[中][Eng]紐約學校舞蹈教育的考察 A Comparative Study on the Dance Education of New York
（原文刊於第三冊第二期Originally published in dance journal 3-2）
前言
香港舞蹈界近年興起討論舞蹈教育對舞蹈發展重要性。較有代表的論述如下：
王志德先生在九七年香港國際藝術教育會議中展述，舞蹈應從體育科中擺脫出來成為獨立學科。他同時促請教育署及課程教育小組採納舞蹈成為中學會考科目之一。1
香港舞蹈聯盟於九八、九九兩年舉辦之《各自各舞蹈節》其中的舞蹈論壇俱以發展舞蹈中學作為舞蹈教育的論述主題，提出參考台灣左營高中及廣州舞蹈中學等專科學校的模式，作為日後發展的藍本。2
而香港舞蹈界聯席會議則邀請了歐建平先生，介紹歐美舞蹈學院的經驗， 作為本地舞蹈教育發展的楷模。3
上面論述的重點，可以分為兩個方面。第一，發展香港的舞蹈教育，應以政府是否把舞蹈納入學校正規課程，作為指標；而這又以舞蹈是否被決定為中學會考之科目之一，作為驗證的標準。第二，促使政府興建舞蹈中學，培養專業人才。歐美舞蹈的蓬勃發展便成範例。簡單的說，第一項針對普及工作，第二項針對水平提高。
第一項目標，是爭取課程的重新制定。這個論述的基礎假設是：舞蹈藝術活動之所以相對地落後，是因為常規學校教育中沒有此訓練。現存的只屬體育科目中的選修項目 ，一般學校不會選擇教授。既然沒有接觸，便容易造成陌生。陌生就是不懂得，舞蹈便不可能發展。所以把舞蹈獨立開來並納入正規課程，同時介定為會考科目，使學校以至學生， 家長，重視其重要性，如此，舞蹈活動便會有長足的發展。
第二項論述又可有如此的伸述。舞蹈訓練須由年少開始。當兒童身體仍未完全發展，予以充分訓練，才可為日後的專業鋪好基礎。目前演藝學院本地收生不足，亦缺乏良好基礎， 自然影響學生質素。基礎不佳，專業訓練趕不上，又影響學員將來成為成功舞者的機會。沒有成熟的、水平高的舞者，何來成功的舞蹈？沒有成熟的舞蹈創作演出，又如何談得上舞蹈發展？當然，這就假設了有良好訓練基礎的舞蹈員 ，便可帶動舞蹈活動，便有好的舞蹈作品／表演。理由是活動多了，演出多了 ，觀眾便多，這就有作勃發展的機會。這邏輯有如經濟學中的Say’s Law ， 供應創造需求。4
兩項意見在邏輯及實証上能否站得住，目標是否清晰可行，都是本文要探討的。不過 ，先參考其他推展舞蹈教育的範例，來為香港作個旁証，相信會對有關討論有很大的幫助。現在世界舞蹈活動較為先進的地區有歐洲、美國及台灣。這報告選定了美國紐約作為考察對象，嘗試搜集，了解，以至分析其在舞蹈教育方面的狀況，然後作為案例，為香港的舞蹈教育評比研究。
美國紐約州市地區中小學舞蹈教育5之狀況
紐約在二次大戰後成為世界舞蹈之都，除卻在政治經濟上的優勢外，其在藝術上的積累及人才輩出，相信是為主要的原因。而舞蹈作為藝術，得以在形式和內涵上持續發展，其在教育方面的工作則不容忽視了。
在正規的大學舞蹈課程以外，民間的舞蹈中心，舞蹈團體及演出場地亦同時組織安排大量包括演出在內的舞蹈活動，舞蹈作為與趣活動到藝術表達，以至街頭演出 ，都是由各式各樣民間機構組織推動，這不單只提供了機會及資源給予藝術家創作，更重要的是積累起一代又一代的懂得舞蹈的觀眾，而舞團和藝術家也進駐常規學校，使舞蹈成了學校生活的一部份。筆者在九九年十月到十二月期間到紐約進行實地考察。冀圖了解它們的發展軌跡，教育理念，和運作模式。
據 ArtsConnection 的行政總監 Steven Tennen 的介紹 ，紐約市的藝術教育主要由三類機構推行。傳統上博物館的教育項目最為完整及久遠，如Metropolitan Museum of Art 就有六十多名專家從事教育工作，還有一千一百名義務工作者。 Museum of Modern Art、Whitney Museum 及 Guggenheim Museum 都有或大或小的教育部門。當然內容是以介紹館藏為主。
第二類是由劇場、藝術團體和藝術中心舉辦的教育活動。活動的目的自然是配合其本身的性質定位，達到拓展觀眾，擴大社會影響等目標。例如Joyce Theatre、 The Kitchen、 Dance Theatre Workshop、 Harkness Dance Center、Alvin Ailey Dance Company， Ballet Hispanic， Performance Space 122 。這類的機構最多，項目亦最多樣化，以下會詳加討論。
第三類就是 Steven Tennen 所從事的中介機構，他名之為 Dedicated Arts Education Institution 。在紐約市最有規模的就是ArtsConnection、 Center for Arts Education及Lincoln Center Institute6。它們為中小學設計不同的教育項目，然後請藝術家或藝術教育老師進駐學校。課程長短不一，但多成為學校常規課程中的一部份，而非課外活動。 因著經濟的發展，這類機構從各級政府及私人公司獲得較前為多的資助。規模在不斷拓大，而有關的會議及交流活動亦十分繁密。7
林肯表演藝術中心 Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts
因考察的對象以舞蹈教育為主，而博物館一類的機構則屬於視覺藝術範疇，故暫且不作評述。如果把舞蹈教育細分，可按以下四個不同類型的機構，順序評述：第一，在學校推動舞蹈活動的中介機構；第二，舞蹈中心；第三，舞蹈表演團體；第四，舞蹈大學。而考察的重點集中在它們為中、小學生設計並推行的舞蹈計劃。
中介機構
美國紐約的學制容許學校有較大的空間自由去安排課程。自然，學校也較願意接受藝術作為智育以外的部份課程。就以 ArtsConnection 而言，現在就為一百一十五所中、小學，三十五萬個學童提供不同形式的藝術教育計劃。行政總監 Steven Tennon 強調，課程必須為正規教育，而最理想應從小學開始。因為，課外活動可有可無，學校不可能高度重視；而從小學開始，可為學童成長奠定重視美感經驗和創作的習慣；到了中學，成長邁進另一階段，那時候才開始藝術教育，要花的氣力、資源會更多，要關注的問題更複雜。
Lincoln Center Institute 及Center for Arts Education 都是規模十分龐大的組織，但理念和 ArtsConnection 差距不大。前者較強調精緻的藝術形式，也較多和高等院校及大型的博物館合辦外展計劃；而後者則比較大眾化。但作為中介機構，就是從公營及私人機構取得資源，而後轉介藝術家到學校推行藝術教育，這基本格局是不變的。中間當然包括許多鼓吹，策劃，研究，談判等複雜工作。
舞蹈中心
考察中探訪了以下舞蹈中心：Joyce Theatre、Dance Theatre Workshop (DTW)8、The Kitchen、 Harkness Dance Center at 92nd Street 等。各個中心都有獨立的節目取向——例如The Kitchen 比較趨向選取後現代主義的作品，而 Joyce Theatre 則傾向較成熟及已建立了名聲的舞團節目——但它們對和舞蹈教育俱抱著積極進取的態度。
DTW以社區作中心，建立一個紐約的藝術家網絡。選取 Public Imaginations 的名字也多少反映了其取向。規模當然不可能很大 ， 影響也只限於其社區之內。而且，針對中小學生的也只有星期五的免費下午場演出 (Free Friday Matinee) 及給予兒童的舞蹈班。
Harkness Dance Center at 92nd Street 則另闢蹊徑，開辦舞蹈教育研究室 (Dance Education Laboratory)，實行師資培訓。現有六十學員，來自十五個國家，同時也利用了中心的設施設立課餘舞蹈班，每星期學員達四百至五百之多 。
The Kitchen 針對兒童舉辦 Kids in the Kitchen 計劃，既有外展的項目，也有駐在The Kitchen 內的。而短訓式的工作坊亦有不少，例如教育總監Treva Offutt 正為Bayview Correctional Facilities 設計連串的工作坊， 為懲教工作注入新的元素。
