's not true either, the impression was created a few years ago when a few big names left Ceroc, for many reasons, and not necessarily because they couldn't express their creativity. Since they have, it has been in their interest to justify their departure by portraying Ceroc as the evil empire bent on crushing creativity :sad:
Amir has a greater understanding of dance and how the body works thanks to his very intensive training and dedication.
The conclusion for me is: more training = better teachers.

You all need to come up to Aberdeen cos all our teachers here are FAB!!Can't argue there, indeed, come up to Scotland, all are teachers are fab! :D

If someone thought I was a crap teacher, or had taught a crap class, then I'd rather know about it than that someone worrying about being polite. I can't change their opinion. All I can do is try to find out why, and see if I can do anything about it. Fortunately several people have given me plenty of feedback on my classes.That is very true. Many teachers are harshly judged based on a bad class 2 years ago... and the rumour mill being what it is, the word spreads, even if they have now improved beyond recognition.
It also works the other way round. Some teachers get an over-inflated reputation based on a one-off class or concept but have failed to move on.

Assessing the quality of a teacher is difficult and subjective as we all perceive and learn differently. Some of us respond well to visual cues, others like a very logical explanation, some prefer (and learn better) when entertained. Beginners have different needs from intermediates, and indeed the blasé dancers who have seen it all...

Graham
29th-April-2005, 01:44 PM
Right now imagine reading this thread were a group of individuals generalise all teachers under groups, two of these being very harsh. Some will take your general comments to heart and feel they fall in to these groups you have so pleasently named,
Do they (of course not) will they be hurt (proberbly, yes).
Nowhere was there any implication that any individual or group was crap: anyone who takes offence at the mere possibility that a crap dance teacher could possibly exist somewhere at some undefined point in time presumably has a great deal of self-doubt, and I'm not sure the rest of us should be treading on eggshells to avoid any possibility of giving offence.


Last the clone thing....

We are not groomed in any other way and i think those who suggest we are are have other aggenda's....
I suspect a lot of the clone reputation of CTA has come about partly from their training, but also because for a while (before the current management took over CEL) the audition process seemed to select a lot of people who were (arguably) of a similar age/appearance/type. This is not to say that all CTA teachers are the same, but I can see how it can lead to someone seeing some of them as being very similar, even down to using virtually the same jokes! And I think it does extend to other professions - haven't you ever noticed that lots of airline pilots sound almost identical (when they're working)?

David Bailey
29th-April-2005, 02:08 PM
That's only true in the first year of teaching, and it does so for very good reasons:
{ snip best post I've read in weeks }


Now that's what I call a rebuttal. Can't really argue with that, all I can say is :worthy:

Rhythm King
29th-April-2005, 02:08 PM
but I can see how it can lead to someone seeing some of them as being very similar, even down to using virtually the same jokes! And I think it does extend to other professions - haven't you ever noticed that lots of airline pilots sound almost identical (when they're working)?

Hmm, suggest you try one of Bill Cooper's classes, next time you're down this way, then you can combine the two :rofl:

Ghost
6th-September-2006, 03:49 PM
Then maybe there's a case for starting a new thread, on the same subject, which takes a constructive viewpoint from the start. Go ahead Taz and start the ball rolling.
Or pick up the old one which didn't go outside.

Please play nice :flower:
Christopher

David Bailey
6th-September-2006, 04:40 PM
Or pick up the old one which didn't go outside.
It came close, and it ruffled a few feathers, even though it was quite joke-y in tone.

I'm glad that there is a debate about teaching and how good / bad it is.

So, let's try to revive the debate on this thread, now the other one's gone all pear-shaped.

David Bailey
6th-September-2006, 04:48 PM
So, here are the relevant original points, which I think are worth re-evaluating:


The basic premise is that dance teachers are accountable to us. The moment you go from being an amateur to being paid for what you do you become accountable to the people that pay your wages. This is even more so the case in dance where people move into teaching for the adulation and the status it gives them. So we should feel free to say what we think both bad and GOOD.
So, the initial question is - do people agree that public criticism of "dance professionals" is justified?

I think it is, as long as it is

credible (for example: "At 5 classes I went to, XYZ teacher did ABC" )
constructive ("I'd prefer it if XXX happened")
focussed on the area that professional is being paid for. - so, for example, I don't think it's appropriate to criticize (or praise!) a DJ's dancing ability.


Secondly, what semi-objective factors make a good dance teacher?

I'm fairly happy with this definition:

My definition for a good dance teacher is:

1.) Someone who regularly teaches classes that mostly fit the profile of the people they are teaching.
2.) Are good ambassadors for the venue or brand they support.
3.) Promote their classes and where they are teaching.
4.) Interact with their pupils in a social environment.
5.) Actually do, regularly freestyle.

