Starting this Module has been like a rollercoaster ride. I started preparing in the summer break full of enthusiasm. I read the module handbook and was feeling really excited to start the term but then I was hit by the enormity of doing research and I lost the plot completely. It seemed like there were endless possibilities and it would take me forever just to find a subject to research.
I was very despondent, insecure and full of trepidation when I decided to take part in last nights Module 2 Skype session, but I am so glad I put those thoughts aside and joined in. It was a revelation and by the end I was excited again and could not wait to continue.
There were so many important things that came out of the call which I know others will blog about but for me one of the main points that struck me was that the idea isn't to prove something you already know, you are not trying to justify your way of doing something. Instead you should be investigating something that interests you in order to better understand it. The kind of research journey we are embarking on does not need to find answers, in fact it may just provoke more questions which can inspire further research later, a 12 week research project is just the beginning.
The realisation that there need not be a specific answer to the question posed, was a relief and I need to remember that the research should be something that is important to me and should help me develop and if someone else finds it useful, well that is a bonus.
So now the task now looks more manageable. The next move is to read the MORE form and use it to help me refine my thoughts. I also need to continue reading literature related to things which interest me in the hope of finding a topic which is not going to change the world but which is going to give me a sense of fulfilment.
Good Luck to everyone else on module 2.
Thursday, 17 October 2019
Thursday, 28 March 2019
Working with a syllabus
This last week I have been thinking about the use of working with a set syllabus.
Jade raised a question recently on the focus of the ISTD modern syllabus on gender differentiation. I agree that this needs to be thought about but on reading more carefully I can see nothing in the syllabus to say that you cannot teach the boys the lyrical work presented by the girls, they just cannot be examined in that work at this time (that may change in the future as more research is done on the subject.)
As a ISTD teacher and examiner I use syllabus work to inform my children's classes and then I go beyond the syllabus to ensure that my classes are interesting and inspiring. At vocational level I tend to work even more outside the syllabus but I come back to the syllabus work when I feel there is a need to repeat technical exercises over several lessons to improve muscle memory.
I often find myself questioning the syllabus content and adapting it to suit a particular group of students or any new research that I have come across. Yet I still return to the syllabus to ensure that my work has a structure that the parents and children can follow and I enter children and students for exams to give them goals within their learning.
I use the syllabus as a framework to inform my teaching and as such I believe it has value, but I can see that some teachers may think of the syllabus as all they need to teach; if the children can perform the syllabus exercises then they will be dancers. I believe this kind of thinking is damaging as it hinders personal interpretation and creativity, the syllabus is just a guideline, a tool to help teachers build classes appropriate to the cognitive and physical development of the students.
As to whether one syllabus is better than another, I think that may be individual. My research on the question of using a syllabus has led me to reflect on the benefit of creating ones own syllabus or not using a syllabus at all.
I would love to hear what other people think on this subject.
Jade raised a question recently on the focus of the ISTD modern syllabus on gender differentiation. I agree that this needs to be thought about but on reading more carefully I can see nothing in the syllabus to say that you cannot teach the boys the lyrical work presented by the girls, they just cannot be examined in that work at this time (that may change in the future as more research is done on the subject.)
As a ISTD teacher and examiner I use syllabus work to inform my children's classes and then I go beyond the syllabus to ensure that my classes are interesting and inspiring. At vocational level I tend to work even more outside the syllabus but I come back to the syllabus work when I feel there is a need to repeat technical exercises over several lessons to improve muscle memory.
I often find myself questioning the syllabus content and adapting it to suit a particular group of students or any new research that I have come across. Yet I still return to the syllabus to ensure that my work has a structure that the parents and children can follow and I enter children and students for exams to give them goals within their learning.
I use the syllabus as a framework to inform my teaching and as such I believe it has value, but I can see that some teachers may think of the syllabus as all they need to teach; if the children can perform the syllabus exercises then they will be dancers. I believe this kind of thinking is damaging as it hinders personal interpretation and creativity, the syllabus is just a guideline, a tool to help teachers build classes appropriate to the cognitive and physical development of the students.