Joyce Theatre 有較完整的外展及駐場的舞蹈計劃，針對學生的分為Joyce Theatre as Classroom、 Dance Residencies in Schools 及 Outreach 。簡單說就是以演出和工作坊來推廣舞蹈，既在Joyce Theatre 內，也有在學校中進行。
舞蹈團體
紐約市內少說也有超過一百個大大小小的舞蹈團體。但擁有學校，推展舞蹈教育的，卻是不多。可在九九年的Dance Magazine 找到的，如Martha Graham、Merce Cunningham、Jose Lemon、Louise & Nickolas、Alvin Ailey、Trisha Brown、Ballet Hispanic等。舞蹈團之所以附設學校，主要是為了推動宣揚舞團的動作風格，所以一向少有進駐常規學校，及發展針對兒童成長而設計的計劃。經過初步了解，只有Alvis Ailey 建立了獨立的部門，推展這方面的工作。計劃的名稱是Ailey Dance Kids，和包括有為期八週的Intensive Workshop，技巧課，敲擊動作工作坊，高中學生大師班及Repertory Workshop。現在總共有一千學員，當然內容以教授Alvin Ailey 的風格為主。
舞蹈大學
如果光是看在學校內所教授的舞蹈，眾大專院校內的舞蹈系，可能是最頻繁的地點。當然大學教育以訓練專業人士為主，而且課程繁重，並不可能關注外展到中小學的教育活動。即使是有，也只因著招生的需要，向高中的學生宣示其課程的成績。和筆者走訪了Juilliard School、SUNY Purchase、University at Buffulo、SUNY及SUNY Brockport。其對中小學的計劃只限於在課程中加入教育理論的學習，而非積極推動有關活動。而專門的師資訓練有 Columbia University 的 Teachers' College及 New York University 的 School of Nursing and Arts Professions，但規模有限，影響也十分微弱。
倘若要排列美國紐約地區的中小學教育工作，其重要性的序次應是由中介機構，舞蹈中心，舞蹈團體到舞蹈大學。中介機構是純粹的藝術教育機構，拿了錢就去幹這一行，沒有風格形式上的偏向，而以學童的成長為最終的目的。舞蹈中心與舞蹈團體則勝在靈活，小規模和有取向性。而舞蹈大學則在理念上提供訓練。所以，紐約地區的舞蹈教育雖不能說辦得十分成功，至少一環扣一環，板板有眼。政府除卻從各個途徑提供資助，並沒有直接插手管理。而商界私人性質的贊助亦為重要的組成，例如Lincoln Center Institute 就有三十五家基金贊助，包括Cola Cola、Exxon、Mark & Spencer 等等。而Alvin Ailey 教育計劃的主要資源是來自Merrill Lynch。總之各個環節由民間組合，各組織的董事局任命行政班子，總體上俱由業界的專業人士管理。
紐約的經驗也強調容納教育於常規課程中，作為整體藝術教育的一部份。學校多可按其課程的需要，及設施條件等決定接納那幾個藝術形式，而這些科目會否納入考試並不重要，重點還放在欣賞及實踐上。概括的說，紐約的舞蹈教育是全民事業，政府商界提供資源，民間各類機構主導。
有關於舞蹈中學的考察，筆者走訪了 Talented Unlimited High School ，據其校長 Ira Shankman 的介述，課程分兩部份進行，一半為藝術課程，另一半是文化課，學生開始可選擇多過一門藝術，其後便得專注一項。校長說學生在其他學科的表現還高於全市的平均水平，學校人數四百，藝術科目有戲劇、舞蹈、音樂（器樂，聲樂）及視藝等。Ira Shankman 述說 Talented Unlimited High School 是紐約市內兩所具規模的演藝中學之一，而另一所則是Amsterdam Performing Arts High School。他說演藝中學的理念在於提供多一些藝術技能的訓練，但同時不能排除學習其他學科的機會，學童的成長始終要均衡的。所以，紐約並非產生少年舞蹈精英的地方。
Talented Unlimited High School 學生於2017年3月參與Australian Dance Company 大師班
Students of Talented Unlimited High School participated in Australian Dance Company Masterclass in March 2017 (Photo: http://tuhs.nyc/full-gallery/)
比較下之香港中、小學舞蹈教育
如前所述，香港常規教育中的舞蹈，是列在體育科目下的，尤如田徑，球類一般。其理念是舞蹈包括身體活動，因此舞蹈是被視作體育項目，而非藝術形式。舞蹈曾經是體育科會考課程中之一部份，因報考人數太少，到一九九六年已被剔除，所以舞蹈在常規教育中，不至於說不復存在，實際上也不重要。這當然與戲劇、曲藝、電影、錄影和形形式式的藝術類別一樣，根本沒有系統的介紹及提倡，更又遑論有系統的循序漸進的學習。
現行的課程中的音樂及美術， 情況又如何呢？根據考試局提供之資料，九八年報考香港中學會考音樂及美術兩科人數分別為231 及8,425。而同年度報考高級程度考試的人數是7及87。而報考英語 、中文及數學的為122,583、99,717及97,736。9 若是要比較的話，不難得出音樂科及美術科不備受重視的結論。究竟，列為獨立課程及成為會考科目，對其發展有何效用？
其實現行的教育中，課程以學科(語文、數理、史地、經商)為主，術科(體育、音樂、美術)只充作調劑。課程又以考試為依歸， 學科考試便主導了課程的安排，自然對術科起排擠作用。在這條件不變的情形底下，可以想象，舞蹈即使成為課程之一，也只是聊備一格，充其量也只有少數人報考會考。再者，能容納舞蹈，為何不能容納其他藝術門類？所以前言中的第一論點， 舞蹈成為獨立科目，及列為會考課程之一，可促進舞蹈教育的論述，在實證上是行不通的。
如果談到舞蹈專科中學，八九年成立的香港賽馬會體藝中學，可引為案例。體藝中學在文化中學的課程上，加強體育或藝術方面的訓練。中一至中三的課程內由一般的兩堂增至八堂。但到中四， 還得要回到文理商等分科。只是在選定了的某個體育項目或藝術及設計科目而繼續訓練，以達至會考的要求。究竟十年來，體藝中學對發展香港的體育及視覺藝術活動有何積極作用？如果體育中學為一平衡的對照，興辦舞蹈中學的倡議者是否以體育中學十年來的業積作依歸？香港中、小學藝術教育問題的癥結在於以考試來指導教育，考試又側重於學科，輕視術科，藝術教育的空間便非常狹窄。就算標榜體育及藝術的體藝中學 ，也得關顧會考的需要。這考試導向的課程不解開，藝術教育便無從談起！就算成功的遊說了政府，建立了一所舞蹈中學，那和現在的體藝中學 ，本質上並無二致，學術上的訓練還未夠，如何培養優秀的舞蹈員？連這也未必做得到，成熟的表演和作品可能更是遙不可及的了。那供應便成問題，需求自不待說 ！何況，供應和需求本就是二條獨立的曲線！
如果只從課外活動角度考慮，香港的成績倒是十分突出的。九十年代開始，區域市政局推出的連串計劃把藝術帶到學校之中，相繼主辦的有新界育苗計劃（香港芭蕾舞團），現代舞培訓計劃(城市當代舞蹈團)，文化大使計劃等。而舞蹈團體到校演出，已成慣例，形式內容多元多樣！教育署主辦的校際舞蹈節到現在已經有三十六屆，參與人數達五千人，可謂年度盛事。當然這些活動，並非針對學童的成長，主要還是以推廣某種特定的舞蹈形式為主，論深遠廣泛的影響，自然是談不上。
關於體制上的另一方面的觀察，是政府基本上負擔起所有資源，舞蹈團體不單進駐學校，而且也扮演了中介的角色。而商界對藝術教育支援甚微，這是文化使然。演藝學院似乎在這生態環境中未有任何腳角。
總結
