Lens 1: Communication and Ideas: My practice: Zooming in.

After engaging in the Skype discussion last week and thinking more about the various methods of mind mapping, I thought I would experiment with this technique by placing my practice in the lens of 'Communication and Ideas'. On reflection, I can see that although effectively it looks like a jumbled mess on paper, it was incredibly beneficial to make connections between what initially appeared as a lot of factual information which only seemed relevant to the world of digital computing. This assumption of mine was soon disregarded as I came to realise the significance that the Web 2.0 platform has had on Practice in the Arts.

Web 2.0 is a term which has been growing in recognition over the past twenty years or so. You cannot deny the rapid pace of technological development. In fact Alvin Toffler likens the phenomenon to an impactive 'culture shock' where humans have been catapulted into a new social environment due to the advances of computer capabilities. He states that “We no longer feel life as people did in the past” (1970) which made me reflect on how I may have considered my practice twenty years ago before the revolution of the internet. Platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Youtube are interwoven in our everyday lives that it's almost incomprehensible to imagine a world without them. But is this of benefit to the population and to my own personal practice? Or are there areas of detriment which cross ethical boundaries and inadvertently cause more division? I don't think there is one simple answer but in order to explore this, I need to think about how I utilise Web 2.0. More specifically, how my contribution has an influence on the collective intelligence of the community and the knowledge I acquire for myself.

The Benefits of Web 2.0 communications in Dance teaching

1. Music access: There are a wealth of musical genres at ones' fingertips. Spotify has changed the ease of my teaching preparation over the short time I have been practicing. Time reduction is not the only positive, as I believe my repertoire of accompaniment has expanded, impacting on the diversity of my choreography. This gives the students a more varied experience of training which can only enhance their capabilities.
2. YouTube: At surface level I can instantly see the advantage of easy access to a range of online videos. Users who collectively share their media are invited a community to comment, share, express opinion and even remix a theme to further develop creativity.
   Video tutorials on teaching methods can be readily viewed, allowing for deeper learning of teaching techniques and I personally love to browse videos of choreographic masterpieces danced by the elite. This pastime sparks inspiration, further initiating hype within a community of people with a common interest. On a deeper level this is an example of collective intelligence where discussions, debates and connections arise to help evolve interaction and deepen learning. As Pierre Levy explains, collective intelligence “helps a novice while another specialist in the initiative, in turn in a field in which he has less knowledge” (Levy & Bonnono,1999, P.31)
3. Employment accessibility: Employers have the freedom to post job vacancies to appeal to those practitioners who are seeking work. There are a number of sites which allow a user to post their C.V as an advert in the hope that they will be sought out. Recommendations from past employers can boost a person's profile, and communication can be initiated between the two parties which could lead to employment, further connections with others in the field, or perhaps a process of elimination. Undoubtably it's easier to make oneself known by creating an online presence and I know I have gathered most of my working pursuits through sites such as Dance Teachers pro, or Facebook groups.
4. Blogs and forums: Similar to the above, Facebook has been a common platform where artists have felt safe to express their opinions on many ethical questions regarding industry. I have learnt what is an acceptable rate of pay via group conversations and this has generated a collective feeling of self activism amongst professionals. Even in areas of disagreement, the respect is maintained across the web and this just deepens the capacity to empathise with alternative points of view.
5. Research and Education: BA PP is a prime example of harnessing a Web 2.0 platform to further knowledge on a particular subject via a community of learners. We all have responsibility to take an active role in expression of ideas, and a passive role in observing and contemplating what has been shared. I am beginning to realise that I often learn by reflective observation (learning from others) yet discovering that by participating in dialogue rather than just taking a web 1.0 approach, my understanding deepens. John Dewey theorised this concept by claiming “Experience is primarily an active-passive affair; it is not primarily cognitive” (1916). Online educational courses such as the RAD CBTS Ballet course, DDE module learning for ISTD dance and the Future Fit Pilates course follow this structure so I have become more accustomed to this collaborative approach. I can recognise how this style of learning contrasts from my academic education where I predominantly was just fed information by the teacher.

But with great advancements in technology there also come disadvantages and I have been thinking about how such communication has impacted on my practice.

