24 Jun
2013
24 Jun
'13
2:22 p.m.
Alan wrote:
I totally agree that we need to rely on and empower
experienced dancers to
teach figures. What I'm talking about however is newcomers who seemed to
have learned the figure in the walkthrough losing it after the dance starts
and apparently unable to receive any input from caller or other dancers,
and what can be done about that.
My apologies. I was not being clear in addressing your question. Earlier
Alan wrote:
This is likelier to happen if both partners are new,
and likeliest to
What I was trying to say is that this problem seems to be rooted in the
fact that your hall was not integrated. If all first-timers were paired
with a regular then your situation would be a very different one.
Instead of focusing on tactics to teach multiple couples of paired
first-timers from the mike I am suggesting that we address the root cause
which is the fact that the hall is not integrated.
Obviously, this is more difficult when there are already couples of
first-timers paired with each other. But being pro-active in your efforts
to integrate the hall would solve the root problem for your next gig and
would set a different tone that will allow you to demonstrate to the
regulars that partnering with first-timers is very gratifying and fun.
This is not, by the way, a long-term "problem" that lives in the "local
dance culture." Any caller who can call precisely and clearly using
effective word-order can set a tone that immediately makes it clear that
the regulars have a vital role to play in welcoming and leading newcomers
through the figures. This is what makes contras a "traditional" dance
form. The regulars show the first-timers how it's done...not the caller.
Thank you Donna and JoLaine for your ideas about integration.
JoLaine wrote:
happen if all four in that set are new. But that
couple that's new will
have that problem repeatedly. When I see that I continue to prompt the
figures, maybe with more emphasis - Ladies CHAIN and COURTESY TURN - and
it doesn't seem to make any difference.
I often hear callers tell the newbies to find
experienced dancers. That's
like telling a drowning person to go find a lifeguard!
This is a good point. But there are some subtle factors to keep in mind
when speaking on mike that can make it more effective to speak directly to
the first-timers. If you tell the regulars to pair up with first-timers
you are sending out some subtle implied messages with negative consequences:
- You will be indicating that you feel the regulars either do not know that
there are first-timers in the room...or worse you will be indicating that
you believe the regulars are not inclined to dance with first-timers and
must be told to do so from the mike.
This point will not be lost on the first-timers themselves, who are likely
to assume that the regulars are not fond of dancing with first-timers (why
else would the caller have to tell them to do it?).
I prefer to address the first-timers directly and assume the full support
of the regulars. The regulars already know who the first-timers are. And
the first-timers need to know that it is the custom that regulars will
partner with them. (The regulars already know this.) I begin my evening
by saying:
"If you are new to this kind of dancing please find someone who has danced
for at least one night. I will tell you everything you need to know and
your more experienced partner will show you all of the moves."
This is a subtle point but it has to do with "leading by assumption." If
you assume the support of the regulars you will get more support than by
ordering them from the mike. The "at least one night" phrase authorizes
everyone in the room--except first-timers--to partner with first-timers,
and this makes the task seem much more manageable because there are many
dancers who can help.
Just a thought,
Greg McKenzie
West Coast, USA
26 Jun
26 Jun
5:56 a.m.
New subject: First-time Contra Dancers and similar figures
I disagree with the general concept of teaching by the regular dancers, during the dance
or walk-thru. I absolutely encourage helpful eye contact, proffered hands, body language,
friendly waves ("its me, here I am") by all to all, but 'teaching' in
the sense of doing what the caller is or should be doing...no.
Greg Mackenzie says that regular dancers like to teach a much as does the caller. It is my
contention that among the several agendas a contra dance "regular" might have
when going to a dance, teaching is not one. I think the main agenda is to dance as much
and as seamlessly as possible with whomever ( no preconception about dancing only with
experienced folks) and to this end, folks hope the caller has done their homework and can
explain the moves so clearly that additional 'teaching' from the floor is
unnecessary. In the minority, there may be a few regulars who are compelled to tell others
what to do, or more benignly, just try to be helpful with verbal or physical instruction.
Here's a worst case scenario. Cpl B in the minor set isn't catching on to the
ladies chain....man A walks across to teach them how its done...while he is doing so the
caller has 2 choices Stop calling/teaching while one person in the hall instructs 2
others in the hall or keep calling....lets say caller goes with the latter option and
calls "and balance and swing a new neighbor". Cpl B is engaged in being taught
the previous move...they are out of place and out of time. Man A is over teaching cpl B:
he's out of place and out of time; Next female neighbor for Man B has no one to
balance. Instant set breakdown.
