How solid are your dancers?

[Martin]

Something that has raised it's head in Aussie land recently being how grounded in ceroc (solid) are the dancers.

Many dancers here do a few beginners classes and think they are ready for the intermediate lesson, which makes the intermediate rows, if nothing else "challenging".

Hence we have dancers who have danced for some time doing advanced routines and lessons who really have not mastered the basics.
(somehting commented upon by some of the teachers and observed first hand by myself).

Whilst we do not want to discorage dancers in thier first few months, should we not be concerned about basic levels.

In NZ, they have to pass a test to progress to the next class (from what Hamish told me anyway).

In Newcastle (the NSW Newcastle) they have what I reccon to be a brilliant sytem.

Beginners need to demonstrate that they can execute the 16 basic beginers moves by going through them with the teacher, ALSO they have to dance to a complete track and include a minimum of 6 beginner moves with a teacher demonstrating lead or follow techniques.

Then they can pass onto intermediate B classes (non dips and drops) - if they are sucessful at a dips and drops workshop they can progress to intermediate A.

End result being thier dancers are GREAT to dance with and I remain injury free when visiting Newcastle venues.

In Sydney, to not "upset people" they have a more relaxed approach - which IMHO has lowered the standard of the dancers coming through.

One of our top teachers in Sydney freely admits he spent 3 months in beginners and the beginners consolidation classes before moving on.

[psyc0diver]

Originally posted by Martin
Something that has raised it's head in Aussie land recently being how grounded in ceroc (solid) are the dancers.

Beginners need to demonstrate ...basic beginers moves ... with a teacher demonstrating lead or follow techniques.

Could be amusing if Franck had to 'grade' a bunch of guys !

Originally posted by Martin

Beginners need to demonstrate that they can execute the 16 basic beginers moves by going through them with the teacher, ALSO they have to dance to a complete track and include a minimum of 6 beginner moves with a teacher demonstrating lead or follow techniques.

But more seriously, some people may be intimidated by going through an exam & you may find the attrition rate amongst beginners going up, though the general quality of dancers may improve

[Martin]

Originally posted by psyc0diver
Could be amusing if Franck had to 'grade' a bunch of guys !




But more seriously, some people may be intimidated by going through an exam & you may find the attrition rate amongst beginners going up, though the general quality of dancers may improve

Franck's top demoer could do that with Franck watching.

It provides an early target, and they also could get an intermediate level certificate?

100%, quality of dancers do improve, from my observations.

They did have one case where someone from another dance organisation had been dancing for a while and they told him he had to do the test, he was indignant and left (they did explain the concept and the reason) - [they could also see that he really needed to get the basics] well 3 weeks later he was back, did the hard yards, and since then has been ever thankfull and is now a regular.

[Jon]

I'm all for the test even though there will be people who dont want to do it. But if it helps keep the standard of the intermediate class at a good level then I'm all for that. What annoys me is when people go straight into the intermediate class who are clearly not ready for it. It means me as the leader having to pull them round the dance floor while trying to learn the moves myself. And I've heard ladies complaining about men who are dangerous because they dont know the basics.

So going back to another thread the standard of dancers doing the intermediate class would be another reason why some of us sit it out and chat.

Personnaly I did 6 weeks of normal classes and 4 beginner workshops before moving on to intermediates just to get the basics perfected.

[Paul F]

Thanks for explaining that Martin. I knew there was some sort of exam structure in place over there but wasn't too sure how it worked.


Fundamentally, it goes against all that (IMHO) ceroc stands for which is social, friendly and fun dancing without the pressures of grades etc. BUT........

I think its a very good idea!!!!

I know i will more than likely get flamed for saying that but i really do believe it is something that 'could' be beneficial if organised correctly.

The dancers would have to have the reason behind it explained to them well but i think it would give everybody the chance to improve ten-fold, especially new people.

It will, however, turn many people off but if it is run correctly (ie still have an open beginners class etc) I think, in the long run, we would see progress.
People have been crying out for inter/adv classes over here for some time but i still maintain that we cannot have them (and for them to be successful) without a structure like this.

If ceroc introduce advanced classes you will get a greater and greater number of people dancing with fixed partners. Not what i want to see.

I also think it would keep the interest up. If the teacher's people skills are up to the job they can point out the reasons why they cannot progress at that time, in a friendly and constructive way. That would give the dancer something to focus on and work with. I wish i had that when i started.