無庸諱言，紐約地區的中學舞蹈教育遠比香港的優越和成熟。這也揭示了制度上及文化上的差別。第一，考試制度不同，課程安排不同，學校的權限不同，自然就決定了基本結構的差異。常規學習與課外活動，本質不一，一而以考試為主導，和成長為主導的教育取向，導致在課程上的安排，評核上的偏重，都有南轍北徹的結果。第二，藝術在社會上的地位，紐約又遠高於香港；家長，學生都會較願意接受藝術作為核心學科之一；藝術家的地位和專業人士，和商界精英不若香港的雲泥之別。如果說香港人絕大多數以富有作為人生人奮鬥的目標，並不為過。社會也大多以李嘉誠、郭氏兄弟、馮炳禧等為成功偶像，藝術家、文化人甚至政治人物，只能是恭陪未座。所以，從硬件（制度）到軟件（文化），兩地都有巨大距離。
另外，政府在文化事務上的角色也有許多差別。紐約主要的文化藝術機構，除卻圖書館外，都是民間機構，例如Carnigie Hall、 Metropolitan Museum of Art 及百老匯的眾多劇院，沒有那間由政府主導。他們在社會中都有自己的空間，自己的群眾網絡。經濟旺盛時，資源充沛，發展的步伐快一點；經濟困難時，便又來一番汰弱留強。各級政府只是資源的供給者，環境的管理員，而非主導者。香港的恰恰是政府主導了整體的文化事務。從劇院、圖書館、博物館的與建，到藝術團體的運作，政府都參與其中，有些還直接包辦。民間力量少能與政府匹配，好處是政府這座靠山，資源不愁，可作長遠計劃。缺點當然是資源得不到最有效的使用；官僚機構習慣令組織僵硬，不適合文化藝術團體變化靈活，積極求新的特性；而政府作為直接的資源供給者，令受管理的團體不可能，亦不敢挑戰政府的權威。反之，在舞蹈教育上，政府充當支助角色，藝團的活動空間相對大了，而成績亦較為顯現。
文化的改變不是一朝一夕的事，倒是制度上的變化可或促使文化的變遷。但是制度不改變，舞蹈教育，舞蹈發展便談不上，也只能在狹小的課餘空間中,繼續尋找生存的機會。
Introduction
In recent years, there have been a series of discussions about the importance of dance education on the development of Hong Kong dance; the following are some representatives of these discussions:
at the Hong Kong International Arts Education Conference, Mr. Wong Chi Tak suggested that instead of being a part of physical education, dance should be an independent subject in secondary education. He also urged the Education Department and curriculum committee to accept dance as a subject in Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations. 1
the development of a Dance Secondary School was the theme of discussion at both Forums held during the Hong Kong Dance Alliance's All Independent Dance Series ‘98 and ‘99. The models of specialized high schools such as Tso-Ying Senior High School in Taiwan and Guangdong Dance School in China were used as references.2
the Hong Kong Dance Sector Joint Conference invited Mr. Ou Jian Ping to give a speech about dance education institutions in Europe and America, for use as models for the development of local dance education. 3
The main ideas of the above discussions can be grouped into two themes. The first one is that we should consider the inclusion of dance into the regular education curriculum as an index of the development of Hong Kong dance education, with a goal of incorporating dance into the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations. The other idea is that we should lobby the Hong Kong Government, using the prosperous dance development in Europe and America as examples, to establish a dance secondary school to train professional dancers. In a nutshell, the first aspect pinpoints general dance education, while the second aims to raise the professional standard of dance.
The aim of the first idea is to strive for a restructuring of the general education curriculum. This is based on the following assumption: the relatively slow development of dance in Hong Kong is caused by the lack of dance training in the regular education system. The existing dance education within the general education system in Hong Kong is only an elective part of the Physical Education curriculum and most schools do not select that curriculum. Because there is no chance for students to learn about dance, they do not understand dance, and therefore dance cannot possibly develop. The conclusion is that the incorporation of dance into the regular curriculum and the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations would make schools, students, and parents pay more attention to the importance of dance, and then there would be a rapid development in dance.
