Dancer Sugar Plum

Wishing you good luck Fiz, but I'm sure you won't need it though! I hope you have a wonderful time

I agree with the above posters, your DD should be getting corrections. I also think it is a good idea to speak to your DD’s teacher and see what she/he says.

Most people/DCs' parents probably know this already, but in case it’s helpful, I would also suggest it’s a good idea to say something along the lines of, ‘My DD really loves her ballet classes and really wants to improve. What would you suggest she works on?’ rather than, ‘Why is my DD not getting any corrections from you?’

I hope it works out, good luck.

I too have found your articles and advice very helpful, Anjuli. We are very lucky to have your help on this forum.

I can see (and feel) how psychology can affect pirouettes. It seems to be magnified for pirouettes en pointe for me, and I wonder whether this is a psychological ‘issue’. When I feel okay about the idea of pirouetting en pointe, the odds are good that I can work on my turns that day.

However, for whatever reason, if I feel nervous/anxious about doing pirouettes en pointe, then that ruins any meaningful work I can do that day. The fear seems to stop me doing the pirouette. I find this can hold me back and can stop me doing even just a half turn sometimes. Apart from trying to work through the fear – if/when it comes – I don’t suppose there is anything else I could do?

I just don’t like the thought of ‘wasting’ time in class because of fear! So any further advice you might have would be much appreciated.

Hi Dancer Sugar Plum

 

I’m so glad you put those reference times in, that was extremely helpful.

 

If you go to those you will see it illustrates my point “In reality we are looking for a strait leg line to and including the bottom, but it will be off vertical to maintain the centre of balance, it’s physically impossible to be otherwise” exactly.

 

In any case nothing untoward came out of this exercise for me in class, no correction etc, so I'm really not going to get excited about it.

 

I take your point on the comment about using the barre to support doing a full port de bra whilst on releve. However for me, I must confess I frown on anything that is associated with balance that requires holding the barre. Only tonight we were doing rond de jambes at the barre which ended in a arabesque and then a penche. As soon as the movement changed to towards the arabesque my hand came off the barre, the rest of the exercise was completed self supporting, my teacher does not have a problem with that. The rest of the class continued to used the barre.

I am still learning about correct ballet technique so I don’t mind if someone else has a different opinion from myself.

I am impressed that you don’t need the barre, Michelle. I wish I could say the same for myself in class. However, I would suggest that ‘frowning on anything that is associated with balance that requires holding the barre’ may not be the most useful state of mind to have. The barre is there to help you maintain correct alignment, whether you are on flat or on rise. This is harder when you are on demi-pointe.

I would also suggest that your fellow dancers may be holding the barre in an attempt to maintain and improve their alignment and turnout. I hope you don’t mind me saying that because someone holds onto the barre for something does not mean they are technically worse than other dancers.

At first pirouettes are difficult, too, in a tutu.  

I find this very interesting and it's something I've not thought about before.

I'm interested to know how wearing a tutu would make pirouettes more difficult? Would the weight placement need to be different to do pirouettes?

And would doing pirouettes feel different wearing a practice tutu compared with a stiff performance one?

Hello Billyelliott,

I hope this link works for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EVMjnHFg-w

If not, if you type in 'royal ballet class' into YouTube it's the video called 'Royal Ballet Daily Class (complete video)'. It's just over 1 hour 15 minutes long.

It made me wish I could do what those dancers could do!

I should have said the teacher was talking about anyone who had long hair that was long enough to go into a bun. If I remember correctly there were a number of women in that class who kept their hair completely down at the start of term and the teacher had to explain why this was not helpful for ballet class. Needless to say it was a beginners' class. But if it was not explained to me why it was a good idea to have your hair in a bun (if it was long enough to go into a bun) I wouldn't have worked it out for myself!

I tried using the doughnut for my bun but it just made my head look bigger! Well, I thought it made my head look bigger the first time I used it so I've not used it since.

I used to put my hair in a ponytail for class when I first started ballet. But the teacher said he didn't like people adding 'extra movements', such as flicking the head after recovering from a forward port de bras to get your hair out of the way, so buns were encouraged. Many teachers have said ponytails are not good because they ruin your pirouettes - you become worried about your hair hitting you in the face that you don't spot properly.

Hi Dancing Sugar Plum

 

Welcome back to the thread.

