In the popular media, American cultural, educational, and political life is portrayed as ideologically split down the middle. The split is often framed in terms of opposites by using the ideas and labels addressed by the author in this paper--traditional versus nontraditional, experiment versus the status quo, diversity versus homogeneity, change versus a return to traditional values--and the cycle starts again. According to Hagood, dance educators are not effectively using their discipline's scope and substance to counteract the corroding forces of a relativistic and narcissistic popular culture. Instead, their work is often reactive; shifts with the tides of local pressures for product; and is shaped by the limited, parochial, and dimensionless understandings many in education and culture have regarding the merit and worth of educating in and through dance. He contends that the isolation of so many dance educators and the lack of any field voice or advocacy for standards will keep dance, at best, an activity, thus exacerbating the troubling influence of popular culture on what dance is or can be in its educational potential. He suggests that, while framing dance teachers' work in consideration of the values inherent in legacy (tradition), test and trial (experiment), multiple forms and views (diversity), and subsequent evolution (change) is no panacea for uncertainty and the corroding effects of narcissistic political and popular cultures, attention to those notions (along with ongoing and open discussion among faculty, students, and dance teachers at local, state, and regional levels, in K-12, university, and studio environments), may better foster field sensibility and thereby support communities of educators and learners that enjoy their capacity to share and disagree, challenge and join, plan and produce in an environment of learning in and through dance.