[NZL] Ralph Buck

[Abstract] This paper demonstrates an auto-narrative that reflects upon dominant observations of contemporary issues shaping dance education in China.Through a constructivist lens, this paper presents dialogic perspectives based upon conversations, conferences, and experiences while the author travelled along parts of the Silk Road in China from 2018 to 2019.Philosophic and pragmatic issues arose concerning the “what” and “how” is dance education.Preservice teacher education was found to be a dominant issue concerning contemporary dance education in China.At the heart of many conversations were teacher’s concerns relating to their lack of confidence in engaging with learners and implementing diverse pedagogical strategies.With a focus on teacher-learner relationships, this paper notes the importance of adopting diverse pedagogical paradigms.

[Keywords] dance education, China, pedagogy, relationships, constructivism

Introduction

During my years in dance education, I have travelled to many countries, exchanging ideas and learning about diverse contexts, histories, practices and concerns.Of the many journeys I have taken, none has piqued my curiosity and expanded my horizon more than my journey along the Silk Road in China.While travelling, I have built networks and partnerships that not only facilitate sharing but foster diplomacy and an “opening-up” of understandings.

The Silk Road, which stands for exchange and trade, sees a long history in China.The Silk Road, a term coined by the German geographer Ferdinand von Richthofen in 1877[1], has evolved into a world changing network of trade routes presently re-labelled, expanded and politicised as the Belt and Road Initiative[2].

Brady[3]and Ang[4]have noted that these can be either positive or negative.Against this historical backdrop of trade, exchange and internationalisation, this article presents an auto-narrative that critically reflects on dance education as I recall my journey along parts of the Silk Road from 2018 to 2019 from Beijing to Dunhuang.

This article presents an auto-narrative that reflects on dominant observations made at the National Dance Aesthetic Education Alliance’s first Silk Road symposium in Dunhuang, 27—28 September 2018, the second Silk Road symposium at Northwest University Lanzhou, 24—25 November 2019, and then my subsequent workshops and discussions held at Beijing Dance Academy, in December 2019.As I reflect, I ponder on the contemporary issues shaping dance education in China.How do these current concerns and practices fit within current policy agendas and what are implications for dance educators in China?

An “outsider and insider” to China: Methodology

In examining the dominant dance education issues and directions raised at the two Silk Road symposiums, one in Dunhuang in 2018, and the other in Lanzhou in 2019, and observations while I taught in Beijing, my lived experience[5]was valued.As I reflect, I take a phenomenological perspective[6]that respects the voices both whispered and pronounced[7], and actions of participants during conference exchanges and conversations.Moreover, constructivism[8]offers a theoretical framework for examining meanings and dispositions through a dialogic and reflective process.

I respect the theoretical position championed by Elliot Eisner[9]that there are many ways to know the world and that meaning making is an ongoing process of re-making of meanings.As such, I accept that the auto-narrative presented in this article represents dialogic perspectives based upon my conversations, discussions, insights and experiences[10].I acknowledge that the comments and reflections made in this article are my perspectives and that these may be different from other observers’ perspectives.As Ellis commented, “research, writing, story and method that connect the autobiographical and personal to the cultural, social, and political”[11]XIXis a core tenant of autobiographical research.

As I travelled along the Silk Road, I was both an “outsider” and an “insider”[12].I am not Chinese and do not speak Mandarin, and as such I am an “outsider” to the concerns and contexts often spoken about in the afore-mentioned events and situations.Moreover, these meetings and events in China are not always easily accessed by international dance scholars.Yet, I was welcomed and invited because of my expertise in dance education pedagogy.In this respect, I was an “insider” as I have often been welcomed by Chinese dance educators into their networks and institutions, and it is along such international dance education networks and routes that I am well journeyed.My outsider-insider perspective enables me to bring diverse insights into play, and to observe trends and tensions common across the global networks of dance education and learn from ideas and practices within China.Having said that, my observations require interpretation, as a narrative alone does not serve as data[13].As such, while I share my narrative I also need to be reflexive[14]in drawing out the underlying theme and concepts evident in the narrative.This article provides a glimpse, albeit fleeting and mine, into contemporary dance education issues and directions within China and specifically within the context of the Silk Road.