I'm extremely sorry but I cannot agree with some of the wording associated with your comment for the following reasons:

 

“your weight should not go back behind you at all in a forward port de bras.”

 

The body in that state roughly resembles an inverted “L” shaped structure as it goes down, for a L shaped structure to be in balance on the vertical column it must be tilted so there is equal weight on both sides, otherwise you would naturally fall forward. Of course we have feet at the bottom of our vertical column (Legs), if they are fully turned out at 180 then they are not helping us to place the weight forward, however if we were in sixth position which is seldom used and often considered as no turnout in first, then some of that weight can be placed forward and remain in balance. Consequently one could ague that the poorer the turnout, the less the bottom protrudes at the back.

 

In reality we are looking for a strait leg line to and including the bottom, but it will be off vertical to maintain the centre of balance, it’s physically impossible to be otherwise. That centre of balance should go equally through the arches, in other words equally distributed between the heel and ball of the foot.

 

The wall thing you referred to, we were doing using our partner at right angles, which worked just as well.

 

 

Hi Billyelliot

 

We were looking at our teachers stance not being totally vertical (not quite the same as poking your bottom out), that stance was quite correct for the reasons I have mentioned above.

Hello Michelle,

From your post above I think you mean that it is not possible to stop the weight going back in a forward port de bras. I would still stand by what I said in my last post that it is possible, but difficult to do correctly.

With the exercise standing behind a wall, the aim is to feel how difficult it would be do a complete port de bras forward. A lot of people would feel how it easy it would be to let the hips/weight go back if they tried to bend right down to their feet.

Balleteacher is right in post 477. On demi-pointe it is a lot easier to feel when your weight has gone back because you are balancing on a smaller surface that on the flat. So it's even more obvious if your hips go back because the weight placement in your feet will change. Having your hand on the barre helps you keep your weight forward.

If your hips go back, you have not pulled up first, before bending up and over your legs.

The Royal Ballet demonstrate correct forward port de bras beautifully in their company class - their weight/hips don't go back: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EVMjnHFg-w

If you watch 0:01:24, 0:01:52 and 0:02:23 I think you will see what I mean.

Yes he is or at least was a really nice person so I am hoping for his sake that Channel 4 doesn't do the dirty on him as we know the editing of programmes can be a tad naughty and even downright malicious at times!

I would imagine Wayne is canny enough to have negotiated some sort of editorial control!

I hope you are both right.

I also hope they don't make it sound like, 'you could have been a ballerina if you were X pounds lighter than you are now/back then'. I hope it's explained that the Balanchine-ballerina proportions and figure is something people are born with, which happens to include being very slender, and not something you could get by reaching a specific weight.

Dance sugar plum: I think they have, at least mine doesnt show sweat! It's a material called meryl I think and its in one of my capezio leotards. It's thicker than nylon but nicely stretchy, very good at keeping me warm or cool and its never shown sweat.

Munchkin - Thanks for the tip.

I used to have a shirt, which I think was made of a nylon type of material (that was what it felt like). It was nicely fitted and looked smart but awful if you were sweaty! The material seemed to make you sweat even more if you were sweating, which is why I have stuck with the cotton leotards. I wouldn't like to wear a leotard made with the same type of material as that shirt, which is why I made my earlier comment about leotard materials!

I have a navy leotard, which is a nylon-y (that's the best word I can think to describe it) material. It's pretty good at hiding sweat, but if it were a lighter colour I think the sweat would show through. I'll definitely look into the meryl material leotards. I'm still trying to decide which of the Degas styles I should get. I can't decide whether to get one with a skirt attached or not!

I find that when I am stressed or anxious, then the first thing to 'go' are priouettes. I could be anxious about the pirouette itself and that would make me 'off'. Or if I 'brought' work with me into class and part of my head is still at work - that's not good for my pirouettes (or general class) either.

However, I'm interested in the 'calander' affecting pirouettes. I find it affects me in that I 'put on' weight for that duration (water retention) so that it affects my pirouettes, balances and pointe work. It's only about 2 pounds at the most but it makes such a difference. It makes me wonder how other female dancers - including the professionals - deal with this normal problem?

I have noticed the trend for wearing black and for wearing skirts or shorts. Mimi66, as you say, there seems to be more skirts around than shorts at the moment. I wonder whether adult dancers choose these cover-ups because we are a bit embarrassed about sweat showing through?! There was a changing room discussion recently about picking specific leotard styles - and cover-ups - to hide areas where you feel self-conscious about sweat showing!