As to whether one syllabus is better than another, I think that may be individual. My research on the question of using a syllabus has led me to reflect on the benefit of creating ones own syllabus or not using a syllabus at all.
I would love to hear what other people think on this subject.
Thursday, 21 March 2019
Ethics vs. freedom of artistic expression?
Apologies for not writing anything useful following the Skype session on reflection and Ethics.
The discussion opened my mind to so many avenues of thought that I find myself wandering down many new avenues of thought and getting distracted.
From the play "ways of seeing" FOTO: LEIF GABRIELSEN
However the discussion on ethics caught my attention. There has been a case in the Norwegian press recently which has raised a discussion on the balance between ethical practice and the importance of freedom of artistic expression. The play "Ways of seeing" presented at Oslo Black Box theatre by Pia Maria Roll provoked an intense political discussion and a legal battle.
The producer, director and actors were charged with violation of privacy for using film of the home of the Minister of justice Tor Mikkel Wara in the play. The film was taken and used without the permission of the home owner. A lot of prominent people in the theatre world mean that these charges are an attack on freedom of artistic expression but I am wondering if ethically the producer should have considered asking permission before using these images. The theatre has admitted that the play has provoked controversy and raised ethical issues, but they support the use of the film claiming it was taken from such a distance as to be within the law.
I had not really paid attention to the case until our discussion on ethics last week brought it to my attention. I think based on that discussion that permission should have been sought to avoid what has become a serious political and legal battle. Any thoughts.
The discussion opened my mind to so many avenues of thought that I find myself wandering down many new avenues of thought and getting distracted.
However the discussion on ethics caught my attention. There has been a case in the Norwegian press recently which has raised a discussion on the balance between ethical practice and the importance of freedom of artistic expression. The play "Ways of seeing" presented at Oslo Black Box theatre by Pia Maria Roll provoked an intense political discussion and a legal battle.
The producer, director and actors were charged with violation of privacy for using film of the home of the Minister of justice Tor Mikkel Wara in the play. The film was taken and used without the permission of the home owner. A lot of prominent people in the theatre world mean that these charges are an attack on freedom of artistic expression but I am wondering if ethically the producer should have considered asking permission before using these images. The theatre has admitted that the play has provoked controversy and raised ethical issues, but they support the use of the film claiming it was taken from such a distance as to be within the law.
I had not really paid attention to the case until our discussion on ethics last week brought it to my attention. I think based on that discussion that permission should have been sought to avoid what has become a serious political and legal battle. Any thoughts.
Tuesday, 12 March 2019
Gender and Identity
A few weeks ago there was a discussion about gender and the issue of the ISTD syllabus work which conforms to the gender norms that were in place when I started teaching 35 years ago.
In her blog yesterday Adesola presented a fascinating film which challenged the traditional role of Male and female and got me thinking.
I was taught to be very aware of gender differentiation, when approaching the teaching of boys it was important to emphasise strength and breadth of movement to make sure that the boys did not see dancing as something "girly".
Nothing emphasises this more than the way we were taught Ballroom and Latin dance. In order to take our exams all the girls in the class were made to learn to lead, dance the mans steps, and to follow, dance the woman steps, and we had no problem switching from lead to follow just as Trevor Copp and Jeff Fox demonstrated. There were no boys in my class, but when I was working for my Associate I was asked to work with the first years and there were two boys in the class. They were not made to learn to follow, "be the girl", they took the same exams but only ever did the mans steps.
Watching the film I realised that I need to look at this subject in more depth.
I teach mostly classical ballet and modern theatre dance and over the years I have had a fair number of boys in my classes. I have always allowed them to do the lyrical work if they want to alongside the traditional boys exercises that develop upper body strength and core stability. They have nearly all been late starters and have mostly joined to work with the girls as partners, supporting and lifting and taking the traditionally masculine roles but they still meet with the usual comments at school about dance being for girls.
