MATSEC SEC Dance common mistakes
MATSEC SEC Dance · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Writing a choreography commentary that only names the steps in order ("plié, tendu, pas de bourrée") without stating the choreographic intention, the motif, and how the movement was developed and varied.
Candidates rehearse the movement but never rehearse the reasoning behind it, so under exam pressure they describe what the body does because that is what they can see in their memory, and they have no vocabulary for intention or development.
What to do instead
Before the exam, write a one-page plan for each studied work using four headings: intention, motif, development (repetition, inversion, canon, retrograde, size change), and structure. In the answer, open with the intention in one sentence, then justify each movement choice against it. Practise turning any 8-count phrase into three sentences that answer 'why this movement here'.
Giving a purely emotional or autobiographical response to a set work ("it made me feel sad and free") instead of analysing the choreographic, musical, and staging features that produced that effect.
The candidate's genuine personal reaction is the most vivid thing they remember from watching the work, and they mistake sincerity for analysis; they also lack the technical terms to name what caused the feeling.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed three-step frame for every viewing note: feature (what is done), effect (what it produces), evidence (where in the work it occurs). Build a personal glossary of terms such as unison, canon, contact, spatial pathway, dynamic contrast, and accompaniment. In the exam, keep the personal response to one closing sentence and spend the body of the answer on features and evidence.
Answering a safe-dance or anatomy question with general advice ("warm up properly and drink water") rather than naming the specific structures, actions, and corrections involved.
Safety content is often revised as a list of slogans rather than as applied anatomy, so the candidate has nothing more precise to offer, and the question wording ('describe how you would prepare for...') invites vague good intentions.
What to do instead
Revise safety through named joints and muscle groups: ankle stability and the role of the calf and peroneal muscles in rises and landings; turnout originating at the hip, not the knee; core support for extensions; spinal articulation in rolls. Practise writing a warm-up for a named style (e.g. a contemporary class) that states each exercise, the body area it prepares, and the injury it prevents.
Describing a dance style only by its costume, music, or country of origin, without addressing its characteristic movement vocabulary, stance, rhythm, and use of space.
Style questions are revised from video clips where costume and music are the most memorable features, and candidates assume the examiner will accept context as evidence of knowledge.
What to do instead
For each prescribed style, prepare a four-line profile: stance and posture, characteristic steps or actions (named), rhythmic and musical features, and spatial or group conventions. Test yourself by describing the style to someone who cannot see it, using only movement words. In the answer, lead with movement and use costume and music only as supporting context.
Using musical terminology loosely or incorrectly, for example calling any slow section 'adagio', any fast section 'allegro', or saying a dance 'follows the beat' when it deliberately works against it.
Candidates pick up terms from studio talk without precise definitions, and the difference between tempo, metre, pulse, and phrasing is rarely drilled, so approximations slip into written answers.
What to do instead
Learn five terms exactly: pulse, metre, tempo, phrase length, and accent. For each studied work, notate the time signature, the phrase length in counts, and one place where the choreography is synchronised with the music and one where it is contrapuntal. Practise labelling a recording in real time with only those five terms until the labelling is accurate.
Presenting a composition or improvisation task as a string of unrelated movements with no clear starting point, development, or ending, so the piece reads as a warm-up rather than a dance.
Under time pressure candidates generate movement on the spot and keep adding to it, never deciding on a motif or an ending, because development devices feel risky in performance.
What to do instead
Use a fixed composition checklist before performing: one motif of 4 to 8 counts, two development devices applied deliberately (e.g. canon and size change), one clear spatial plan (pathway or formation change), and a decided final image. Rehearse the ending as carefully as the opening. In improvisation tasks, set yourself a single rule (e.g. 'only low levels until the music changes') so the improvisation has visible structure.
Treating the performance criteria as one undifferentiated mark and so neglecting areas such as focus, projection, and musicality while over-rehearsing steps, or the reverse: performing with energy but with imprecise alignment and line.
Candidates rehearse what feels difficult (the steps) and assume the rest follows, and they have often never seen the assessment criteria broken down, so they do not know that alignment, focus, and phrasing are separately judged.
What to do instead
Obtain the syllabus assessment descriptors and turn them into a self-check list: alignment, line, coordination, control, dynamic range, musicality, focus, projection, and spatial awareness. Film yourself twice, once for technique and once for performance quality, and score each criterion out of five with one specific correction. Rehearse corrections one at a time rather than re-running the whole routine.
Writing about a professional work without distinguishing the choreographer's contribution from the dancers', the designer's, or the composer's, attributing staging or music choices to the choreographer as if they were movement decisions.
Programme notes and reviews present a production as a single artistic whole, and candidates absorb that framing, so roles blur when they write under pressure.
What to do instead
For each set work, build a credits table: choreographer, composer, designer (set and costume), lighting, and original company. Then write one sentence per role explaining what that person contributed and how it interacts with the movement. In the exam, attribute explicitly ('the choreographer's use of canon', 'the designer's bare stage'), which also demonstrates production knowledge.
Ignoring the command word in the question, for example writing a description when asked to compare, or listing when asked to evaluate, and so losing marks despite knowing the content.
Candidates read the topic words ('two works', 'the motif') and start writing immediately, and they have not practised the difference between describe, explain, compare, analyse, and evaluate.
What to do instead
Underline the command word first and write a one-line plan that matches it: compare needs paired points and explicit similarities and differences; evaluate needs a judgement with reasons; analyse needs features broken into parts with effects. Practise by taking one set work and writing five short answers to the same topic using five different command words.
Running out of time or space because the answer retells the plot or the narrative of the work before reaching the dance content, leaving the analytical section unfinished.
Narrative is easy and fluent to write, so it consumes the early minutes of the answer; candidates do not rehearse under timed conditions and misjudge how long an analytical paragraph takes.
What to do instead
Practise full answers under exam timing at least three times before the exam. Cap any narrative context at two sentences, then move straight to movement evidence. Structure longer answers with the conclusion or judgement stated early, then support it, so a truncated answer still shows the analytical position. Leave a two-line space at the end of each answer for a final sentence added in the last minutes.