Would anyone like to comment on these criteria?

If we can broadly agree that criticism can be helpful, and if so, then broadly agree on the criteria we can use, then maybe we can do a "What do you think of these teachers" thread.

How does that sound?

DavidB
6th-September-2006, 05:02 PM
Would anyone like to comment on these criteria?The criteria assume that the teacher is a regular class teacher.

The more specialised the subject, the less these criteria apply. For example, is freestyling regularly important for the teacher of a drops workshop?

ducasi
6th-September-2006, 06:25 PM
Would anyone like to comment on these criteria? I'd say the two most important aspects of evaluating a teacher are:

Do they have useful knowledge to teach?
Can they teach it?

Everything else is a bonus.

David Bailey
7th-September-2006, 08:40 AM
The criteria assume that the teacher is a regular class teacher.

The more specialised the subject, the less these criteria apply. For example, is freestyling regularly important for the teacher of a drops workshop?
Dunno really. I realise this is a controversial area - and I certainly wouldn't want a drops teacher doing lots of drops on a crowded dance floor.

There's two things here - working the floor, and general "going freestyling".

For the first, I can see the case for working the floor being part of the teacher's job description. It helps improve the level of understanding, hel;ps promote the venue, and so on.

On the other hand, that gives them maybe another 2 hours of work, with no extra money for it - so if you're expected to "work" the whole evening, you should be paid appropriately. Of course, that's never going to happen, the amount of money most Ceroc teachers (for example) get per night is pitiful IMO.

For the second - tricky one. If "going freestyling" helps develop you as a teacher, then it's good - but I don't think a teacher should feel forced to go out dancing, it's supposed to be fun so I'm told.

It's an interesting question though. I wouldn't expect a Maths lecturerto go around in his / her spare time doing equations for fun (!). And an aerobics teacher wouldn't necessarily have to do loads of aerobics classes every week. But obviously, you'd exepect them to remain aware of the developments in their area of expertise.

So, I guess if it's a choice between spending time planning / practising a workshop, and going freestyling, I think it'd be better to do the former.


I'd say the two most important aspects of evaluating a teacher are:

Do they have useful knowledge to teach?
Can they teach it?

Everything else is a bonus.
Yeah, but you could say that about any teacher (of course) - I'm trying to find specific criteria for a (regular class) MJ dance teacher.

ducasi
7th-September-2006, 09:04 AM
Yeah, but you could say that about any teacher (of course) - I'm trying to find specific criteria for a (regular class) MJ dance teacher.
OK...

Do they have useful MJ knowledge to teach?
Can they teach MJ?

Everything else is a bonus. :)

Let's look a your/GaG's criteria...

1.) Someone who regularly teaches classes that mostly fit the profile of the people they are teaching.

Definitely useful.

2.) Are good ambassadors for the venue or brand they support.

Irrelevant beyond that they will bring in "new blood".

3.) Promote their classes and where they are teaching.

Ditto.

4.) Interact with their pupils in a social environment.

A bonus, but not essential.

5.) Actually do, regularly freestyle.

A bonus – You'd expect a dance teach to regularly dance. I wouldn't necessarily expect them to (want to) dance with me, but it'd be nice.

Within the mechanics of teaching, I'd want them to be:–

clear communicators;
able to do what they are teaching;
able to understand both the leader and follower's role;
able to watch and see where people are having problems;
able to explain things differently if need be.

There's probably others...

Beyond teaching ability, I'd also suggest things like "infectious enthusiasm" are important.

JamesGeary
7th-September-2006, 12:21 PM
Well, popularity is certainly one of the main indications. ...
However, I don't believe it's the only criterion - a "niche" teacher can be very good, but he/she may only appeal to a smaller audience, by the nature of the topic.
Its kind of like comparing a Stephen King book to a Peter Carey book (who?, a Booker award winner). One is for the mass market, and one is for a smaller more sophisticated audience. Arguing about which is better is kind of moot.

Gadget
7th-September-2006, 01:01 PM
...There's two things here - working the floor, and general "going freestyling".

For the first, I can see the case for working the floor being part of the teacher's job description. It helps improve the level of understanding, hel;ps promote the venue, and so on.