Norway is a very open and forward thinking society in many ways, same sex marriage is accepted and gender equality is very important in the workplace. Sadly I think that small town mentality where I work means that it may be to soon to challenge the norms too much but I am going to discuss this film and the questions raised by it with my pas de deux class this week and see what the boys and girls think.
I look forward to hearing their response and seeing if it is time to challenge our local community.
In her blog yesterday Adesola presented a fascinating film which challenged the traditional role of Male and female and got me thinking.
I was taught to be very aware of gender differentiation, when approaching the teaching of boys it was important to emphasise strength and breadth of movement to make sure that the boys did not see dancing as something "girly".
Nothing emphasises this more than the way we were taught Ballroom and Latin dance. In order to take our exams all the girls in the class were made to learn to lead, dance the mans steps, and to follow, dance the woman steps, and we had no problem switching from lead to follow just as Trevor Copp and Jeff Fox demonstrated. There were no boys in my class, but when I was working for my Associate I was asked to work with the first years and there were two boys in the class. They were not made to learn to follow, "be the girl", they took the same exams but only ever did the mans steps.
Watching the film I realised that I need to look at this subject in more depth.
I teach mostly classical ballet and modern theatre dance and over the years I have had a fair number of boys in my classes. I have always allowed them to do the lyrical work if they want to alongside the traditional boys exercises that develop upper body strength and core stability. They have nearly all been late starters and have mostly joined to work with the girls as partners, supporting and lifting and taking the traditionally masculine roles but they still meet with the usual comments at school about dance being for girls.
Norway is a very open and forward thinking society in many ways, same sex marriage is accepted and gender equality is very important in the workplace. Sadly I think that small town mentality where I work means that it may be to soon to challenge the norms too much but I am going to discuss this film and the questions raised by it with my pas de deux class this week and see what the boys and girls think.
I look forward to hearing their response and seeing if it is time to challenge our local community.
Thursday, 7 March 2019
What to write?
Wow this hard. Knowing what to write about is a real challenge.
I have spent 35 years teaching dance and throughout those 35 years I have learnt as much as I have taught. Each group of students challenges me to rethink my method, encouraging me to research different approaches to teaching the same exercises, forcing me to revisit old ideas or find new ones. I have also been an examiner for the ISTD for over 15 years. I have watched students all over Europe and seen how different teachers approach the same exercises and how students in different countries approach the exam experience. I have attended courses and lectures both as a teacher and as an examiner, all designed to make me a better teacher and examiner.
I know I am lucky as my ISTD fellowship status counts for 60 credits at this level so I only need to find material for 20 credits but what do I write about?
How do I put into words what I have learnt and how do I make it into a cohesive and intelligent piece of writing?
I have read so many fantastic blogposts from fellow students and have even managed to reply to a few but I can't seem to put my thoughts into words... I spend days trying to compose blogposts in my head only to find that they have lost their relevance as others have taken the ideas and written them so eloquently. Now I need to present a draft of my AOL and I am struggling to know where to start.
Any advice?
I have spent 35 years teaching dance and throughout those 35 years I have learnt as much as I have taught. Each group of students challenges me to rethink my method, encouraging me to research different approaches to teaching the same exercises, forcing me to revisit old ideas or find new ones. I have also been an examiner for the ISTD for over 15 years. I have watched students all over Europe and seen how different teachers approach the same exercises and how students in different countries approach the exam experience. I have attended courses and lectures both as a teacher and as an examiner, all designed to make me a better teacher and examiner.
I know I am lucky as my ISTD fellowship status counts for 60 credits at this level so I only need to find material for 20 credits but what do I write about?
How do I put into words what I have learnt and how do I make it into a cohesive and intelligent piece of writing?
I have read so many fantastic blogposts from fellow students and have even managed to reply to a few but I can't seem to put my thoughts into words... I spend days trying to compose blogposts in my head only to find that they have lost their relevance as others have taken the ideas and written them so eloquently. Now I need to present a draft of my AOL and I am struggling to know where to start.
Any advice?
Tuesday, 12 February 2019
Started at last
Following Sundays stimulating Skype session I have finally started to put pen to paper... or at least fingers to keyboard. The discussion around communication was fascinating and I related to several of the issues raised.