The second idea can be elaborated as the following: dance training should be started at a young age. Good foundations, which can only be achieved by proper training during childhood when the child's body is not yet completely grown, are essential for professional dancers. Currently. the students' standard at the Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts is influenced by the limited supply and poor foundation of local students. With poor foundation, professional training cannot progress at a sufficient pace, ultimately influencing the students' chances of becoming successful dancers. Lacking mature and high-standard dancers, how can we have successful dance works? Without mature dance creations and performances, how can we talk about dance development? All these deductions are based on the assumption that well-trained dancers would promote dance activities and create good dance works and performances. The rationale for this assumption is that with more activities and performances, there would be more audience and therefore a propitious chance for dance development. This logic is similar to Say's Law of Economics — supply creates demand. 4
This article aims to discuss whether these two ideas are logical and pragmatic, and whether their goals are clear and feasible to achieve. It is clear that a study of the dance education development in other countries will be helpful to this discussion. Among the relatively dance-advanced regions, such as Europe, America, and Taiwan, New York in the USA was chosen. Its situation of dance education was studied through collecting, comprehending, and analyzing information; and then used as a case study and compared to the dance education in Hong Kong.
Dance Education in New York’s Primary and Secondary Schools 5
After WWII, New York became the dance capital of the world. In additional to its political-economic advantages, its heritage in arts and generations of talents contributed to this development. As an art form, the forms and content of dance in New York have developed continuously. Its work in dance education is surely significant.
Besides regular dance courses in tertiary institutions New York dance centres, dance companies, and dance theatres also organize a great deal of dance activities including performances. Dance, as a form of leisure activity, or artistic expression, or even street performance, is organized by different non-governmental organizations. They do not only provide opportunity and resources for artistic creations, but more importantly, accumulate generation after generation of dance-appreciating audiences. Dance companies and artists are also frequently stationed in regular schools, so that dance becomes an integral part of school life. Between October and December of 1999, I went to New York for a field study with the aim of understanding its developmental pattern of dance education, educational concepts, and operational models.
According to the Administrative Director of Arts Connection, Mr. Steven Tennen, art education in New York City is operated by three types of institution. Traditionally, that organized by museums is the most complete and has the longest history. For example, the Metropolitan Museum of Art has more than sixty experts and about 1,100 volunteers working in its education department. The Museum of Modern Art, the Whitney Museum, and the Guggenheim Museum also have education departments of various sizes. However, these education departments mostly concentrate on the introduction of their own collections.
