Thread: Pro vs teacher vs Student

Hey ladies (long time no chat!)

Some of the dancers in the community where I am are trying to raise the bar at their particular venue. They are great girls with wonderful hearts, but do want a distinction between student and Pro/teacher. Recently they have alloted the first set for student and second for pro/teacher. Many of the dancers have been dancing at this venue for QUITE sometime regardless of skill level, so we have to be careful as to not slight anyone. The problem is that people are having a hard time understanding that they are a student and not a pro/teacher. I think that the main problem is that the level of some of the teachers is equal to some of the students, and some students think its ok do dance in what ever, while others go buy costumes and then just assume that they are now pro after 9 months of dancing. We tryed to say pro was someone who got paid for dancing etc, but that actually includes both the poorly trained teacher, and student working for pennies. While the rest of the dancers with good technique, professional costumes, time and $$$ invested in the dance are either sitting at home or dancing in the same sets as these other dancers. Now we are trying to bring the community together, raise awareness etc. With the economy so bad we are down to 2 venues, and yes we have been searching. There are TOO many dancers in the area an not enough venues. So raising the bar at the place we love and are comfortable is the best option for us at this point. We have also just increased the door fee, and want to give the people their $ worth, but without coming off as jealous catty haters. So ladies help, how to we make it clear where each dancer belongs and put on a good show while saving the community?

The last show I attended was a mixed show of beginner and advanced. I feel it is boring as an audience member to have an entire group of dancers blocked together.
Instead of making in PRO, TEACHER, BEGINNER, have it all mixed together.
When each dancer comes on stage have her announced as, ______, who is a beginner dancer, ________ a professional dancer at Zorbas Greek Restaurant, ________ a dancer who has studied for * years .

The audience will see that it is a mixed show and you will avoid hurting feelings.

I agree that it's great for an audience for a show to be all mixed like that, but I also worry that it's a bit unfair to the inexperienced performers to put them on straight after a really good dancer!

This happened at the first Raqs Britannia event, where there was an Open platform, but with various of the BDSS dancers interspersed. Imagine the poor soul who had to go on after RB, or after Adoré doing her amazing acrobatic work!

and I should mention ALL dancers are used to getting paid regardless of skill, which is one of the reasons for the split

Is anyone going to get lose their spot for not being up to scratch, or are they just split on student vs. pro/teacher lines?

If by "raising the bar" you mean "put on a better show for the audience", then rearranging the same group of dancers and/or attaching various labels to their introductions doesn't really do much of anything IMO. The audience is still subjected to the same show.

Grouping the weaker dancers together into a "student set", as someone pointed out, could actually make the show seem worse, to the point that people leave or their eyes glaze over and they tune out before the pro dancers perform.

Who is "in charge"? Do you have to answer to the restaurant owner or are you essentially getting the run of the place? If the owner is concerned about show quality, you might get some support towards having auditions of some sort, or someone in charge of selecting the lineup.

I think raising the bar in a meaningful way will require shifting a higher % of the show time to strong dancers. That may mean cutting the weaker ones, putting them on a rotation, and/or giving them shorter performance slots.

Also, who is the audience? Is it virtually all friends and families of the dancers? If so, the whole raising the bar issue might not matter so much.

Originally Posted by annwyn

and I should mention ALL dancers are used to getting paid regardless of skill, which is one of the reasons for the split

So are the "students" taking a paycut?

And the "teachers/pros" getting more?

Could get a bit dicey...how does one gradutate to "pro" from a "student?"

Is this a long show (like a hafli) or a restaurant show with one student and one pro?

If it's the former, I agree with the others: mix it up as much as possible.

If the latter, why not bill it as "opening act" and "headliner". That way, it will be easier to split people by skill, rather than by status.

This lets you take the focus away from their resume, and to whether they meet certain standards: if you want to be a headliner, it doesn't matter whether you teach or how long you've been here - you have to have competent technique, good stage presence, a professional and appropriate appearance, and professional behavior.

If you're not there yet, you can develop those skills and earn those chops in the opener slot.

No matter what you do, you will ruffle some feathers (especially among those who thing they're more advanced than they are), but the only way to avoid that is not to have standards.

Maybe less skilled dancers could go in in groups, and the solos are reserved for the skilled dancers?

Who is doing the paying, and why would they pay for less-than-pro dancers when they could have pros?

