Dance Certifications -- Yes or No?

[pygmalion]

In another thread, d nice, will35 and I got into a discussion about the relative merits of dance certifications. Given that ballroom,swing and Argentine tango worlds are all different, we all had very different views.

What kinds of certifications are out there? And what do you think about certifications? Useful? Restrictive? Pointless?

[pygmalion]

I'm really curious about this, guys (and ladies). What do you think? Do certifications really have any value for a dancer? Hmm? :D

[SDsalsaguy]

Also worth considering in this thread is the even larger question of What should a student look for in a teacher? (http://www.dance-forums.com/viewtopic.php?t=900)

[pygmalion]

There are some interesting thoughts on this topic embedde in one of the Argentine Tango threads, as well.

My teacher and I had an enlightening conversation about this yesterday. Basically, we were talking about what makes a dance pro. Self-proclamation. Meaning, if I pay the state of Florida the fee for an occupational license, and can get somebody to pay me two bucks to teach them, I am a professional.

Shouldn't there be some guidelines in terms of what makes someone qualified to teach dance? If so, what? Is there anything out there right now?

[DanceMentor]

I have trained for the certifications in both American and International style, but I never followed through to actually take the tests. I agree that certifications can show that a teacher meets a certain level of excellence, especially when given by a large governing body (rather than a Bronze Certification from John Doe's Dance School).

At the same time, there are many excellent teachers who do not have a certificate.

From a teacher's perspective, certifications can be helpful later in life to help get work as a judge.

[Spitfire]

As far as being a dance instructor goes is there a certification system of any kind in place for dance instructors?

[pygmalion]

Yes and no. Yes, franchise studios, for the most part, do have an internal training and certification system. No, technically speaking, as far as I know, there is no governing body with established guidelines in terms of what's required to become a teacher. So the quality of dance "teachers" varies dramatically, even within one studio. At least, this is the picture I've been able to synthesize from my experiences and other people's stories.

Anybody else have a different impression?

[smoothdancingirl]

Yes any teacher worth their salt is going to be certified at least in Bronze. There are those that would disagree. I believe that just because you are a great dancer does not necessarily make you a great teacher. The certification test are not easy and are a true test of a person's knowledge of the material and way to teach it. Teachers can become certified in all standards of dance American, International, etc. through various organizations. The ones recognized by the NDCA are the ones to be taken seriously.
The exams generally reqiure the teacher to demonstrate his/her knowledge of the material by written exam, dance exam, and question and answer session on teaching theory with the judge. Knowledge of both the lady's and man's part is required. There are also exams one must take in order to be a judge. Being a champion dancer does not qualify you, but can be one of the qualifications.

[pygmalion]

Hmm. First, let me say that for ballroom, I absolutely agree that teachers need certifications, especially if they're going to train competitiove dancers, who have to work within a specific syllabus with technique requirements. Yes! Finally somebody who undrestands. :D

Now about NDCA. Just curious. Does NDCA administer professional and student exams as well? I'm familiar with the ISTD exams that are governed out of London and are internationally recognized. Does NDCA do something similar? How do they compare?

[Spitfire]

Welcome to the forum smoothdancingirl. :D

[smoothdancingirl]

Now about NDCA. Just curious. Does NDCA administer professional and student exams as well? I'm familiar with the ISTD exams that are governed out of London and are internationally recognized. Does NDCA do something similar? How do they compare?

The NDCA National Dance Council of America is very similar to ISTD except I think they do more. Yes they have certification process of their own but also recognize many of the franchise and other organizations' certifications. But they also are the governing body concerning competitions for amatures and professionals. They also certify judges. You can go to their website at ndca.org.

[pygmalion]

Thanks. I went to their website, as you suggested. Yes, NDCA does seem to cover a lot more ground than ISTD, because it has a "ballroom department", but it also has another department which covers other forms of dance, such as ballet, jazz, hip-hop, folks dances, etc. (check this out, Giselle, DD, eloise and others! :D ) ISTD does ballroom, period.


They also provide lots of cool downloadable information. I'll post some of the links later today.

I was curious mostly because my dance coach is a certified member of both NDCA and USISTD. Just wondering about the similarities and differences.

Thanks again. :D


Jenn

[MissAlyssa]

I have quite a few things to say but not too much time to devote to saying them well so forgive me.

I happen to dissagree that only a teacher certified in bronze is better than one with the same experience that is not. Certification is just verification. Some teachers I know work 10 hours a day 5 days a week and just don't have the time to train specifically for the tests.

Also, as I've said in other topics, some teachers are considered "professional" instructors even though they are not 'advanced instructors' (anyone that is trained beyond a social foundation dancing). This IS NOT A BAD THING. Would you agree if I told you these instructors dealt with ONLY new students and taught them ONLY basics? There are different levels of teachers and in my opiniion every studio should have at least one of each to make everything run to it's full potential. The enrollment teacher starts with the basics while a general teacher teaches some elements and then the advanced teacher teaches style and has a coach come and help with technique.


Anyone care to agree or dissagree?

[pygmalion]

Hey MissAlyssa. Can I agree and disagree?

I agree. Certification is not necessary to teach beginners. Heck. I, a total schlub, teach beginners all the time. Teaching beginners (or being an "enrollment" teacher) requires only that you know more (a lot more :D ) than the beginners in question. Being new may even be an advantage, since you still remember how to break things down.

On the other hand, people who are teaching higher-level students and/or people with competitive aspirations, need different qualifications. Maybe not certifications, but certainly enough qualifications to get them. So why not get them?

[MissAlyssa]

Of course you can agree and dissagree. I also agree with your last statement, but that brings it back to my statement about teachers not having the time. What would you propose for those teachers? Maybe if there was a basic studio qualification certificate (even if it's not the BIG EXAM)?

[pygmalion]

Cute flamenco picture, MissAlyssa! :D

No offense, but right now, I'm holding out for teachers who have passed the big exam. Baggage from my bad experiences. No reflection on you. :D

I really don't think certification is needed to teach inexperienced students, though. Teachers do (in my observation) a minimum of twenty hours a week training for six to ten weeks, before they come anywhere near a student. Surely they know enough to get new people through a box step?

[smoothdancingirl]

Of course you can agree and dissagree. I also agree with your last statement, but that brings it back to my statement about teachers not having the time. What would you propose for those teachers? Maybe if there was a basic studio qualification certificate (even if it's not the BIG EXAM)?
The first studio I worked at we had to take an exam with the studio owner and pass even to be considered for a teaching position. (It only covered the first three steps in Bronze in F/W/ECS/R/CHA) You should never be too busy to study your own dancing. Not if you want to survive in this business. A good owner should have a dance training program in place for his/her staff. At my studio we are required to take exams. And if there isn't a training program the teachers should consider at least getting together on their own a couple times a week before or after work to study. If you already "know" the material then taking an exam shouldn't be that difficult. You'll have a much easier time transfering or starting your own studio if you have your certifications. Plus you can demand higher pay. :D

[pygmalion]

I'm considering applying for a part-time position at local dance studio. Words of wisdom? Anyone? (It's not about making a living. It's about learning to dance. :D )

[Spitfire]

Yes and no. Yes, franchise studios, for the most part, do have an internal training and certification system. No, technically speaking, as far as I know, there is no governing body with established guidelines in terms of what's required to become a teacher. So the quality of dance "teachers" varies dramatically, even within one studio. At least, this is the picture I've been able to synthesize from my experiences and other people's stories.

