Course History

The origins of the Physics of dance, a core laboratory science class at Santa Clara University begin with the meeting of Prof. Rich Barber in Physics and Prof. David J. Popalisky in Theatre and Dance. This occurred in the summer of 2002 when Prof. Barber attended several sessions of Prof. Popalisky’s weekly workshop series called “Dads Don’t Dance.”

Rich and the other fathers in the workshop were rookie dancers willing to ask questions about fatherhood and process them through movement exercises. In fact they requested the chance to learn and perform a dance and so Prof. Barber’s second career was born. Little did David know that in Rich’s scientific mind wheels were turning around all the physical principles that were inadvertently being demonstrated through the movement exercises.

At Santa Clara University’s Christmas party in 2002 Rich proposed “a crazy idea. “What about a laboratory science class called The Physics of Dance, where the objects for demonstrating and observing physical principles, primarily Newton’s laws of motion, were the student’s own moving bodies.” David, whose artistic discipline traffics regularly in “crazy ideas,” immediately concurred that it would be a great project to investigate.

In the summer of 2003 Rich and David met repeatedly over two months to flesh out a possible course outline. They compiled a series of lab experiences that introduce and explore dance movements that could be measured successfully and generate data for analysis. At the same time the two professors shared extensively about the theory and practice of doing science and doing art – in this case dance. They repeatedly found that their different discipline experiences both complimented each other and at the same time contradicted popularly held assumptions about dance and physics.

One often assumes that a scientific experiment is always a precise series of preconceived activities that yield clear results. And conversely one might assume that making a dance is all spontaneous inspiration married to perspiring bodies. In fact, any successful dance results from extensive preliminary and detailed organization as well as spontaneous decisions that arise from this organization. Likewise, a hypothesis worthy of experimental analysis is often tested in a simple “sloppy” experiment to see if the idea is robust enough to merit a more detailed experiment. Below are some other comparisons between dance and physics that energized Rich and David’s ongoing discussions about the new course.

Over the ‘03/’04 academic year the course went through the proposal and evaluation process within the university to determine if it would successfully promote the learning outcomes expected of a laboratory science class. The proposal included one of the simple “sloppy” experiments we tested, measuring the distance of a vertical jump over time. The plotted results were a close approximation of the expected parabolic curve revealing the force of gravity acting on an object propelled into the air. The course was enthusiastically approved in time to sign up its first twenty students for the fall of 2004. Over that summer plans for the course were finalized along with purchases of measuring equipment to be used in the laboratory sessions. The course description that resulted from this process follows:

The Physics of Dance

Explores the connection between the art of dance and the science of motion with both lecture/discussion sessions and movement laboratories. Topics include: mass, force, equilibrium, acceleration, energy, momentum, torque, rotation, and angular momentum. Movement laboratory will combine personal experience of movement with scientific measurements and analysis, in other words: “dance it” – “measure it.”

In the maiden voyage of The Physics of Dance Rich and David sought to provide challenging experiences yet at the same time observe week to week how well the students were both comprehending the physical principles and building skill with the measurement tools and analytic software. Each student maintained a lab journal that included both an experiential and physical analysis component for each lab session. The expectation was for students to accurately record their activities whether it be clearly notating the variable(s) altered in a series of measured jumps or the kinesthetic sensation of the hip, knee and ankle joints receiving the body’s weight in landing from a jump. The goal was for students to build understanding and respect for both the art of dance and the scientific process and physics in particular.

The course culminated with the final assignment, which was to choreograph a simple dance in small groups to be performed twice in the final exam. It was necessary to include at least one example each of horizontal and vertical acceleration and at least two of the following three movements 1) vertical and horizontal (a leap), 2) rotation (a turn) and 3) a partnered section (weight share or turns). Each group needed to choose three movements from their choreography for physical analysis. This analysis had to incorporate data produced with the course measurement tools, graphic illustrations, and quantitative analysis of results. Overall Rich and David were very pleased by this first round of final projects and the course objectives. Students were both engaged and excited by the combination of performance and analysis.

In preparation for the second incarnation of The Physics of Dance Rich and David decided to set the bar a bit higher by outlining specific experimental goals for each of the first six labs. The intention was to accelerate the process of students learning to use the analytic tools. With this better facility in measurement and analysis, the students could push the envelope in their final projects with creative approaches to their experimentation. To achieve this goal a weekly lab manual was created, which outlined the new movement experiences to be introduced, experiential questions for reflection and specific physical analyses to perform. This formed the genesis of this Physics of Dance lab manual. The students responded wonderfully and far outdistanced the first group in their mastery of the tools and ultimately in the inventiveness and clarity of the choreographic and analytic presentations.

Various individuals outside of the SCU began to hear about this course, including Kenneth Laws, the author of the course text “Physics and the Art of Dance – Understanding Movement.” Their interest and enthusiasm matched Rich and David’s own appreciation of the course’s early success enough to encourage the writing of this manual for possible use by other educators at the secondary and college level. We hope you find it interesting and useful to your own pedagogical goals of bringing a fresh and engaging approach to teaching science.