If you were choosing a teacher would you.

Choose someone who had taken up teaching the instrument that they played because they thought that it was a good way to earn money, but whose only experience of teaching was an "A" type teaching diploma, and who couldn't sight read well enough to play in a local community group?

Or, someone who had decided to teach the instrument they played, because they were interested in helping children and adults get the most out of their musical education, had been to a conservatoire, or had studied music performance on their instrument at university, played at a high level, better that the "F" type diploma didn't have a teaching diploma, had played in many of the groups at conservatoire/university and also played in a community orchestra?

Sounds like you are touting for business morton.

No! Natural players ought not to teach. They often can't tell what they are doing never mind help someone else. I would be a terrible oboe teacher.

Because of the instrument DS plays I generally have to go with the only person who teaches it in the area. TBH I have never looked into their qualifications.

I think there are pros and cons to different teachers.

One of DS bassoon teachers was a professional musician, been to the RCM and lived close by. I still view her as the best teacher he ever had but her priority was performing so sometimes she had to cancel or couldn't book weeks too far in advance because of jobs/auditions.

I don't really know anything about his current teacher. I think he occasionally plays in an ensemble but he only teaches part time at the weekends because I think he works out of the area. I don't think he works as a musician but I could be wrong as he is always around at the weekends and I would have thought that was a performers busiest time. Lessons are done through the school so I have never heard him play or observed his teaching style. He does seem to have confidence in DS abilities and pushes him on, imo, at quite a fast rate.

The main thing I look for in a teacher for my children (not me) is a teacher who works during the holidays because private school holidays are so long. It is easy for a child to learn bad habits during the long breaks, especially if they move onto work not set.

Military musician? They are often around at the weekends, and work away from home.

What are an 'A' type diploma and an 'F' type diploma? Assuming A is meant to be higher/better than F, is this dependent on the establishment from which it was obtained? Or something else? That's just out of interest - I don't know what qualifications my son's teachers have. As has been discussed before, personal recommendation, like-mindedness regarding goals and achievements, personality - and many other things - come before qualifications.

Never pictured him as a military musician - DS will love him if that's the case!

I suspect I know who DS's teacher is, given that we've established by PM that we live in the same area...

For what it's worth, if I've got the right chap, his week job is music related, in music publishing. An excellent way to keep on top of the current teaching repertoire amongst other things! He also does a lot of local freelance professional playing. He's known as a very reliable, good player, and probably the only contrabassoon player within about 40 miles. Like you, I don't know what his 'paper' qualifications are, but I do know that he's a committed and experienced teacher who consistently gets good results from his pupils. And I've never come across anyone with a less than positive opinion of his character!

"Ability to teach me" is the only criterion I have - and that's based on the things Crotchetymum mentions. Paper qualifications, teaching or performing, are basically inconsquential (though, to be fair, interesting to me, but purely because I'm nosey!)

KTViola,

I think he is a thouroughly nice chap but that was all I knew about him so thanks for the info. The only criticism I can give of him is that his contrabassoon is always on display and DS is positively foaming at the mouth to get his hands on it!

I have always chosen teachers based on personal recommendations, and the type of qualifications they have doesn't really concern me, nor what they get up to apart from teaching. That's not to say I'm not interested in these things, just that I don't think they would be a deciding factor for me. There is no one definitive combination that makes a good teacher, because so much depends on the personalities and compatibility of teacher and student.

I think morton is referring to Associate and Fellowship diplomas? (F higher that A, with L in between)




Bit of course - it is all part of his cunning plan!! I think I know who you are talking about too, in which case I concur with everything KTviola has said.

I did discount a piano teacher who lives 2 minutes walk from our house because she only taught to grade 3 level. She may well have grade 8 distinction and be great but I was worried at her knowledge and ability if she could only teach to grade 3.

Thanks!




