So, one of the SOs I work for has expressed to me that she wants to transition from a rec studio to a more competitive studio. Im THRILLED about this, because thats the kind of studio I love working for. The students there now love to dance, and are hard workers for the most part.. but there is an issue with missing classes and being late for silly reasons. (hair appt, birthday parties, ect..) I have expressed my frustrations with this to the SO and she is completely on my side, but when I have talked to her about next year and really cracking down on the students, she is hesitant to do so. I grew up with a demerit system and I know that it really helped the girls who were less diciplined to stay on track and get to class, if they werent in class, they didnt get to perform and it really kept our team technically strong and got everyone to rehearsal.

This SO is against demerits because it "brings negativity to the studio", and she wants to find a positive way to get the girls in class, like a reward system for being on time and not missing rehearsals. As I see it, shouldnt being in class be something thats just required??

I grew up at a very serious, competitive studio, whereas the SO did not.. I feel that if she really wants the girls to advance and start doing well in competition that we've got to enforce some rules ( I currently have a student competiting who ONLY comes to rehearsal, shes been to one technique class and two ballet classes... I have to keep her in my number and her lack of technique really shows )

Im wondering if you all have thoughts on this. Am I being crazy and out of line? I understand that I am not in charge, but I know how badly the SO wants the studio to produce really great dancers and I dont feel that that will not happen unless we crack the whip with some of these girls...

How do you handle this with your students and getting them to put the studio before other things...? obviously Im not asking that they miss their sisters wedding, but 20 minutes late for a nail appointment? thats not acceptable.

I also would love for the girls to be in class for more hours, right now they have 1 hour to rehearse all of their numbers, 1 hour of jazz technique, 1 hour of ballet and an optional 1 hour modern class. I just dont think that they are putting in the time that is neccecary to become the dancers that we (and they) really want to be.. this is another place the SO and I disagree on. She wants the girls to have time to be at the studio, be on student council, go to basketball games, church activities, and whatever else they want. If the girls really want to be strong dancers, they'll need to make some sacrifices, right??

Maybe Im over the top because I pretty much lived at my studio from the time I was ten, thats why I need some second opinions! thanks!

Being Jacks of all trades means that they will be masters of none.

The SO needs to see that if the girls can't be bothered to dedicate all of their time to their dancing it won't be of a high standard.

Is your SO a dancer?

She is a dancer, and should know what needs to happen in order to have a successful, competitive studio. Her big argument was that she didnt want to lose students because we were being to hard on them, but to be honest, the studio is very small to begin with. We only have 5 girls on the highest competition team.

In the area I teach in, most students lose most of their high school age students to drill. If they dont make drill, they just quit dancing all together. I feel that if we, as a studio, can provide a competitive atmosphere and show the dancers that there is more out there to train for (professional companies, ect) and that drill/being a NBA dancer is not the only thing that dance classes prepare them for, that we would keep more students.

The younger classes are all full, and then once the girls turn 15 they quit to pursue other things. I strongly feel that if we instill more loyalty to the studio in the girls when they are young, that they will stay and be more willing to train longer/harder when they get to high school. The SO, however, feels that we will lose students by becoming too strict. I want to tell her that we cant have it both ways, the girls can be in class or they can be mediocre and do everything else they want... but I dont know if its really my place to be as firm with her on the issue as I want to be. She has told me that she wants me more involved with the studio next year, and if thats the case, I think that I should have a little more of a say in what goes on at the studio.

I know she is worried about losing kids but in my experience, the studios who have the highest enrollment numbers are the ones who do OFFER recreational dance classes, but that also have their competition teams be just that- competitive. The studios that do well at compeitions are the ones that moms bring their children to, and we wont ever do well at compeitions if our most advanced students are only taking 4 hours a week on a good week.

If I am completely wrong, since I have never owned a studio before.. someone please point me in the right direction. If not, I could use some backup that I can use on the issue, because she wants to meet with me sometime over the break to discuss changes/policies and all that jazz.

When I bought my studio from its original owner seven years ago, I felt as you do, and I loved dance too - it was always a priority for me. I had gone to a pre-professional ballet academy; four times a week was the minimum allowed, or you were dropped from the school. And enough of my classmates did turn pro, and even won at international ballet competitions.