Rocking the cradle: A brief context of dance education in China

I begin my reflection by taking a moment to position my journey in a brief historical context.The establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 instituted the main goal of socialist education focusing on “making the educated people develop morally, intellectually and physically and become labourers with a socialist consciousness and culture.”[15]114The building of a socialist education system found China looking towards the Soviet Union while the USA and the UK resisted engagement with the PRC.

As part of building a philosophical socialist alliance, China established “peak” arts institutions[16].In 1954, Beijing Dance School was established and quickly became the pre-eminent dance training institution, earning the title as “the cradle of dance in China”[17]6.Beijing Dance School evolved into Beijing Dance Academy (BDA) in 1978, offering a Bachelor’s degree in dance with the first cohort graduated in 1980.

The BDA borrowed from the Soviet Union a dominant training pedagogy[18]that had a clear focus on training professional dancers for performance careers[19][20]. As Jin noted, “sustaining the purity of a professional training system was always the key philosophy for its (BDA’s) development and reformation”[19]29.Subsequently, pedagogical priorities were informed by technical excellence, performance ability and mastery of skill as determined by the teacher.This training model became the status quo in tertiary dance education in China, with BDA maintaining to this day its status as the leading Chinese tertiary dance institution.

At the end of the 20th Century, dance education in China began to change[21].The influential Programme for the Reform and Development of Education in China, and more specifically the subsequent National Overall Programme for Art Education in School (1989—2000) initiated widespread reform within secondary and tertiary education.An aspirational outcome of these policies was a shift away from teacher training models validating authoritarian attitudes, towards developing learners’ independent and creative thinking.In line with this vision was the development of the Quality-oriented Education project.

The beginning of the 21st Century saw a philosophical shift away from a professional dance training model towards a wider appreciation of inclusive aesthetics education.Professor Yisheng Lu led this change as he developed his pedagogical theory of Quality-oriented Dance Education (QODE)[19].Lu’s aim through QODE was to make dance education more accessible and foster the learners’ holistic competencies, such as creativity, collaboration, leadership, and problem-solving skills.Liu examined the contrast between Lu’s QODE and predominant training methods and noted the challenge of moving away from teacher-oriented and subject-oriented education towards student-centred education[21].Liu’s analysis revealed the ongoing authority of the teacher’s voice, teacher’s demonstrations, teacher’s decisions, and teacher’s ambitions.

It was also noted by Bush and Qiang[22]that teacherled education was influenced by “the traditional cultural concept that students are educated by parents and teachers through childhood and that they need to respect the teachers in classrooms due to the culture of adoring authority”[21]35.The dominant challenge is that “dance teacher education in China continues to highlight the importance of dance technique over the knowledge of how to teach”[21]37, and this challenge is not unique to China.

There is considerable dance education literature that articulates the value of developing dance pedagogical knowledge.However, as Jin noted, in China, challenges remain in terms of how to provide professional development in teacher pedagogy that would enable the development of new skills when leading teacher training institutions were still strongly influenced by the professional training mode[19].A deeper examination of what dance teacher training/education entails in China reveals a systemic attitude that presents a distinction between theoretical knowledge and practical knowledge.This distinction presents a barrier for applying theory in practical contexts and creating a hierarchy that values the theory of pedagogy more than practising pedagogy.Following Liu’s study in 2020, it appears ironic that practical knowledge in the Chinese context is seen to be more relevant to a teacher’s effectiveness, while the “practical knowledge” valued is predominantly concerned with dance skill acquisition rather than the development of pedagogical skills.The challenges seem to be connected to teacher education and the deconstruction of long held practices that foreground the authority of the teacher as the source of knowledge, as opposed to this author’s epistemological position that knowledge is created in dialogue between teacher, learner and their contexts[23].

It needs to be stated that the issues around shifting pedagogy and power relationships within the classroom are abundant within classrooms across the world, not just in China.Taking a constructivist position, I am frustrated by a lack of comprehension of the value of talking with students rather than talking to them.This applies to many educators in diverse cultures.Perceptions that inform traditions where knowledge rests in the hands of a few teachers are hard perception and belief to shift.

