Disillusioned with Medal Tests

[dancingirldancing]

Have anyone noticed that NO ONE ever fail their medal test in Australia ?

Well, I have not even seen anyone scored under 85% in my studio OR in the other 2 studios I frequented previously.

Normally someone good will score about 94 to 98%, someone who dances so so with score about 90-94% and someone who just walk around doing the steps (eg no cuban motion at all in latin, no swing in swing dances) who forgets half his/her routines will score 86-90%.

I know that you dont want to discourage people from doing these medals but these extremely high often undeserved marks really lose the value of doing these medal tests for me.

I dont think I deserve anything over 90% I would rather get a 70 % or 80% and when I am really really good to then get something like 90%.

What do you think about this ?

[wonderwoman]

It's still going to be quite some time before I comp out of bronze 1, but from what I have witnessed... If a person sticks with it long enough to get to a medal test, they are probably proficient in everything, meaning not only can they walk through it, but can apply the technique reasonably well for the level they are. I think that instructors are the ones qualified to assess a students ability. And they want their students to keep going, not get discouraged by low scores. But I think I kind of get where you're coming from. You want to excel. You want to stand apart from the crowd of average dancers in some way.

It's kind of like how I felt in high school... If I got A's in honors classes and someone taking remedial classes also got straight A's also, we had the same GPA.

[waltzguy]

I don't know about Aussie. But in the US, I find that the results of medal tests or progress tests to be inflated. There's other things that are inflated too, but that's another thread.

To fail a student means the student is dejected. A dejected student means ... .

[wonderwoman]

I don't know about Aussie. But in the US, I find that the results of medal tests or progress tests to be inflated. There's other things that are inflated too, but that's another thread.

To fail a student means the student is dejected. A dejected student means ... .
They don't buy no more lessons! :P

[etp777]

Heh, yeah, I've noticed every passes, and same on proficiency at our FA comps. That being said, while the scores cover a very limited range (80 and up or so), they definitely are scored in that range. So best dancers are definitely at top of the range, and people who can't dance are definitely at bottom.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

There was at least some social promotion in the medal exams I've seen. I've observed awful "silver" exams, pretty good pre-bronze exams, decent intermediate bronze exams - everyone passed. It's really just a bunch of steps graded at an arbitrary standard. In this case, the standard was set below your personal standard. If the studio/examiners wanted to, they could set the bar so high that only the top pros could pass.

I don't think you should do medal exams for the score. You should do them because:
-you like the structure/goal (especially if one doesn't compete)
-you want to present some of your dancing in public
-you want the examiner's comments (written feedback, not scores) on your dancing

Medal exams are more of a personal thing. If you're comparing scores with other students, there's this sort of event where judges rank dancers relative to each other called a "competition" that might be a better fit for you. ;)

[waltzguy]

I think if you're an amateur wanting to become a professional, then medal exams could provide some level of "proof" of your proficiency. But, like me, if you want to dance as an amateur with no goal of being a pro, I would not bother with medal exams. Competitions, IMO, are a much better judge of how you do. But that is another thread. :)

The basis is simple, with medal exams, everyone can get a 99, A+, etc. At comps, only one couple can get first place, except for a tie. So, it's a much better way than to differentiate yourself, good or bad. Again though, that's another thread. :)

[waltzguy]

there's this type of event where judges rank dancers relative to each other called a "competition" that might be a better fit for you. ;)

Ooops, I didn't read your thread carefully, I ended writing basically the same thing. :doh:

[waltzguy]

They don't buy no more lessons! :P

Yup!

[tanya_the_dancer]

My guess is that people who would fail them do not bother to take them in the first place. That's why the results are skewed.

[dancingirldancing]

I do competition as well and I do not compete with others during medal.

It is not that.

I just want a fair score on MY dancing and progress and I am not happy getting marks that I do not think I deserve !

[Terpsichorean Clod]

I do competition as well and I do not compete with others during medal.
Yes, I already knew that. I was being tongue-in-cheek. :razz:
I just want a fair score on MY dancing and progress and I am not happy getting marks that I do not think I deserve !
I think "fair" is pretty subjective. You've got your own idea of a fair score. I've got my own idea of a fair score. Those dancers who were falling over themselves have their own idea of a fair score. But on the day of the medal exam, the only thing that's going to matter is the judge's idea of a fair score. :)

[etp777]

I ignore the 100 point scale and compare my scores to others, and my former scores. But my main reason for doing our testing is the feedback. We get our score sheets, and get notes on WHY we got score we did too. a nd tester iwll actually go over their notes with us.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Ooops, I didn't read your thread carefully, I ended writing basically the same thing. :doh:
:) Well, medal exams are about absolute scoring. Comps are about relative scoring. Depending on the person and situation, I think medal exams can be a much better choice.