The second type includes the educational activities organized by art companies and art centres. The nature of these activities naturally matches each company/centre's own preference, so that they can achieve their goals of expanding audiences and increasing their influence on society. Joyce Theatre, The Kitchen, Dance Theatre Workshop, Harkness Dance Centre, Alvin Ailey Dance Company, Ballet Hispanico, and Performance Space 122 all belong to this category. This type of institution is the most numerous, and its services are the most various. There is a more detailed discussion below.
The third type of art education institutions are the so-called intermediaries, one of which is where Steven Tennen works, and are referred to by him as "Dedicated Arts Education Institutions". The biggest in New York include Arts Connection, Center for Arts Education, and Lincoln Center Institute 6. These institutions design different curricula for different primary and secondary schools, and then invite artists or art teachers to the schools. The lengths of the courses can vary. However, rather than extra-curriculum activities, they are all integral parts of the school's regular curriculum. Because of the economic development, this type of institution receives more sponsorship from various governmental departments and private companies than ever before. As a result, these institutions are expanding, and related conferences and activities are also frequent. 7
If we disregard museums, because of their concentration on the visual arts which is not the target of this article, and add tertiary institutes, we can conclude that there are four main groups of dance education institutions in New York: intermediaries, dance centres, dance companies. and universities. Their role in dance education in New York's primary and secondary schools is discussed below.
Intermediaries
The education system in New York allows schools to have more freedom to arrange their own curricula. Beside intellectual education, schools are also more willing to accept art education as a part of regular education. For example, ArtsConnection is now providing different art education programmes for one hundred and fifteen primary and secondary schools and 350,000 students. Its Administrative Director, Steven Tennon, emphasized that these programmes have to be part of the regular curriculum, because extracurricular activities are not essential, and schools do not pay much attention to them. Furthermore, arts education should also start in primary school, so that a habit of valuing aesthetic experience and creation is established in the early stage of students' development. In high school, students are in a different stage of development, and it takes more effort and more resources to achieve the same goals, and yet, faces more complicated problems.
ArtsConnection的小學舞蹈教育。Dance Education for Primary School Students by ArtsConnection
（圖：ArtsConnection Facebook 2012）
Lincoln Center Institute and the Center for Arts Education are both large organizations, and their ideas are similar to ArtsConnection. The former emphasizes refined arts, and more frequently cooperates with tertiary institutions and large museums to organize outreach projects, while the latter is more oriented to the general public. However, the basic role of intermediaries, that are receiving resources from public or private organizations and then inviting artists to schools for art education, is the same with all these institutions. There is also a lot of effort devoted to avocation, planning, studies, and negotiations.
Dance Centres
In this study, the following dance centres were visited: Joyce Theatre, Dance Theatre Workshop (DTW)8, The Kitchen, and Harkness Dance Center at the 92nd Street YMYWHA. Each centre has its own preference of programmes. For example, The Kitchen prefers post-modernist works, while Joyce Theatre tends to work with more mature and reputed companies. However, they are all active and aggressive in dance education.
DTW concentrates on community work, and has built up an artist-network in New York. The use of "Public Imaginations" in its name also reflects its orientation. Its scale is not very large, and its influence is mainly limited to its communities. Its contributions to primary and second school dance education include its free Friday matinees, and dance courses for children only.
The Harnkess Dance Center at the 92nd Street Y, quite different from the directions of other dance centres, organizes a Dance Education Laboratory for teacher training. It has sixty students from fifteen different countries. At the same time, it also uses its facilities to organize after-school dance classes for four to five hundred students each week.
The Kitchen, on the other hand, targets children and organizes a project called "Kids in the Kitchen", which includes outreach programmes and programmes in The Kitchen. The Kitchen also organizes many short-term workshops. One of the examples is the series of workshops designed by The Kitchen's Education Director, Treva Offutt, for the Bayview Correctional Facilities, which provides a new element at correctional institutions.
Joyce Theatre has more complete outreach and station-in dance programmes. Among these, "Joyce Theatre as Classroom", "Dance Residencies in Schools" and "Outreach" are programmes targeting students. In other words, it promotes dance through performances and workshops, both at the Joyce Theatre and at various schools.
Joyce Theatre的學校計劃。Joyce Theatre’s School Programme
（圖photo: https://www.joyce.org/school-programs）
Dance Companies
There are more than a hundred dance companies of various sizes in New York City. However, there are not many companies that have their own schools that promote dance education. According to 1999 Dance Magazine, these include Martha Graham, Merce Cunningham, Jose Limon, Louis & Nikolais, Alvin Ailey, Trisha Brown, and Ballet Hispanico. The reason for a dance company to have its own school is to promote the company's own dance movement and style. Therefore, they are seldom stationed at regular schools, and seldom develop programmes targeting children's development. After a preliminary study, only Alvin Ailey has developed its own separate department for children's programmes. The project is called "Ailey Dance Kids", which includes eight weeks of Intensive Workshops, Technique Classes, Drum Technique Workshops, Senior-High Master Classes, and Repertory Workshops. Naturally, the contents mainly concentrate on teaching Alvin Ailey's dance style. They now have one thousand students.
University
If we only consider dance teaching on campuses, dance departments in various colleges and universities may be the most frequent. However, with their concentration on professional training, and their intensive curricula, it is impossible for them to pay much attention to outreaching dance education to primary/secondary schools. The few exceptions are mainly because of their need to bolster enrollment, and to illustrate their programme's achievements to senior secondary students. I have visited Juilliard School, SUNY Purchase, University at Buffalo, SUNY and SUNY Brockport. Rather than actively participating in dance
education, their partaking in primary and secondary school education is only limited to the education theory in their programmes. On the other hand, there are also tertiary institutions concentrating on teacher training, such as the Teachers' College at Columbia University and the School of Nursing and Arts Professions at New York University. However, they are relatively small and their influence limited.