[DavidB]

Ceroc in the UK used to be like this. I remember one lady having to dance with James Cronin because he believed that 2 beginners lessons wasn't enough to progress to intermediate classes. (In this particular case he was wrong!)

I'm quite happy for beginners to try the intermediate class. But I almost think there should be a separate row for them. Not just for them - get some of the better dancers to join in this row, with instructions to help as much as possible. Then maybe any good technique might get passed around.

[Martin]

Originally posted by DavidB
Ceroc in the UK used to be like this. I remember one lady having to dance with James Cronin because he believed that 2 beginners lessons wasn't enough to progress to intermediate classes. (In this particular case he was wrong!)

I'm quite happy for beginners to try the intermediate class. But I almost think there should be a separate row for them. Not just for them - get some of the better dancers to join in this row, with instructions to help as much as possible. Then maybe any good technique might get passed around.

Might work if the intermediate class is basic, and the moves explained at a slow pace. (dumbed down) + of course no dips or drops.
Why ruin the intermediate class for the intermediates?

I am one of those people who sit out of the intemediate classes in Sydney so as not to get injured by beginners (or those who never suppassed beginner level in thier basic skills) who cannot follow correctly and worse still start leading you.

This does not happen in NSW Newcastle http://www.mamboroc.com as people have learnt lead and follow and the correct basics before coming to the next class. This makes it safe for all and increases the fun aspect as you can relax and enjoy.

IMHO doing 50 moves badly do not make a good beginner.

[DavidB]

Originally posted by Martin
Might work if the intermediate class is basic, and the moves explained at a slow pace. (dumbed down) + of course no dips or drops.

I've never equated the 'speed' of a class with its 'level'. The hardest classes I've done have generally covered just one topic.
I'd be interested to know how Donna is getting on in Australia. She originally wanted to slow down her classes, and teach less moves but in more detail. But from the classes we saw, the 'standard' seemed to be 4 or 5 moves taught very quickly, with lots of repetition.

I'd rather beginners do the consolidation class a few times rather than move straight to intermediate. But even after doing this, some people might like a more gentle introduction to the intermediate class. I know the first one I did almost blew my mind.

Perhaps 'beginners' was the wrong term - 'prospective intermediates' would have been better.

IMHO doing 50 moves badly do not make a good beginner.

It doesn't make a good intermediate either.

[Martin]

Originally posted by DavidB
I've never equated the 'speed' of a class with its 'level'. The hardest classes I've done have generally covered just one topic.
I'd be interested to know how Donna is getting on in Australia. She originally wanted to slow down her classes, and teach less moves but in more detail. But from the classes we saw, the 'standard' seemed to be 4 or 5 moves taught very quickly, with lots of repetition.

I was not equating speed and level either, and yes I thinking of the 4 to 5 moves or more taught quickly (not my personal favorite)

[spindr]

Isn't the *real* problem that there's no public syllabus available -- either explaining the techniques to be covered, and the moves to be covered -- for whichever level. Even on a per-venue basis it would be helpful.

At least the ballroom crowd can refer to IDTA/ISTD to see what constitutes a social, bronze, or other levels of dancing -- that certainly didn't make any ballroom classes I've been to unsociable.

So, here's a suggestion: improver has knowledge of techniques and moves presented in (*) "Learn To Dance Modern Jive" [Sigma Press], able to apply them and dance freestyle to 140-160bpp 4/4 music. [(*) Fill in your own publication here, this was the first one I found on the bookshelf]

SpinDr.

[Stuart M]

Originally posted by Martin
In Newcastle (the NSW Newcastle) they have what I reccon to be a brilliant sytem.

Beginners need to demonstrate that they can execute the 16 basic beginers moves by going through them with the teacher, ALSO they have to dance to a complete track and include a minimum of 6 beginner moves with a teacher demonstrating lead or follow techniques.

From what I've seen up here, the way taxi dancers work with beginners is changing a bit. Perhaps something voluntary like the above could be incorporated into that.

It would require something of a culture shift here though, to start formal vetting of any sort. I know it would have put me off. Someone mentioned ballroom - MJ appears to be considerably more popular than ballroom in the UK and if you started introducing formal tests, I suspect MJ would become just as popular as ballroom here... I think someone's said this before but it's worth repeating.

My own experience in learning, it took me several lessons at intermediate level before I was in any way competent (frequently dropping out of the class part way through). I'm sure a few ladies at the time suffered :sorry. No-one advised me about whether I was able to move on and I probably wasn't. However, the beginner's lesson no longer seemed to be a challenge and I would have become discouraged at having to persevere. Not my attitude now, but I might have given up altogether at the time due to frustration. Nowadays I can always find something worthwhile in a beginner's class (which maybe we should call a basics class incidentally?) .