Anybody else have a different impression?

Another question; how exactly does one obtain this certification. I know it must be some kind of test, but is part of it written and/or does one have to do a demonstration. That's my guess; I'm not familiar with any of these aspects.

[SDsalsaguy]

Sorry to be hopping in late but a couple of points…

(1) The IDSF is far larger then the NDCA! Why? Because the NDCA is the National Dance Council of America while the IDSF is the International DanceSport Federation – the NDCA is to the WD & DSC (World Dance & DanceSport Council) what USABDA is to the IDSF.

(2) Once cannot be certified by the NDCA. The NDCA is an “organization of organizations” (their terminology, not mine) and, as such, one is certified via one of the NDCA’s constituent groups. Part of the problem thus created, however, is a lack of consistency in certification examinations. Regardless of what claims anyone may care to make, there are discrepancies is the rigorousness of various exams and examiners.

(3) Personally I’m largely with smoothdancingirl on this…teaching a pure beginner, on the side, is one thing. But if you honestly want to be considered a professional then teaching really should be a requirement. Why? Because you don’t know where that student will go or what that student will do with their dancing. Maybe, if you knew for 100% certainty, that the student would never, ever, ever compete, then this wouldn’t need to be as stringent a rule. Any other scenario however and, even with the best of intentions, an insufficient foundation can be lain. And, again mirroring smoothdancingirl, if an instructor can’t take the time to work on and demonstrate their own technical knowledge and competence, why in G-d’s name would I be inclined to trust them to help me with mine?

[MissAlyssa]

Yes and no. Yes, franchise studios, for the most part, do have an internal training and certification system. No, technically speaking, as far as I know, there is no governing body with established guidelines in terms of what's required to become a teacher. So the quality of dance "teachers" varies dramatically, even within one studio. At least, this is the picture I've been able to synthesize from my experiences and other people's stories.

Anybody else have a different impression?

Another question; how exactly does one obtain this certification. I know it must be some kind of test, but is part of it written and/or does one have to do a demonstration. That's my guess; I'm not familiar with any of these aspects.

yes, they need to be able to do man/woman's parts, hold the correct frame, perform the steps right and be able to count the timing.

[MissAlyssa]

Of course you can agree and dissagree. I also agree with your last statement, but that brings it back to my statement about teachers not having the time. What would you propose for those teachers? Maybe if there was a basic studio qualification certificate (even if it's not the BIG EXAM)?
The first studio I worked at we had to take an exam with the studio owner and pass even to be considered for a teaching position. (It only covered the first three steps in Bronze in F/W/ECS/R/CHA) You should never be too busy to study your own dancing. Not if you want to survive in this business. A good owner should have a dance training program in place for his/her staff. At my studio we are required to take exams. And if there isn't a training program the teachers should consider at least getting together on their own a couple times a week before or after work to study. If you already "know" the material then taking an exam shouldn't be that difficult. You'll have a much easier time transfering or starting your own studio if you have your certifications. Plus you can demand higher pay. :D

Oh I train every possible second I can. I study steps/techniques so that I know them, I can teach them, and I can show them to newer staff to better the whole team.

[pygmalion]

Oh yeah, and I checked. ISTD does cover many forms of dance, not just ballroom. They also cover ballet, classical Greek dance, modern dance, even disco.

It's definitely worth browsing either website, ISTD or NDCA or ISDF. Lots of good information anywhere you look. :D

[pygmalion]

(3) Personally I’m largely with smoothdancingirl on this…teaching a pure beginner, on the side, is one thing. But if you honestly want to be considered a professional then teaching really should be a requirement. Why? Because you don’t know where that student will go or what that student will do with their dancing. Maybe, if you knew for 100% certainty, that the student would never, ever, ever compete, then this wouldn’t need to be as stringent a rule. Any other scenario however and, even with the best of intentions, an insufficient foundation can be lain. And, again mirroring smoothdancingirl, if an instructor can’t take the time to work on and demonstrate their own technical knowledge and competence, why in G-d’s name would I be inclined to trust them to help me with mine?

Yup, SD. And while a dance teacher probably doesn't have to have certifications to be able to teach the newest of beginners, what you say is true. Good or bad dance habits are formed from the very beginning. And as I've said in another thread, can't remember which, now :lol:, certification requirements would protect many unsuspecting students from spending good money for bad dance instruction.

[pygmalion]

Hmm.. As I type, I'm wondering if this is the right thread in which to post ... Oh well. Here goes. After our discussion in the past couple days about qualifications and certifications for teaching dance, I got curious, so went to google as usual. I found a couple interesting sites.

First, there's a site out there which lists recognized ballroom dance (or other dance) governing organizations by country. (http://www.danceuniverse.co.kr/society/org-intl.htm) There are five international organizations listed, among which IDSF and ISTD are prominent. Under the US, USABDA and NDCA are the only two listed. Of the four I've mentioned, only USABDA focuses on ballroom. The other organizations have a much broader scope, in terms of dance disciplines.

I also found a very interesting couple pages published by the IDTA (one of the other international dancesport organizations) which spells out some career options (http://www.idta.co.uk/what/careers.html) and recommended teacher qualifications. (http://www.idta.co.uk/what/qualify.html) Obviously, not the Bible, but an interesting read, nonetheless.

[pygmalion]

(2) Once cannot be certified by the NDCA. The NDCA is an “organization of organizations” (their terminology, not mine) and, as such, one is certified via one of the NDCA’s constituent groups. Part of the problem thus created, however, is a lack of consistency in certification examinations. Regardless of what claims anyone may care to make, there are discrepancies is the rigorousness of various exams and examiners.


You make a good point here, SD. When I was checking out the NDCA website, I found a list of member organizations. Among others, it lists FADS, and USISTD. I happen to know from a good source (someone certified through both FADS and USISTD) that the certification requirements are dramatically different, even at the same level-- bronze (FADS) versus associate (ISTD), for example. So two instructors certified at the same level through two different NDCA member organizations may have dramatically different qualifications or levels of experience. Caveat emptor, isn't that the expression that applies, here?

[SDsalsaguy]

As I'm sure you'd suspect Jenn, I have spoken with multiple people who have done their exams then more then one of the various certifying bodies and, as you have discovered for yourself, there really can be drastic differences in the examinations in question. To some extent I think that this undermines the credibility of certification...although some (read "any") may still be considered better then none.

[MissAlyssa]

I'm getting certified for sure within a month. I'm coming in extra early to train until then :D

[pygmalion]

Cool, MisssAlyssa! :D 8)

Best of luck! :D I'm sure you'll do very well.

Jenn

[Black Sheep]

The certification of Dance teachers should follow the same procedure that
public school teachers go through and that is in the very beginning of their career before they give a lesson for a fee.
The Chain Studios used to have an eight or six week training course, before a teacher was assigned a student. At least there was some assurance that the student teacher had an adequate knowledge of the teaching procedure and material enough to work with beginners. However, a period of perhaps six months of employment and logging a set number of teaching hours (60-70) should be set for qualifying for an AUTOMATIC General Certification with testing during the Teacher's Training Course.
Giving any Organization the privilege of Certifying a Dance teacher with
testing, will not guarantee the quality of a dance teacher. There are too
many factors involved in teaching, and being a great dancer is no criterion of a proficient teacher.
We all know Great dancers who look good, talk a great game, but have few return students and can't log 20 hours a week teaching time.
Let a teacher who has finished an six to eight week teacher's training
course in Ballroom dancing with six hours a day, six days a week and then adding sixty hours of proven paid teaching time, receive a certification from the school they trained at.
No politics, no tests, no overseeing organization, and let the teacher sink
or swim on their own ability. As for teachers already in the business, if they want to specialize in competition training; who's is stopping them?
The best credentials a teacher can have is if he is teaching six hours a day six days a week. That's proof enough of their professional status!
There is no way of knowing that a certification by some overseeing
Organization with judges testing, will turn out good teachers. More than
likely they well create an atmosphere of conformity in order to pass tests.
Keep the field open. Restrictions keep out creative people.
Black Sheep 'Conformity Stifles Creativity' Joe Lanza 2003 a.d.