The ranking of the above four groups of institutions, according to their importance on dance education in New York's primary and secondary schools, is: intermediary, dance centre, dance company, and university. Intermediaries are purely art education organizations. Art education is a business to them. They have no preferences of dance styles, and their ultimate goal is to balance children's development. In comparison, dance centres and dance companies are smaller and more flexible, but have their own preferences. Universities, on the other hand, provide theoretical training. Although dance education in New York is not perfect, it is at least provisioned by various interlocking organizations, all with their own contributions. Except by providing support in different ways, government does not directly influence dance education, while private and commercial sponsorship is a relatively important component of art education in New York. For example, Lincoln Center Institute receives sponsorships from thirty-five funds, including Coca Cola, Exxon, Marks & Spencer; the education programme of Alvin Ailey is mainly supported by Merrill Lynch. In a nutshell, every component of dance education in New York is composed by the general public, the board of each organization appoints its own administrative personnel, and each organization is mainly managed by professionals in the field.
The experience of New York also emphasizes including dance education in regular education, being a part of the overall art education. Most schools make decisions, according to their own conditions, such as curricular needs and facilities, on which art subjects to include in their curricula. To them, taking part in public examinations is not an important issue, rather, emphasis is placed on appreciation and participation. In general, dance education in New York is a non-governmental business: although governmental and commercial organizations provide the resources, it is directed by various organizations in the general public.
In addition to the above institutions, I also visited Talented Unlimited High School to study the situation of a dance secondary school in New York. According to its principal, Mr. Ira Shankman, its curriculum could be divided into two parts - art classes and academic classes. In the beginning of their study in the school, students can study more than one art subject; later concentrating on only one art subject. He also said that his students' results in other subjects are higher than the average in New York City. The school has four hundred students, and the art subjects include Drama, Dance, Music (instrumental and vocal) and Visual Arts. According to Mr. Shankman, Talented Unlimited High School is one of two well-developed secondary schools for performing arts in New York City, the other one is the Amsterdam Performing Arts High School. He explained that the idea of performing arts secondary school is providing more training in art. However, the development of students must be balanced, and therefore they also study other subjects at the same time. Because of this. New York is not a place to produce youth dance talents.
Comparison to the Dance Education in Primary and Secondary Schools in Hong Kong
In the regular education in Hong Kong, dance is a part of Physical Education, just like track and field or ball games. This is because dancing involves movement of the body, and therefore it is not considered an art form but a sport. Once, dance was also listed in the syllabus of Physical Education in the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations; however, because of the small number of students taking the examination, it was terminated in 1996. As a result, rather than saying dance education does not exist in Hong Kong, it might be more correct to say it does not play an important role in regular education. The situation is similar in drama, traditional theatre, film, video, and all other forms of art: there is even no systematic introduction, it is meaningless to talk about a systematic and progressive study.
How about the situation of music and fine arts education in the existing curriculum? According to data from the Hong Kong Examination Authority, in 1998, there were 231 and 8,425 students who applied for Music and Fine Arts respectively in the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations. In the same year, there were seven and eighty-seven students who applied for these two subjects respectively in the Hong Kong Advance Level Examinations. Compared to the number of student applying for English (122,583), Chinese Language (99,717), and Mathematics (97,736) 9, we can conclude that Music and Fine Arts are not really playing an important role in the regular education system. After reading these data, we should ask: is it really important for dance to be an independent subject and a subject in Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations?
The existing education system in Hong Kong emphasizes academic subjects (Languages, Mathematics, Sciences, History, Geography, Economics, and Business Studies); technical subjects (Physical Education, Music, Fine Arts) are just accompaniments. Furthermore, the examination-oriented education system also influences school curriculum, and repulses technical subjects. If this situation remains unchanged, it is not difficult to predict that, even though part of the regular curriculum, dance would only be another accompaniment, with a limited number of students attending the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations. Moreover, there is no reason to include dance only in regular education, the argument could be made for other art subjects to be included as well. For these reasons, we can see that the first idea discussed in the introduction of this article: having dance as an independent subject and making it part of the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations would promote dance education, is not correct pragmatically.
In order to discuss the second idea -- to establish a dance specialized secondary school, the experimental Jockey Club Ti-I College, established in 1989, can be used as a case study. On the foundation of the regular curriculum of grammar school, Ti-I College strengthened the training of physical education or art subjects by increasing them from the regular two lessons per week to eight in the Lower Forms (Form One to Form Three). Starting from Form Four, like other schools, its students are divided into Art, Science or Commerce streams, with a concentrated training on a particular sport or art and design subject, to meet the requirements of the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examinations. After ten years of establishment, what is the Ti-I College's role on Hong Kong sport and visual arts development? If we accept that Ti-I College is a parallel subject, shouldn't the promoters of dance secondary school use its achievement as an assessment? In Hong Kong, the main problem of primary and secondary school education is the situation of education being directed by examination, and examinations stressing academic subjects and neglecting technical subjects. As a result, the space for the development of art education is very limited. Even Ti-I College, with its emphasis on sports and arts, cannot avoid paying attention to examinations. With this examination-oriented curriculum unchanged, it is not possible to have a proper art education. Even if we could successfully persuade the Government, and establish a dance secondary school, the result might be close to that of the Ti-I College: how could we possibly nurture good dancers, while there is not enough time to teach academic subjects? If there are no talented dancers, it is impossible to have mature performances and works. With a limited supply, demand would be small. However, supply and demand should be two independent curves!