Jin, however, does point out the role of QODE in foregrounding the interaction between teacher and learner.It is clear that the development of QODE was in part attempting to cause a shift in meanings of dance education in China[24].That is, moving meanings away from skill and teacher-oriented education to a more student-centred and dialogic pedagogical model that develops competencies for the 21st Century and that in turn may lead to diverse career endpoints[21].Again, having said that, Jin and Martin have noted that the leaders of the major and emerging dance education faculties are all educated at BDA, where their training was dominated by conservatoire-style dance training[18].The power of prior learning experience in shaping teacher beliefs and practices is ever-present in China as pedagogy and curriculum traditions are held on to consciously and unconsciously.Again, I hasten to add that this is a global “hanging on”, not only a Chinese issue.

Whispers on the Silk Road: Narratives

I have always been interested in the aura of the Silk Road, so when the first Silk Road Dance Education Symposium invited me to travel to Dunhuang, I agreed very quickly.I was looking forward to seeing and feeling the landscapes that shaped some of the world’s major trading routes and witnessing ancient places of cultural exchange.I was also very keen to meet new people and experience a more provincial China.The following narratives remind me of my travels and key ideas and practices I heard and saw repeatedly at these conferences on the Silk Road and in Beijing.

In Dunhuang, the formal presentations were delivered in a relentless stream of formal talks in Mandarin.It was in the morning’s tea and lunch breaks that I had the most meaningful exchanges, and gathered a good sense of what mattered in and beyond each talk.My chats were enabled by a translator and all names in the following are pseudonyms.

A lunch break conversation with Lucy revealed her reflections on what she heard during the morning session.She decided to write down her response, which was then translated.As she read the response in English, the translator checked the meaning in Chinese with Lucy.She had two initial thoughts: Chinese dance educators are increasingly valuing international perspectives, and they want to be part of international dance education dialogue.My immediate thoughts were that Lucy was being polite for my sake, but on further discussion, she recognised her own and other dance educators’ confidence to explore new approaches to teaching and learning dance in China.

Lucy went on to speak of the increased valuing of dance education, alongside performance and choreography careers.While Lucy recognised that there were diverse meanings of dance education, she noted that the work of respected education leaders, such as Prof.Lyu Yisheng, were finally gaining and in her words: moving China forward.

Lucy observed that there was a need for more and more “qualified” dance educators, who are dance educators with teaching strategies and skills for including diverse learners within dance in primary schools and dance academies.She also commented that an authoritarian style of pedagogy continues to dominate nearly all dance contexts in China.She said, “It was an ongoing struggle to shift people’s focus away from only winning competitions and developing extreme skills.” She was happy to add however that “dance educators across China were happy to work together and create a new momentum for change.” She said, “We don’t deny our history, but we just want to keep evolving.It is a quiet revolution.”

At the next morning’s tea, time was found for a chat with Jim who could speak Mandarin and English, and was undertaking postgraduate studies.He quickly summed up the ideas that he was hearing in the conference.His first observation was that speakers were noting their increasing dissatisfaction with authoritarian pedagogies.He said, “It is apparent that the speakers do not see this style of teaching as relevant enough to meet the needs of the younger generation.” I asked if he agreed.He hesitated, and agreed, but also noted that there was still value in the authoritarian model.He went on to state, “The place of the teacher in Chinese society is high; teachers are respected for their knowledge and influence on children.I don’t think teachers in China will give this esteem and authority away easily, and nor do I think the society will change that much.”

I found that several speakers commented on the need for a portfolio of skills that would prepare them for multiple career possibilities.Jim agreed and also identified that teachers wanted students to learn skills beyond dance.I asked if he could give me an example, “You know, something like learning to work in teams and communicate with each other.When we teach dance in groups we can develop these skills.” He felt that the dance education trainees required “less dancing skill and more dance teaching skill.” As we had another tea, we quickly discussed how this might happen.He wanted more theory, while I argued for a more experiential approach.