[pygmalion]

Hi Joe! :D

I agree that the six-to-eight week training course franchise studios have is good, because by the end of six weeks, the new teacher has at least the lead and follow parts for bronze 1 - 5 of a few dances under their belt. So they probably aren't doing much harm with the newest of beginners. And you can learn a whole lot by dancing six or more hours a day for six weeks, if you're being taught proper technique by a good advanced teacher.

I have a problem with automatic certification by teaching hours, though, and here's why. A teacher's popularity or rapport with his/her students isn't necessarily a good measure of their teaching ability. I can give an example. My first dance teacher was the best salesman at the dance studio where he worked, and he logged the most teaching hours. But, as I later came to realize, he was hopelessly, even aggressively mediocre when it came to teaching good ballroom technique. He had a ballet background, so he did teach some dance technique well. But, for example, body contact was something he absolutely refused to do. How the heck can you call yourself a ballroom teacher and not do body contact? Yet, he was repeatedly the top salesman at his studio and often within the entire franchise. Why? Because he had several wealthy students who liked him and who didn't know good ballroom technique from bad. Hmm. :?

[SDsalsaguy]

Joe, aren't you the one who'd just pointed out the quality and quantity were different things? Personally I agree with this point.... so how can the quantity of teaching serve as a proxy for the quality of teaching? Hate to say it, but this is just a bad idea.

[Black Sheep]

Pygmalion,
Every profession has its 'Con men' and the field of dancing has more than its share of glib talking teachers. Unfortunately, studio owners too often support their big money makers even when they are aware that he or she may be a charlatan.
One tip I can give students is that any teacher that has to stop dancing every five minutes to go into an abstract dialogue about the theory, etc. is a conning and not teaching dancing.
As for giving a 'Automatic General Certification'? How do we weed out those 'salesman' who do not teach efficiently, without restricting other teachers? Free enterprise has its drawbacks!
There are a lot more details I can add in support of this 'Automatic Certification' if any group was really interested in initiating such a concept to improve the level of our dance profession.
But keep in mind, Experienced Teachers already working in the field should get an 'Automatic free ride'; it is only the new dancers coming into the field that should be required to go through the training process.

Salsaguy,
Did I not sign one of my recent posts, "Quality is Bigger Than Quantity'? Do I have another 'Mis Quoter' on my case?
Black Sheep 'Never Mis Quote a person with a memory like a bear trap'

[SDsalsaguy]

Ok Joe, first off saying that "Quality is Bigger then Quantity" is rather nonsensical since "bigger" is, itself, a quantitative variable.

Beyond that, however, I was agreeing with the underlying concept of valuing quality over quantity... and hence my reluctance to accept quantity of teaching time as a proxy for quality of said teaching.

[Black Sheep]

SD,.
If you don't understand my statement, "Quality is Bigger than Quantity', I hope you don't mind if I suggest that you look up the world 'Big' in an unabridged Dictionary, and take your pick from, ' better than to more important than, to greater than, etc.!
I intentionally use the word, 'Bigger' to express the value of Quality as being superior to Quantity. Whew!
And SD, I never said or implied, "...accept quantity of teaching time as a proxy for quality of said teaching."
And although the English language is the most, flexible and the fastest expanding, If you mean by 'Proxy' as 'superior to or more important than', You might as well look up the definition of 'Proxy' while you are looking up the word, 'Big, bigger, biggest'.
Your use of the word 'Proxy' in your given context is stretching the English language to point of strangulation!
I still do not understand how the word 'venacular' ever was used as an adjective for describing 'the Texas Tommy Swing'. Now I have this word, 'Proxy' to disipher!
Black Sheep 'I never passed a spelling test in my life, but I understand da woids!

[SDsalsaguy]

Taken from an online dictionary Joe:
Big: large or great in dimensions, bulk, or extent <a big house>; also : large or great in quantity, number, or amount <a big fleet> b : operating on a large scale <big government>
Just to clarify, "dimmension," "bulk," "extent," "quantity," "number," "ammount," and "scale" are all measures of quantity Joe, not quality.

Also note, from the same dictionary source:
Proxy: the agency, function, or office of a deputy who acts as a substitute for another
Not sure if this might help you "disipher" but, should you need help with deciphering, all you need to do is read the deffinition provided above.

[Swing Kitten]

Every profession has its 'Con men' and the field of dancing has more than its share of glib talking teachers.
ok, so this is one reason why certification exists. A test-based certification would at least keep these charlatans capable of teaching at a some level of competancy.

One tip I can give students is that any teacher that has to stop dancing every five minutes to go into an abstract dialogue about the theory, etc. is a conning and not teaching dancing.
I don't feel this is nessesarly true. What I'm thinking that you're describing is the difference between teaching the principles of the dance and teaching the steps of the dance. While the steps are important the principles are the back bone. The former is more likely to emphasize frame and compression while the latter is more likely to teach "When he lifts his arm, she spins" which does not transfer into other variables of dancing situations and does not make adequate dancers. I'm sure that you make good dancers, Joe, so I'm sure you must therefore spend a certain about of time teaching dancing principles/ theory.

Salsaguy,
Did I not sign one of my recent posts, "Quality is Bigger Than Quantity'? Do I have another 'Mis Quoter' on my case?

SDsalsaguy was referencing the body of your post-- which emphasized quantity and asserted that if a teacher survived a given amount of time teaching then the quality would have been taken care of. Actually, Salsaguy didn't quote you on anything at all. If there was no quote how can there be a mis-quote? Please do not accuse people of such things until they are actually true! I am sure I would not be the only person to appreciate this.



By the way, I was first introduced to the concept of vernacular be reading Steinbeck. More many years after that I thought that it only dealt with region dialects and the like.

More recently I have learned that it is considerably more expansive than that.

here are a few clips from an online dictionary:

:arrow: The everyday language spoken by a people as distinguished from the literary language. -- this is the one that most folk are used to.


:arrow: The idiom of a particular trade or profession: i.e. in the legal vernacular. An idiomatic word, phrase, or expression.

:arrow: Of or being an indigenous building style using local materials and traditional methods of construction and ornament, especially as distinguished from academic or historical architectural styles.

Vernacular in the dance sense (ie. especially with those dances stemming from jazz) is, as I understand it, the dance without contrived order or formality. I like analogies, so this helps me understand it. i.e. Waltz = Giving a professional public speech (the knid where you want to sound really educated) where as Vernacular Jazz = conversational language (it may not be grammatically correct but it flows, it's natural, and it works without complaint).