I had the impression this is a 2-set pro restaurant show, not a hafla or showcase with lots of dancers each night. Is that right?
=

Originally Posted by annwyn

The problem is that people are having a hard time understanding that they are a student and not a pro/teacher. I think that the main problem is that the level of some of the teachers is equal to some of the students, and some students think its ok do dance in what ever, while others go buy costumes and then just assume that they are now pro after 9 months of dancing.

wow. So you're dealing with people who've been dancing in restaurants and thinking of themselves as pros for a long time, who don't even have costumes? And teachers who, however goodhearted they may be, don't really dance at a professional level?

There are TOO many dancers in the area an not enough venues.

Are there too many dancers? Or is the problem that there are students who THINK they are dancers and feel entitled to a professional gig but aren't really qualified? If only the truly professional dancers were performing at the pro gigs, would there still be way too many?

We have also just increased the door fee, and want to give the people their $ worth, but without coming off as jealous catty haters. So ladies help, how to we make it clear where each dancer belongs and put on a good show while saving the community?

First, if people are paying a door fee they are entitled to a professional show. They shouldn't be seeing students (unless they clearly bought tickets to a student show).


Second, pros should not sit at home while uncostumed, untrained students get paid to dance in professional venues. That's not fair to the dancers who've invested in being career-ready, it's not fair to the audience, and it's not fair to the students who are being deluded and misled.

I feel for you so much, I really do. How to tell the students who *think* they are pros -- much less the unskilled teacher -- that they don't have what it takes (yet) even though they've danced there a long time? While preserving a sense of community?

(continued)

The only idea I have is to turn this gig into a student showcase. Have the students sell tickets to their friends/family and see if you can move it to a day/time when the restaurant is NOT open to the public. (Sunday evening? Late on a Friday night?) I never think it's right for the casual dining public to find themselves at a student show. I also think monthly or less is plenty often for a student showcase... weekly and they'll start thinking they have a gig again.

Can you take the pros out of this gig and set up the second restaurant as a professional show? Or have a pro show during a different day/time at this same venue? I'd offer VERY clear written guidelines for what constitutes a pro. So people know that it's not 'we like Suzy better.' It's 'must own a professional-quality costume*, have excellent posture, energy and extension through the arms, a full vocabulary of movements, a compelling stage presence, command of all basic props, and excellent audience interaction skills' or whatever.

That way, at least if someone wants to be inappropriately included, whoever is doing the scheduling/hiring has something concrete to point out and say 'You're not quite ready for this venue yet. But when you get X and Y worked out, come see us!"

The community may lose one or more deluded students-who-think-they're-pros over this. But hey, sounds like you might have some extras. (sorry, that sounds snarky and I don't mean to sound that way. I'm sure these dancers have a point of view as well, and maybe one of them will pop up to bring it to the discussion?)

*note: I didn't say it had to be a designer costume, or even a professionally made costume. Just pro-quality.

I'm with Lauren, she has some good ideas.

I missed the fact that there is a door charge and you just raised it. IMO, this should put the primary concern on the audience and quality of the show; the feelings of the dancers become secondary. You can't expect people to become repeat customers to the shows that cost money unless they are good. Ultimately, a show with too many inexperienced dancers is going to burn out your audience base and destroy the gig for everyone.

Someone or ones needs to reign in the student dancers and be in charge of making the hard decisions of putting together a strong show lineup. Two pro sets with one or two short (like 3-5 min.) student acts in between would be good. Moreover, even the students should have to be held accountable for some level of preparation. (e.g. their teacher should require to see/coach them for x number of rehearsals before the show).

You could make a new rule that dancers with less than 3 yrs experience are going to be cut down to a limited number of slots, and those slots will only be given to students who are working with a teacher/mentor.

That leaves then the problem of what to do with those that have more than 3 years and/or are teaching but still not very good. You could suggest that the "pros" get together weekly or every two weeks for "peer coaching" wherein everyone rehearses the sets they are planning to perform and receives constructive input from the group. That might at least put everyone on the path to improving their performances.

Originally Posted by Aniseteph

Is anyone going to get lose their spot for not being up to scratch, or are they just split on student vs. pro/teacher lines?

No one will loose their spot, but there will be less openings for students. This is run as a monthly showcase at a hookah bar, with about 6 slots in the winter, and 10 in the summer. (each dancer dancing 2 times)

Originally Posted by annwyn

and I should mention ALL dancers are used to getting paid regardless of skill, which is one of the reasons for the split

So this means that Suzie Q who has taken 3 months of classes gets the same cut as dancers who have been dancing for a decade....

I also want to mention, I am not the one incharge as this is a venue that has had dancers for years and years, but I have passes the link, and they are reading and are VERY thankful for all your advice

Originally Posted by eshe

So are the "students" taking a paycut?