[tanya_the_dancer]

:) Well, medal exams are about absolute scoring. Comps are about relative scoring. Depending on the person and situation, I think medal exams can be a much better choice.

I have once heard from a coach that the expectations on quality of your dancing on a medal test are lower than the expectations at the competition.

[suburbaknght]

There's a simple reason why everyone passes: an instructor won't let their student test if he or she doesn't know the student will pass. In crooked places, this can mean skewed test results, but more often it's the result of instructors insisting their students learn the material their students will be tested on.

[wonderwoman]

There's a simple reason why everyone passes: an instructor won't let their student test if he or she doesn't know the student will pass. In crooked places, this can mean skewed test results, but more often it's the result of instructors insisting their students learn the material their students will be tested on.
Which makes total sense. I've heard instructors saying things along those lines.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

I have once heard from a coach that the expectations on quality of your dancing on a medal test are lower than the expectations at the competition.
How would one compare expectations at a medal test with expectations at a competition? :)

[BasicsFirst]

I'm sure you're hoping the author of that will answer... but I don't think they compare at all.

At my very first mentioning the thought of doing a medal test way back when I was told right off... "Forget it... everyone ALWAYS passes!" I was naive at the time and thought... "Naaawwww"... but still, I dropped it.

Now I know better.

Nevermind the score, we have some friends who still went ahead with a medal test and they weren't happy with the feedback either... it was ALL positive, nothing to work on.

Now "they" know better.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

I'm sure you're hoping the author of that will answer...
:D
At my very first mentioning the thought of doing a medal test way back when I was told right off... "Forget it... everyone ALWAYS passes!" I was naive at the time and thought... "Naaawwww"... but still, I dropped it.

Now I know better.

Nevermind the score, we have some friends who still went ahead with a medal test and they weren't happy with the feedback either... it was ALL positive, nothing to work on.

Now "they" know better.
I enjoyed my one medal exam experience. Curiously, I never did receive my score or written feedback. I'll never know if I passed. But my post-exam session had the examiner heavily critiquing my posture and then teaching me five different ways to arrive at the same good posture. Pound for pound, it was perhaps some of the most amazing instruction I'll ever get in 15 minutes.

[Rugby]

Medals are different than competiton. In medals they are looking for a couple that dance well together and have a basic sense of the steps in the level they are going for. Technique, frame and connection are not as important as what is expected in competition. Medals are for people who want to work toward something to evaluate their dancing but not at a competitive level. In this the medals serve a purpose if they are not used and abused.

Up here the medals are a joke. I've seen so many couples get highly commended or in the 90's yet the dance is damn near unrecognizable. No technique, off time, steps done so poorly you have to take a guess as to what they are. It's a bragging right for those who do it, since everyone I know gets into the 90's, and a great way to make your students do more lessons for the teacher. To me, and increasingly to more people I know, it is being looked upon as just another money grab. I think the people judging it may want to be encouraging but instead they are de-valuing the medal system to a point where soon it will be looked upon as worthless. I have my gold medals with highly commended but I can't say the guy I did it with and I should really have gotten that mark.

[barrefly]

My daughter has the opportunity to take her exams in October (Los Angeles). She has never taken an exam, but is at gold level in her sequences (?). Would there be any benefits for her to take the exams?

[tangotime]

. In this the medals serve a purpose if they are not used and abused.

Up here the medals are a joke.



taking "tests, " within a chain school and a recognised international Soc.( ISTD, IDTA, UKA for e.g. ) are worlds apart... if you test as a student ( or Prof. ) failures are not out of the Question, and the higher grades are "earned " .

Medal test classes were devised, to ensure the perfection of technique on an individual basis.. we used to run them in the UK 2/3 nites a week for adults ( BR and L ) .

The demand has diminished, and in many schools, non existent.
They tend now to be geared more to the 16 and under..

[dancingirldancing]

I dont go to franchisee studios but I still find even independent examiners are very reluctant to give conservative scores.

They are still upmarking everyone.

I also get mostly good feedback with very little criticism every time.

My coach do critizise me a lot afterwards though !

