Do you have to be an advanced dance teacher to teach advanced moves?

[Jive Crazy]

A bit controversial this. In teaching an advanced class should the teacher who is teaching that class be regarded as an advanced dancer by the people in their class, or is it possible just to learn these moves "parrot fashion" and pass them onto the masses.

Steve R

[Andy McGregor]

There are no "advanced moves". Advanced dancing is about the music.

[NZ Monkey]

There are no "advanced moves". Advanced dancing is about the music.

While I agree with the sentiment about the music, there is clearly a difference in complexity between something like a supergirl and a first move.

If we’re happy enough to have beginner and intermediate moves then it seems reasonable to me that we consider moves considerably beyond the difficulty of most intermediate moves to be advanced. Someone who can pull off these moves isn’t necessarily an advanced dancer themselves of course, but I’d still call the moves advanced.

My answer to Jive Crazy's question is that they most certainly should not be passed on parrot-style to the masses. They’re more difficult than the standard moves for a reason, and one needs to understand all the mechanics of the move well before they can hope to pass it along to somebody else. At the best the students aren’t likely to learn enough to actually perform the move outside of the class, and at worst it can be dangerous.

[Martin]

A bit controversial this. In teaching an advanced class should the teacher who is teaching that class be regarded as an advanced dancer by the people in their class, or is it possible just to learn these moves "parrot fashion" and pass them onto the masses.

Steve R

Ceorc, historically, has taught beginner and intermediate. A McDonalds system, as in you get a certain quality, and it is consistant.

When it comes to advanced classes, they are often less popular (as in less money) often done by the more experienced teachers, who are seen as advanced teachers.

I would hesitate to do an advanced class taught by someone who I did not see as "an advanced teacher"

There are no "advanced moves". Advanced dancing is about the music.

It is great to focus on the music, but if you dig deep Andy, I am sure you will agree there are "advanced moves"

[Gus]

Of course ... one could be philospohical and debate why there is a need for advanced moves being taught to the masses.

Personal view is that the vast majority of advanced/complex moves are only suitable for performance/competition dancing. The carnage that ensues after weekenders when dancers have been shown (rather than taught) complex moves, is a sight to behold on the local dancefloors.

Then again ... how many teachers teach 'dancing to the music'? In my books that is a far more valuable, and far more testing, area of dance teaching.

Apologies if I'm taking the disciussion off thread

[Dreadful Scathe]

or is it possible just to learn these moves "parrot fashion" and pass them onto the masses.

The assumption here is that "advanced moves" is advanced dancing - which it isn't, as Andy said. But I'd agree there are more complicated moves; "tumble dryers", aerials and the like. For moves, it probably doesnt matter the "label" of the teacher as long as they are 100% safe and accurate at teaching said moves, which generally means they are at an intermediate to advanced level anyway. For advanced dancing;style, musicality, spinning or whatever, then yes - they have to be "advanced" themselves as those elements will not work* out of the context of an "advanced" dance, rather obviously i would have thought.


* or "be useful" anyway, you probably know what i mean

[Andy McGregor]

It is great to focus on the music, but if you dig deep Andy, I am sure you will agree there are "advanced moves"

There are moves that we teach in advanced classes. I have just done an advanced workshop where I taught loads of them. My description of an advanced move is one that would be too difficult to teach to an intermediate week-night class. That means it's a move that's too hard for someone who has just moved up from beginners - hardly advanced. My flyer for the workshop said that people needed to have been dancing jive for at least one year or have enjoyed other dance training.

Having said all of the above, I do not believe that advanced moves make an advanced dancer - in fact, learning advanced moves usually makes a dancer worse, not better. Advanced dancers are those who move well, use the music, execute moves with style, etc, no matter what the moves are. Going a step further, the real "advanced" modern jivers are the ones who don't care about the moves, do the ones they do well and have a fun time with their partner - they've stopped worrying if a move is advanced and just have fun.

[Gadget]

There are moves that we teach in advanced classes. I have just done an advanced workshop where I taught loads of them. My description of an advanced move is one that would be too difficult to teach to an intermediate week-night class.