Now that I'm the primary teacher as well as the SO, I've seen it for myself that kids today don't understand the value of technique - and I don't just mean ballet training. You can talk at them all you want, but they tune you out. They just want to get up and dance the way they see on TV - funky with flapping arms, fish faces, and no finesse. Even the youngest will quit if they're not having fun, as moms listen to their 3 year olds. I'm lucky to have our teens attend four hours a month!

Our local schools, and Parks & Recreation, offer too many cheap/free activities so the kids can easily replace dance with: cheer team; soccer; baton; glee; hockey; band; softball; swim team; karate; gymnastics; and 3 Musical Theater shows/year, so a dance recital or Nutcracker show is no longer an incentive. And these other activities DEMAND hours a day, EVERY day, or they're off the team! They can't come to my studio one hour a week, and they quit by age 10, especially when the sports coaches bad mouth dance as something for babies. Hence, their peers ridicule them, and they're forced to hide the fact that they dance. Parents have been brainwashed that their child will get college scholarships only via sports.

To make matters worse, our town is an older suburb with half the number of kids from 10 years ago, and quadruple the number of dance schools. When you have too few students, you lose the energy/momentum in the class; you panic at each drop-out. Even if you can afford to keep the dance school going financially, there won't be a class if the teacher is sitting in an empty studio.

I hate to sound so negative, but then I would be thrilled to have your problem of kids only attending 4 dance classes/week. If you're lucky enough to be in Canada, or England, where dance teachers require certification, and you can keep students motivated via levels of testing, dance schools are regulated, and have remained viable. But here in the USA, thanks to Title IX practically mandating every girl join a sport (and dance is NOT a sport here) the dance industry has been dealt a lethal blow, IMO.

Then Musical Theater show licenses were made super cheap for schools, and all of the local schools (not just the high schools) realized they could make big bucks by offering more than the one annual traditional school show, and packing them with EVERY non-sport kid who auditioned. I have had 8 year olds drop our once a week combo class for months, so they could be one of 20 spoons marching around a crowded stage's "Beauty & the Beast."

I think the transition has to happen more slowly over time. If you come in and slap down all these new rules and demerits, your SO is right. You will lose students. Of course some standards need to be set or no improvement will happen. Take the current attendance policy (if there even is one) and take it one step towards the ideal. Let the students know the reasoning. I would also find ways to reward students who are following rules. For example, students with good attendance will be invited to participate in special small group piece or duo/trio or even a solo. That would encourage more dedication in a positive way, plus it is more likely that those pieces will score better, so the results of good attendance will be seen.

If in your role, I would continue making my recommendations for what I think needs to happen to reach the goals set by the SO. I would even make suggestions for compromises when she feels uneasy putting forth all my ideas. But in the end, you have to let her make the decision that is best for her business. Next year, the two of you can reevaluate things and decide what new changes may be needed. It won’t happen overnight, but I think improvements can happen slowly over several years.

I think that there's a difference between the negative connotation you have put on "not strict" and your SO's philosophy which seems to be "not negative."

I think "not negative" is a valid approach to teaching dance at a recreational level. It isn't the way you grew up, but it is valid and you can still teach wonderful classes with the philosophy of "not negative". You can still help your students achieve great things by not being negative. If the SO wants major changes to the studio, then gradually is a valid way to achieve that.

Yeah, I think you're being too dramatic about this. Continue talking to her about the balance between producing technically proficient dancers and having an all-positive atmosphere, but I don't think you should be approaching this as if your opinion is right and her opinion is wrong. They're both valid, so although you want her to agree with you, I don't think you should consider this in any way "educating" your SO.

And, if it matters, I agree with your SO that childhood is a time to explore, so ESPECIALLY if you are talking about children under 16 years old, they SHOULD have the ability to explore other areas of interest without feeling like they are being faulted by their instructors and mentors for doing so. There may be some wiggle room in offering additional optional classes, but it shouldn't be "you have to dedicate X hours of dance per week to matter, otherwise don't bother" mentality.

But here in the USA, thanks to Title IX practically mandating every girl join a sport...

lol, what? How is it mandating that every girl do a sport? I never did sports, and I know plenty of girls in my school never did sports. The only girls that ever DID join sports teams where the girls that wanted to. I agree with other points that you made (especially dance being downplayed or belittled, dance being forced out by inappropriate demands on times from other sports, the pressure of sports/language/skill/academic scholarships to pay for rising college tuition) but this one made me stop an laugh, because to the best of my knowledge, it only says that you can't be denied the ability to play a sport because of your sex.

danzin_gurl wrote:



The younger classes are all full, and then once the girls turn 15 they quit to pursue other things.