I think whoever invents a leotard material that stops sweat showing through will become a millionaire!

I guess its that auto correct, it should be, "When OUR teacher", the centre of balance always causes the bottom to be positioned further over to the back, yes it can and should be minimised but its impossible to have completely vertical legs going up and the bottom on the top so to speak. We both see the same thing from our teachers demonstration that her bottom was noticeably over but I will add not too far. That why we smiled.

Your teacher is right, if done correctly, your weight should not go back behind you at all in a forward port de bras. If your weight goes back, it means you've lost the hold in your turnout during the bend forwards or your core is not strong enough to sustain the movement properly. Or both things have happened.

If you stand directly behind a wall and try it, you will know how difficult it is to do this 100 percent correctly. And how easy it is for your weight to go back.

I digressed a bit when I mentioned white (short) tutus...

 

My real point was that Swan Lake I do not think is a good choice for most amature companies to perform, unless you are doing non-swans scenes, for example spanish dance or russian dance.

 

It is a bit like asking someone who has only ever skated for 2-3 years (if that) to do triple turns in the air.

 

I agree with you, Mimi66.

I haven't seen the clip yet, but I think the 'problem' with trying the classics as a recreational dancer is the difficulty of achieving the correct technique and line, plus telling the story as well. For this programme, it sounds like it will be complete beginners trying to dance one of the classics.

It's not that the recreational dancer is unable to ever achieve it. Rather, the 'problem' is not enough years of training to do the classics justice (for most amateur dancers). It's the professional dancers' job to make everything they do on stage look easy (to put it simply). Making it look easy takes years of training, as many people have mentioned already. Even 'easy' sections of variations, such as the pose passe entrance of the Sugar Plum Fairy in the Nutcracker, is a nightmare to do technically correctly, make yourself look light and weightless and make it all look easy at the same time. On top of all that, to your audience you also have to look like you're having a wonderful time too! Therefore I agree that they shouldn't have chosen Swan Lake.

It is always better to do something technically easier but do it well on stage, rather than something that is way beyond your current level, badly. I was given this piece of advice, which I agree with very much.

Is it just me or do most of the ladies in that photo not actually look very large?!

That thought came into my head too, Moomin. And since when was size 12 considered 'plus size'?!

I agree very much with your end comments Mimi

However in the Standard tonight there is a comment from Wayne Sleep about the programme in which he says he wants to show that "big" people can do ballet.

He talks about bigger dancers being put at the back of classes when they did ballet as a child which I have no idea is true for that many people or not.

But he then does go on to say that he knows bigger dancers and 'big boned' individuals won't really make it in the Professional world but that doesn't mean they can't dance etc.

I have met women, not younger than myself, who did ballet as children. Some of them have said they were put into the back of class as children because they 'weren't good enough'. I'm not sure what is defined by 'weren't good enough'. They never mentioned size as being the issue and these women would be considered slim in the 'normal' world anyway so I think size was not the issue for them.

Also, I'm not sure 'big' is right word for what Wayne Sleep is trying to prove. I think he's trying to prove that you don't have to have Balanchine-ballerina-type proportions to do ballet, no matter what your age. But that would be quite hard to put into a title that the general public would understand.

I agree with what's been said but just wanted to query one thing.

 

On the correction where you've been told to take the upper body back - is this like the efface position where there is an upward lift back and an opening of the chest? If so I can see how that might work. It's possible to stand in efface without the weight going back into the heels and indeed to do a backbend.

 

I'm not saying its correct or 'RAD' and it's not how I do it, I'm just saying it may not be considered wrong.

Aurora - There is are a couple of exercises in the centre, which ask for the efface line. As you have mentioned there is an upward lift of the back and an opening of the chest. I have also heard it being described as an opening up and out of one shoulder from the back.

However I was referring to 'plain' developes devant, and the rise on glisse devant. The school I have referred to have asked for 'leaning back' as you do these movements. It has been pointed out that this sounds like Vaganova technique, which is a fair point - I have learnt something new. However, the school I have talked about is an RAD school, and have no connection to Vaganova, which was why I have wondered if this was a new 'trend' for the RAD...