[Terpsichorean Clod]

They are still upmarking everyone.
How do you know they are upmarking? :)
I also get mostly good feedback with very little criticism every time.
Good for you! :applause:
My coach do critizise me a lot afterwards though !
LOL

[tangotime]

I dont go to franchisee studios but I still find even independent examiners are very reluctant to give conservative scores.


Of which Soc. ?.. and what is an "independant " examiner ?

[pinkstuff]

I have never done any medal tests but am working towards doing some (ISDT) - I spend most of my lessons perfecting technique, posture, foot work etc etc etc in preparation for them. The routines are not difficult and I have enjoyed spending time choreographing them (and I think I will be able to use some for competing??). For me (as I currently don't have a competition partner and that is my ultimate aim) I think working towards something is good as it ensures that I learn the technique etc which can never be a bad thing and gives me a goal & some structure to what I am doing. And I like to think that may be when I get a partner it will be of benefit. I don't know what the standard is like though, or the marking for that matter but I was under the impression that not every-one passes. I haven't really looked into the medal system here (UK) too much but I thought that if you ultimately wanted to teach etc these are stepping stones towards that?

[tangotime]

. And I like to think that may be when I get a partner it will be of benefit.

I don't know what the standard is like though, or the marking for that matter but I was under the impression that not every-one passes. I haven't really looked into the medal system here (UK) too much but I thought that if you ultimately wanted to teach etc these are stepping stones towards that?

Good techn. is always a benefit, no matter your ultimate aim.

The medal tests have been re structured to encourage people to study for single dance entries in the Bronze level ( used to be all 4 dances ) and the minimum pass level is %65.. you may take the test with a teacher and or an amat. partner .( failures to reach the "standard " are rare, but can happen )

And yes, they will prepare you for teaching from a technical standpoint.. but.. there is a theoretical side that will need to be addressed.

[dancingirldancing]

How do you know they are upmarking? :)

Good for you! :applause:

LOL

Well because wel all get so much bollocking from our coaches at the end no matter that everyone is getting something like 'Wow you are a lovely dancer ! Nice extension ! Nice footwork !' on our medal assessment !

Then my coach were like 'YOU ! Why were you not keeping your posture ? And YOU ! Why were you not keeping your balance well ?'

Hearing our coach we were more deserving of something like 60% rather than 96% or whatever ridiculous mark we got !

I think 100% is for GOD, 96-98 % is for Alessia (who is kind of my Ballroom Goddess anyway !).

In the grand scale of think we are maybe 60%.

Okay if you think that we are dancing Gold level not Gold Premier Superstar God level that Alessia will be dancing in ..... let's lower the standard to at least the finalist in national champ dancing standard for 96-98%.

In that case we are more like max 70% ?

[tanya_the_dancer]

How would one compare expectations at a medal test with expectations at a competition? :)

I don't know, but what was said to me on the coaching "you'd be fine with this amount of stretch if you were doing the medal test but you need to double that for competing", that was a couple of years ago, when I was still doing bronze standard.

[etp777]

Medal test is testing an individual to a perceived minimum competency. Competition is testing group for person (or couple) with maximum competency. Different ends of the curve. Or something like that, anyway. :)

[Standarddancer]

How did you find out people’s marks anyway? Isn’t medal test marks confidential?

[tanya_the_dancer]

Medal test is testing an individual to a perceived minimum competency. Competition is testing group for person (or couple) with maximum competency. Different ends of the curve. Or something like that, anyway. :)

I think you're right about different ends of the curve. Also, I think if an active competitor was taking a medal test, they would still get their good marks, like OP is getting, but they might get additional feedback based on the fact that they are competitive dancers, and what was good enough on the test, would not be enough to place well in competition.

[wooh]

Medal test is testing an individual to a perceived minimum competency. Competition is testing group for person (or couple) with maximum competency. Different ends of the curve. Or something like that, anyway. :)

Yep. The expectation is what a bronze level dancer should achieve on a bronze level test. Not what a top pro should achieve on a bronze level test. Because a top pro won't be taking the bronze level test. If you don't like the way the medal tests are run, don't do them. Run through a routine and ask a pro for feedback instead. And tell them to be just as picky with you as they would be with a top level pro. Then everyone is happy.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

I don't know, but what was said to me on the coaching "you'd be fine with this amount of stretch if you were doing the medal test but you need to double that for competing", that was a couple of years ago, when I was still doing bronze standard.
I think it really depends on who is the medal examiner and who shows up for the competition. For example, you could have the tough-as-nails, perfectionist examiner of DGD's dreams :razz: and you could have a really weak field on your comp floor. :)