I'm not sure, but I don't think it's uncommon for some teachers to have cut-off levels. Grade 3 is quite low, I suppose, but it could be that she loves bringing on the younger, earlier, learners, and then likes to hand them over when they're well on their way I knew a swimming instructor who was brilliant and coaching older kids, but rarely did so as he loved the first bit - actually teaching youngsters to swim. My son's previous piano teacher only taught to grade 5, or above that only if, having passed grade 5, students just wanted to play for fun.

Advice: buy a very small car NOW, then you can argue you couldn't transport a contra.


Daughter2's bassoon teacher once casually remarked that something she had set up (bassoon octet at local music festival, maybe?) was part of her plan to take over the world. D'you know, I'm not sure she was joking? There's something of the megalomaniac about <at least some> bassoonists.

I'm rubbish at singing. I scraped grade 5 with much hard work. I might do some more grades but it will be tough. And yet my singing teacher always tells me I should think about becoming a singing teacher eventually - because I've had to find out all the tricks to make it possible for me to sing in the first place.

I did have a piano pupil who was a (young) singing teacher - she was a natural at singing (not piano) and had got grade 8 effortlessly and I often wondered what she had to draw upon in her own experience to teach.

I promised son 3 a bari sax when he'd passed grade 6 but by the time he got there he'd lost interest. Result!

Our teachers have nearly always come via recommendation. They all have different qualifications and experience but all (bar the first - famous musician but useless teacher) have been excellent.

No. This is a cop-out.
Excellent teachers are so, because they take time and great thought to analyse the playing of each individual pupil and the problems they have. And this is regardless of the problems they may oror may not have had themselves when learning.
I was a natural. I have worked very hard at my teaching and am a very good teacher. I have perfect pitch, but am excellent at teaching aural, even though I never had to think about them for myself.
As with anything, there are hardworking teachers and there are lazy teachers. Natural ability is a poor excuse for bad teaching.

Why do all your posts revolve round community groups/amateur musicians or how qualified people are on paper but not in reality?

Are you insecure about your own ability by any chance?

can't find a smiley for a zipped up mouth..

Oh you clever boy, you!

FEAR THE BASSOONS!!!!

Actually the contra that a friend of mine used to play fitted perfectly into a mini clubman estate. It rattled about a bit in a Mk II Escort estate.

In all honesty I wouldn't go with either of the two teachers you have outlined in the OP.

I'd hope that someone had taken up their instrument or continued with it to an advanced level because they were passionate about it. And that's the sort of person I'd want for my teacher in addition to them meeting certain other requirements.

At a beginner level the requirements are different to at a higher level.

To teach a beginner requires someone who can inspire, explain, coax and encourage as well as provide a secure basic technique. It also requires a degree of flexibility as not everyone will be able to take the same path towards proficiency. The teacher's playing standard is secondary to their ability to accurately convey the techniques required to play the instrument. (As a teacher I was taught that one did not have to be the next Picasso in order to teach art effectively and cultivate a child's natural talent.)

To teach an advanced player the teacher themselves needs to be more advanced and experienced in a variety of styles and playing settings. They need to be familiar with more advanced techniques and problems commonly encountered. They still need to be encouraging, good at explaining or demonstrating etc. For an advanced player I believe that the teacher's own playing ability and their ability to teach are each 50% contributors to their efficacy as a teacher.

What bits of paper my teacher/s has and whether they are recent or from 20, 30, 40+ years ago frankly doesn't bother me so long as they can do the job I'm paying them for.

I don't view this as a cop out. For one thing one of my teachers described it as a pronounced natural player. As with all things there are degrees. I never use intervals relying on hearing the note I want to play in my head.
If someone made a funny noise on a reed, I would have no idea what was causing it or what to do about it.
I wouldn't know if someone was making good progress, or not. I have no idea how long anyone might take to get to learn some aspect of playing. I would be unable to try any of my pupils reeds to see if they were working as I would blow them to bits as soon as I tried them. I can't make reeds for beginners for the same reason. I have no experience of what a beginner oboist sounds like, except one that can only get one long uncontrolled note and then I would not know if this was due to how they were playing or the reed.
This isn't necessarlly because I am a bad teacher. I would be quite happy to teach the horn again, but don't because I don't play it anymore and I believe that a teacher should be able to demonstrate in the lesson what they want the pupil to try to do.