[Black Sheep]

Salsaguy,
Get yourself a BIGGER dictionary!
And how does an agent (Proxy) become the 'substitute' for an abstract word like bigger, Quality or Quantity? A Proxy always has to do with a person, not an unanimated word. You could have used at least a dozen words that would have expressed your idea adequately.
But then maybe your word 'Proxy' is a vernacular used in your village. Than it makes the word 'Proxy' OK if it's a vernacular term like the Texas Tommy whatever!
'Quality is BIGGER (more important, better, powerful) then Quantity'.
And when composing a laconic saying, I believe there is such a privilege called, 'Poetic License'.
In the mean while, let's get back to 'Automatic Certification, instead of
bantering like two cocks on a back yard fence.
Black Sheep 'Semantics is a Double Edged Sword', Joe Lanza 2003 a.d.

[pygmalion]

With all due respect to you guys, and as much as I love the intricacies of words and their shades of meaning, I really like the certification topic, so I'm going to share something that's back on topic. Okay? :? *shrug* :D

Yes, Joe you're right. There are charlatans on virtually every profession. But I don't think what I was describing earlier in this thread was an isolated incident, unfortunately. I'm actually quite observant, quite a good judge of character, and people think I'm harmless. (Wrong! :lol: ) So I witnessed a lot of bad stuff at my previous studio, because my teachers didn't realize I could see and judge for myself.


Examples: My former studio used to hire an outside certified adjudicator to certify its teachers, but stopped when she failed too many of them.

Another former teacher of mine, a very nice man who refuses to use high pressure sales, has and teaches a bad sense of rhythm. He consistently breaks the rhythm when he spins ladies. It took me months to unlearn that! :? Good guy, bad technique. *shrug*

A lady that I know from another studio, who is supposedly doing competitive training, and who, after two years of study, obviously is not even beginning to work on the proper footwork, and some other fairly obvious technical aspects of comptetitive dance.

A lady I know from yet another studio who competed in pro-am for years, and who also until recently didn't have some basic competitive dance technique.

I could go on. Yes, there are both charlatans and good teachers out there, and I can tell the difference.

There are problems, though. 1. Not everybody can tell the difference. Like my friend, an older widow lady who has cancer. She has hundreds of lessons purchased, buys lunch for the studio teachers every Friday, and views them like her family. Problem -- she can't dance! After hundreds of lessons and tens of thousands of dollars spent.

2. Without some objective measure, there's no way to tell who the charlatans are, particularly if you're unfamiliar with ballroom dance.


I'm with SD on this one. Even though the certifications out there vary wildly, some certification, in my mind, is better than none.

What does anyone else think?

[SDsalsaguy]

Even though the certifications out there vary wildly, some certification, in my mind, is better than none.
Well said Jenn! And it is in light of the very type of examples you cite that – inconsistencies aside – there should be some type of examination involved in attaining certification. Personally I'd advocate an even more stringent adherence to even the current criteria, i.e. no more "well, they tried hard and I'm sure they'll pick it up soon, and they're only teaching beginners, so I guess we'll give it to them for now" passes! Obviously we all learn more with time but, if you can't demonstrate that you know the fundamentals of something, inside and out, you shouldn't be teaching it as a "professional."

[Black Sheep]

Jenn & SD,
Although I am in complete agreement with you on all counts, including having a more stringent Certification process, and that the field of teaching dancing is inundated with too many unqualified teachers, I believe it is more prudent to take a back door approach.
If we come up with Certification Standards that are too demanding on beginners and the veteran teachers, the resistance will be too strong to initiate any General Certification Process at all. However, if NO ONE feels threatened by the 'Standards' and feel that they can easily qualify for a Certification, then the concept is more likely to be accepted by the Dance Teachers' Associations who can help give this Certification Testing their support. Once the Certification System is established as the criterion for adequate teachers' competency to teach 'itemized' Ballroom Dances, then the Qualification Tests can be 'evolved' into more stringent standards every subsequent year, which testing teachers must undergo annually to keep their Teacher's Certification 'Updated' hanging on their wall or carried in their wallet with the current date in BIG letters.
Like any business, it is best to start small, but once you get your foot in the door, than you can push for more stringent Qualifications the next year. Every Dance teacher should be able to get copies of the testing areas in advance to guide them in their preparation for the tests. To take the politics out of these testing programs, we have to have an objective agency.
Who administers this process is a big (important) question.
There are Universities that have Dance programs with Degrees awarded; UCLA was one of the first to set up a credentialed Ballroom Dance Program in 1961. I was a quest teacher at that time when I introduced my Bossa Nova Dance (and I have the photos and news items to prove it). UCD still has a dance program according to D'nice, and the teacher who discovered that SF news head line about the Texas Tommy Swing is a Graduate of the Stanford University's Dance Program, I believe.
I would trust these Universities to give the Certification testing for many obvious reasons.
But let us not create a massive resistance by coming up with a Testing Level most teachers would knowingly fail.
Black Sheep ' Always start from the beginning' Joe Lanza 2003 a.d.

[pygmalion]

Hmm. That's an interesting perspective, Joe. I'm not sure what I think, so I'm going to ponder that for a while. One day this week, I found a website for IDTA, an international dance governing body, that publishes recomended credentials for dance teachers. Those recommended credentials appeared fairly stringent, but then, they're really not enforceable. Hmm. I'm thinking about it. :?

[pygmalion]

I've thought about this a bit, and here's what I think.

The way things are now, doesn't work. Ballroom students get excellent education or they get scammed, just by the luck of the draw and whom they happened to call first from the yellow pages. Something's gotta give, here.

Joe, you're right. To arbitrarily impose a new set of standards on teachers, particularly long experienced teachers, would only lead to resentment and a total lack of cooperation. No one wants to be forced into compliance with arbitrary guidelines.

Here's something I think could work, and it works on the same principle as any capitalistic society. Have ballroom governing organizations (such as ISTD) offer certifications, same as they do now. But also make an issue of educating dancers -- perhaps through organizations like USABDA, or others, about what teacher qualifications mean. This might lead dance students to start asking questions.

For example, when the FDA (US Food and Drug Administration) raises quality and labelling requirements for foods, the food packaging companies rush to comply, and often beat compliance deadlines. Why? Because they know that their customers watch the news, and are going to want the new, improved products NOW. (This is going on right now with trans-fatty acid labelling, BTW.)

Same thing could work with dance instruction. If we can get dance students to start demanding quality instruction, dance studios will hurry to provide it, beceuae they know their students are savvy, and will go elsewhere.

What does anyone else think?

[SDsalsaguy]

You know I love you Jenn...but I think you're way off track here. Why? Because the vast majority of dance students come in off the street and are taking classes, etc., for a long time before they ever learn of, let alone join, any dance organizations. Your system might work if dance was popular at the societal level.

Lawyers, Doctors, Accountants, etc., all have to pass stringent exams to qualify as professionals. If we ever want dance to be taken seriously as a profession we can't be hypocrites and say we're scared of intimidating new/potential teachers. Are there people who love law but don't pass the bar exam? Sure there are. And do I feel bad for them? Yes... but I wouldn't want them as my lawyer! Same with medical students... you may love medicine, and may contribute a lot to the medical field in some alternative manner, but if you don't have your medical license I'd rather take my chances with a doctor who does!

[pygmalion]

True. Most new dance students don't have a clue. So what's the alternative? Leave things the way they are? Yikes! :shock:

[pygmalion]

Actually, the other alternative I considered suggesting was, at least in the US (where the unqualified teacher problem appears to me to be most prevalent), to have some sort of enforceable requirement before a dance studio can be licensed. The problem with that is that licensing is mandated by each individual state government, not by any sort of dance governing body. The state essentially determines who can sell dance lessons, and you can bet that state officials are just as clueless as the public at large, if not moreso. Not only that, there is a huge societal reluctance to allow any governmental authority over and above what's absolutely necessary. Heck, in Florida, you can get married without taking any sort of tests. All you have to do is buy a license. Buy it. You sure as heck can teach dance without taking tests. All you have to do is buy a license.