Even on a less dramatic scale, verbal instruction is best done by one person. Historically
this has been the caller. Historically, it has worked for a long time. "Duelling
teaching" is very disorienting to most newcomers..they want to listen to the caller
but feel its impolite to ignore the 'experienced' person in their face. It is also
disrespectful to the caller.
________________________________
From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com>
To: winston(a)slac.stanford.edu; Caller's discussion list
<callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Callers] First-time Contra Dancers and similar figures
Alan wrote:
I totally agree that we need to rely on and empower
experienced dancers to
teach figures. What I'm talking about however is newcomers who seemed to
have learned the figure in the walkthrough losing it after the dance starts
and apparently unable to receive any input from caller or other dancers,
and what can be done about that.
My apologies. I was not being clear in addressing your question. Earlier
Alan wrote:
This is likelier to happen if both partners are new,
and likeliest to
What I was trying to say is that this problem seems to be rooted in the
fact that your hall was not integrated. If all first-timers were paired
with a regular then your situation would be a very different one.
Instead of focusing on tactics to teach multiple couples of paired
first-timers from the mike I am suggesting that we address the root cause
which is the fact that the hall is not integrated.
Obviously, this is more difficult when there are already couples of
first-timers paired with each other. But being pro-active in your efforts
to integrate the hall would solve the root problem for your next gig and
would set a different tone that will allow you to demonstrate to the
regulars that partnering with first-timers is very gratifying and fun.
This is not, by the way, a long-term "problem" that lives in the "local
dance culture." Any caller who can call precisely and clearly using
effective word-order can set a tone that immediately makes it clear that
the regulars have a vital role to play in welcoming and leading newcomers
through the figures. This is what makes contras a "traditional" dance
form. The regulars show the first-timers how it's done...not the caller.
Thank you Donna and JoLaine for your ideas about integration.
JoLaine wrote:
happen if all four in that set are new. But that
couple that's new will
have that problem repeatedly. When I see that I continue to prompt the
figures, maybe with more emphasis - Ladies CHAIN and COURTESY TURN - and
it doesn't seem to make any difference.
I often hear callers tell the newbies to find
experienced dancers. That's
like telling a drowning person to go find a lifeguard!
This is a good point. But there are some subtle factors to keep in mind
when speaking on mike that can make it more effective to speak directly to
the first-timers. If you tell the regulars to pair up with first-timers
you are sending out some subtle implied messages with negative consequences:
- You will be indicating that you feel the regulars either do not know that
there are first-timers in the room...or worse you will be indicating that
you believe the regulars are not inclined to dance with first-timers and
must be told to do so from the mike.
This point will not be lost on the first-timers themselves, who are likely
to assume that the regulars are not fond of dancing with first-timers (why
else would the caller have to tell them to do it?).
I prefer to address the first-timers directly and assume the full support
of the regulars. The regulars already know who the first-timers are. And
the first-timers need to know that it is the custom that regulars will
partner with them. (The regulars already know this.) I begin my evening
by saying:
"If you are new to this kind of dancing please find someone who has danced
for at least one night. I will tell you everything you need to know and
your more experienced partner will show you all of the moves."
This is a subtle point but it has to do with "leading by assumption." If
you assume the support of the regulars you will get more support than by
ordering them from the mike. The "at least one night" phrase authorizes
everyone in the room--except first-timers--to partner with first-timers,
and this makes the task seem much more manageable because there are many
dancers who can help.
Just a thought,
Greg McKenzie
West Coast, USA
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
7:03 a.m.
New subject: First-time Contra Dancers and similar figures
When regulars teach by doing, it's great. Dance with a newcomer, during
the dance, point them in the right direction, give a verbal clue as to
who their next interaction is, etc. Another thing an experienced dancer
can do is ask the caller the question the dancer needs answered -- any
question that comes up is likely to come up in more than one person.
But this rarely happens. What is more common is what Jean points out.
I can't count how many times I've held up a walk through, waiting for
some "helpful" person, because that someone thinks it's important to
teach a person how to buzz step. An equal number of times someone is
holding up the movement of a star to teach the interlocking hands
formation. [1]
If people come back, they will learn these forms. And, again, if they
come back, their foot will learn the buzz step. There is never a need
for these things to be taught by a "helpful" regular during the course
of a walk through.