If we look at dance education from the perspective of an extra-curriculum activity, its achievement is quite remarkable in Hong Kong. Since the 90's, District Councils started to carry out a series of programmes to introduce dance to schools, including Making Dance (Hong Kong Ballet), Modern Dance Workshop (City Contemporary Dance Company) and Cultural Ambassador. Dance companies also frequently perform in schools with different contents and in various ways. On the other hand, the Hong Kong Education Department's Inter-School Dance Festival, which has been held for thirty-six years, and has a participation of five thousand students, is a celebrated annual event. However, rather than aiming for a balanced development of students, these events are mostly promotions of particular categories of dance, and they do not really have a deep influence on Hong Kong dance development.
In respect of overall system, the Hong Kong Government basically provides all the resources. Because of the local culture, the business sector rarely supports art education. Dance companies not only visit schools, they also take up the role of "intermediary". The Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts, on the other hand, does not seem to have an active role in the dance education of primary and secondary schools.
Conclusion
It is clear that dance education in New York's secondary schools is much better and more mature than that in Hong Kong. This reflects the differences in system and culture. Firstly, the differences in the examination systems, curricular arrangements, and the powers of schools determine the differences in the basic structure. Regular classes and extra-curriculum activities are basically different. The different orientations in education - examination-orientation in Hong Kong and student's development-orientation in New York -leads to the completely different arrangements in curriculum and the different emphasis on evaluation. Secondly, arts in New York enjoys a much higher social status than in Hong Kong. In New York, parents and students are relatively willing to accept arts as part of schools' core subjects. The status of artists in New York is also much higher, different from Hong Kong, where artists and the professional and business elite are situated on two opposing ends of the scale of status. It is not an exaggeration to say that most Hong Kong people seek to be rich, and that the public recognize the rich as successful idols, while artists, culture-workers and even politicians are all minor characters. Both the hardware (system) and the software (culture) are greatly different between New York and Hong Kong.
On the other hand, the role of government on cultural affairs is also different between New York and Hong Kong. In New York, most of the major culture or art institutions, except the library, are privately-owned, such as Carnigie Hall, Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the theatres on Broadway. They have their own niche in the society and their own networks. In a time of better economy and more resources, their development is faster; while they would go through a process of selection in a poor economy. Rather than direct the operation of art and cultural affairs, various levels of the government just provide resources and manage the environment. In Hong Kong, the situation is completely different: the Government simply directs the whole cultural affairs. From the constructions of theatres, libraries and museums to the operation of art companies, the Hong Kong Government is involved in, and in some cases directly controls, various aspects of cultural affairs. There are rarely any privately-owned organizations comparable to the Government. The advantage is with the resources of the Government, it is more possible to make long-term plans. However, it is not the most effective way to use the resources. Bureaucracy, which always rigidifies organizations, is not suitable for art and cultural companies, which need flexibility and creativity. Furthermore, the companies whose resources are provided by the Government find it impossible to and dare not challenge the authority of the Government. In contrast, because of the indirect supporting role of the Government on Hong Kong dance education, art companies can enjoy more freedom, and therefore the results are more significant.
Although culture cannot be changed in a short period, the change of systems may accelerate the modification of culture. However, if the system remains unchanged, there is no point to talk about dance education and dance development, and they can only strive to survive in the limited dimension outside the curriculum.
註釋 Notes:
“Facing the Future: The Arts and Education in Hong Kong” Report on the Arts and Education in Hong Kong: An International Symposium March 1997 by Ken Robinson published by Hong Kong Arts Development Council 1998 (P39-P42)
《各自各舞蹈節》公開論壇：一九九八年五月九日的「舞蹈的前景——由舞蹈中學的構思開始」； 一九九九年五月二十九日的「應否在本港設立和舞蹈中學？」 Forums in All Independent Dance Series: Future of Dance — Starting from the idea of Dance School on May 9, 1998 and Dance School in Hong Kong on May 29, 1999.
一九九九年九月十九日太空館香港和舞蹈聯席會議，歐美舞蹈教育的狀況介紹，歐建平主講。 Hong Kong Dance Sector Joint Conference, An Introduction of the Dance Education in America and Europe, September 19, 1999.
薩伊定律 (Say's Law) 最簡單的假設是只要有供給，就自然會有消費，所以用不著去刺激消費的慾望。激勵生產是明智的政策。所以也不怕發行出來的貨幣，沒有人會不要。實證中這假設自然不對。 The simplest assumption of Say’s Law is that when there is supply, there is consumption. Therefore, there is no need to stimulate the desire for consumption. To increase production is a good strategy to stimulate consumption and people would accept all the money issued. This assumption is wrong pragmatically.
美國學制在進入大學前分成十三級，即由K-12。中學指Junior High 及 Senior High 合共六年，仿似香港的中學；小學指K-6，恰如香港的小學。因報告為香港人而寫，便用上香港慣用的分級法。 American school system is divided into thirteen grades, from K to 12th grade, before tertiary education. There are six grades in High school, including Junior High and Senior High, which is the equivalent of the Secondary School in Hong Kong. Elementary School starts from K to 6th grade. and is the equivalent of the Primary School in Hong Kong. Because this report was written for Hong Kong people, the terms for common Hong Kong school system are used.
編按：現名Lincoln Center Institute for the Arts in Education Editor: Now renamed as Lincoln Center Institute for the Arts in Education
例如由The New York City Arts in Education Roundtable （附錄九）主辦的 "Face to Face Learning from Teach Other about Arts in Education" 。遞Joyce Theatre 的教育總監Joanne Hill 說差不多每兩年都有一次大會的會議。 Such as the Face to Face — Learning from Teach Other about Arts in Education held by The New York City Arts in Education Roundtable. According to Ms. Joanne Hill, the Education Director of Joyce Theatre. there is a conference about every two years.