And membership in any sort of dance governing body is strictly voluntary. You and I both know the way things are is wrong, in my mind, even immoral at times. So what next?

[SDsalsaguy]

True. Most new dance students don't have a clue. So what's the alternative? Leave things the way they are? Yikes! :shock:
For one thing definitions need to be cleaned up and then enforced. Being paid and being certified (even by the currently imbalanced system) do not make someone “professionals” in the same way. Terminology needs to match this discrepancy and then be enforced by the licensing bodies involved. Tightening up the certification processes is, of course, an important move in the right direction…but that’s an issue in and of itself.

[SDsalsaguy]

Don't forget that Florida has among (if not the) tightest legal restrictions on dance instruction and businesses precisely because of the unethical conduct of a handful of slime balls. A more stringent system might, indeed, discourage some…but it would also weed out those few who unduly discredit the majority.

[pygmalion]

Yes. The certification requirements need to be well defined and equalized somehow. And, personally, I think that's the easiest of the many issues to resolve.

I keep thinking back on the first dance studio I was associated with. They deliberately hired people with no ballroom experience, trained them briefly, certified them from within, and let them loose on innocent students. Meanwhile, they created a self-contained dance community within their studio, and subtly discouraged their students from ever going outside. AND made it fun! The probability any of those people will ever know what truly good dancing is, is minimal.

Unless there's a state mandate, there's nothing to prevent other dance studios from behaving the same way. And making a lot money doing it. These people just ignore the dance governing organizations, and do whatever they want.

My previous studio stopped selling me lessons when I got educated about what was really out there, and voted with my wallet.

[pygmalion]

Don't forget that Florida has among (if not the) tightest legal restrictions on dance instruction and businesses precisely because of the unethical conduct of a handful of slime balls. A more stringent system might, indeed, discourage some…but it would also weed out those few who unduly discredit the majority.

Yes, Florida does have stringent restrictions, but the nonsense continues. There are loopholes. Example: there is a legal maximum of the amount of money per transaction for dance lessons. How do the studios get around it? "Offer" to sell you the maximum number of lessons legally possible, twice within each sales promotion period. So if the max is $7500, they offer to sell you $7499 in October, and then another $7499 in November. They complied with the law, only just. But (and I think this is why Florida had so many slimeballs) lonely retirees, widows, etc. easily fall prey to such tactics. It's disgusting!

[Black Sheep]

Jenn et all,
Did it ever occur to you that my magic Pills in Lindy, Bossa Nova and Salsa are ways to challenge Dance Instructors? If my 6 step methods can get beginners started in 15 minutes, which they in fact do, then beginner students do not come off the side walk without some background that will challenge teachers to be more proficient in their lessons. a Magic Pill graduate will not be so gullible to spend three hours relearning what they already learned at home in less than a half hour!
My point: Doesn't this challenge from the Magic Pill Method motivate existing teachers to get into some professional teachers' training class to obtain a General Certification in specific dances qualified to teach?
My Magic Pills has a purpose beyond getting the dance population to grow; it also helps those teachers who take the time to check out these Magic Pill Methods to learn a few techniques to add to their own dance education.
What do I get out of divulging my 50 years of education for free? Much of this material comes straight out of my books, which I no longer sell! There is a real satisfaction knowing I can pay back for my FREE dance education by sharing freely with other would-be wallflowers!
General Certification is overdue for dance teachers. As for these stringent tests that lawyers and doctors go through? If you go back only a hundred years ago, those doctors tests and lawyers tests were much simpler; they started from the bottom.
And that is where this Certification Process is...on the bottom rung of the ladder. Let us get every one to subscribe to these tests first, then eventually, increase the requirements for a 'General Certification's in whatever categorical dance or level.
Black Sheep 'Always learn anything from the bottom up if you want success", Joe Lanza 2003 a.d.

[DancingMommy]

Thanks. I went to their website, as you suggested. Yes, NDCA does seem to cover a lot more ground than ISTD, because it has a "ballroom department", but it also has another department which covers other forms of dance, such as ballet, jazz, hip-hop, folks dances, etc. (check this out, Giselle, DD, eloise and others! :D ) ISTD does ballroom, period.

Ummm that's not exactly true *worldwide*. The USISTD is mainly for ballroom, but the ISTD (across the pond) has many different division including ballet, etc.

As far as certification goes, NDCA has a rule in place that requires all competing Pros to be certified through a member org by a certain date (can't remember it tho) or their NDCA membership will not be removed.

The main orgs that provide certification are:

NADTA, DanceVision (DVIDA), ISTD & NDCA. Each has their own syllabus/reqs.

[SDsalsaguy]

NADTA, DanceVision (DVIDA), ISTD & NDCA. Each has their own syllabus/reqs.
Don't forget AMI and FADS, they're both also NDCA member organizations...

[DancingMommy]

Don't forget AMI and FADS, they're both also NDCA member organizations...

I didn't *forget* them, I just neglected to mention them, LOL. :lol:

I'd like to hear how the NDCA is enforcing their ruling. I know that if a pro isn't certified, they can't register/renew which means they can't compete. This creates a potential difficulty with the "love connection" style studios who don't ever go to NDCA sanctioned comps.

If their were a national org that was the governing body for Pros only (like USABDA) that had some teeth and couidl really enforce rules for the good of all, it'd be a good thing.

Unfortunately, I've seen some of the training materials that AMI uses to "certify" their teachers. UGH!!!! But then, using videos has never been my idea of adequate "training". Especially when the quality of said videos is so pathetic. I've seen better on some public access tv.

Also, a little side rant.... I remember one of the teacher trainees at the AM studio I started at in Atlanta.... She started at the same time I started as a student. Her dancing was really really bad and she was not anywhere near ready to teach students, yet the let her loose anyway. SAD. :?

[d nice]

Certification... hate to say it but it doesn't really mean anything. I knowlots of instructors who have various certification who aren't good teachers. Passing a test in no way shape or form illustrates the ability to teach.

The only kind of "certification" I'd be willing to take is in teaching from an accredited college in some sort of kinesthetics program.

Memorizing the steps and moves is great for testing for competancy in dancing... but teaching has little to do with actually dancing, and everything to do with your ability to break material down so people can understand it and actualize it.

Personally I think trial by fire is the only way to properly judge someones teaching ability. It is how I got both my current teaching positions. I went in and taught classes to the advanced class and to the dance team. My ability to handle their indepth questions, and break material down, my method of disimenating information, class preparation, and ability to demonstrate the material being taught was all judged.

To me this is the only way to truly judge the effectvieness of a teacher.

[Sagitta]

I agree with you here D nice. Certification as it stands is simply a competency standard that measures one's ability to know steps/moves.
And teaching comes in breaking down the moves so that people can learn them. And if students are having difficulty learning a particular step/move figuring out what is troubling them and coming up with a solution to get them over those obstacles. You don't know the material until you can teach the material!!

Having more or less repeated what you said so eloquently, for the average Joe Schmo coming off the street, knowing that the dance instructor has passed competency standards is better then knowing nothing at all.