All realy good players seem to feel insecure about their playing. That is what drives the need to practise. I often suspect that the people who don't feel insecure about their playing are actually never going to make good players. Also I have the most trouble with people who are very secure about their playing, and can't see what to do next, although often it is obvious to anyone who listens to them.

I am very interested in the people's assessment of qualifications in the music world.

What I think I am seeing is a fair bit of wishful thinking, not on my part. My interest is in encouraging adults to start instruments and to play for fun. At the same time I am interested in raising the standard of musical education available to adults. As I don't consider grade 8 as a high level of achievement for a musician, I would want the adult education to be delivered by someone with a much higher standard of musical education.

Right, exactly... so becoming a good teacher would involve (heaven forbid!) WORK for you. You would have to invest time into learning the things other people might have picked up just from the experience of gradually gaining proficiency. This doesn't mean that it's impossible at all!




It's not about just being insecure about your own playing for the sake of the music - with you it seems to be about how you and others are perceived. While the first type of "insecurity" can be beneficial as it drives improvement, the second is often unhealthy as it relies too much on factors beyond one's own control. The other thing that seems to be important to you is belittling grade 8/first level diplomas. I do wonder how this fits in with your agenda of making music fun for adults, since most adult starters are happy to achieve grade 8; undermining somebody's accomplishments in a particular field hasn't generally correlated to increased "fun" in said field within the course of my experience...

My agenda for playing for fun for adults means playing with other people. Passing grade 8 (any board) with distinction does not necessarily mean that you will be any good in an ensemble situation.

Ensemble playing is a completely different skill. In grade exams some people as I have found out from the answers on this forum rely on their pianist to cover up mistakes that thay make in rhythm. In an ensemble of amateur players, no one is going to help you out with your rhythm, you are on your own.

The first time through a new piece will be sight read by the whole ensemble. No one wants a chamber music session where they have to stop every two bars because one member of the group can't count. The only part of a grade exam that tests if you can count is the sight reading, so technically you could pass without being able to count accurately.

To play in an ensemble for fun means that there is no need for you to have passed any exams. So what does having passed grade 8 show that you can do? It shows that you can play scales from memory. It shows that you might be able to read grade 6 music at sight, however if you don't get full marks for this then obviously you aren't grade 6 standard in sight reading. It shows that you know something about the music that you are playing, all my musical friends know this whether they have taken exams or not. (Most concerts have programme notes about the pieces being played.) It shows that you can play some music with a pianist who is better than you are.

None of the above means that you can play in an ensemble. So why do grade 8? Well some people like to have milestones in their playing. That's fine. However grade 8 doesn't qualify you for anything. This is why I don't pay any attention to what grades/ diplomas people have taken, because in the general adult music making scheme of things they don't mean anything. They are only useful if people want to do recitals.
Not very many of the people I come into contact with want to do recitals, they wouldn't consider this as fun playing.

An amateur ensemble also doubles as club. Like a bowling club or a tennis club etc. It is a way of meeting new people, making new friends, getting out of the house, an intersting hobby. You don't need any exams to be good at any of these things.

I think then, that the only person who is interested in what exam someone has passed is in the case of young people their friends, and family, or in the case of an adult the person themselves. A grade 8 exam pass/ merit / disctinction for an adult is for the satisfaction of the candidate. The diplomas are the same.
On their own, none of these exams qualify anyone for anything. Further study is always needed.

That 'covering up' is an important part of ensemble playing, eg: if you are sitting there for 12 bars rest and you have a cue marked in that some other part hasn't reached yet, unless they've given up completely, you may be better waiting until they get there, if the rest of the orchestra followed.