It was clear that we had different ideas, and as we discussed them further the word creativity surfaced.I remembered hearing a speaker’s curiosity concerning how we teach for creativity.I asked Jim if my observation was accurate and what this meant, and he replied, “Chinese students and teachers want to have creative thinking and ideas but are not sure how to construct lessons that foster this in the everyday general education classroom.” We both heard several speakers advocating more theory about pedagogy in teacher training and that would help foster more creative learning.I spoke for less theory and more experience in “playing with teaching” and exploring what worked and what did not work according to each trainee teacher and their context.

After listening to several people’s thoughts about the conference and reviewing notes taken during the conference, a clear theme emerged that in turn revealed sub-themes.For me, the strong emergent theme focused on pre-service dance teacher education.Related to this were smaller themes that spoke to career endpoints: dominance of BDA’s pedagogy model, challenging dominant authoritarian notions of pedagogy, and importance of learning holistic competencies.

A year later many of us gathered again in Lanzhou.The second Silk Road symposium was characterized by a much more dynamic philosophical structure where all speakers were given five minutes to speak, with most of the conference time devoted to small group discussions.This conference also specifically included international and Chinese postgraduate students and diverse scholars from across China, New Zealand, Finland, the USA, and Norway.

Pedagogy was the key word that drove this conference, and we shared views around the usual perceptions of authoritarian and transformational pedagogy.We did not dwell on the historical positioning of these pedagogies but more on how they are valued in different contemporary teaching and learning contexts that are informed by different educational aims and outcomes.We danced and talked about what is actually happening in classrooms in China now.We focused on who are the learners and what are their needs in diverse contexts; what is dance education’s role in society; how we will educate the next generation of teachers who will cope with shifting ideals of society and learners’ needs.It quickly became apparent that the critical examination of teachers practice in China was needed in order to understand and support China’s political agenda espoused by China’s grand strategy[25]and the Belt and Road visions[2].

As always, I found the key conversation emerged in the sideline of a conference.I asked a group of postgraduates and to-be teachers in China what mattered most to them in dance education at present.Initially shy, they warmed to speak of their lack of confidence in teaching children who are not interested in dance.I quipped, “like nearly all children in primary schools”, and they laughed and agreed, asking “how do you control them, and how do you get them moving and interested?”

After I returned to Beijing the next week and teaching undergraduates at BDA, many of the issues discussed in Lanzhou resurfaced in the dance studio classroom.I was teaching students who were training to be dance educators.We were doing a session and I asked the class to think about teaching their future students to learn in, about and through dance.A young female class member quietly said, “I don’t think we are ready for that way of thinking about dance in China yet.” As a class we had a great conversation about this, and these 18-year-olds’ perceptions of dance education in China.They were positive that dance was valuable in education.Their rationales for dance in education, however, mostly focused on the value of learning steps in order to either win competitions, or as a means for being recognised as a “student with special talent”, hence gaining extra “credits” that would get them into better universities or jobs[20].They also spoke a lot about learning dance traditions.When I asked them about the value of dance in fostering expression and creativity, they were quick to agree that this was important, but also shyly admitted that they did not fully understand how to teach for individuality and creativity.This led me to ask about 21st Century competencies of teamwork, collaboration, creativity, leadership, problem solving and so on.I pointed out that when I say learning through dance, I am focusing on learning more holistic life-long skills and attitudes such as those just mentioned.Again, the students understood what I meant but struggled with how they would teach dance in such a way that taught 21st Century skills.I finished my teaching at the end of the week, and thanked the students very much for their honesty and their willingness to work with me in exploring ideas and concepts that may have been challenging for them.

As I reflect on my experience in China, I am struck time and again by the openness to debate and ideas, but also the reticence or inability to actually integrate many of the ideas into practice in the classroom.In sum, I feel that what I heard most and observed along “my small silk road” was an understanding of what is happening within dance pedagogy theoretically but a lack of confidence in how to actualise theory in practice in the classroom.There was a hunger for a text book that would teach students HOW to teach, and while such a book might be useful, I reiterated my belief that it was hands on experience of doing it and making mistakes and doing it again that was needed.