... although "Advanced moves" to me is any move where the follower relies on the lead to support them.

Are there any "Advanced moves" that this doesn't cover?

[David Franklin]

... although "Advanced moves" to me is any move where the follower relies on the lead to support them.

Funny, I'd almost completely reverse that. Just because a move requires strength doesn't mean it requires advanced dance technique. (And even when a lift/drop requires technique, it's usually technique that has very little to do with MJ).

Are there any "Advanced moves" that this doesn't cover?

Tumble dryer is the obvious one. Also travelling pivots. There are quite a few WCS moves (from performance routines) where I find I don't have the precision to make them work. (I can't remember the details, but Kyle/Sarah do a move where he's repeatedly free-spinning her, but with such an accurately timed and positioned lead that she doesn't actually stop inbetween. Very "simple", and very hard to actually do).

[TA Guy]

Would you sign-up to learn advanced maths from your primary school teacher ?

There are advanced moves... moves that require heightened skill in movement, leading etc etc. The teacher needs to be able to teach that.
IMO I always think the pretzel is actually quite a complex move to perform correctly and 3/4 of the teachers out there arn't really qualified to teach it properly.

What makes a dancer advanced is, of course, open to interpretation, but I think there is music out there, lots of it, that benefits from advanced moves, not least for the contrast element with the simpler moves. So my definition of an advanced dancer would at least include the option of doing advanced moves (along with many other things ).

[Andy McGregor]

Nope! I've still not read anything on this thread that convinces me that advanced moves exist. Think of any move you like, and I'll bet a non-dancer could learn to do it in less than a day - even the lifts can be taught to a non-dancer who is strong enough. But they probably couldn't dance them in an advanced manner or fit them to interesting music, they could just do the "advanced move". Advanced dancing is, IMHO, all about the way you do the move and how you fit it to the music.

[Martin]

There are moves that we teach in advanced classes. I have just done an advanced workshop where I taught loads of them. My description of an advanced move is one that would be too difficult to teach to an intermediate week-night class.

That was my point, I guess we agree.

So there are advanced moves..... but executing them, might not make you an advanced dancer, as there is a lot more than moves that make an advanced dancer....

There is however , as you have admitted.... advanced moves...

[David Franklin]

Nope! I've still not read anything on this thread that convinces me that advanced moves exist. Think of any move you like, and I'll bet a non-dancer could learn to do it in less than a day

Sorry Andy, but I don't think this is true. I really don't think you could teach a non-dancer to do the Kyle/Sarah move I was talking about in a day. Certainly Bryony and I decided "that's just too hard" to do in a hurry. For another example, there's a counterbalance (promanade-like) move that Clayton/Janine do. It's not a strength move, but they said it took them several weeks to get it working.

Edit: for a more straightforward example, if you made up a "move" that requires both sides to do a synchronized triple spin, I bet you couldn't get 1% of couples to do it reliably in the course of a day.

even the lifts can be taught to a non-dancer who is strong enough.

There are several lifts where I have the strength but can't get them to work. That's over years, and I have pretty good people to teach me.

But they probably couldn't dance them in an advanced manner or fit them to interesting music, they could just do the "advanced move". Advanced dancing is, IMHO, all about the way you do the move and how you fit it to the music.

I agree with this bit, however.

[Andy McGregor]

There is however , as you have admitted.... advanced moves...

My meaning is mostly about time taken to teach. As I said earlier I think you could teach any move to a complete novice if you had the time. In an "advanced workshop" I can teach faster if everyone knows the basic building blocks. It's nice to say "starts like a catapult but this is where it changes" and not have to teach the catapult bit.

However, I still maintain that advanced dancing has nothing to do with difficult moves.

To answer the original question. I think it depends on the level of the people in the class as much as it depends on the level of the teacher. Teaching a new move to a good dancer is so easy and could be done by anyone who was a half decent dancer and teacher. However, you really do need to be an advanced teacher, with the patience of a saint to teach some people anything, let alone advanced moves.

[Jive Crazy]

Having read all of you posts thus far I have reached the conclusion that anybody can dance in an advanced way, just like a child who reaches the highest grade at piano. But not everyone can be the concert pianist of the dance world. That extra magic cannot be taught to anybody.