When I wrote my original post, I partly used it as a chance to have a rant about classes, which had not gone well. But I was also confused about what seemed to be RAD 'changes'. I had been wondering for a while whether these 'techniques' were always there, but for some reason I had not noticed. Or if these 'techniques' were new. But it seems from forum members who do RAD classes, or are RAD teachers, RAD teachers to-be or parents of DC that what I have described in my original post is not thought of as 'usual' RAD technique.
 

Dancer Sugar Plum,

 

I was a bit reluctant to comment for fear of offending anyone or to be seen as contradicting correct technique, but....

 

In my experience, pre professional students are 'allowed' to 'cheat' (a bit) in certain classes. Leaning slightly backward for example when extending the leg devant does improve the look of the extension for most people. Winging (fishing) the foot is also fairly commonplace, as is (when on stage in a static pose a terre en arriere) the extension is actually much more a la seconde than derriere - giving the impression of beautiful turnout- Regarding the rise in glisse devant - this sounds very much like Vaganova technique where the upper back is always engaged and used differently than in for example RAD. I hasten to add that these are 'techniques' (tricks ?) which in my experience are allowed to students who already have a very solid understanding of correct technique.....( I have no idea about the sickling, but maybe the teacher is correcting you more because they see potential ? It does happen) x

 

I apologise for the lack of accents for ballet terms in my post - my PC won't let me !

Ellie - I am glad you mentioned this and hope my original post doesn't read in a way that would make people worried they would offend by offering a different opinion or viewpoint. In fact, it's been really useful reading other people's viewpoints. It was interesting to read that things such as the upper back bend during a rise in glisse devant is more Vaganova technique.

I also don't have any complaints against pre-professionals (I believe you mean those in vocational school, who will soon be auditioning for jobs) who develop 'tricks' to look more turned out, or have a better line. I mentioned in an another thread that I have a teacher (not connected to the school I have referred to) who once talked about a 'trick' to look more turned out on stage. I hasten to add she wasn't talking about twisting knees or forcing turnout. She mentioned it to point out that having stage experience from when you're a young student enables you to get used to performing on stage and learn how to present yourself as well as possible. I find this fascinating and I don't have any complaints about these 'tricks'.

I agree Ellie, when teaching young students technique is a lot more clearer cut but as you grow into a professional you've had that many teachers with that many views and backgrounds of dance and you are also encouraged to develop your own style, little tricks and cheats pop in, and to be honest if a choreographer asks you to do something, no matter how weird or wonderful it is..you do it ...if you want to keep the job!
Teaching adult ballet/older students who arnt looking for a career in dance is harder because students are there for different reasons, but still want to be pushed and it's tough to gain a happy medium. If you are finding the classes unhelpful, the corrections/techniques taught confusing and you feel you can't ask for an explanation, maybe you arnt gelling with this teacher and it would be better to move on?
As for the bit about her being and RAD teacher, what are the schools exam results like? That should give you an idea of the schools teaching standard

Charlie153 - I agree with what you have said as well, and I have no questions against someone choreographing a piece, be they working for professionals or working on a piece for a school show, display, festival, competition, etc, which may involve mixing different genres of dance, or changing some 'rules'. I also understand that professionals would need to follow what a choreographer wants to be done since it's part of their job, to put it bluntly.

Some forum members have mentioned that once you lose confidence/trust in a teacher it is time to move on and I agree with this. But I hope my posts haven't read like I believe, or claim, that all RAD teachers are 'like that'. I have some, or only met with, wonderful teachers and some of them are connected with the RAD and some are not.

I once met a visiting RAD teacher from the other side of the world, who was on a flying visit and dropped into one of my open classes. We were able to chat after class. She had a student who was competing in the Genee that year and it wasn't the first year she had had students compete in the Genee competition. It was fascinating to hear about the challenges faced by her students, and probably other students as well, who go through this competition. The teacher talked about tavelling alone with her student to the country and city of the competition, and the challenges she faced in trying to coach her student's variations in a place neither of them had ever been to before. It was a real eye-opener to me to hear what it is like to be a part of this competition and I was touched by the dedication this teacher had in ensuring her student could perfom the best she could during the competition.

I understand that different teachers suit different people, and that not everyone is looking for the same things in a teacher (balletically-speaking). I understand that what I may like about one teacher, someone else may not for one reason or another. So I hope my posts on this thread haven't made people think I believe everyone is after the same type of teacher as well.