[Paul F]

Would I be right in thinking that the reason ceroc is so much more popular than ballroom (and others) is because it is SO much easier to learn.

I cant really see the fact that ballroom having a syllabus and exams is detremental to its success. Its simply a more technically exact art. Ive had to live my whole life living with ballroom teachers (my parents ) and from watching the tuition, the comparisons between that and ceroc are worlds apart.

I think ceroc + a syllabus is the best of both worlds.

[Gadget]

I would only advocate a "syllabus" for basic (beginner) dancing that would cover the twelve or so basic moves and introduce elements of style, musical interpritation, floorcraft and lead/follow.

I know that Ceroc have "Flash cards" for the basic moves, but I think that similar for an introduction to the above topics would be advantageous.

SpinDr/Paul F: Can you define what your definition of a "syllabus" as it relates to classes would be? I have a feeling that I dissagree with some points, but I may be getting the wrong idea.

{Btw my experiance of moving from only doing beginners class to the intermediate was after a couple of weeks of taxi-dancers telling me I should: I was reluctant more because of the teacher's "you must have been dancing 6-8 weeks" speil than the moves or my abilities.}

[Paul F]

Originally posted by Gadget


SpinDr/Paul F: Can you define what your definition of a "syllabus" as it relates to classes would be? I have a feeling that I dissagree with some points, but I may be getting the wrong idea.

I must confess that im using the word 'syllabus' without actually thinking about its meaning as such.
By syllabus, i really meant following some of the ideas mentioned above about NZ ceroc. Getting the beginners to freestyle incorporating 6+ moves / getting them to demonstrate all 16 moves.

Above and beyond that I would not be able to suggest additional points without really sitting down and weighing the pros and cons but to watch someone do the 16 moves you can tell if they are proficient enough or not to advance.
(you can probably do this from 2 or 3 moves!)


I could be wrong. Maybe it is impossible to generate a syllabus but i feel it should be, given the right amount of effort to draw one up. Otherwise we will continue to get people in the intermediate classes that simply cant cope which hampers everyone else to varying extents.

[stewart38]

Originally posted by Paul F
I must confess that im using the word 'syllabus' without actually thinking about its meaning as such.
By syllabus, i really meant following some of the ideas mentioned above about NZ ceroc. Getting the beginners to freestyle incorporating 6+ moves / getting them to demonstrate all 16 moves.

Above and beyond that I would not be able to suggest additional points without really sitting down and weighing the pros and cons but to watch someone do the 16 moves you can tell if they are proficient enough or not to advance.
(you can probably do this from 2 or 3 moves!)


I could be wrong. Maybe it is impossible to generate a syllabus but i feel it should be, given the right amount of effort to draw one up. Otherwise we will continue to get people in the intermediate classes that simply cant cope which hampers everyone else to varying extents.

Well I have been only dancing ceroc 10yrs and doubt if I would be ready to advance on that criteria. I gave up ballroom because of the 'syllabus' and instead of having 300 in a ceroc class we had 15 or 20.

There has always been people who are not ready for intermediate
90% drop out if they find out they are. re 10% they probably never will be !

[spindr]

Originally posted by Gadget SpinDr/Paul F: Can you define what your definition of a "syllabus" as it relates to classes would be? I have a feeling that I dissagree with some points, but I may be getting the wrong idea.

(0). What's a beginners' move? Different franchises / classes have different ideas:

E.g. http://www.elmgrove-leroc.co.uk/Moves_Beginner.htm lists: Arch, Hatchback, Push-Pull, Basket, Ladies Spin, Secret Move, Short Butterfly, Loophole, Closed Sway, Change Places, Neckbreak, Windmill, Figure Eight, Nigel's Move, Wurlitzer, First Move, Overhead Change, Yo-Yo

Whereas http://www.eutek.co.uk/jive!/moves.htm lists: Arm Jive, Basket, Catapult, Comb, First Move, Half Windmill, Hatchback, Lady Spin, Man Spin, Octopus, Push Spin, Shoulder Slide, Side to Side, Step Across, Wurlitzer, Yo-Yo (Plus variations )

(i). You can get some idea of what you might be taught in a class -- really useful for workshops, or classes you don't normally go to, etc. E.g. is class A's improvers ~=~ class B's intermediates?
(ii). You can tell whether you've covered enough to swap/try classes -- I think that for every pushy beginner in the improvers class, there's a shrinking improver in the beginner's class. I know the pushy beginner won't bother reading a "checklist" but it might reassure a shrinking improver that they actually know what's expected of them.
(iii). From a pseudo-academic viewpoint an ISBN makes a nice reference -- anyone can acquire a copy.