I personally rarely take lessons from someone without finding out from former and current students what their experiences are and observing/trying out one class. I also ask other dance instructors what their opinions are of a particular person that I am interested in. It simply is a matter of educating oneself to make sure that you are not cheated. :)

[pygmalion]

Oh yeah, and I checked. ISTD does cover many forms of dance, not just ballroom. They also cover ballet, classical Greek dance, modern dance, even disco.

It's definitely worth browsing either website, ISTD or NDCA or ISDF. Lots of good information anywhere you look. :D

Hi Dancing Mommy! Welcome to the forums. Adn nice to have yet another DF member in this next of the woods. Do you ever go dancing at the Barn? Fun C&W for everybody! :D Yes, I found my error after checking the ISTD web site. Both NDCA and ISTD do cover many forms of dance.

[DancingMommy]

Do you ever go dancing at the Barn? Fun C&W for everybody! :D

I would, but the cigarette smoke was too much for me last time I went. Besides, my husband is totally self-conscious about going there. He's Asian and thinks that some "redneck" is going to beat him up in the parking lot or something crazy like that. He has a complex about stuff like that.

If I were still in GA, I'd be worried (there's some unfriendly folks in some of the more "rural" areas), but for gosh sakes, this is MICKEY LAND... Everybody comes to Florida at least once (and lots of Asians come here).

And it's not like we don't live about 6 blocks from The Barn... We could walk if we really wanted to...

[pygmalion]

Yup. The last time I went, I had a blast, but lost my voice for a week -- allergic reaction to all the smoke.

[KevinL]

Memorizing the steps and moves is great for testing for competancy in dancing... but teaching has little to do with actually dancing, and everything to do with your ability to break material down so people can understand it and actualize it.

While I can certainly agree that ability to dance doesn't necessarily equate to ability to teach I feel that a good certification exam should instill the knowledge necessary to be able to break the material down in an understandable and consistent manner.

I've taken the DVIDA Junior Associate Certification exam which only covers the first 7-10 patterns of American Style Waltz, Foxtrot, Tango, Rumba, Cha Cha and East Coast Swing. 5% of the test was general teaching questions, like how to start a dance to music. Half of the exam was the ability to dance all of the patterns in each of these dances, as both leader and follower. However, the hard part of the exam was the 45% that covered all the technical aspects of each pattern. For Waltz and Foxtrot that includes: Foot position, Timing, Rise and Fall, Sway, Footwork, Alignment and Amount of Turn for every single step. Tango was slightly easier because it doesn't include Rise and Fall. Rumba, Cha Cha and ECS only covered Footwork, Timing, Foot Positions, Amount of Turn and Lead, so they were "easiest".

I assume that other certification exams are similar. A teacher has to know (and be able to articulate) the specifics of every step they take in incredible detail so that they can break it down properly. Yes, I suppose I could have (eventually) been able to articulate most of those aspects of dance without practicing and studying for the certification exam, but I had the advantage of being able to use the words and techniques of much more experienced dancers, without having to reinvent the wheel, so to speak.

Personally I think trial by fire is the only way to properly judge someones teaching ability. It is how I got both my current teaching positions. I went in and taught classes to the advanced class and to the dance team. My ability to handle their indepth questions, and break material down, my method of disimenating information, class preparation, and ability to demonstrate the material being taught was all judged.

To me this is the only way to truly judge the effectvieness of a teacher.

I am glad this system worked out for you, but how much better would your experience (and that of your students) have been if you hadn't had to break things down on your own? If you had already known one really detailed and precise way to describe everything the students needed to know? Then you could have varied that tried and true method for the situation at hand.

Personally, practicing and studying for my certification exam was the most intense and positive experience of my dance career. However, all that learning would have meant nothing if I hadn't put my training and knowledge to the test by beginning to actively teach. Like you, it was once I got in front of real students that my "teaching" skills came to the forefront. That was because I didn't have to focus on the details of what I was teaching, I already knew the details, I just needed to practice the teaching aspects.

Kevin

[pygmalion]

Hi Kevin! :D Welcome to the forums. :D One thing I've noticed about the certification/no certification discussion is that the ballroom people tend to be largely in favor. The street/informal dancers tend to think they're irrelevant. I wonder why that is. Anybody care to speculate? Or am I wrong?

[DancingMommy]

Hi Kevin! :D Welcome to the forums. :D One thing I've noticed about the certification/no certification discussion is that the ballroom people tend to be largely in favor. The street/informal dancers tend to think they're irrelevant. I wonder why that is. Anybody care to speculate? Or am I wrong?

You aren't wrong. In my experience, street/informal dances are less codified than ballroom, therefore extensive training is less necessary.

Both Kevin and d nice have valid points. In fact it isn't an all or nothing proposition. If you have all the steps/technique in the world and can't explain them, then you aren't a teacher. Even if you could explain all the steps and aren't consistent in what material is taught from student to student, then again, you may be teaching but you aren't a teacher.

The methods may vary from student to student and from group to individual, but the material/technique is constant.

You have to have both IMNSHO. And since NDCA is now requiring certification of all it's competing pros..............

[KevinL]

Hi Kevin! :D Welcome to the forums. :D

Thanks!

One thing I've noticed about the certification/no certification discussion is that the ballroom people tend to be largely in favor. The street/informal dancers tend to think they're irrelevant. I wonder why that is. Anybody care to speculate? Or am I wrong?

I would suggest that the difference between ballroom and street/informal is twofold. First, ballroom teachers have been exposed to certification exams and therefore know their value, while street/informal teachers have not had that exposure and so don't know what they are missing. Second, ballroom dances (especially those that travel line of dance) are "harder" than most street/informal dances because you have the added dimension of movement around the room.

Another minor difference between ballroom and street/informal is that the street dances by their nature are more fluid and constantly changing. Does Salsa break on 1 or 2? What is the difference between Hollywood Lindy versus Savoy? Basically, the style and emphasis of the teacher. That's why people like the street/informal dances, because they can develope their own personal style. And that's as it should be, it's only dancing, after all!

[pygmalion]

Hmm. You've got me thinking philosophically now, KevinL. (Danger! LOL!) Is it that street dances are more fluid, therefore don't lend themselves to syllabi and medals? Or is it that ballroom dances are less fluid BECAUSE of syllabi and medals?

Note: I'm not taking a position on this. Just thinking about it.

[jon]

I would suggest that the difference between ballroom and street/informal is twofold. First, ballroom teachers have been exposed to certification exams and therefore know their value, while street/informal teachers have not had that exposure and so don't know what they are missing. Second, ballroom dances (especially those that travel line of dance) are "harder" than most street/informal dances because you have the added dimension of movement around the room.

There are a lot of swing and country dance instructors with ballroom dance background as well, and there are plenty of "street" progressive dances. Country-Western, vintage ballroom, Argentine Tango, Cajun, Contra/ECD all are or include progressive dances. Yet there's a lack of certification (exception noted below).

I think the difference is more likely explained by the highly formalized and lucrative ballroom competition system. In order to "win" within that system you need to dance as the system requires, thus creating a requirement for instructors who follow the dictates of the system. And any time competition becomes the core of a dance scene, rather than an adjunct to social dancing, those same forces will come into play and people will start trying to dictate from the top what a dance "is", thus the UCWDC, GSDTA/WSDC, etc.

[will35]

Well, Pygmalion, is a dance a piece of paper, or is it an expression of what a community of people feel and know? Who made the syllabi, anyway? Historians, dancers, or both?
I am afraid that if a dance is not fluid, it is a reflection of the collective personality of the dance's people. Notice that I wrote, "if" in the last sentence.
A piece of paper cannot stop progress. Dances are all fluid. They are just movement in time to music. If you move left, I move right. If you move up, I move down. That is inevitable. It is life itself.
Dances are alive, too. Hopefully, the dancers are living with and in and through the music.