I understand there are different ways of working and approaching technique and I like to think I understand enough not to label them as 'wrong'. As an example, if a teacher or choreographer choreographs a piece that mixes contemporary with ballet, I wouldn't label it as 'wrong' because the feet might be pararell sometimes.

I am also not the type of person - I believe - to be offended by genuine corrections. In fact, I would rather be corrected rather than ignored in class.

I have a teacher who used to be a professional ballet dancer. I know that he can tell that I have more flexibility than I have the strength to sustain, so he has never told me - or any other student - than we are lazy for not getting the legs higher in grande battement, for example. But just by chance, in between exercises at the school I have been referring to, there were students who were getting their leg in a develope second to be as high as they could go by raising the working hip. I have noticed this 'trend' at the school for a while, and the 'trend' that these girls are not told their hips should be level. I hasten to add I go to class to learn, and it has only been by chance I've noticed this in-between exercises.

It's during the time in-between exercises that I've noticed there are girls sickling en pointe, both in echappe second facing barre and during courus. These girls are not corrected for sickling. Instead the teacher spent all her time yelling at me to me get my leg higher all through class even though it was distorting my hip line.

With the school I am referring to, I can't really ask for clarification on corrections either because the teacher(s) have made it quite clear what they are after. In my original post, I have used the example of a rise with glisse devant as an example. I thought of growing up and slightly forward in order to hold the rise. The teacher said this was wrong and pulled my weight back so that it was like doing a back-bend. As I mentioned earlier, her school tells her students to 'take your weight back to allow the leg to go up at the front'.

Also, since this is a public forum, I am having to hold back on a lot of the details. However, I would understand if this was a particular method of teaching, which just so happens does not suit me. But I am confused why it's being 'sold' as RAD.

Don't make that preparatory lunge position too large - you need to make it a bit smaller so you don't have so far to go to get well forward over the toe of your supportig foot.  You must turn as one piece - like a statue and this means opening (not tilting the leading shoulder and you must bring the second shoulder with you.. If you keep the leading shoulder tight and/or the following shoulder is allowed to drift behind - either or both of those occurences will stop the turn.

 

Try this in aa simple pirouette.  As you go around squeeze both shoulders together and you will stop almost instantly.  This is good to know for an occasion when you really need to stop and the floor is slippery.  Lowering the heel of the supporting foot is your brake but the shoulders are the emergency brake.  Thus you must be aware of what they are doing as they can definitely hinder you such as in attitude turns.

 

Try the turn going en dedans to the right (left leg will be up in attitude), right hand is stretched in front of you, left hand is in second.  Now as you turn switch hand positions so that the right is now in second (which means you've opened the leading shoulder) and the left hand is now in front of you (which means you haven't allowed the following shoulder to fall behind).

 

Hope this helps.

Thanks Anjuli, I can't wait to try this out.

In class I took your advice about thinking of the energy going up for en dedan pirouettes and that seems to have stopped me leaning to one side. Your help is much appreciated.

Thanks to everyone who responded to my post.

About 'fishing' the foot, I was advised something similar to hfbrew's DS. I can't physically 'fish' and my 'default' position used to be a sickled foot. But in always trying to 'fish' the foot it helped me break the habit of sickling.

Going back to my original post, I'd had some doubts/worries about the school I have referred to in my original post. Like a lot of people attending one RAD school (or another syllabus school) I only get to see what that particular school is teaching, so I thought it would be useful to check if there has been a change. I was very pleased to hear from forum members, including RAD teachers and RAD teachers to-be, that what I have described in my first post has not suddenly become the new 'trend' of the RAD. I had a feeling it was just that particular school and forum members have confirmed it for me. The analogy of 'one bad apple' comes to my mind.

However, it is quite worrying that methods not endorsed by the RAD seem to be - at that school - taught as RAD technique. I have learnt from this thread, and from other teachers not connected to the school I have referred to, that RAD teachers need to attend courses to keep up-to-date, etc. So it confuses me how one school appears to have got it so wrong and 'slipped through the net'. I feel sorry for the other students who have no idea that what they are taught is not considered proper RAD technique (or even just proper ballet technique).