As I sit here in New Zealand writing this reflection, I realise that it is the teachers who must keep alert to who they are teaching and adjust what and how we teach to meet the needs and contexts of the learner.There is nothing new in this statement, and yet for me right now, it is a realisation that I need to refresh my skill sets and expectations in response to who these learners are and their contexts.

I return to an earlier observation that pre-service teacher education and professional development are two contemporary issues affecting dance education in China presently.Especially it is the HOW of teaching that needs practice.When we were in Lanzhou, much of the small group discussions were about how dance is taught in different contexts to different learners, how creativity is fostered, how we teach ALL learners not just the dance students, how we assess choreography and creativity, how QODE supports a new vision for Dance in Schools.

There are many themes I could select and discuss in response to my observations above.However, at the heart of many conversations in respect to how we teach are the relationships between the teacher and the learner.It is this relationship that informs how we shape and implement the curriculum; it is this relationship that informs how we foster participation and inclusion of diverse learners; it is this relationship that recognises that there may be diverse meanings of what dance education is, and in turn, how the teacher invites such diversity of meanings into the classroom.A focus on relationships returns the focus to who we are teaching and how we are engaging learners in dance education.Jin and Martin alluded to these questions when they spoke to issues around meanings of dance in higher dance education in China, “The various meanings of dance that have developed within a Chinese context have resulted in certain approaches and practices being valued more than others.”[20]5Listening to whispers I heard on the Silk Road, how we make dance accessible to all is an emergent pressing question and in my view teachers in China are struggling with how to do this.

Fostering teacher/learner relationships in dance education classrooms

A focus on relationships returns the focus to who we are teaching and how we are engaging learners in dance education.How we construct dance education in tomorrow’s schools in China will rest upon how teachers see themselves in the classroom in relation to history and in relation to the learners in front of them.As mentioned in the narratives, BDA and other dance education stakeholders in China are still grappling with a dance pedagogy borrowed from the Soviet Union that, as Jin and Martin note, placed emphasis on “subject-oriented, classroom-oriented and teacher-oriented education”[18]7.This along with the dominance Confucianism gives to the teacher[26]; and the valuing of examinations and competition[27]present dominant paradigms that teachers and students are struggling to overcome.

I feel that against the above historical and cultural backdrop many teachers were turning to Lu’s QODE with curiosity, with desperation, and with a strong belief that it offers a way to counter the dominant dance education that is characterised by elitism, professional dance preparation, and authoritarian pedagogies[28].QODE advocates inclusion of diverse learners and creativity within dance classrooms, but how this is actioned remains unclear for many people.QODE arguably shifts the emphasis from “instruction” to “construction”, where teachers work with the students to create dance.QODE asks for different types of relationships to be formed in the classroom and hence a different dance pedagogy.The narratives above, however, present a picture where teachers are still struggling with “how” to foster this classroom relationship.

The value of the findings in this discussion in terms of relationships is supported by the literature and social constructivist theory that attests to the central role of relationships in education.Eisner argued that educational reform might only occur when complex relationships between educational intent, curriculum, teaching, assessment and systemic structures are seen ecologically or as interrelated[29].Connelly and Clandinin also drew attention to relationships that originate within the teaching practice in the classroom, but which are informed and related to cultural and systemic influences outside the classroom[30].

Relationships are integral to theorising about education from a social constructivist perspective.Constructivism rejects the Cartesian epistemology that knowledge is a reality discovered, arguing instead that knowledge is constructed and that an individual makes the meaning of the world within “an interactional dynamic”[31]xiii.In her study of beginning teachers’ knowledge in action, Ethell described the relationship between personal experience and the translation of that experience for teaching purposes[32].Gallego, Hollingsworth and Whitenack noted that reform in primary schools must acknowledge the relationships within the “nested social, political, and cultural contexts of the school communities in which teachers and students are situated”[33]241.

The Chinese educators and students spoke of their specific relationships with teachers, learners, history, curriculum, and pedagogy.They talked of dance experiences gained in their lifetime and related this to a future dance education that children might value and experience in their communities.They talked of the dominant training curriculum offered at dominant institutions such as BDA, and how this impacted the wider curriculum and pedagogy in China.They also spoke of themselves as teachers and learners struggling with old and new pedagogies.This demonstrates to me that teachers were not only aware of these relationships and actively interpreting and managing them, but suggests that these relationships inform their meaning of dance in the classroom and the subsequent dance experiences offered.