Welcome to the world of teaching teenagers, this is where they realise that they can't do it all and they have to choose, talk to anyone who teaches this age group and they'll say the same thing that their numbers drop as the students make their choices.

I really appreciate everyone taking the time to respond, and shedding some light on my little situation. I guess I just always felt so passionate about being at the studio, it's hard for me to process why anyone would want to do anything else

I do agree that we should take things slowly. When my SO mentioned stepping things up, I just got so excited and started imagining this amazing studio with a huge, dedicated older company... Ha ha, right?

As far as being positive goes, I like the reward system idea. What about using a point system (3 points for being to class, dressed, and on time or whatever)... And then each student with the highest points in their age group gets a solo? I hope that that would also encourage parents to try a little harder also ( Lateness is a HUGE issue... I'm talking 20 minutes late.. Consistently)

In the area I grew up in, dance was huge. We had 25 girls 16 and up on my senior companies and the two studios in our neighborhood were the same... I guess we were the exception!!

If you don't mind me asking, how many hours do all of your advanced kids take each week? Obviously we can't jump up from 4 hours to 15... But would it be too crazy to change technique classes to 1.5 hours and adding another ballet class? That would give the oldest girls 6.5 hours... I don't know if that's expecting too much?

We also already bring the younger ones to competition, and right now (they are 7-10) they have 3 hours each week: tap, ballet, and choreography. Would I be crazy to want to include a jazz technique class or an extra ballet and bump it up to 4 hours?

I hope nobody thinks I'm too crazy... I just see a lot of potential in some of these girls and maybe I'm the psycho dance teacher who wants to live vicariously through her students... But I do know that a few of them really do want to be committed and love being at the studio and that just fuels my fire!!

Thanks again for all of the replies!

danzin_gurl wrote:

If you don't mind me asking, how many hours do all of your advanced kids take each week?

This is one of those questions that comes up every so often. Do a search and you can get a good feel for the answer.

I think adding a single technique class is a good way to start. As I recall from a previous thread, it was recommended that you start by making it optional and then the following year it's mandatory. The idea is that those who are doing the extra technique class will progress faster and makes the nah-sayers see what you are talking about. (It was a great thread, you may want to dig around for it.)

I'm a ballet teacher. Years back I taught at a new studio (I joined it in its 2nd year). Ballet was low down and not important in the studio. I started by offering 2 classes for each level (age 7 & up). The 2nd class was used for Choreography. Only students taking both classes were allowed to compete in 2 local festivals. The first year I had small choreo. classes. But with good results at competition and the support of the SO, those 2nd classes were full the following year and some of those students went on to 3 classes of ballet per week. So if you are patient and positive with your goals for the students, it can be done with little steps.

danzin_gurl wrote:


As far as being positive goes, I like the reward system idea. What about using a point system (3 points for being to class, dressed, and on time or whatever)... And then each student with the highest points in their age group gets a solo? I hope that that would also encourage parents to try a little harder also ( Lateness is a HUGE issue... I'm talking 20 minutes late.. Consistently)

Absolutely. Kids are going to work a lot harder if they realize that they're competing for the right to perform a solo.

danzin_gurl wrote:

If you don't mind me asking, how many hours do all of your advanced kids take each week? Obviously we can't jump up from 4 hours to 15... But would it be too crazy to change technique classes to 1.5 hours and adding another ballet class? That would give the oldest girls 6.5 hours... I don't know if that's expecting too much?

You might consider adding a competition only ballet class for "serious dancers". That would give it the spin of being an "elite class". Keep the other classes required, though. Time spent in the elite class adds to the total calculated towards winning a solo.

It varies greatly with our advanced dancers as to how much time they spend in class. Our studio has an emphasis on ballet, so they normally spend at least four hours in ballet class. Some only do ballet. Others might also take an hour of jazz, an hour of modern, and a company class or two (.5 hours). So, 6+ for the more involved dancers. Some more, some less.