[NZ Monkey]

As I said earlier I think you could teach any move to a complete novice if you had the time.

If you had the time to take make them something other than a complete novice this is true. At some point they're going to need skills that just can't be gained in a day though. Or even weeks, after which point you probably couldn't call them novices anymore.

You could teach someone how to do a single spin pretty quickly but it takes a hell of a lot more precision to do six even if the necessary technique doesn't change. Good luck getting a novice to manage that.

[Martin]

My description of an advanced move is one that would be too difficult to teach to an intermediate week-night class.

The fact that you have discribed it, means it exists.
It does exist to you, as you put it in your advanced workshop.

However, I still maintain that advanced dancing has nothing to do with difficult moves.

True, in fact many advanced dancers use simple moves, with decoration.
They do however use some "advanced moves" - simple example - watching Vicktor dance, most moves are simple moves, and then out comes an "advanced move or 2" - which you would not expect to see taught to intermediate dancers.

I still have nightmares thinking about 2000, Camber Sands, where I was asked to teach an advanced Aussie workshop... I had been in Aussie toooooo long and pitched it toooo high...

What I thought was a normal advanced move, was more like an "OMG move" for most people, so I had to cut at least one move.

Since 2000 I learnt and dumbed it down. However getting back on track, if you are promoting an advanced workshop, are you not by deffinition teaching advanced moves?

I do understand - musicallity etc. comes into it. The thing is, I can show you many "advanced moves" which should not be taught in intermediate classes. - Plus you have sort of admitted that yourself.

[geoff332]

It's virtually impossible to teach anything well unless you have mastered it. In terms of ceroc, the complexity of the move is largely irrelevant: it's the mastery of the teacher that determines whether or not they can teach that move well. One can attempt to teach a something that one has not mastered, but it is rarely very successful.

The problem typically lies in the fact that if one is merely parroting the steps, the movements are less natural and more forced. It's harder to understand the details of what you are doing.

Then there's the issue of what mastery actually means. To teach well, what you really need is a form of self-aware unconscious competence (and ignore the fact that's an oxymoronic phrase).

Unconscious competence arises when we can do something without thinking about it. A nice way of looking at it is a great definition of intuition: analysis frozen into habit. When we learn a skill, we have to think about it; as we master it, we perform the skill without thinking about it.

A good example is changing gears in a manual car. When I started driving, I had to think about everything involved in changing a gear - press the clutch, release the accelerator, move the gear lever, release the clutch and accelerate. As I improved as a driver, I was able to do this without being consciously aware of each action: I could focus on thinking about which gear I should be in. As I improved further, knowing which gear became intuitive as well.

A good teacher needs to go to the next level. They need to progress through unconscious competence, to become aware of their own actions. But that awareness needs to be informed by unconscious competence. That is, they know what it feels like to master the move to the level of unconscious competence, then can apply their mind to understanding everything they do to get to that level. This is the key difference between a great dancer and a great teacher. Not every great dancer can teach; and most of the best teachers aren't the best dancers.

Would you want a teacher teaching your kids maths if they couldn't add?

[Andy McGregor]

Would you want a teacher teaching your kids maths if they couldn't add?

I know of a very effective teacher who falls into this category. He's a good teacher but a poor dancer with many bad habits. You can spot the people he's taught in a room full of dancers.

The one thing I've found the most difficult is that most classes, even advanced ones, contain dancers of mixed ability. I find it really hard to leave someone behind during the intermediate lesson and spend time trying to help that one person who ends up facing the wrong way at the end of the move. One very experienced primary school teacher who attends my classes told me that an OFSTEAD report (she's just passed with top marks ) would say that I spend too much time with the slowest student. In the beginners lesson I've got a strategy which addresses this situation with the slowest or struggling students. My primary school teacher's comment was a great help as I now apply the same strategy to my intermediate lessons. Which means we get more freestyle

[Dreadful Scathe]

In the beginners lesson I've got a strategy which addresses this situation with the slowest or struggling students.

When did you start shooting them ?