編按：DTW於2011年與Bill T. Jones/Arnie Zane Dance Company合併成New York Live Arts Editor: In 2011, DTW merged with the Bill T. Jones/Arnie Zane Dance Company to become New York Live Arts.
一九九八年香港考試局年報。Report of the Hong Kong Examination Authority. 1998.
編輯手記 Editor's Note
九七約二十年前《舞蹈手札》刊登了當年藝術發展局舞蹈界別代表潘少輝的《紐約學校舞蹈教育的考察》，及方人的回應文章《一份消極的考察報告 對「紐約學校舞蹈教育的考察」的一些回應》，各有立場及觀點。文章刊登後，香港的中學舞蹈教育起了很大變化。兩篇文章中所討論的，有多少得到落實?
千禧年後，當時已成立了十多年的香港演藝學院舞蹈學院開始站穩陣腳，第三任院長施素心教授開始尋求提升收生質素的途徑，並乘著當年的課程檢討，積極向教育署推動中學舞蹈課程。2002-03年香港舞蹈聯盟受香港藝術發展局委約，聯同舞蹈學院進行了「學校舞蹈研究發展計劃」。當年的計劃研究員陳頌瑛（現演藝學院舞蹈學院院長）走訪全港50所學校，以了解當時學校舞蹈狀況，並出版了「舞蹈教育新里程」一書，推動更全面的舞蹈教育。其後，轉任舞蹈學院講師的陳頌瑛，聯同當年的舞蹈學院副院長白朗唐，到教育署作出簡介，並開始了一連串對話，最後編寫了舞蹈課程。在2005年的「中學職業導向課程（COC）」中試行，並順利過渡成「應用學習課程」的文憑試科目。這個課程是由演藝學院推出的專業科目，每年只開辦三班，從全港200-300名申請者中，選約80名學生到演藝學院上課，亦有學員在畢業後考進演藝學院。
在更普及的層面上，2009年在全港實施的新高中學制，也推行了「其他學習經歷（OLE）」， 其五大範疇包括藝術發展，並規定學生完成一定學習時數。另外由康樂及文化事務署在學校層面亦在這二十年間舉辦多項藝術教育計劃，包括「學校演藝實踐計劃」、「學校文化日計劃」、「高中生藝術新體驗計劃」、「中學生演藝賞析計劃」等。 多項校際演藝活動亦持續推行。這些活動和計劃中，很多是由學校與舞團或舞者合作推行。
二十年過去，香港學生接觸舞蹈的途徑因學制資源大大提高，而他們又有沒有因此而更了解及喜愛舞蹈呢？
About twenty years ago, dance journal/hk published the A Comparative Study on the Dance Education of New York by Pun Sui Fai, who at the time was the Dance Representative on the Hong Kong Arts Development Council, and Fengren's response to his article by A Study Report with Unconstructive Conclusions - Several Responses to "A Comparative Study on the Dance Education of New York", in which their differing positions and opinions on dance education in Hong Kong schools were voiced. Years have passed since the articles were published, and dance education in secondary schools in Hong Kong has changed a lot in that time. How many of the ideas discussed in these two articles have been realized since then?
After the start of the new millennium, the Hong Kong Academy for Performing Arts (HKAPA) School of Dance, under the leadership of its third Dean, Professor Susan Street, began to seek ways to improve the quality of the students it enrolled. Taking advantage of the curriculum review that was taking place at that time, she actively promoted the development of dance education in secondary schools to the Education Department. In 2002-03, the Hong Kong Dance Alliance, in partnership with the HKAPA, was commissioned by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council to conduct a "School Dance Education Research and Development Project". The researcher on that project, Anna CY Chan, who is the current Dean of the HKAPA School of Dance, visited 50 schools and interviewed their teachers in order to gain an understanding of the status of dance education in Hong Kong schools. She subsequently published Intelligent Moves: Dance Education Handbook, which put forward a direction towards building more comprehensive dance education. She then took up a new position as Lecturer of the School of Dance, where she joined Tom Brown, then Associate Dean of the School, to make a presentation to the Education Department. A series of dialogues was held, a dance curriculum was written, and a pilot programme by HKAPA was implemented in the Career-Oriented Curriculum (COC) in 2005. It successfully moved forward to become an Applied Learning subject of the Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education (HKDSE) examination. Currently, three classes are offered each year, with about 80 students out of 200-300 applicants from all over Hong Kong selected to attend classes at the HKAPA. This is primarily a professionally oriented programme, with a number of students going on to enroll at the HKAPA once they have completed the HKDSE.
On a more general level, "Other Learning Experiences (OLE)" was later implemented as one of the three components in the New Senior Secondary Curriculum in 2009. It covers five major areas including Aesthetic Development and requires students to complete a certain amount of learning hours. Over the past 20 years, the Leisure and Cultural Services Department has also organized a number of arts education programmes for schools, including the "School Performing Arts in Practice Scheme", "School Culture Day Scheme", "Arts Experience Scheme for Senior Secondary Students", and "Performing Arts Appreciation Project for Secondary Students". At the same time, numerous inter-schools performing arts activities and programmes have also been held regularly over the years, many of which were made possible by cooperation between schools and dance organizations or artists.
While Hong Kong students' access to dance has greatly improved over the past two decades due to the new curriculum and resources provided, has this helped them to a greater understanding and appreciation of dance?
【延伸閱讀Extended Reading】早前我們邀請了五位舞蹈教育工作者分享了本地中小學舞蹈教育之現況與實踐：詳文
Earlier, we invited five dance educators to share their experiences on the practice of dance education in local primary and secondary schools. Read full article.
客席編輯Guest Editor: 劉秀群Cathy Lau Sau Kwan ｜ 翻譯Translation：施德安 Cecil Sze