I know this has already been said, but you have to be careful to move slowly. Adding too much too quickly will scare them off. Change has to come gradually. Their enthusiasm has to grow with yours, then they'll want to put the effort in. But, it won't happen until they gain some perspective and really see what is out there and what is possible for them. Maybe you could do a party or a movie night for the targeted competition girls and play them videos of your favorite dances to get them excited for the experience. Or, bring them to a competition before you've even started the team, so they can get a feeling for what goes on there.

danzin_gurl wrote:

We also already bring the younger ones to competition, and right now (they are 7-10) they have 3 hours each week: tap, ballet, and choreography. Would I be crazy to want to include a jazz technique class or an extra ballet and bump it up to 4 hours?

Actually, 3 hours a week sounds like a great foundation for this age group.

danzin_gurl wrote:

I hope nobody thinks I'm too crazy... I just see a lot of potential in some of these girls and maybe I'm the psycho dance teacher who wants to live vicariously through her students... But I do know that a few of them really do want to be committed and love being at the studio and that just fuels my fire!!

Thanks again for all of the replies!

Good luck!

Basically, as my SO put it to me once - if the kids have to be with you at the studio 40 hours a week for you to make them good dancers, than one or the other of you isn't doing something right. This isn't something you need to, or have to kill yourself over, in order to do it well.

At our studio, each competition dance has an accompanying 45 minute to one hour technique class that goes with it, depending on the age of the dancers involved. So if you do jazz production, you have the class for the jazz production, and then a 45 minute technique class. Add in tap production, and you get another hour of tap production, and another 45 minute techniue class. And people can do as many dances as they want to do/can pay for.

My son is five, and is on the petite team, and their class doesn't have a technique class. The group is two five year olds and a six year old, and they dance for an hour, once a week, so they don't really need to dance for an hour and 45 minutes a week, just the three of them. :/

Have you considered rearranging the class times? If your kids can't consistently make it at 5:00 on Wendesday (or whatever...), then why not quit beating your collective heads against the wall, and move the class to another day or time?

If that is the case, and if I were you, I would not be involved in any way, shape or form, with the competition teams or competitions. I could not put my name to anything like that and ruin my own reputation.

Tell her that if that is how she is thinking, it's best not to bother. She will fail, miserably.

I really like that idea of having an optional, competitive ballet class! I did something similar at my studio and we occasionally took special "ballet company" field trips to the nutcracker or to take class with the local ballet company... It was super fun and we learned a lot- plus ballet was easier to enjoy when the girls who didn't like ballet weren't forced to be there...

I also like adding on a technique class for each routine the girls perform, and letting them have a little say in how involved they'd like to be, I just hope that once they commit- they'll understand that they need to follow through, which is where I hope that implementing a reward system will help.

I do think that most of the girls will want to perform a lot and be in class a lot, and those who dont, won't have to be in a lot of numbers... Win-win, right??

I definitely don't want to leave the studio! I love the girls and am treated with a lot of respect from the SO. I am excited about the direction she wants to take our dancers and am just trying to brainstorm the best steps to take in order to get there!

Again, I really do appreciate all of the replies- its given me a lot more to consider!

Oh, and changing class times doesn't help we've tried!!

How is it (title IX) mandating that every girl do a sport? I never did sports, and I know plenty of girls in my school never did sports.... because to the best of my knowledge, it only says that you can't be denied the ability to play a sport because of your sex.

In theory, you're right about Title IX, but in practice, especially here in my town, it's a different ballgame. There have been newspaper articles that explain how this law is interpreted to mean that there has to be a 50 - 50 ratio by gender. A boys' wrestling team program had to be eliminated, because there were 12 more boys than girls doing sports at this school. Sports coaches don't want this to happen at their location, so they're VERY aggressive with recruiting girls into sports. I have lost promising dancers to: cheer teams (considered a sport); ice hockey; swim team; track; field hockey; lacrosse; ice skating; and soccer. (The latter is notorious for destroying girls' knees, but this alarming statistic is hidden.) They promise trips to Texas for national competitions, and fund raise aggressively for that, gaining lots of positive visibility. And parents are told that sports is necessary to build "team work" and job success.

Not by coincidence, these same coaches recruit their students into their private sports academies, where they pay big bucks for one-on-one coaching with the "pro's" - needed to get those college scholarships. It's a very big business here!

The coaches badmouth dance, and the entire student body picks up on this negativity, and bullies my students. I had to man a "dance station" at our town's annual "Healthy Kids Day" and most students, and their parents, glared at me and refused to do a simple fun hip hop step, to get their participation verified via a punch on their card - to earn a prize at the end.