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Medals are different than competiton.
I agree. :)
In medals they are looking for a couple that dance well together and have a basic sense of the steps in the level they are going for. Technique, frame and connection are not as important as what is expected in competition.
How would you define expectations in competition? The judges might have certain expectations but it really doesn't matter if only bad dancers show up to compete. The least bad couple is going to win. :)
Medals are for people who want to work toward something to evaluate their dancing but not at a competitive level.
I'm not sure I agree. I think there are a lot of people who work on their dancing at the same level as a competitive dancer, but simply prefer not to present their dancing on a competition floor. I had had about a year of private lessons (plus lots of practice, of course) when I took my pre-bronze exam. Technique was there - correct footwork, swing, sway. Frame was, well, not quite there as I noted my feedback on posture. :oops: Connection was certainly there - we did not use any routines (not to imply that routine means no connection). It was a valuable experience that I wouldn't mind doing again. And if I were to do so, I think I'd like to retake for pre-bronze. :)

[wooh]

... at a competitive level...
A wise man once mentioned that competition is an event, not a level. :)

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Well because wel all get so much bollocking from our coaches at the end no matter that everyone is getting something like 'Wow you are a lovely dancer ! Nice extension ! Nice footwork !' on our medal assessment !

Then my coach were like 'YOU ! Why were you not keeping your posture ? And YOU ! Why were you not keeping your balance well ?'

Hearing our coach we were more deserving of something like 60% rather than 96% or whatever ridiculous mark we got !

I think 100% is for GOD, 96-98 % is for Alessia (who is kind of my Ballroom Goddess anyway !).

In the grand scale of think we are maybe 60%.

Okay if you think that we are dancing Gold level not Gold Premier Superstar God level that Alessia will be dancing in ..... let's lower the standard to at least the finalist in national champ dancing standard for 96-98%.

In that case we are more like max 70% ?
Okay, I concede! :D I can't think of a scoring system I'd like better than what you suggested. I agree that the scores would have more meaning if all the dancers in the world were distributed from 0-100% rather than in a blob around 95%. Or maybe we could still keep the 90-100% system but treat it as a logarithmic (typed it earlier as "logarhythmic" :oops:) scale? ;)

[tanya_the_dancer]

I think it really depends on who is the medal examiner and who shows up for the competition. For example, you could have the tough-as-nails, perfectionist examiner of DGD's dreams :razz: and you could have a really weak field on your comp floor. :)

Perhaps, you could end up with a perfectionist on the exam, but it's not a good idea to assume your competitors are weak and therefore you can relax and dance at 50% of your abilities. You still have to do it full-out at the competition, even if you did end up being well above everyone else on the floor.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Perhaps, you could end up with a perfectionist on the exam, but it's not a good idea to assume your competitors are weak and therefore you can relax and dance at 50% of your abilities. You still have to do it full-out at the competition, even if you did end up being well above everyone else on the floor.
I agree. Similarly, one shouldn't assume the examiner is a marshmallow, so one should go full-out at the exam. :)

[tanya_the_dancer]

I agree. Similarly, one shouldn't assume the examiner is a marshmallow, so one should go full-out at the exam. :)

Of course. But perhaps when a student's goal is just to take the medal exam, and not to compete, the expectations placed on him (by teachers/coaches/examiners) would be lower than the expectations placed on a competitive student, and perhaps even lower than those placed on a professional. Actually, I don't have it in front of me right now, but I think the standard manual discusses what is expected on the exam from a teacher vs. a student. A teacher has to do more to pass the test, as I recall.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Of course. But perhaps when a student's goal is just to take the medal exam, and not to compete, the expectations placed on him (by teachers/coaches/examiners) would be lower than the expectations placed on a competitive student, and perhaps even lower than those placed on a professional. Actually, I don't have it in front of me right now, but I think the standard manual discusses what is expected on the exam from a teacher vs. a student. A teacher has to do more to pass the test, as I recall.
I agree that expectations are lower for a student taking a medal exam vs. a teacher taking a certification exam.

