The Evolution of Ballet Pedagogy: A Study of Traditional and Contemporary Approaches
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71222/2nw5qw82Keywords:
ballet pedagogy, traditional teaching methods, contemporary teaching methods, teacher-student dynamics, creative pedagogy, technology in balletAbstract
Ballet pedagogy has evolved significantly over the centuries, with traditional teaching methods focused on strict technical mastery and contemporary approaches emphasizing creativity, individuality, and holistic development. This paper explores the key differences between traditional and modern ballet teaching methodologies, examining their implications for dance education and the training of future professional dancers. A comparative analysis highlights the shifting teacher-student dynamics, assessment strategies, and the impact of technological innovations such as AI in ballet training. The paper discusses the challenges faced by educators in balancing tradition with innovation and offers recommendations for integrating modern pedagogical tools without compromising classical techniques. Additionally, the paper investigates the global influence on ballet pedagogy, emphasizing the importance of cultural exchange and inclusivity in shaping the future of ballet education. The study concludes with reflections on the potential of technology and the importance of continued teacher development to address the evolving needs of ballet students.
References
1. K. Schupp, “Rethinking the pedagogy of dance pedagogy,” Res. Dance Educ., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 254–267, 2024, doi: 10.1080/14647893.2022.2083596.
2. E. C. Warburton, “Recentering Ballet for Twenty-First-Century Dance Education,” Dance Educ. Pract., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 7–13, 2025, doi: 10.1080/23734833.2024.2434426.
3. R. Elliott, “Facilitating ‘Corrective Experiences’ with Ballet: The Site of Trauma as the Site of Healing,” J. Dance Educ., pp. 1–11, 2025, doi: 10.1080/15290824.2024.2423382.
4. G. Docherty, S. Bennett, L. Clements, A. Pereira, and M. Mason, “Psychological Well-Being and Adult Ballet: From the Per-spective of the Adult Ballet Teacher,” J. Dance Educ., pp. 1–12, 2025, doi: 10.1080/15290824.2024.2447560.
5. D. Dornelles de Almeida, “Haptic and deep sensing in ballet class,” Senses Soc., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 112–129, 2025, doi: 10.1080/17458927.2024.2350805.
6. L. V. McCabe and D. Risner, “Using student field observations in dance pedagogy coursework: Learner and teacher perspec-tives,” J. Dance Educ., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 23–34, 2025, doi: 10.1080/15290824.2023.2214558.
7. D. Wilson and P. Richards, “Building a case for coaching: informing an innovative, pedagogical approach to dancer devel-opment,” Res. Dance Educ., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 313–330, 2024, doi: 10.1080/14647893.2022.2097656.
8. E. Cholewicka, “The autopoiesis of ballet. How the classical dance education system affects the lack of female ballet leaders in Poland,” Res. Dance Educ., pp. 1–20, 2025, doi: 10.1080/14647893.2025.2455678.
9. C. Moss-Thorne, “How Histories and Pedagogies Intertwine: An Educator's Purpose,” Dance Chronicle, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 380–406, 2024, doi: 10.1080/01472526.2024.2376458.
10. S. Wensel, G. Kerr, and K. A. Tamminen, “‘The abuse of minors you witness or experience’: A qualitative study of former professional ballet school students' characterizations of maltreatment,” Child Abuse Negl., vol. 155, p. 106982, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2024.106982.
11. Y. Huang, “Enhancing ballet posture Teaching: Evaluation of a scientific computing model with motion capture integration,” Entertain. Comput., vol. 52, p. 100824, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.entcom.2024.100824.
12. Y. Hashimoto, N. Murakoshi, and M. Higashide, “Somatic Feedback Design for Ballet Studios in Japan: A Case Study on In-tegrating Somatic Education in Ballet Training,” J. Dance Educ., pp. 1–11, 2025, doi: 10.1080/15290824.2024.2447561.