[d nice]

HAhahahaha!

Oh, Kevin, could you toss in a few more generalizations about people you don't know and haven't met?

[suek]

I would suggest that the difference between ballroom and street/informal is twofold. First, ballroom teachers have been exposed to certification exams and therefore know their value, while street/informal teachers have not had that exposure and so don't know what they are missing. Second, ballroom dances (especially those that travel line of dance) are "harder" than most street/informal dances because you have the added dimension of movement around the room.
Kevin, come dancing at Tower Club in Sacramento on a Wednesday (swing) night. Not a ballroom dance on the agenda, just lindy hoppers and ECSers dancing on a crowded floor. IMHO the ballroom dancers have it easy since all they've gotta do is follow the circle around the room. Sheesh. Try dancing circularly, ovally (I'm making up words now) on a crowded dance floor without any prescribed direction, while being musical, leading and following, and keeping the collisions and kicking and bruising to a minimum.

And another thing: I do ballroom too, and I keep taking ballroom lessons in addition to all my swing classes to keep my frame awareness getting better and better. And the best swing teachers I've found do some ballroom too. It's not either/or; at least not in my world.

[pygmalion]

Oh come on, guys! Kevin is new to the forums, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't scare him off. :wink:

You're right. Lots of people do find a way to combine both worlds -- like one of my teachers, who is a well-ranked American Smooth competitor, a certified member of the ISTD, and a fairly well-known LA style salsera.

But Kevin makes some good points, too. It does take going through the certification process to appreciate it. Before I took my ISTD exams, I thought they were pretty pointless. But going through the process of preparing for and taking the tests taught me a lot about dance, and about myself, and helped me define my goals. Until you've been through it, the certification process is hard to appreciate. Once you've been thgouh it, you see the value.

Also, street dances ARE fluid, rapidly evolving, and DON'T lend themselves well to codification.

You've gotta admit he's right about that.

Hang in there, Kevin. This can be a tough crowd.

[KevinL]

HAhahahaha!

Oh, Kevin, could you toss in a few more generalizations about people you don't know and haven't met?

OK, D.

People who grow up in an environment that includes music and the expectation of dance, and start dancing at the age of 6 or 7, have an incredible advantage over those who don't start until their late 20's or 30's.


Kevin, come dancing at Tower Club in Sacramento on a Wednesday (swing) night. Not a ballroom dance on the agenda, just lindy hoppers and ECSers dancing on a crowded floor.

Thanks suek, I would love to attend, but I live in Vermont now, and I think the trip back and forth would be a little excessive for a dance, 8^).

IMHO the ballroom dancers have it easy since all they've gotta do is follow the circle around the room.

All? Sure, it's not difficult to move around a room if everyone is moving at the same speed, and doing basic steps/ patterns. The challenge comes with mixing in patterns that turn, or hesitate (or whatever) while trying to avoid other couples who are also changing the speed that they travel around the room.

Sheesh. Try dancing circularly, ovally (I'm making up words now) on a crowded dance floor without any prescribed direction, while being musical, leading and following, and keeping the collisions and kicking and bruising to a minimum.

Some of the swing dances I've attended at The Doghouse in San Francisco have been much more crowded than any ballroom dance I've attended and it is difficult to avoid collisions due to the crowd. However, the nature of the dance space is different. Swing/ Lindy dancers tend to claim a specific piece of floor and dance on it. If the floor gets more crowded good dancers limit what they do to smaller size movements to use the more limited space.

And another thing: I do ballroom too, and I keep taking ballroom lessons in addition to all my swing classes to keep my frame awareness getting better and better. And the best swing teachers I've found do some ballroom too. It's not either/or; at least not in my world.

It's not either/or in my world either, I was responding to a post the split people into "ballroom" or "steet/informal". In my classes I teach the patterns from the DVIDA syllabus because experts with much more experience than I have thought they were good patterns. However, once the class gets the syllabus patterns we move on to "and then you can change it here, here, and here." I think that covers the "ballroom" and the "informal" camps fairly well.

And regarding the best swing teachers, I'll have to agree that they have often done ballroom as well, although my experience here is limited. Paul Overton and Sharon Ashe met while doing the same teacher training program (although years earlier) that I did in San Francisco. Paul was already a great swing dancer, but wanted to learn how to teach well so (rumor has it) he forced himself to do ballroom even though he didn't really like it. The front page of their website even has a classic (although relaxed) ballroom pose of them dancing together.

Oh come on, guys! Kevin is new to the forums, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't scare him off. :wink:

suek agreed with me (mostly), and d nice was annoyed with generalizations. It's all good, 8^).

You're right. Lots of people do find a way to combine both worlds -- like one of my teachers, who is a well-ranked American Smooth competitor, a certified member of the ISTD, and a fairly well-known LA style salsera.

But Kevin makes some good points, too. It does take going through the certification process to appreciate it. Before I took my ISTD exams, I thought they were pretty pointless. But going through the process of preparing for and taking the tests taught me a lot about dance, and about myself, and helped me define my goals. Until you've been through it, the certification process is hard to appreciate. Once you've been through it, you see the value.

See, pygmalion agrees with me, too!

Also, street dances ARE fluid, rapidly evolving, and DON'T lend themselves well to codification.

You've gotta admit he's right about that.

Hang in there, Kevin. This can be a tough crowd.

Thanks, have a great day!

Kevin

[pygmalion]

Check out this list of criteria that the Dancesport South Africa (fedansa) has in place for "amateur" teachers. Apparently, IDSF approved the ceritification of amateur teachers a few years ago, and left specifics up to member countries. This is the program being implemented in South Africa. Holy cow! :shock: :D

http://www.fedansa.co.za/rules/AmateurTeachers/CriteriaAmateurTeachers.asp

[Porfirio Landeros]

IMHO the ballroom dancers have it easy since all they've gotta do is follow the circle around the room.

BTW, only 7 of the ballroom dances move around the room, W T F VW QS Sa and PD... these only make up around half of a nights playlist. You've still got to have the other rotational and slot dances in your pocket to play on the ballroom floor ;-)

[pygmalion]

And moving around the room at high speeds while avoiding collisions with moving targets (i.e. other couples) is not all that simple. :lol:

[Achat]

This is a very good topic. I followed the arguments for and against the certificates and I have to say that there are many pros and cons and it really depends on what you are looking for as a student.

Firstly, many of you mentioned it - Dancing and teaching are two completely different animals. Although someone dances amazingly well does not mean they can teach anything at all. Many professional and well known competitors have spent all of their time and focus on execution of the various dances and have therefor put off even thinking about teaching someone till an injury or age forced them to. On the other hand, there are many very good teachers that have wanted solely to teach from a very early age. They know how its supposed to look like even if they cannot execute it like Mr. World Famous-Dancer.

Many franchises demand certification because they know that people like to have diploma-like objects and they want to keep a standard level throughout their organisations. It keeps up motivation and looks professional. Unfortunately there are instructors who have passed rigorous exams teach rather well but I sure wouldn't pay anything to see them dance anywhere. I have also seen absolutely amazing international and professional dancers that are hard pressed to break down or explain why what they do looks so well. Would they pass such exams? Should they have to?