For example, although it is wonderful to be able to access a plethora of performance videos, I question how these cultural dance examples have changed the face of production today. In recent years there seems to have been a decline in quality of movement, and more focus on tricks and athleticism. It has been discussed amongst Web 2.0 platforms how dance is now falling into the category of sport due to American dance influences where the main question seems to be how many turns or acrobatic tricks one can perform.

Does this discovery raise the standard of students in the present day? To some extent, perhaps. Easy access to viewing the most competent dancers can be inspiring and perhaps encourage pupils to aim for higher standards in their work. I have observed this as a teacher, where competitors can perform with more advancement that ten years ago. This can also be a frightening concept as the pressure to attain this new level of expectation can mean safety in the studio is an afterthought. Often the desire to grasp an impressive step reduces sensible perseverance. 'Running before you can walk' provides further difficulties for dancers who then have to refine technique at a later date which is also problematic for the teacher.

Similarly, I have witnessed replicated versions of routines viewed online. The teacher has passed off as their own invention, completely contradicting the original intentions of Web 2.0. O'Reilly's principle of 'Harnessing collective intelligence' (1916) cited in Illeris (2007) effectively then backfires if the freedom to publish content is then abused. What is meant to promote deeper thought and inspire creativity can potentially revert to a passive Web 1.0 user experience.

One disadvantage I have certainly experienced is information overload. I find myself viewing content as less valuable as it is so readily available in mass. What would once inspire is now commonplace and the constant, addictive engagement in technology is reducing ones' present emotional experience. Could this be impacting on the quality of dance? Isn't performing about connecting with the body and the audience rather than with the screen?

Then there is the question of digital literacy where “web 2.0 offers almost all users the same freedom to contribute” (Pal, 2012) allowing for non verification of information thus reducing reliability. In terms of my practice, this can be seen in the form of dancers being filmed performing syllabus exercises. They could very well me inaccurately dancing the required steps due to the teacher's interpretation of the written syllabus, yet users may take this as concrete reference.

There is always an ongoing debate about the safety of internet use and this must be considered when working with the younger generation. Teens often gravitate towards the Web 2.0 Sphere because they are generally considered by users to be adolescent “publics” where they can interact without parental supervision (Boyd, 2008). The boundary between teacher and student is often one which can be difficult to navigate with the intention to maintain respect, but to also generate a partnership of balance. This can feel compromised if a teacher becomes too genial with a student which can be exasperated if a student has access to the Tutor's social media presence. There is an element of wanting to keep work and private life separate, but social media arguably blurs those boundaries.

Finally, my work in administration for a dance school has introduced me to the importance of an online presence in terms of advertising to new students and showcasing the school in an appealing manner. It almost feels as though behind the scenes there is a secret network which aims to target customers at a certain time, with sneaky sales pitches and generated hype. What once to me seemed like innocent dance school promotion now reflects a deep hunger for more money, more pupils and more admiration. Could this focus take priority over focus in the dance studio, where more energy is placed into the business model as opposed to the students?

Then there is the debate over whether Web 2.0 is truly accessible for all? Despite this being one of the held principles, being able to have a presence online requires having a computer in the first place which obviously requires money, the time to be able to participate and also the capabilities. Age can be a barrier to this as typically the older generation and the juvenile age group can be neglected. What effect does this have on dance schools which are owned by older teachers? Do they feel left behind in this mass market of online promotion?

As you can tell from my more than lengthy post there is a lot of information to be considered on this subject! But where do you stand? How as Web 2.0 affected your area of practice? I'd love for you to share your ideas.

References

Boyd, D. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Illeris, K. (2018). Contemporary theories of learning: learning theorists ... in their own words. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Lévy Pierre, & Bononno, R. (2001).Cyberculture. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Pal, Surendra. (2012). Web 2.0 : A New Tool For Teaching and Learning in Electronic Environment. Journal of young Librarian Association. (Online) Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284028865_Web_20_A _New_Tool_For_Teaching_and_Learning_in_Electronic_Environment (Accessed 30 September 2019)

Toffler, A. Future shock, Random House, New York, 1970.