[1] An aside: many people call this the "wrist grip" form. I encourage
us all to remove the word "grip" from out teaching lexicon, as gripping
has led to griping, and that (IMHO) horrid no-thumb allemande... The
connection is through hooks and surfaces to lean on, not through
gripping. And, although I don't like the no thumb allemande, when do I
teach this form of star, I encourage all five fingers, thumb included,
going over the top of the wrist in front - no grip.
erik hoffman
~oakland, ca
On 6/25/2013 10:56 PM, jean francis wrote:
I disagree with the general concept of teaching by the
regular dancers, during the dance or walk-thru. I absolutely encourage helpful eye
contact, proffered hands, body language, friendly waves ("its me, here I am") by
all to all, but 'teaching' in the sense of doing what the caller is or should be
doing...no.
Greg Mackenzie says that regular dancers like to teach a much as does the caller. It is
my contention that among the several agendas a contra dance "regular" might have
when going to a dance, teaching is not one. I think the main agenda is to dance as much
and as seamlessly as possible with whomever ( no preconception about dancing only with
experienced folks) and to this end, folks hope the caller has done their homework and can
explain the moves so clearly that additional 'teaching' from the floor is
unnecessary. In the minority, there may be a few regulars who are compelled to tell others
what to do, or more benignly, just try to be helpful with verbal or physical instruction.
Here's a worst case scenario. Cpl B in the minor set isn't catching on to the
ladies chain....man A walks across to teach them how its done...while he is doing so the
caller has 2 choices Stop calling/teaching while one person in the hall instructs 2
others in the hall or keep calling....lets say caller goes with the latter option and
calls "and balance and swing a new neighbor". Cpl B is engaged in being taught
the previous move...they are out of place and out of time. Man A is over teaching cpl B:
he's out of place and out of time; Next female neighbor for Man B has no one to
balance. Instant set breakdown.
Even on a less dramatic scale, verbal instruction is best done by one person.
Historically this has been the caller. Historically, it has worked for a long time.
"Duelling teaching" is very disorienting to most newcomers..they want to listen
to the caller but feel its impolite to ignore the 'experienced' person in their
face. It is also disrespectful to the caller.
________________________________
From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com>
To: winston@sla
27 Jun
27 Jun
3:15 a.m.
New subject: First-time Contra Dancers and similar figures
Jean wrote:
I disagree with the general concept of teaching by the
regular dancers,
during the dance or walk-thru. I absolutely encourage helpful eye contact,
proffered hands, body language, friendly waves ("its me, here I am") by all
to all, but 'teaching' in the sense of doing what the caller is or should
be doing...no.
I'm sorry. I should have been more clear in stating that by "teaching" I
was not referring to the narrow meaning of verbal teaching as in
"lecturing" or "presenting" in some spoken form. I was referring to
"teaching" in the general sense.
I agree that it is disruptive when dancers talk during the walk-through. I
try to earn and hold the attention of the crowd...primarily by limiting my
words to only the most essential ones. When folks realize that my voice
always carries essential information it is easier to capture and hold their
attention.
Educators worldwide have come to recognize different forms of teaching.
One is "collaborative learning" in which the "teacher" facilitates a
learning environment where the "learners" teach one another. The educator
creates the learning environment and manages the process. But in
collaborative learning the "teacher" speaks very little.
This kind of collaborative learning is an ancient form that is particularly
helpful in complex tasks involving psychomotor skills...such as dance.
Think of a "barn-raising" where there is no single "teacher" but the
participants learn from each other by doing, watching, and modeling
behaviors for one another.
When I first learned contras about 30 years ago about 70% - 80% of what I
learned came from the dancers around me who taught simply by modeling the
correct moves and gentle leads.. Now, as a caller, I try to allow at least
90% of the learning to happen collaboratively in this way. This is a bit
of a different approach than most contra dance callers but my experience is
that, when I limit my words and choose them carefully, the walk-throughs
are much shorter; the music starts sooner, the first-timers are more
confident and amazed, and the regulars are very enthusiastic about how well
new folks are "swept in" to the excitement. Everyone works hard to make
sure it happens that way again.
The ironic thing is that I get a lot of compliments about "what a great
teacher" I am.
But this approach depends upon the hall being integrated well. I try to
take full responsibility for making that happen. The regulars will
enthusiastically integrate the hall when it is fun to do it that way.