Over the years, I have been told these things repeatedly by my students, and it's been verified by the teachers in the schools too. I'm not making this up, sorry to say.

^^^vfdt, sorry your situation is so hostile. I taught once in a hostile small town. I left after 2 years...it was way to stressful for me and I needed to be in a positive environment.

When my SO started her comp teams years ago...she started the strict rules only with the littlest kids. The ones that were already established dancers in the studio, were given more "recreational" rules around the whole comp thing. The parents of the littlest kids are salivating for competition and will do anything we ask - and they follow every rule because they don't know anything different.

We also had to be very very patient, because it took many years for our comp teams to do well. With every passing years, the exponential growth was amazing, because with more dance hours, comes better technique. We've now found ourselves with younger dancers at higher skill levels than kids of the past.

I would argue that your SO is right. The existing parents will complain and fight against strict rules. They may quit. Demerits sound horrible as well. Even though our younger teams have strict rules, we never use negative reinforcement. I personally don't believe in use of demerits, but that's just my opinion.

We also took years to work our way into more competitive categories and competitions themselves.

It does take time, but rules must be firm, from the start. Requirements, at first, well, that is different. They can be less so and as they grow, slowly tighten them up. That is how I worked it but always must be firm on rules.

I think the "50/50" ratio thing is the rare exception, not the rule that defines the practice of Title IV. In fact, my own experience in a small town was that there was still resistance to even allowing girls on male-dominated sports if there wasn't enough for a full girl's team. (For example, wrestling and football). I think that the average would probably be pretty close to the spirit of the law, with extremes on either end.

In the area I grew up in, dance was huge. We had 25 girls 16 and up on my senior companies and the two studios in our neighborhood were the same... I guess we were the exception!!

I have a question for the OP on her comment above. I've seen some huge dance schools at local competitions, with lots of teen dancers, and I wonder how they manage to hold on to that demographic. Are they in towns, or school districts, where sports haven't gotten the upper hand - yet?

I researched the ones I saw, and they were mostly from small isolated rural towns, that seemed to be in a time warp bubble (like circa 1970's.) Their dance schools tended to be established a very long time, maybe 3rd generation, or had a strong-willed well known 80 year old SO, with daughters who teach for her. (Hence, their base isn't being diluted by a profusion of competitors. They are impervious to other studio start-ups, or defecting teachers stealing their stars.)

I'm guessing the OP is from the mid-west, and was protected from the siren song of sports, that's so prevalent here on the east coast (thanks to the lucrative sports academies businesses)? Or maybe danzin_gurl is in Texas, or Arizona, where there's explosive growth of young families, and dance schools are flourishing, no matter what.

Just curious: don't mean to hijack this topic either.

Yup, born and raised in Utah... Basically if your daughter isn't a dancer (especially in my town) or concert pianist, you are a bad mother. Here, drill is like a religion and there are a TON of dancers. (lots of kids too, which helps). My high school has had 4 top 10 SYTYCDers... If that gives you an idea of how my area feels about competitive dance.

My school was in a very, sports-oriented town with 3 dance schools, two who were very Dolly Dinkle and perfect for those in sports. You could get four or five lessons (1/2 hour each), in one night. Since they only worked on dances for recital, there was no technique.

Everyone said that my school, with 90 minute classes, would never go. Well, I had huge, teen classes and so many in ballet. Why? I do not know.

I think because I never did anything but look ahead and go for what I wanted. I don't know.

One thing,m I always had a positive, "I can do it", attitude and was not afraid to do it all, by myself. I had high rent, too. Maybe there is no real reason, maybe it was just meant to be.

^^^ Did it help that you were near two colleges that had degree programs for dance majors, but too far from the Rock School?

And it's one thing being in a "sports-oriented" town but quite another being in a "dance hostile" locale. Practically every after school activity in our local elementary, middle, and High School is set up to run for hours EVERY night - a real boon to working moms, so parents won't complain. Unless a child does no extracurriculars, my dancers, who were in Band and Musical Theater, usually could not free up for my one hour dance class once a week. Here, Dance is intentionally frozen out, and no one really cares, except me - and there's nothing I can do about it!

We are near colleges with dance programs, but my town has only one high school. I do not think that they have programs that intense, but dance was looked on, and still is, as just for kids and not serious. My students would hear about it in school, all of the time.

"You dance? Like that's a work out... not."

My students would invite them and say, "Take one of my teacher's classes and you will not say that, again."