SpinDr.

[Gadget]

OK; a syllabus to me is a list of subjects/topics to be covered by a course of lessons, generally in a specified order.

The only thing I really have a problem with here is in strictly defining the order in which the information is dispersed.

Unless you are talking about having people jump through the hoops as dictated by the syllabus before they can taste the "next level". This I do have a problem with.

By all means, have published targets and goals that beginner dancers would be able to "check off". But to have other people (no matter how good or qualified) sit on high and judge you worthy or not is a big step towards elitism & segregation {IMHO}.

Personally, I have no issues with beginners ladies joining in intermediate classes:
* If they get another beginner, they can compare notes and work together to attempt the moves- As long as communication is good, it will build closer social ties.
* If they get an improver then they may be confused by what their partner is doing, but it will serve as a comparison for later dances.
The improver lead can use the reactions of the beginner to gauge how they are doing and what areas of their lead need work.
* If they get an advanced dancer, they will see what the moves should be like and the advanced lead gets a chance to make their lead as clear as possible.

So why do you need an exam again?

{SpinDr: Your concept seems to be completely moves orientated - if it was to be implemented, I would hope that a brief note on floor craft, dangerous moves, leading/following and musical interpritation was included in the check-list.}

[Gus]

Originally posted by Gadget
OK; a syllabus to me is a list of subjects/topics to be covered by a course of lessons, generally in a specified order.

All Ceroc clubs have a defined specification for Beginners moves (and 'basic' intermediate moves). The fun would start when it came to assess your class. At the class I teach, out of the 130 or so in the intermediate lesson, I'd say no more than half are doing their basics right. If I go to the local independents, I reckon that drops to nearer 20% Now ... who is going to tell these people that technically their dancing sucks

Sorry if the above is a bit blunt ... too tired to put into polite english

[ChrisA]

Originally posted by Paul F
Would I be right in thinking that the reason ceroc is so much more popular than ballroom (and others) is because it is SO much easier to learn.

It's a reason, though the basics of waltz and quickstep aren't at all difficult to pick up - and just like beginner Cerocers, you don't have to have fab lead/follow skills to get round the floor in one piece. Foxtrot and Tango are harder, certainly, IMHO. To do them well, not that I ever did, is a lot harder.

But it's not just that.

Ballroom music is much less popular. Very occasionally there's something in 3/4 time that would be waltzable. Quickstep and foxtrot less so, arguably, at least without forcing them on to unnatural music that just happens to be at the right speed. The so-called "strict-tempo" ballroom music has been around for about a million years, and IMHO it sounds like it too. It just wouldn't appeal much to the 20-40+ crowd that constitutes most of the MJ crowd.

Latin music would probably sound a bit groovier to us youngsters, but more than about 2 cha chas in a row always used to drive me mad. Ballroom jive music needs to have quite a rock-n-roll vibe for it to feel (or look I expect) any good, so it's far more limiting than MJ-able tracks.

At risk of generalising horrendously, the people seem to fall into two camps: the young, competitive ones (the uni ballroom scene is still pretty healthy I believe), and er, those that aren't - and haven't been for a looooong time . I may be out of date, though - so please correct me, anyone that knows better.

Though there are some ballroom and ex-ballroom dancers on the MJ scene that fall into neither camp. The only one of them I've had a ballroom dance with put me to shame, and would have done even if it wasn't nearly 20 years since I'd done any of it "for real" as it were. I'd love to give it another bash, but I suspect it's mostly nostalgia talking.

Chris

[spindr]

Originally posted by Gadget
{SpinDr: Your concept seems to be completely moves orientated - if it was to be implemented, I would hope that a brief note on floor craft, dangerous moves, leading/following and musical interpritation was included in the check-list.}

Nah, sorry the problem is it's too easy to single out moves as the differences between levels.

Obviously, the first thing to introduce is floorcraft. You reinforce it in improvers. And understand it later in intermediates, or later.

Similarly, body position, how not to damage your partner, smiling , linking moves in freestyle (or how not to do 29 first moves in a row), improvisation, musicality, starting (without an armjive/firstmove), etc.

SpinDr.