- Greg McKenzie
West Coast, USA
****************
Greg Mackenzie says that regular dancers like to teach a much as does the
caller. It is my contention that among the several agendas a contra dance
"regular" might have when going to a dance, teaching is not one. I think
the main agenda is to dance as much and as seamlessly as possible with
whomever ( no preconception about dancing only with experienced folks) and
to this end, folks hope the caller has done their homework and can explain
the moves so clearly that additional 'teaching' from the floor is
unnecessary. In the minority, there may be a few regulars who are compelled
to tell others what to do, or more benignly, just try to be helpful with
verbal or physical instruction.
Here's a worst case scenario. Cpl B in the minor set isn't catching on to
the ladies chain....man A walks across to teach them how its done...while
he is doing so the caller has 2 choices Stop calling/teaching while one
person in the hall instructs 2 others in the hall or keep calling....lets
say caller goes with the latter option and calls "and balance and swing a
new neighbor". Cpl B is engaged in being taught the previous move...they
are out of place and out of time. Man A is over teaching cpl B: he's out of
place and out of time; Next female neighbor for Man B has no one to
balance. Instant set breakdown.
Even on a less dramatic scale, verbal instruction is best done by one
person. Historically this has been the caller. Historically, it has worked
for a long time. "Duelling teaching" is very disorienting to most
newcomers..they want to listen to the caller but feel its impolite to
ignore the 'experienced' person in their face. It is also disrespectful to
the caller.
________________________________
From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com>
To: winston(a)slac.stanford.edu; Caller's discussion list <
callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Callers] First-time Contra Dancers and similar figures
Alan wrote:
What I was trying to say is that this problem seems to be rooted in the
fact that your hall was not integrated. If all first-timers were paired
with a regular then your situation would be a very different one.
Instead of focusing on tactics to teach multiple couples of paired
first-timers from the mike I am suggesting that we address the root cause
which is the fact that the hall is not integrated.
Obviously, this is more difficult when there are already couples of
first-timers paired with each other. But being pro-active in your efforts
to integrate the hall would solve the root problem for your next gig and
would set a different tone that will allow you to demonstrate to the
regulars that partnering with first-timers is very gratifying and fun.
This is not, by the way, a long-term "problem" that lives in the "local
dance culture." Any caller who can call precisely and clearly using
effective word-order can set a tone that immediately makes it clear that
the regulars have a vital role to play in welcoming and leading newcomers
through the figures. This is what makes contras a "traditional" dance
form. The regulars show the first-timers how it's done...not the caller.
Thank you Donna and JoLaine for your ideas about integration.
JoLaine wrote:
I totally agree that we need to rely on and
empower experienced dancers
to
teach figures. What I'm talking about
however is newcomers who seemed to
have learned the figure in the walkthrough losing it after the dance
starts
and apparently unable to receive any input from
caller or other dancers,
and what can be done about that.
My apologies. I was not being clear in addressing your question. Earlier
Alan wrote:
This is likelier to happen if both partners are
new, and likeliest to
> happen if all four in that set are new. But that couple that's new will
> have that problem repeatedly. When I see that I continue to prompt the
> figures, maybe with more emphasis - Ladies CHAIN and COURTESY TURN -
and
it
doesn't seem to make any difference.
I often hear callers tell the newbies to find
experienced dancers.
That's
like telling a drowning person to go find a
lifeguard!
This is a good point. But there are some subtle factors to keep in mind
when speaking on mike that can make it more effective to speak directly to
the first-timers. If you tell the regulars to pair up with first-timers
you are sending out some subtle implied messages with negative
consequences:
- You will be indicating that you feel the regulars either do not know that
there are first-timers in the room...or worse you will be indicating that
you believe the regulars are not inclined to dance with first-timers and
must be told to do so from the mike.
This point will not be lost on the first-timers themselves, who are likely
to assume that the regulars are not fond of dancing with first-timers (why
else would the caller have to tell them to do it?).
I prefer to address the first-timers directly and assume the full support
of the regulars. The regulars already know who the first-timers are. And
the first-timers need to know that it is the custom that regulars will
partner with them. (The regulars already know this.) I begin my evening
by saying:
"If you are new to this kind of dancing please find someone who has danced
for at least one night. I will tell you everything you need to know and
your more experienced partner will show you all of the moves."
This is a subtle point but it has to do with "leading by assumption." If
you assume the support of the regulars you will get more support than by
ordering them from the mike. The "at least one night" phrase authorizes
everyone in the room--except first-timers--to partner with first-timers,
and this makes the task seem much more manageable because there are many
dancers who can help.
Just a thought,
Greg McKenzie
West Coast, USA
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
4168
days inactive
4171
days old
contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Erik Hoffman -
Greg McKenzie -
jean francis