In an ensemble there are going to be note, rhythm and volume mistakes, and part of being in an ensemble is that when it wobbles a bit in those sorts of circumstances you should be trying to help steady the ship.



Having a grade 8 shows that you were able to satisfy the examiner that you met the requirements for grade 8 on the day of your exam. In the same way having an A-level maths shows that you satisfied the examiners in your exam for that.

You don't need to get full marks in a music grade exam, so why should full marks be required in the sight reading to demonstrate a capability of sight reading a grade 6 style piece of music?




As above a grade 8 shows you satisfied the examiners that you were of that standard for one particular half hour.
Why are they useful if people want to do recitals?


People often like a benchmark, sports clubs can provide a handicap, so in music people can use a grade as a grading, and a specific target to aim at often helps with improving.


How is that different to anything else?

I don't think it is different to anything else, but if I suggest that people who are grade 8 standard do not know enough to teach their instrument, on this forum I get told that I don't know what I am talking about.
I asked at band practise what people thought about people teaching their instrument as soon as they had got grade 8. One person has grade 8 and knows that he doesn't know enough. Someone else who works in a school music department said that if they hear of anyone doing that they try to get them to stop. They said we tell them that grade 8 is the beginning of learning an instrument, not the end.

As for the recitals and the grade exams, it was the only thing that I could think of that resembled taking a grade exam.
Do you really get a handicap for tennis and bowls or is this only golf?

In this case, I think you don't know what you are talking about.

Two of my piano teachers had grade 8 and no other qualifications at the time that I was with them. They were fine teachers for me when I was in the lower grades (edit: Except for keeping me doing exam pieces and little else, but technique-wise, I learnt the right things). I was a rubbish student but that was not their fault. The things they taught me have still stuck.



Right, so these "people" at band practise are qualified to judge, as is "someone else who works in a school music department".

As usual, a gross oversimplification. If I wanted to be a concert pianist then it is true that I would need someone who had the relevant experience of competitions, festivals, and advanced technique that usually are correlated with post-Grade 8 experience. However, if I had children whom I wanted to learn music, Grade 8 would be more than adequate.

Edit: Clarify one point.

The difference I think here is that I have taught grade 8. So I know what the pupils who have passed this exam know. It would be possible for a grade 8 person to pass on to their pupils very bad technique, posture and knowledge of the type of sound that they are aiming for. This is because at grade 8 standard someone is only beginning to have an understanding of how to play. I would want a much higher standard than this for adult education. I am sorry that some children have to put up with teachers who are irresponsible enough to think that they have something to offer their pupils when they are beginners themselves.

I can't even be bothered to go through all the fallacies above because they are so obvious

Good night, it's past my bedtime.

I've seen tennis done where one person is allowed to use the doubles court, that acts as a handicap.
I've played in handicapped table tennis tournaments - these were with games being first to 26 and people being given a head start of up to 20 points.
I'm sure a similar system could be applied to most games.

No-one is suggesting that someone with grade 8 is automatically going to make a good teacher. The perfect teacher would have superb technique, musicality, listening skills, communication skills, organisational skills ... the list is endless. Unfortunately there aren't too many perfect teachers around, so most of us have to compromise somewhere. For a particular pupil, some of these qualities may be less important than others. A teacher who is less than excellent in some ways may therefore be fine for certain kinds of pupil. A budding soloist needs to be taught by someone whose technique is far above grade 8 standard; a beginner doesn't. It's true that even a beginner needs to learn good habits rather than bad ones; but, for a beginner, the sort of technique that will get you to grade 8 is quite good enough to be getting on with.