On the other hand, that gives them maybe another 2 hours of work, with no extra money for it ~
Erm... every teacher I have seen(/been taught by) loves to dance - that's the primary reason that they teach. Working the floor or "going freestyle" is just dancing.
OK, perhaps some people expect feedback, but is that "work"? When 'work' is the same as 'play'? They get to dance with everyone and get paid for it :what: us mere mortals pay for that privilege! :tears:

tsh
7th-September-2006, 01:30 PM
I think it's easy to associate the less good teachers with just attending for the class, and not participating in the freestyle, but this isn't something that they 'do', more something that suggests that they're hapier chatting to their mates and are just teaching because it's their job.

Whether a teacher dances with the punters or not might be an indication of how good a teacher they are, but it's not a deciding factor. If they (for example) specifically make a point of giving 1-1 time to people who will benefit from it, then that is an additional plus point, but that is different - they are doing something extra here which adds to the overall package they deliver. Is it a cause or effect?

I think it's a mistake to try and make a list where a teacher needs to tick all the boxes. A good teacher is one who does enough things well that they have things to pass on, and can pass them on. I expect to learn different things from different teachers - and even if they maybe struggle to communicate an idea, if it's a particularly useful concept and they persist, then that's better than a good comunicator with no content.

Sean

David Bailey
7th-September-2006, 01:52 PM
Whether a teacher dances with the punters or not might be an indication of how good a teacher they are, but it's not a deciding factor.
I agree.


I think it's a mistake to try and make a list where a teacher needs to tick all the boxes.
Yeah, but we have to have some criteria to measure against - otherwise it's all just personal opinion and there's been enough of that over the past week I reckon.

Or are you saying that it's actually impossible to make any objective assessment of teacher levels?


Erm... every teacher I have seen(/been taught by) loves to dance - that's the primary reason that they teach. Working the floor or "going freestyle" is just dancing.
No, I don't think so - "Working the floor" involves doing things you wouldn't normally do, such as avoiding your favourite dancers.

"Freestyling", yeah maybe - but I don't know if "doing lots of freestyling" is a valid criterion now...

DavidY
7th-September-2006, 03:15 PM
Would anyone like to comment on these criteria?

There's two things here - working the floor, and general "going freestyling".

For the first, I can see the case for working the floor being part of the teacher's job description.Here's a quote from the Ceroc.com webpage about teaching (http://ceroc.com/ceroc_teaching.html) which is presumably close to the actual job description for a Ceroc teacher:
As a Ceroc teacher, you are responsible for creating a fun and sociable night out where the class will be racing to come back for more! You will have your own weekly night where you teach a Beginners and Intermediate class and then enjoy freestyling with members of your class for the rest of the evening.

To achieve a successful night you will need to: Teach classes ensuring that the moves are taught accurately and are appropriate to the level you are teaching.
Help to build the confidence of your class and respond to their needs.
Establish a rapport with your class. People will come back if they have an affinity with you.
Dance with the class, particularly beginners, from the end of the class to the end of the evening. One dance with the teacher can make someone's night.
Be on hand throughout the evening to give advice and top tips for improving their dancing.

tsh
7th-September-2006, 04:06 PM
Or are you saying that it's actually impossible to make any objective assessment of teacher levels?


If you want to be able to compare two different teachers when asessed by different people then it's very difficult, because different people have different expectations. Maybe the best you could do would be to come up with a list of scores for different tasks, and leave the value of these up to individual interpretation. An a/b/c score for each is probably sufficient detail for each, and it won't let you separate the great teachers from each other!

Crowd control/communication
Choice of moves/routines
Description of movements
Technical instruction/exersises
Styling
Individual attention
Useful techniques

any others?

Mr Cool
10th-September-2006, 09:47 AM
I just wish that more dance teachers of all types would Greet thier customers so many teachers blank people. :mad: A simple Hi is sufficient. :yeah:

The dance business is no different to any other. I just find this attitude so rude.:mad:

Come on Guys Gals its simple stuff smile and say Hi when you see people :yeah: :yeah:

:waycool: :waycool: :waycool: :waycool:

Gadget
10th-September-2006, 09:54 AM
~any others?This thread from my syg perhaps?:
Mark of a good teacher? (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?p=120265#post120265)

quiet_flame
15th-September-2006, 09:34 AM
Its kind of like comparing a Stephen King book to a Peter Carey book (who?, a Booker award winner). One is for the mass market, and one is for a smaller more sophisticated audience. Arguing about which is better is kind of moot.
and I've got three of his books on my bookshelf...
Peter Carey that is...

What does this say about me... :eek:

TheTramp
15th-September-2006, 09:36 AM
and I've got three of his books on my bookshelf...
Peter Carey that is...

What does this say about me... :eek:

Ummm. That you like reading Peter Carey?

quiet_flame
15th-September-2006, 09:38 AM
prolly, that and he was required reading for my English Literature Degree.