Implicit in the narratives above are theories of learning, and the teachers’ observations of not meeting learners’ emerging needs in a rapidly changing China.What I saw and heard were teachers not knowing how to build and value their relationships with their learners that in turn shaped the dance experiences offered and created in the lesson.This in turn informs what careers were accounted for within dance education graduate profiles.

Underpinning the teachers’ comments about meeting the learners’ needs were the identified concerns for providing comfortable learning environments, support, trust, ownership and appropriate learning activities.How these qualities were created in the classroom was in a large part dependent upon the teachers knowing or, as Eisner said, “seeing”[9]68the children.Marques in her study of dance education in Sao Paulo, Brazil, commented on the vital importance of seeing the learner.“Perhaps we should…stop and look straight at the students before us (not the ones described in the books) and WITH them seek alternatives.”[34]17As the students in Beijing and Lanzhou noted, they recognise the need to see each learners’ creativity, but accepted that they struggle with connecting learners with a curriculum that sought such outcomes.As several teachers in Dunhuang and Lanzhou observed, they will need to shift their emphasis away from teaching skills to teaching children.

The relationship between teacher and learner is often described in the teaching literature in terms of the production and reproduction of knowledge.Two models predominate.One is the traditional or “transmission” model, which confers the teacher’s knowledge to a learner who is ready to receive the knowledge.The other is an interaction model, where the teacher and the learner are active participants in creating knowledge[35].

The transmission model is uni-linear, involving oneway monologues, with the knowledge being deposited or “banked”[36]with the learner.Dewey described this pedagogy as subject-centred and authoritarian[37].In respect to dance in education, Bolwell described this learning process in terms of “rote teaching”[38]89, suitable for specific stylistic vocabularies of dance.Stinson stated, “This is the reproductive function of education.Traditional methods of teaching dance technique fulfil this function.”[39]27

The interactive model values the exchange between the teacher and the child in the production of knowledge, and is often known as “student-centred learning”, whereby “[children’s] personal experience is validated”[40]10.The latter pedagogy applied to dance in the classroom leads to lessons where students actively create dance from their unique bodies of movement valuing the liberating and active process of creating and critiquing knowledge.Facilitating critical dialogue and the development of personal understanding, “that is liberating and empowering”[35]32, becomes central to the dance teachers’ role when this theory is applied in the classroom.

Similarly, another model is a constructivist pedagogy that takes as its starting point children’s understanding, “and what they are likely to find puzzling”[41]8.The characteristics of constructivist pedagogy have been enumerated in the literature.Howe and Berv presented the core premises as:

1) instruction must take as its starting point the knowledge, attitudes, and interests students bring to the learning situation, and 2) instruction must be designed so as to provide experiences that effectively interact with these characteristics of students so that they may construct their own understanding[42]31.

Applied to dance, constructivist pedagogy acknowledges the individuality of children in terms of their ideas, their creativity and their bodies.Individuality thus applied refers to the inclusion and acceptance of a diversity of individuals, not in terms of the dancer maintaining notions of otherness such as the gifted individual.Constructivist pedagogy allows for difference and actively works against perpetuation of stereotypes associated with gender, body types, dance hierarchies, and abilities.

The practicalities of classrooms in China, which include time constraints, parental and systemic expectations, diverse curriculum content, children’s learning preferences, and teaching preferences, would indicate that some information may best be taught in an instructive manner.Constructivist pedagogy as detailed by Howe and Berv[42]recognises that it is impractical and philosophically misleading to be totally child-centred.They deferred to classroom reality and proposed a conceptualisation of constructivist pedagogy that takes constructivist-learning theory and supports it by “mixing ostensibly constructivist and non-constructivist teaching techniques as appropriate.”[42]32Dewey, who disagreed with the exaggerated swings to and from childcentred or teacher-centred approaches, would most likely have supported such a view[37].As several 18-year-olds in BDA inferred in our discussions of their teaching, teachers have to arrange their teaching to cater for their personal experiences and skills, and those of the learners.