When I was teaching I realised that a beginner needs the most experienced player and teacher. The reason for this is that starting off a beginner is a big responsibility. You have to do it so that no major changes are likely to be needed to their playing when the beginner is beyond the standard of grade 8, Dip ABRSM, LABRSM FABRSM. It is a popular misconception that anyone can start beginners off. If someone is grade 8 they haven't got far enough in theirr own playing to know for certain that they are not going to also need to make a major change in their own playing at a later stage, unless of course they were started of by an experienced teacher and high standard player themselves. This means that when they demonstrate to their pupil, they could be demonstrating in a way that is incorrect.

I have also learned from this forum, and elsewhere, that some people are teaching grade exams by letting the pupil learn the pieces parrot fashion by listening to the CDs. It follows that if a teacher has passed grade 8 using this method, their teacher wasn't actually teaching them. I know this is happening to a greater of lesser degree, because I have another friend who is an experienced accompanist who plays for professional recitals as well as grade exams, and who has complained about the low lever of competence in sight reading of many of the pupils she plays for. She has found out that the pupils learn the pieces by listening to the CDs. The CDs should be an aid, not a teaching method. Only a bad teacher would encourage a pupil to copy someone else's performance. This is the same as copying someone else's work.

I have just this morning spoken to a friend who is an ex music college violinist, who spends a lot of time repairing damage caused to new pupils by inexperienced/bad teaching. A pupil of any standard deserves the best teaching possible. Someone for whom grade 8 standard is the highest attainment in their music education cannot offer the best teaching possible to their pupils because they don't know enough about playing their instruments, or the construction of pieces of music, and they do not have enough experience of playing music, because most of the repertoire is likely to beyond what they can play.

The excuse that someone has to go to a grade 8 standard teacher because there is a shortage of teachers, can't be true if the what the conservatiores say in their statistics is also true, that they are preparing 42% of their students to be teachers.



Oh good I learn something new every day!

There is a lot of truth in this post. If you had expanded your first post to include all of the qualifications and exceptions you put in here, I think we could all have said "Yes" and gone back to doing something fun!

I would love to meet the person who could learn the pieces I am learning for grade 8 piano simply by listening to the CDs and learning parrot fashion. They would have to be a genius to pull that off.

I would think it depends how long you have to spend on learning the grade 8 pieces. I am told that for a wind instruments a year or 2 is not very unusual. I will admit that it is much quicker if you can read them off the page.

er...I don't remember any teachers/ parents from this forum ever saying or even suggesting that they did that.



um..so in a nutshell, your point is that Grade 8 students shouldn't teach because they generally have very bad technique, posture and tone, and this conclusion is mainly based on observations of your own students?

I think I might need the zipped up mouth smiley....

On a more serious note - I am sure there are some "grade 8" musicians who have poor technique and shouldn't be allowed to teach. I am sure there are also some musicians with performance degrees and teaching degrees that in reality shouldn't be allowed to teach!

But there are equally many grade 8 students with a good solid foundation of good technique and an awareness of their own faults,an understanding of what the common pitfalls are who are more than capable of passing this on to their students. Often this is done with the support of their own teacher. There are also a number of "grade 8" musicians who have had years of lessons post Grade 8 but simply haven't bothered doing any further exams. They maybe playing at a significantly higher level than grade 8 with a high level of understanding of what is good/ bad technique. It is simply ridiculous to suggest that they are unable to teach well.

Presence or absence of bits of paper do not always relate to competence.

I think I actually said that not teaching at grade 8 standard applied to people whose musical education had only reached this stage. They simply do not know enough. Teaching under the guidance of another more experienced teacher used to be called teaching practice. However the person doing the practice did not get paid for it. I also think that if someone is doing this with only grade 8 standard then, there is no reason why someone with a much higher standard of musical education isn't doing it as well.

You could have a teacher with all the qualifications in the world who still would not be a good teacher - for a particular student at a particular stage in their learning. I have no idea what qualifications my teacher has, other than that he did go to music college and has done a reasonable amount of performance. What matters to me is that he has a sound I aspire to, a style of teaching which encourages me to do the best I can, and also that he can fit around my insane work schedule at times . None of those are factors which are necessarily tested by any particular set of qualifications!