I had a few very upsetting classes at this school recently and I deliberately did not mention all the details in my first post just in case I happen to give the school away, therefore potentially revealing my identity to people connected to the school. But there were other technique 'methods', which are obviously not supported by the RAD, as shown by the replies on this thread.

I will be looking for another RAD school if I decide to continue doing RAD work.

Thanks once again everyone.

It also presents difficulties in going through first position such as in rond de jamb a terre.  The dancer with a hyper extended knee has to remember where her own particular first position is and allow for that when passing through first position. Otherwise the dancer, in an effort to go through first with heels brushing past one another, has to either loosen the moving knee or make a squiggly line instead of a straight line while passing through first. 

 

We all have our own personal first position - as in many other things.

Yes, I agree with this. I always have a gap in first position. But I have come across teachers in the past who would not accept that gap and they would tell me to close that gap. I found this quite frustrating. I once replied that I didn't know how to close that gap and it was the truth - that must have been the only time I have ever 'talked back' at a teacher (if you would call it 'talking back').

A lot depends upon the amount (degree) of swayback.  It is a difficult construction with which to work.  The dancer must constantly be aware of the need to engage the muscles upward through the thigh rather than pushing back through the knees.

 

Depending upon the degree it can be a more at risk construction for the knee and give the dancer problems in placing the weight in correct alighnment.  

 

However, many dancers have overcome these challenges.

I have a teacher who has said a similar thing to what you have said, Anjuli. She has been trying to get me to engage the inner thigh muscles upwards and it has made a difference to things like balance. She has also said the difficulty of having swayback legs is that it's easy to push the hips out of alignment because the knees pull you back. So activating the inner thighs is good for stopping this happening.

I have swayback legs and I have been told I am 'as swayback as they come'. I once met a girl about to go to vocational school, who did not have swayback legs. She told me she wished she had legs like mine - we all want what we don't have! But I told her I found things like closing in a tight 5th (or back to the 5th I started with) difficult because the calf muscles seem to get in the way. Personally, I think this is the hardest thing about working with swayback legs.

However, I think it does make a beautiful line on dancers who can control or use it properly. I am still learning to do this. 

Hello Anjuli,

Sorry I didn't make my last post very clear. Your description of how to approach finishing a pirouette in attitude was very clear. In my last post I meant to ask, as a follow-on question, how to approach doing a pirouette in the attitude position. From what I have come across so far, it looks like these usually start in the same way as an en dedans turn in a lunge position, arms in third. Then you releve into the attitude postion so the actual turn is in this postion. It's this type of turn where I get 'stuck' half-way round. I also find it hard to stay in a proper attitude position and not feel the back knee dropping or the body twisiting.

Any advice on how to approach these turns would be much appreciated.

I first started going to RAD classes about 7 years ago. In that time I've done the Intermediate exam. But from doing various other RAD classes I've noticed a change in RAD style, which I don't quite understand. I have been to a few RAD schools, so this is my observation.

I have been to non-RAD classes where it is consider correct that the working hip should not raise to get a higher extension in second, whether it is in grand battement or a develope, etc. However, I have noticed that it seems to be the trend to get your leg up as high as possible, no matter what the cost. Even if the student needs to raise his or her hips to get a higher leg, this seems to be considered okay. One teacher said that I was 'lazy' (a direct quote from her) because I did not kick my legs up as high as they could go, even though I did not have the strength to keep my hips square if I just 'kick my legs up as high as they can go'.

I have also heard of the 'advice' to take the upper back, back, in order to make room for the leg to go higher up the front, for example, in a develope devant. I was going a glisse devant with a rise (at the barre), which needed a hold of 2 counts. The placement, which works for me, is to think of the body growing forwards and up over the working foot on the rise. But I was told by the RAD teacher that my placement was wrong, that I should take the weight back instead. If I was doing this en pointe, surely I would fall off? And if I take my weight back, surely I would lose the hold I have in my centre muscles? And then surely leaning back while raising a leg devant does not make a very pleasant line?

I just wondered if these are actual changes RAD have made in teaching technique, or have I just happened to come across a particular interpretation of RAD technique from a few RAD teachers? Or is it just by chance I have come across teachers, whose methods do not suit me, and nothing to do with RAD technique?

Obviously, I don't want to argue with teachers in class, and I never have. To cut a long post short, I guess I am looking for advice on what to do or say when teachers insist I do something, which does not work for me at all.