When talking about the education of the next generation of dance educators in China, I return to my description of a classroom as a community of learners.This view reflects the thinking of Fosnot, who wrote “Dialogue within a community engenders further thinking.” The classroom needs to be seen as a “community of discourse engaged in activity, reflection and conversation.”[43]29—30

As heard in Dunhuang and Lanzhou, teachers wish to create more democratic classrooms that foster creativity, problem solving, risk taking and collaboration.However, in seeking these competencies, teachers must also accept that this brings with it diverse opinions and values that require voicing and management.A dynamic constructivist epistemology emerges from a democratic position.It begins with the students and the teacher’s own values and meanings, and if managed well may lead to contested, relevant and owned shared meanings.The teacher invites a “fallible view of knowledge by inviting critical perspectives”[42]36.As Dewey noted, this pedagogy is not easy to enact, as it requires considerable insight into the learners’ starting points in respect to culture, needs, and interests[37].Nonetheless, the benefits are immense in terms of the personal relevance the new understandings have for the learner, society and the teacher.

Riding the Iron Rooster home: A conclusion

At the outset, I asked: what were the contemporary issues shaping dance education in China? As I think back to my travels along the Silk Road, I conclude that the key issues and challenges were philosophic and pragmatic.The main philosopical challenge was about shifting the dominant relationship in the classroom from one of “control” to that characterised by “partnerships”.I believe that teachers and learners in China can more ably work together to build understandings that are more inclusive and relevant and in so doing becoming more resilient to China’s rapidly changing society.The second challenge is related to more day-to-day reality issues of fostering and managing learners’ engagement in dance education in such a way that children, parents and society saw the relevance of dance education in the curriculum.The teachers want to know HOW to engage the learners in their diversity.The teachers know what they aspire to achieve, but seek support in order to achieve the vision of dance maintaining a more meaningful place within primary and secondary school curricula.

As I wrote this conclusion in 2020, COVID— 19 forced the educational world onto ZOOM and similar technologies.It is ironic that we were talking about the power of relationships, the ideals of connecting across borders and globalisation of pedagogy, and here we are looking at technology as a vital and central part of teaching and learning across the globe.This too now raises more issues around access to technology and the emerging socio-economic divide of the “data rich”, and “data poor” societies and the implications for teachers and learners in dance education.

Change is ever-present, but it is how we choose to deal with it that is important.In the 2018 and 2019 Silk Road symposiums, the dance educators from China were not fearful of change; they appeared to be more than willing to shape new directions in dance education and pedagogy and in so doing proactively shape their own professional future.They wanted more experience of alternative dance education pedagogies and curriculum.They wanted to explore the strengths and weaknesses and learn from others’ experiences as much as their own.I was in Dunhuang, Lanzhou and Beijing for a similar reason, seeking new ways to teach and learn, and adapt my teaching in ways that would better serve learners in diverse countries.

As a traveller, I took the travel writer Paul Theroux’s[44]advice and rode the Iron Rooster train out of Dunhuang.As I stared at the desert landscape passing by in my leisurely train, a high-speed modern train zoomed in the opposite direction.I was again reminded of the relevance of technology and the speed of change in China.Literally, people are moving faster and so is dance education.WeChat, fast trains, and The Belt and Road initiative are allowing ideas and people to move faster and to trade ideas faster.The young postgraduates at Dunhuang were nearly all speaking Mandarin and English, seeking international internships or the like, and ALL posting information on WeChat that was being “picked up” in Shanghai, Beijing, Taipei and other areas immediately.Again, technology made me think: do we need to travel to places like Dunhuang to have such exchanges and to “trade” ideas.In my stomach, I responded with a resounding YES.It is the felt experience, the eyeto-eye meetings, the chance conversations with unknown people that makes travel and conferences so important.So I ride the Iron Rooster to Urumqi to meet with dance teachers at the Xinjiang Institute of Arts and continue to listen to further whispers of change along the Silk Road.