And the "teachers/pros" getting more?

Could get a bit dicey...how does one gradutate to "pro" from a "student?"

At this time there is an equal split, and this is one of the reasons for the changes, there is no "set" price as it is run on door fee and tips so each month is different.....

Just to modify my earlier suggestion, since we were posting at the same time.

Perhaps the dancer(s) in charge could simply implement an across the board series of rehearsals at which each dancer gets feedback (if this is not already done). This might at least motivate everyone to be at their 100%.

UOTE=Lauren_;732022]I had the impression this is a 2-set pro restaurant show, not a hafla or showcase with lots of dancers each night. Is that right?
=


wow. So you're dealing with people who've been dancing in restaurants and thinking of themselves as pros for a long time, who don't even have costumes? And teachers who, however goodhearted they may be, don't really dance at a professional level?


YES.....
Are there too many dancers? Or is the problem that there are students who THINK they are dancers and feel entitled to a professional gig but aren't really qualified? If only the truly professional dancers were performing at the pro gigs, would there still be way too many?

There are too many dancers that want to dance, but no there are not too many true professional dancers

First, if people are paying a door fee they are entitled to a professional show. They shouldn't be seeing students (unless they clearly bought tickets to a student show).

agreed, the audiance is regular patrons as well as family and friends

Second, pros should not sit at home while uncostumed, untrained students get paid to dance in professional venues. That's not fair to the dancers who've invested in being career-ready, it's not fair to the audience, and it's not fair to the students who are being deluded and misled.

I feel for you so much, I really do. How to tell the students who *think* they are pros -- much less the unskilled teacher -- that they don't have what it takes (yet) even though they've danced there a long time? While preserving a sense of community?

(continued)[/QUOTE]

You could make a new rule that dancers with less than 3 yrs experience are going to be cut down to a limited number of slots, and those slots will only be given to students who are working with a teacher/mentor.

I like this

Assuming you have a person/group who are in charge of this, my best suggestion is to let the change in formating be known and hold auditions, say you are looking for X number of dancers for the "headliner" roster and Y number for the "opener" roster. Having to audition may make dancers evaluate their abilities and where they belong and it gives everyone a fair shot rather than by invitation only group.

OK, if it's a showcase wtih 6-10 performances there's a little more room for students than I thought. I like the idea of one or two 3-minute student numbers mixed in (or a group number).

But the paying audience still deserves a quality show.

You can certainly begin by using # of years dancing as a cutoff point. You can also nip the future in the bud a little by saying the venue is closed to new performers for now and will be by audition only in the future.

What to do with the people who are already there continues to be a problem... but someone must be in charge of the thing? ANd s/he/they need to bite the bullet and start being honest with the dancers.

A show is about the audience, not about the dancers. It's VERY common in show biz to not get the part or job because you're not good enough yet to entertain the audience.Whoever is running the show HAS to be comfortable hiring the best people for the job.

The other option is to run it as a student showcase (or once a month as a student showcase?). Students often bring more people in the door than pros, as their friends/family aren't tired of bellydance events yet. THAT audience can be made to endure... lol

Originally Posted by Lauren_

You can certainly begin by using # of years dancing as a cutoff point. You can also nip the future in the bud a little by saying the venue is closed to new performers for now and will be by audition only in the future.

If you want this to be about quality, then it can't be just about "number of years." The world is full of dancers who have been showing up at classes and workshops for ages, and still dance like beginners. It's not even about the number of years someone has "been pro," because sometimes the dancer with the biggest market share is simply the one who has promoted herself aggressively for the longest time. We have no mechanism as a dance community to keep people with little or no proficiency from soliciting work from a GP that may not know better, so the correlation between getting gigs and skill can be pretty shaky sometimes.

At some point you may have to address the issue that someone can be a fantastic entertainer in a social setting such as a restaurant gig or a party, but still not much of a dancer. That comes down to where the organizer's priorities lie. Ideally, a dancer should be both charismatic and technically competent--but we've already established that this isn't an ideal situation. If you want to have a solid show, there's really no shortcut--someone is going to have to evaluate the performers and trim the weaker ones.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

If you want to have a solid show, there's really no shortcut--someone is going to have to evaluate the performers and trim the weaker ones.

Exactly. That's why I thought # of years should only be an emergency stopgap measure, and auditions should be the ultimate goal.

Originally Posted by Meredith

Assuming you have a person/group who are in charge of this, my best suggestion is to let the change in formating be known and hold auditions.....

