Welcome to this issue of Research in Dance Education. The articles are from scholars representing the UK, Canada, China and Singapore and offer philosophical, pedagogical and sociological debate. There are examples of engaging somatic, inclusive and creative practice as well as partnerships and the use of technology in practice. I open this issue with Martin Leach’s article: Psychophysical what? What would it mean to say ‘there is no “body” … there is no “mind”’ in dance practice? Here, Leach discusses the limitations of mind-body divide and the use of terms that have been developed in language to attempt to describe the fusion of mind and body such as ‘psychophysical’ and ‘psychosomatic’. Leach suggests that dancers’ understanding of self is affected by conception of self as divided or unified. It is suggested that a ‘philosophical practicality’ is needed and ‘to say, “there is no ‘body’ … or ‘mind’” might facilitate a more productive, poietic sense of practice, a “thinking inactivity” that does not imply a dualistic ontology.’ It is suggested that such conception of self might, in practice, afford greater resilience for dancers and future careers.
Next, Clegg, Owton and Allen-Collinson critique gendered bodies in dance in their article: Challenging conceptions of gender: UK dance teachers’ perceptions of boys and girls in the ballet studio and argue for the development of a gender neutral and creative pedagogical model of teaching ballet. This interview study with teachers, discusses expectations that girls are passive and unquestioning in the ballet studio, whereas boys, in contrast, are expected to be challenging, energetic and risk takers. 10 female dance teachers from across the UK participated in semi-structured interviews and two key themes emerged, ‘performing masculinity’ and ‘boys’ challenges to traditional dance pedagogy’. In the main, it is suggested that dance teachers encourage the traditional feminine for girls and masculine for boys’ roles. However, there was some evidence of reflection by the teachers on such tradition.
The next article is also an interview study with teachers: Musings about creative movement: coming to terms with music, movement and drama by Chee-Hoo Lum. Here, the value of an artist-in-school scheme for pre-schools is analysed in relation to definitions of creativity/creative movement, interdisciplinary content and pedagogy. It is suggested that an interdisciplinary approach using dance, drama and music is appropriate and valuable for young children’s self-expression and creative development. The implications for practice are that teachers will need to build their subject knowledge and arts pedagogy in order to offer high quality experiences to the children they teach. In Tomorrow’s dance and health partnership: the need for a holistic view, Sylvie Fortin discusses the rapid development of dance, health and well-being initiatives and increase in accompanying research to support practice. Fortin gives an overview of the field and critically examines some of the issues from a feminist, poststructuralist, Canadian perspective. Implications for the process of research and practice development are discussed.
Ashleigh Richie and Fiona Brooker discuss Imaging the future: an autoethnographic journey of using a guided and cognitive-specific imagery intervention in undergraduate release-based contemporary dance technique in a Higher Education context. They open this article by setting the context as being one of a student as consumer, as students in the UK now pay fees for Higher Education programmes. In order to motivate students to engage, Richie and Brooker suggest the need to use class/studio time to full effect and suggest a collaborative and innovative approach to technique teaching. Using qualitative methods they gather student responses to a guided and cognitive-specific imagery intervention (using Revised Model of Deliberate Imagery, Cummings and Williams) with undergraduate ballet students’ skill acquisition in a release-based contemporary class. Findings suggest evidence of faster embodiment of movement material and improved self-confidence and focus.
Finally, Zihao Li, Mingming Zhou and Timothy Tea examine Mobile technology in dance education: a case study of three Canadian high school dance programs. This article reminds us that we live in and are immersed in a technological society. The authors refer to Big Data, Massive Open Online Courses and e-Learning as buzz words in educational settings, yet, it is suggested, that perhaps such aspects are not used to best effect by dance educators. The use of technology in high school dance education is limited or absent. This ethnographic research was designed to address this issue and to fill the gap by focusing on Generation Z (individuals born after the Millennials) and their teachers in three public high school dance programs in the Greater Toronto area in Canada and particularly focuses on effective use of technology in dance. There is a focus on the role that mobile devices can play in teaching and learning in dance. Implications for practice include how some technological approaches can be integrated to support and challenge dance teaching and learning.
As we draw towards the end of the academic year, I am sure that the work included in this issue will inspire and motivate greater generation of innovation in practice and critical research.