I was going to give a description of the exercise from my past I have been recalling and examining. It makes clear the ironic sense of the last post, which is somewhat lost at the moment.
Been reluctant, as on the surface the description is somewhat bizarre.
Shaped that way for number of reasons, one I can be certain of, it was intended to induce high levels of stress. In this way it replicates the environment of a live performance. It made the experience somewhat memorable. I am also left with a distinct sense of an aspect of the personality of my teacher. A highly developed sense of humour. Whenever I think about it, I can here him laughing.
The exercise was at first so shocking that the class freely and openly expressed a range of very clear signs of disbelief, contempt, anger, clear expression that what was being asked very clearly made no sense. That was met with deep pleasure and amusement.
Struck this morning by the sheer contrast of learning experience between formal eduction in the arts and university. Status of my teacher in the dramatic community was extremely high. University lacked that freedom to express or indeed for the teacher to read and learn from that experience. I certainly experienced the same forms of emotion here. No way I would have expressed them in class to the same degree.
It was one of the shocks of entering the university system, we were free to utterly question and express how we felt. Distance between learner and teacher was nowhere near as vast as at university.
Culture shock that took a couple of years to overcome making the adjustment. Evaluation methods were different. I wonder if the negative judgment calls and just the sheer amount of energy that seemed to not be focused on teaching but in maintaining a social order and clear sense of hierarchy and difference is a direct response to the attempt to cope and maintain order in a high stress environment?
If so, in this case, it looks like a symptom of one rather than a solution.
Teaching methods are shaped and mediate by past experience and from individual to individual. I’ve generalized enhancing both negative and positive (to a degree), but it’s my general impression.
My only observation here is that if my own experience of advanced eduction was limited to study within the University system, I would not be able to note or evaluate the difference here.