A bad practice partner is better than no partner?
- Thread starter OthinkingDesign
- Start date
It's an accepted teaching technique in the overall scheme. It's preparing the followers to understand the move/sequence despite the poor lead. It's as bad/good as teaching leaders the follower's steps without telling them how to achieve that.
(You referenced Fermín elsewhere - you'll see that technique there, and practically every type of partner dance class)
In better places the follower can tell the leader they're not leading that sequence. You then do that sequence randomly to see if you can lead it. Of course some leaders and followers never progress beyond 'set sequences' - especially if they don't continue with further (that's the 'dumb' part!), not necessarily 'better' teachers.
And, of course, it depends on the state of progression of the group, their ability and skills. You have to look at the lessons overall rather than a single instance.
It's the same with a partner, or maybe even private instruction. A single instance may not be fulfilling at the time. Maybe it continues to be poor, or worse; maybe it improves for both. Always the advantage of finding a good practice partner, or several at a practica. It depends on circumstances.
TTanguero
Forum Master
Sure, but it's counterproductive, as it means the leaders don't know what they can and can't lead (and will most commonly end up thinking they can lead something they definitely can't), and followers will go onto auto-pilot when they think they know what is being led.
One of my great challenges in the early days was the classic cross. I would find followers crossing when I hadn't led it, because they had been taught it as side-back-cross, when I might want to lead it, for example, as side-back-back-cross . For ages I thought I just didn't understand how to properly lead a cross until I threw the problem at a teacher and she laughed, said my lead was fine, and that most of my fellow beginners only knew it as a set sequence.
TTanguero
Forum Master
It seems to be absolutely standard – I only ever saw that one exception across all the schools I went to in London and BsAs.
I was very fortunate in having started with privates before I did any group classes, so I knew I had to seek feedback on technique, and that leading the teacher was vital. Teachers liked that a beginner student cared about technique, so I got plenty of personal attention.
To be clear, I've experienced way more good teachers than bad, but the structural issue needs to be addressed, IMV.
opendoor
Forum Master
The other way round with me: They gave me the money back and said I was confusing the other students.
opendoor
Forum Master
Interestingly, young and up-and-coming new teacher couples often meet these quality criteria. They can only assert themselves against the routine of the established studios through higher standards and individual support.
Haha! I've seen eager students jump in to try to "help" the teacher in some beginner WCS classes. I saw one who wouldn't stop teaching get kicked out of group class. The teachers were right, the students did confuse other students. He was also loud and persistent enough that it made it impossible for the students who'd paid $$ for lessons to hear the real teacher.
Several other students I know who'd been to lessons at that place had encountered him. Some of us talked to each other and said "Did you see X got kicked out!" And the response would be something like "yay!! " (This guy also, for some reason, wanted to dance barefoot. That was rather unusual.)
Students really need to avoid "helping the teacher teach" in a lesson. Even if you are pretty good, the other students don't like it; the teacher usually likes it even less.
I'll leave that to the educators and look forward to you setting up and running the leading AT dance school! Have you considered the role of UK Education Minister to correct teachers in their methods?
It depends where students are in the learning cycle. Customers went to learn to dance - the 'milonga' was probably secondary at that stage. We started with very old-school: at least 2 years practicing technique ('walking') before you might even think about considering a milonga. Fortunately that teacher, and style, left. We practiced technique but moved on to some basic moves. Fortunately for us we'd also opted for some 'dance' lessons from a professional dance teacher, who, fortunately, understood social AT. Previous dance experience gave us a concept that the leader/follower needed to know the 'steps' (movements) to do that role.
Those who took over from that early teacher are now running into serious retention problems because they've stuck with getting basics and technique correct. Fortunately we've also found other teachers who've employed more mixed mode - privates, coaching, intensives, vocabulary, technique, leading & following (sometimes both roles). And, above all, practicing together - even when we realised it was incorrect and needed correction.
The group lesson technique gets them into an idea of dancing together. It still needs that flash of consciousness to lead/follow. You have to be aware of [some] the vocabulary as a follower to interpret the lead. That lead is going to be pretty poor at times. Maybe it will reach 'good enough' for the group class/milonga. It's another quantum step beyond that point to appreciate a more complex vocabulary and leading those steps for the follower in a more general situation.
I'm not defending that technique as the only possible option (I see it as one of many strategies) but, if you really think it's counterproductive, what's your proposed teaching strategy to both teach, improve and retain?
TTanguero
Forum Master
What happened in the exception I mentioned: separate the leaders and followers; teach the leaders the steps and the technique needed to lead them; and separately teach the followers some relevant technique but not the steps.
To me, the single most exciting moment in my first few weeks was when I successfully led a follower I'd never met, in a practica. My steps? Walking for seven beats, and either changing weight or pausing on the eighth – mixing it up with four-beat patterns of the same. But the fact that a complete stranger who had no idea what I was going to lead actually followed me, and it felt smooth, was a thrilling experience to me.
The joy of tango is that it's an improvised, lead-and-follow dance. Let's give beginners a true taste of that right from the start. That's the way to retain them, IMV.
itwillhappen
Forum Master
You could also ask yourself why you want to lead back sacadas. If in doubt, you can also ask one of your partners if she would like you to run back sacadas. If she feels an urgent need, she just has to put up with it for a few practicas.
Don't see that working out well everywhere, but some potential for the more experiencd. The follower isn't a shopping trolley with a wonky wheel to be steered around by a leader still learning to drive. They play their part as well and it needs to be part of the muscle memory for both. Actually, it might be better for the leader to practice the move with that trolley in the supermarket
Me too. I had that revelation that I could actually lead back ochos - and forward ochcos.
If part of the old style of learning was the leader learning the follower's steps, they need to be aware of what they are. Similarly the follower.
In general the perception is that male leaders don't get it. Probably true (I didn't initially, and still don't in some non-AT dances). Despite needing to know the follower's steps, virtually all dance teachers I've come across describe what the leader does - and many leaders still don't get it. Followers need some protection when working with beginners. I'd suggest steel toecaps.
How about follower's back sacadas? Led of course!
opendoor
Forum Master
I'd suggest steel jogstraps.
JournalInTime
Forum Master
Weirdly, I find those less troublesome than follower front sacadas.
Followers walk backwards for most of the dance, so all but beginner followers quickly develop fair back-step technique: fair timing, fair placement, fair extension, etc. Many rapidly become good or excellent. If you lead a follower back sacada like any other step back but just happen to be there to create the illusion of being displaced, it generally works. The only serious challenge is generating overpivot, but my experience is that followers more often pivot too much than not enough.
Whereas the way most leaders in most communities lead, there are few follower front steps that aren't curved somewhat, as in a forward ocho or the front step in the FSBS of the molinete, because normally, a step forward is designed to go around the leader somewhat. So, when a front step is led directly at the leader, followers tend to veer off or even come up short. This makes follower front sacadas tricky. Yes, this could theoretically affect back sacadas, but the follower can't see you there, so there's no visual wall to make them veer off.
In a follower sacada workshop with Pablo Inza and Sofia Saborido a while back, pretty much all the followers got back sacadas, but most balked and pulled up short on front sacadas.
No comment on side sacadas. I find them mostly "just there" and everybody accepts them on both sides of the dance. Probably because they don't have to go-power of a front sacada or the blind mule-kick risk of a back sacada, they're the easiest, even if most people cheat them as slightly turned front sacadas.