Abstract
Abstract
Since the turn of the millennium, there has been a heightened emphasis on the quality of teaching and learning in higher education, with an urge to reform the relationship between teachers and students. During this same period, a growing body of research has been conducted on unequal power dynamics in the teaching of dance technique. In this study, I am doing a literature review of 20 articles published between 1998 and 2020, which especially addressed dance technique and power dynamics in the context of higher education. I am particularly exploring strategies proposed in the literature to challenge unequal power dynamics within dance technique training in higher education. Through a thematic analysis of the articles, I have identified three clusters of strategies in the material: reflexivity of traditions in dance, activity, and embodiment. The research shows that there is a rather high interest in continuing and reforming the teaching of dance technique, and that there are several examples of empirical research related to heightening the students’ activity in their learning process. However, there is still a need for more research on this topic, especially concerning the connection between embodiment and empowerment.
Reference24 articles.
1. Akinleye, Adesola, and Payne, Rose. 2016. “Transactional Space. Feedback, Critical Thinking, and Learning Dance Technique.” Journal of Dance Education 16 (4): 144–148.
2. Alterowitz, Gretchen. 2014. “Toward a Feminist Ballet Pedagogy: Teaching Strategies for Ballet Technique Classes in the Twenty-First Century.” Journal of Dance Education 14 (1): 8–17.
3. Barr, Robert, and Tagg, John. 1995. “From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education.” Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 27 (6): 12–26.
4. Barr, Sherrie, and Oliver, Wendy. 2016. “Feminist Pedagogy, Body Image, and the Dance Technique Class.” Research in Dance Education 17 (2): 97–112.
5. Biggs, John, and Tang, Catherine. 2011. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 4th ed. Berkshire: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.