Who sets expectations on a student in a competition? And what sorts of expectations are they? :)

[tanya_the_dancer]

Who sets expectations on a student in a competition? And what sorts of expectations are they? :)

Don't you think teachers have some expectations of their students? Or judges have some expectations based on the level of the event they're judging? I think they do, and moreover, they adjust them from person to person. When I still danced with my husband (we don't anymore) and we were trying to prepare for a competition (I think we wanted to do bronze smooth), we had a lesson with a judge, and of course the subject of quality came up. So he said to us something like this "well, when we judge am-am bronze, we expect it to be bad, so if you show that you have mastered X, you will be marked, even if it doesn't look perfect". Same with the medal test - no sane examiner will look at bronze-level dancer and think "well, Alessia would have danced this step with so much more stretch and control, this person is doing 1% of what she would do, so he's getting 1% mark on this test". He'll probably think "OK, they have shown that they know how to do X, Y isn't quite there yet, so they'll need to get it by the time they are taking the next level - put it on their feedback and give them their passing grade". That seems more logical to me than ranking everyone from beginner bronze to world champion on the same scale.

[dancingirldancing]

I gues I was just being cheeky with that comment but what I meant was what TC reiterated much better.

Instead of grading everyone on the scale of 85%-98% why don't we mark everyone on the scale of let's say 65%-98% with SOME possibility of failing.

If university exams are marked between 85%-98% with NO possibility of failing, how many dud doctors, engineers, etc will that university produce. People will simply stop trying hard enough. Then the exams will just be a joke.

In our studio and all the other studios I ever take medal exams in all the result is either being called out at the end of the exam or outrightly posted on the notice board.

Given, the competitors are usually top of the list, followed by serious social dancers, followed by once a week group classer.

I have taken piano exams as well and I have been getting 'bad' marks like 65% when I played badly. I took it well though because I thought I deserved it. I didn't stop playing the piano because I got bad marks. Then I just practice harder and when I got 80% in my next exam I felt like it was well deserved.

I just can't understand why dancing exams can't be like that as well ?

Failing is not bad and it does build character.

Otherwise, we may as well just give out first place throphy to everyone who enters competitions.

[tanya_the_dancer]

...

Instead of grading everyone on the scale of 85%-98% why don't we mark everyone on the scale of let's say 65%-98% with SOME possibility of failing.
...
Given, the competitors are usually top of the list, followed by serious social dancers, followed by once a week group classer.


So who do you think would be failing the test under this approach, if you spread out the marks and make 70% a cut-off for F? That probably would be once a week group class people, and they probably would quit if they were getting bad marks, they're not serious to begin with.

[wooh]

Otherwise, we may as well just give out first place throphy to everyone who enters competitions.

Obviously never seen all the uncontested heats at small local pro-am comps. Heck, even at the bigger comps. I love seeing studios brag how they got x amount of 1st places!

[etp777]

haha, yep wooh. :) My last FA competition was almost all uncontested. so of the 24 firsts, 18 of those I was only one on floor. :P

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Don't you think teachers have some expectations of their students? Or judges have some expectations based on the level of the event they're judging? I think they do, and moreover, they adjust them from person to person.
Yes, I agree that teachers and judges have expectations of students/competitors. But how do these expectations directly impact who wins on the day of the competition?
When I still danced with my husband (we don't anymore) and we were trying to prepare for a competition (I think we wanted to do bronze smooth), we had a lesson with a judge, and of course the subject of quality came up. So he said to us something like this "well, when we judge am-am bronze, we expect it to be bad, so if you show that you have mastered X, you will be marked, even if it doesn't look perfect".
What happens if no one in the am-am bronze heat on that day has mastered X? What if everyone in the heat has mastered X?
Same with the medal test - no sane examiner will look at bronze-level dancer and think "well, Alessia would have danced this step with so much more stretch and control, this person is doing 1% of what she would do, so he's getting 1% mark on this test". He'll probably think "OK, they have shown that they know how to do X, Y isn't quite there yet, so they'll need to get it by the time they are taking the next level - put it on their feedback and give them their passing grade". That seems more logical to me than ranking everyone from beginner bronze to world champion on the same scale.
I think I see your point. What I would like about that scale is that it enables one to take a particular exam multiple times and compare the results. For example, one could then take the bronze exam every year and track one's progress. If one's bronze exam scores are always in the 90s, it's hard to tell if one's dancing has gone from, say, just good to very good. :)

[dancingirldancing]

For example, one could then take the bronze exam every year and track one's progress. If one's bronze exam scores are always in the 90s, it's hard to tell if one's dancing has gone from, say, just good to very good. :)

Yes this is my point too !