I think straight auditioning is better than grandfathering in less-skilled and unprepared (not properly costumed) dancers. Considering this is the BD community's main venue, offering up subpar performers can only hurt the BD rep. Showing off the best offerings would better build up ongoing interest in BD venues.

You can always offer a slot here and there for a group student performance, which would be announced as such. Or you can occasionally have student showcases so there's the opportunity to get experience performing, which helps those who really want to learn and grow (and also offers an outlet for those who just want to perform for funsies).

It's fuzzy to me who is in charge of dancers getting gigs. Has it been an open mike sort of thing, with organizer(s)? Can't the
organizers restructure the gig schedule, as in "We are switching to X format". How much input, from whom, is going into this change?
See Lauren's recent threat on changing format re performing groups - lots of good ideas there. Different situation, but similar.
Usually it's the "hurt feelings" thing that looms so large. How to produce the best xxxxx possible without hurting feelings of those unqualified? Who gets to decide this? = can't please everybody.
I hope I don't sound harsh - I've been in similiar shoes and it is difficult. Sometimes things reach a certain point and it is in fact unclear now it developed, but you know it needs to be fixed regardless!

Originally Posted by LiesaB.

See Lauren's recent threat on changing format re performing groups - lots of good ideas there. Different situation, but similar.
Usually it's the "hurt feelings" thing that looms so large. How to produce the best xxxxx possible without hurting feelings of those unqualified? Who gets to decide this? = can't please everybody.

YESSS!!!

the thing is, a show CAN'T be about the feelings of the performers. WHo wants to go to Broadway to see the version of CATS where they let the not-very-good singers and the didn't-have-time-to-practice-much dancers in because they didn't want to hurt their feelings? And didn't make everyone get a costume because, really, it's hard for some people.

The director/producer of such a show has to put the audience's needs FIRST and the performer's feelings.. well, hopefully you're tactful but honest in communicating with the performers, but their feelings really don't get to influence the show much.

Putting on shows that are all about the performers' feelings has value.. but not to the audience. You can't charge them money for it.. or not much.. and they need to KNOW they're going to see a student performance, not pro entertainment.

I just noticed I wrote "Lauren's threat" instead of thread!! Hahaha freudian slip ???!!! LOL

Combine a couple of the ideas:
Have a quarterly student showcase open to all and clearly labeled as such. Maybe have a dress rehearsal or some way to check that everyone has an appropriate costume i.e no undecorated lingerie bras. (When I started reading tarot at a local Renn Faire, we received written costumig guidelines and had to either meet with the head of our group or send her a picture of our costumes.)

Dancers with 3-5 years experience can audition for the opening act slots.
Dancers with over 5 years experience can audition for the headliner slots.

For the initial rounds of auditions, maybe get together 2-3 well-respected teachers / experienced dancers as a panel of judges so there's less feeling of favoritism and who you know being important. Give everybody feedback of what they need to work on.

Then have auditions once or twice a year for new additions to the roster.

Yes, it would be a lot of work but it might help create stronger dancers.

Originally Posted by Lauren_

the thing is, a show CAN'T be about the feelings of the performers. WHo wants to go to Broadway to see the version of CATS where they let the not-very-good singers and the didn't-have-time-to-practice-much dancers in because they didn't want to hurt their feelings? And didn't make everyone get a costume because, really, it's hard for some people.

The difference is that if you want to be a Broadway dancer, your expectations are tempered by the fact that you don't have to train very long before you start running into the harsh truth that not everybody is equally "special." We have a fundamental problem in that our larger educational system is not set up to prepare students for the reality of a stage career. Our system is too heavily biased in favor of the students' feelings, instead of what is better for their development in the long run. I'm not saying we should rough our students up as much as those other dance disciplines do--the top of our field isn't as bloodthirsty as theirs, and relative to our size, we have a lot more opportunities for the less-than-spectacular dancers to still have meaningful and appreciated performing experiences--BUT I don't think it would hurt teachers to be a little more forthright with students when it comes to the reality of public/paid/professional performing. When a student decides she wants to work in the pro arena, she's forfeiting some of her right to hide behind the "it's not nice to hurt my feelings" defense. You can't expect to train to be a pro, much less actually be one, and think you should be exempt from others' critical opinions, especially when they're constructive, valid opinions from people you're paying to train you. That's just not realistic. Teachers shouldn't use this attitude as justification for acting like heartless jerks, but a little more candor in the educational process would mean fewer students who lack an honest appraisal of where they stand in the talent pool.

that's a hard one?