Like several others I struggle to know if what I am writing is written in an acceptable academic style. It was reassuring to hear that although there are certain conventions it is possible to develop an individual writing style that is direct and clear without using to much flowery language or "fluff". This train of thought got me thinking...
I work as head of dance in a ballet school run by a Norwegian opera company and we have just started our annual opera festival. This year we are presenting 2 verdi operas back-to-back and I watched both this weekend. Even though the operas are sung in Norwegian it is still quite hard to understand the text and it is very often the skill of the director that makes the storyline obvious for the audience. This years productions were very different in their approach.
"Rigoletto" directed by Mira Bartov was very spartan and stylised. The director chose to rely heavily on body language, facial expression and vocal dynamic to illustrate the story. There were few actors simple props and almost no extra "fluff". The dancers and chorus did simple but evocative movements and in the mocking scene their slow motion movement really accentuated the unpleasantness of the moment. The story was easy to follow and the directors intention was very clear.
"Macbeth" directed by Ronald Rørvik was much more complex. Again it was the fantastic body language of the soloists that made the text understandable, but here the stage was full of extra "fluff". Pyrotechnics, props and effects were used throughout to dazzle the audience. It was a very clever production set in a mental institution, with the main characters displaying different symptoms of mental illness. The ladies chorus were also patients, the mens chorus were guards and the dancers were nurses. The choreography had a musical theatre style and the dancers were almost a light relief in the madness and underlying malice. Despite being a thought provoking production, I found the story much harder to follow, the extra "fluff" detracted from the essence of the story and was at times distracting.
When I was listening to the Skype session on Sunday I started to wonder whether these two ways of approaching an opera production could illustrate the two different ways of writing we were discussing. The one more direct and pared down (simpler), the other more advanced using more elaborate, literary words. Each has an individual voice, but just because one appears cleverer it is not necessarily better.
It is quite a struggle to put my thoughts out there for others to read and I am not sure if my thoughts have any relevance to anyone but me. But this, finally, is a start.
Like several others I struggle to know if what I am writing is written in an acceptable academic style. It was reassuring to hear that although there are certain conventions it is possible to develop an individual writing style that is direct and clear without using to much flowery language or "fluff". This train of thought got me thinking...
I work as head of dance in a ballet school run by a Norwegian opera company and we have just started our annual opera festival. This year we are presenting 2 verdi operas back-to-back and I watched both this weekend. Even though the operas are sung in Norwegian it is still quite hard to understand the text and it is very often the skill of the director that makes the storyline obvious for the audience. This years productions were very different in their approach.
"Rigoletto" directed by Mira Bartov was very spartan and stylised. The director chose to rely heavily on body language, facial expression and vocal dynamic to illustrate the story. There were few actors simple props and almost no extra "fluff". The dancers and chorus did simple but evocative movements and in the mocking scene their slow motion movement really accentuated the unpleasantness of the moment. The story was easy to follow and the directors intention was very clear.
"Macbeth" directed by Ronald Rørvik was much more complex. Again it was the fantastic body language of the soloists that made the text understandable, but here the stage was full of extra "fluff". Pyrotechnics, props and effects were used throughout to dazzle the audience. It was a very clever production set in a mental institution, with the main characters displaying different symptoms of mental illness. The ladies chorus were also patients, the mens chorus were guards and the dancers were nurses. The choreography had a musical theatre style and the dancers were almost a light relief in the madness and underlying malice. Despite being a thought provoking production, I found the story much harder to follow, the extra "fluff" detracted from the essence of the story and was at times distracting.
When I was listening to the Skype session on Sunday I started to wonder whether these two ways of approaching an opera production could illustrate the two different ways of writing we were discussing. The one more direct and pared down (simpler), the other more advanced using more elaborate, literary words. Each has an individual voice, but just because one appears cleverer it is not necessarily better.
It is quite a struggle to put my thoughts out there for others to read and I am not sure if my thoughts have any relevance to anyone but me. But this, finally, is a start.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)