Most people who take dance lessons just want to do something social for fun. The minute you start telling them any theory or explaining technique to them they start planning escape routs. They probably wouldn't be interested to pay to have training with Mr. World Famous-Dancer anyway. Whereas competitive dancers would rather value having Mr. World Famous-dancer say "No, no, not like this. Like this!!" Even if they would normally take lessons from Mr. Passed Rigorous-Exams.

Social dancers on the other hand have learned by doing and any thought of an exam would cramp their creativity. Street dancers claim to have had no formal training like that is some platinum badge of honour (some are lying I am sure of it). If you try to explain to them that the moves they are doing are actually all found in various ballroom dances, they don't like that.

We would have a mixture of all of this everywhere in the best of all possible worlds. A land full of world famous dancers who were interested in passing rigorous exams and who had put in the thousands of hours in social training like the street dancers. Only studios (just like dancers) have different interests and tend to focus on opposite things depending on goals, habitat and of course money.

A studio that just looks at their clientele of social students may be full of car-salesmen disguised as dancers plus one token local street dancer. Such a studio won't want to deal with world-famous dancers. Dance artists have big egos, are emotional and like divas are often difficult to deal with. A studio that has a mostly dancer clientele won't value the car-salesmen disguised. Their teachers wouldn't be caught trying to sell anything particularly not their own instruction and it could be that the one or two social dancers that may have the courage to walk in would be looked down on. Whereas franchises often look down on everyone else and are looked down on by everyone else.

Finally Ballroom dancers look down on Latin Dancers and vice versa. International Style dancers look down on American Style dancers. Street dancers look down on everyone else. Etc, etc., etc........ Are you getting the picture? Maybe someday in the future this will be different. Until then "seek and ye shall find." This is a big world. Whatever focus is important to you focus on that and I am sure you will find a matching studio that focusses on what you want to focus on. Enjoy,

[SDsalsaguy]

Welcome to DF Achat! :cheers:

[latingal]

Yes welcome to DF Achat!!

[Dancefever]

I am accredited through one of NDCA's member organizations. My examiner was a regular coach of mine for years, a former World Standard and Latin Champion. (Not a 10 Dance Champion, that wasn't an option back then.)

Naturally when I took the exams, it was rather simple to pass, as I have had countless hours of intense training and preparation to compete with him.

Though I am certified, I don't believe myself to be the most knowledgable or the best teacher. I have another coach I work with and with my students, as far as I know he doesn't have any certifications but his knowledge is only surpassed by his ability to communicate. He is a past champion and has had many students placed very high in Pro/Am and also coaches some of today's fastest rising stars in the professional divisions.

Why would someone already certified take from someone who is not certified? Because of his proven performance, knowledge and teaching abilities. He also told me that past champions are sometimes just that, "past" champions. Really good teachers are actually in short supply and much more important in our dance world than they are given credit for.

As for taking beginner lessons from a new teacher, the 10% that move on to higher levels must undo the bad habits reinforced by hours of practicing incorrect movements. Why not learn correctly from the start? Why pay someone 10 bucks to show you a pattern you can get from a book? Why not pay someone who can show you the pattern and even more, answer your questions with real answers?

Certifications or not, look for accomplishments. Look at that teacher's other students. Are they getting better or just learning new patterns? I have certifications and I believe they are good, but experience and accomplishments say much more.

[suburbaknght]

Certifications are a standard but they are not the only standard. Certifications are an indicator of a teacher's qualifications but their presence does not guarantee an excellent teacher (though they do indicate a probability of at least competence) nor does their absence guarantee a terrible teacher.

I rarely talk to my students about my certification or my on-going certification training, and I can count on one hand the number of students who have asked about them. On the other hand, they've been very useful in giving me a standard by which to compare myself and an extremely useful checklist of information and dancing skills I need to master.

[nucat78]

As for taking beginner lessons from a new teacher, the 10% that move on to higher levels must undo the bad habits reinforced by hours of practicing incorrect movements. Why not learn correctly from the start? Why pay someone 10 bucks to show you a pattern you can get from a book? Why not pay someone who can show you the pattern and even more, answer your questions with real answers?

Certifications or not, look for accomplishments. Look at that teacher's other students. Are they getting better or just learning new patterns? I have certifications and I believe they are good, but experience and accomplishments say much more.

And those are among the reasons why DP and I switched studios although our new place has certified teachers. We looked more at the content of instruction (return on investment) and the level of other students, many of whom are active competitors and winning comps. It was quite humbling when we made the switch.

[laucy.my]

Dance artists have big egos, are emotional and like divas are often difficult to deal with.

This can't get any nearer to the truth.

[suburbaknght]

Amused that this thread has been resurrected because...

PASSED MY BRONZE RHYTHM CERTIFICATION TODAY!!!

To quote the examiner, "You'll get the scores later, but I'd say there's a 99% chance you passed with flying colors."

[CANI]

PASSED MY BRONZE RHYTHM CERTIFICATION TODAY!!!

To quote the examiner, "You'll get the scores later, but I'd say there's a 99% chance you passed with flying colors."

:cheers::applause::banana::notworth::bouncy:You ROCK!!!!!! Congrats!

[nucat78]

Amused that this thread has been resurrected because...

PASSED MY BRONZE RHYTHM CERTIFICATION TODAY!!!

To quote the examiner, "You'll get the scores later, but I'd say there's a 99% chance you passed with flying colors."

Cool!

[laucy.my]

Amused that this thread has been resurrected because...

PASSED MY BRONZE RHYTHM CERTIFICATION TODAY!!!

To quote the examiner, "You'll get the scores later, but I'd say there's a 99% chance you passed with flying colors."

Congratulations to you!!! =)

[Joe]

What is the official definitition of "flying colors?"

[tangotime]

What is the official definitition of "flying colors?"

Its a Naval term..as in Flags

[Joe]

I meant with respect to passing a dance exam...

[suburbaknght]

What is the official definitition of "flying colors?"
I won't get my actual scores for a week or so, but for the DVIDA exam one can pass, pass with Honors, or pass with High Honors. I suspect I got Honors, possibly High Honors. The determination is based on your scoring. Full details for scoring are at http://prodvida.com/association/certification_exams/

[Joe]

So I guess "Honors" is the same as "flying colors?"

[tangotime]

So I guess "Honors" is the same as "flying colors?"

Its a " metaphor".. for recognition ,as in doing well .

[suburbaknght]

So I guess "Honors" is the same as "flying colors?"

I hope. Honors is an official designation; "flying colors" was the examiner's opinion. I suspect I got Honors and, while I wasn't expecting it going, will not be surprised if I come out with High Honors.

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Congrats, suburbaknght! :applause: :applause:

Does that mean you've already started studying for another exam? ;)

[suburbaknght]

Congrats, suburbaknght! :applause: :applause:

Does that mean you've already started studying for another exam? ;)

Yep. Aiming to do bronze hustle by September, then starting bronze standard (USISTD, not DVIDA).

[freeageless]

Amused that this thread has been resurrected because...

PASSED MY BRONZE RHYTHM CERTIFICATION TODAY!!!

To quote the examiner, "You'll get the scores later, but I'd say there's a 99% chance you passed with flying colors."

Suburbaknght,

Congratulations, Great job. I know it must have taken a lot of work, time and probably money to pass that exam! Also, I like your blog-a lot!

[Terpsichorean Clod]

Yep. Aiming to do bronze hustle by September, then starting bronze standard (USISTD, not DVIDA).
Ironman! :notworth: :notworth: