On May 9, 7:27 am, "peter" <nos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Profits and income in the partner dance teaching business
> > do not come from efficiency (except, perhaps, at the very
> > top levels). In fact the more inefficiently a studio can
> > teach a student, the more hours of lessons they can sell.
> > So the competitive pressure on the dance business actually
> > optimizes inefficiency, except with the most astute and
> > competitive of high level students.
>
> No kidding. I have seen students making no progress under some "high
caliber
> teacher".
>
> I guess if all instructors are about equal in efficiency, then nobody
has
> the urge to improve. However, if one studio make the effort to use more
> efficient teaching methods and becomes known in the area, then the other
> studios may be under pressure to follow.
Have you noticed the vani****ngly small pro****tion of
people who are currently students of certain dance studios
are ever seen at dances attended by people outside that
studio environment?
And even if they do get out, they are more likely to notice
that other people can do more fancy "steps", not whether
or not those other couples have better dance technique.
So any pressure to follow might well lead to the wrong
thing.
It's often only the competitors who go to outside events
who notice that students of teacher X are climbing the
competition rankings faster than students of their own
teacher.
The best hope may be for that tiny fraction of the public
who might actually be trying to understand Len Goodman's
commentary on technique, character of the dance, bad
footwork, etc. those times when he's not using obscure
crusty analogies while judging Dancing with the Stars.
IMHO. YMMV.
--
rhn A.T nicholson d.0.t C-o-M
|