He wouldn't have a sound you would aspire to if he had only got to grade 8 standard. I can't think of anyone I know that makes a sound on an oboe at grade 8 standard that anyone would aspire to.

I'm not going to comment on your second point, since I have no frame of reference within the oboe world. But there's a difference between only getting to Grade 8 standard, and getting way beyond Grade 8 standard but not having any bits of paper to "prove" that. Which is why, with teachers, it really is a case of trying them out and making up your own mind. A teacher with heaven knows how many qualifications still might not have a sound that you would want to achieve yourself, whereas someone with no formal qualifications might be a natural teacher and have a fantastic sound and style for a student to emulate.

Yes I have realised this, that is why I have been careful to say, someone whose highest level of musical education is grade 8 standard. It is based on the fact that I have known and know of people who have started teaching at this level. If anyone thinks that they have enough knowledge to start teaching someone else, when they are only at this level, they are seriously misguided. I can't see what they think that the pupil is going to gain?

Ok .... Can I ask you a question then? My daughter has lessons with a highly proficient teacher with a proven track record. No problems with that at all.

On the other hand I have no bits of paper to indicate my playing level since grade 5. However, i'd reached a grade 8 standard of playing by AS level - backed up by an almost perfect performance of grade 8 pieces for the exam.

Based on comments from others who teach and have heard me play and my teachers own comments I am of about grade 8 level or above and have played pieces from some of the diploma syllabuses. (notice I say played - not perfected to performance level necessarily, though with time and effort there's no doubt I could have done this) There are other pieces of Grade 7 - 8 level that I find hard to get to grips with. I sightread at an advanced level - as borne out by the fact that I can, and frequently do, sightread pieces (not perfectly) at a similar level to that which I play at.

On balance I consider myself to be round about the grade 8 mark. So ...... my daughter is learning clarinet, she has a lesson (a perfectly good one) but is making mistakes either with timing, aspects of technique - hand position, tonguing or fingering as she's forgotten what the teacher said in the lesson - or she's reading something new. Now on one hand I am perfectly placed to help her, correct her errors, solve her problems which makes her a happy girl, more satisfied and willing to practise. It helps her teacher because her problem is not ingrained.

On the other hand, I'm one who could be seen as not even having grade 8 and thinking she can teach!! I CAN teach (have the skills to impart knowledge) as I have a teaching qualification and a number of years teaching experience (Primary School) so I guess the only question we have is SHOULD I be teaching my daughter these things? To me, the answer is a no-brainer - I have no doubt that my technique is secure enough to teach my daughter these things!!

In addition, I have previously taught 2 beginner sax players (I play sax too, probably only to around grade 5/6 level at my peak) and was asked if I'd give these two kids a start. Whilst I was unsure initially and made it clear to the parents involved that I wasn't really an expert in sax playing. Their response was - they'll have an opportunity to have lessons at secondary school next year - we've heard you play - if you can just get them going that'd be great and better than trying to self teach from a tutor.


In addition, the parents had asked the head of the school if they could have sax lessons in school ( a number of other lessons were on offer but not sax) but if was deemed not possible. They asked if MrsF (that's me) could do it. The head approached me to ask if I could do it. It was agreed that if I was to go ahead that it would be a private agreement but that I could use the school premises to teach from. It was also kind of hinted at that it would be good if I could do it.

So I gave it a go and both the children concerned, their parents and I were pleased with their progress. It's not something I would have actively promoted myself to do but I don't feel I shouldn't have done it purely because I wasn't at some arbitrarily decided level.

I could think of at least 3 people who fitted that description on the oboe, and more on the clarinet. Even a couple of flautists and one french horn player.

Do you mean they do have a sound you'd aspire to or don't. May be just me being dense but I think your post could be taken either way. i.e I think it reads in agreement with Morton's statement but Could be taken to mean the opposite