Inquiry task 2D

"The hierarchy of education".  Being a dance teacher I feel passionately about this and it is so wonderfully expressed by Sir Robinson in his speech.  Is there a culture out there in the World that does stand the arts in the same importance in education as fact based subjects?  In this speech by Ken Robinson published on the TED website, he makes a controversial point. We live in a culture where academic subjects and those who do well at them are held in high regard and the arts are undermined. He believes, like me that all areas of education and growing up are equally as important. I don't believe that any subject is more important than any other, and there may well be a majority of people who would not enjoy dance and will flourish in other areas.   But what about the percentage that 'dance to think'?  Don't we have a duty as a country/culture/World to cater for everyone in their education?   Dance should not be seen as a past time.  For me it is when I feel like I am thinking and learning to my full capacity and therefore a necessity. 

Twyla Tharp spoke about 'muscle memory' as a form of intelligence which dancers use.  She thought that muscle memory should not be 'accessed by conscious thought'  (Tharp and Reiter, 2006) as it is something that we know innately or  is tacit knowledge.  Similarly Howard Gardner,  thought that people had various intelligences, one of them being bodily/kinaesthetically.  These ideas are widely known as a theories about learning and people's learning styles.   Why then, in schools do we not incorporate movement more into the learning of other subjects?   For me it seems so restrictive that children sit still for the majority of the 6/7 hour school day.   I truly believe that their are some that need to move to learn,  because I was one of them.  I am not generalising,  I know that the majority of the population do their thinking and learning being still, but I don't think it is the answer for everyone. 

Today I read an article about Isadora Duncan.  When her children were growing up she taught them about the arts, the theatre and literature, that was all.   People of the 1900's would have thought this radical and absurd, which it is.   I thought however, if she had been a famous academic who only taught her children about say, mathematics and science would people have had the same view?  
http://learningenglish.voanews.com/content/isadora-duncan-1877-1927-the-mother-of-modern-dance-101714348/114147.html

So far through this section focusing on reflective practice I have been really drawn to learning more about this idea of different intelligences and how people learn.  I am interested in finding out more about research that has been done in using movement to teach other subjects.   I would like to look at any corroborative research that not all people can sit still to learn, and movement in learning other subjects could be beneficial for some.

I have started to become more aware of the different thinking / learning styles in children that I teach over the past few weeks, and this had made an impact on how I am teaching.  In one of our Skype sessions, myself and Jessica spoke about how we have thought about changing what we are doing 'in-action' rather than reflecting about it afterwards.   I also have thought about changing the structure during the class if something is not working as I want it to.   So, I've changed the default way I go into teaching.  Sometimes by teaching the dance first,  sometimes by showing them first, sometimes listening to the music and asking the children what it makes them think of etc.  So I think by being more aware of different learning processes I am more open to changing the structure of a class to get the most out of children if it is not working the way I think  it could.