ive been formally teaching piano for 2 years, but it was my first time sending quite a number of students for piano practical exams last month.

i just received all their results, most did well for all the other sections except for sight-reading. in fact most of my students did really badly for sight reading.

how can i teach sight reading? any tips or methods? how much time is given to students during the exam to look at the score?

thanx.

I find that in the early stages of learning a lot of sight reading is done naturally.
Every new piece for beginners will be played through in the lesson (maybe hands separately once hands together things are being learned).
I sometimes use different tutor books for this too.
Duets of the appropriate level can be a fun way to help with sight reading too. You don't have to label sight reading as being that either, just make it a normal thing to do.

There are also several series of sight reading training books on the market as well as specimen tests for the exams.
You can teach student how to look at the music they will play..... things like checking time and key signatures, looking for similar bars, making sure both hands are ready at the start even if they don't begin together, working out the rythm.....
30 seconds is allowed in the exam to look through and even try out psrt of the test.

About 30 seconds is given to students to look at the music.

I use "Improve your sight reading" books by Paul Harris. They have pieces in there which are so similar to what is given in the exams and they go through things like different key signatures, odd rhythms so these can be practiced. I normally spend about 15 minutes out of an hour lesson working on these books as well as giving them specimen sight reading tests from the ABRSM. My students sight reading always improves using these books.

Also, when a new piece is given to them, you can give them things to think about before they play it, like looking for scale patterns, changes of key signature/time signature through the piece, passages which are repeated. This is the sort of thing they should be thinking about in those 30 seconds.

Hope this helps!

I'd say that's about it in a nutshell! Some are naturally better at it than others, though, and what I find is that the 'good' ones are more willing to practise it, as it's less of a chore for them, so they tend to get better, while the strugglers continue to struggle because they won't practise it! That's not a lot of help, I'm afraid but any way of making it structured or enjoyable will encourage practice. Working systematically through any of the above-mentioned books at least gives some sense of achievement when they reach the end of the book and can (hopefully) see that they now find the earlier exercises easier. I try to get through some in every lesson, though I don't always manage it, but I insist that they do two or three exercises a week at home and tick them off. Sight-reading simple duets duets together is a good way of encouraging pupils to keep going in spite of wrong notes. But don't despair; sight-reading is often the weakest section of exams and you're not alone!

I'm going to disagree on this one, though I'm not going to pretend that teaching (or even understanding sightreading skills) is easy!

The problem is, as identified esleswhere, is that it's an incredibly complicated procedure, so trying to understand where the learner needs to improve can be highly problematic.

The key, as far as I can see, is to have as clear an understanding of the processes involved as you can ... and this is complicated further by the fact that we sight-read differently depending on what stage of learning we're at. For instance, take a simple two bar tune in 4/4 E (minim) E (crotchet) D (crotchet) C (semibreve). As I'm a trumpeter, I'll pretend that I've given this to a beginner pupil ... what does he/she do? Look at the notes, work out what the notes are (pitch), remember what fingers to press down for each note, remember how tight to have the lips, remember to tongue the start of each note and to keep blowing through each note. Oh, and I almost forgot, work out how many beats long each note is, and then to set a pulse and to keep counting! Boy, that's complicated!!

In other words, the early learner will usually: SEE SYMBOLS - MAKE APPROPRIATE PHYSICAL ACTIONS - HEAR SOUND. Conversely, I suggest that the advanced player will SEE SYMBOLS - HEAR SOUND (in head) - (and as a result of hearing sounds) the body will automatically MAKE APPROPRIATE PHYSICAL ACTIONS to produce the sounds heard in the head. In other words, the advanced musician will hear the symbols as sounds, and those sounds direct the body - just like singing, in other words. But we can only get to this ideal SYMBOL/SOUND/ACTION model if we're competent in all the skills which have to be individualy addressed in the early stages of learning, such as: keeping a steady beat; feeling the 'groove' of different time signatures; working out what the notes are; remembering the fingers needed for each note; etc, etc.

Sometimes someones sightreading is poor because they have no sense of pulse (though they can do all the logical stuff about keys and note values); sometimes it's poor because they're slow at reading the notes or remembering the fingering; sometimes because they can't pitch the notes. But unless you analyse the skills involved, and work out which ones the particular pupil needs to develop, any teaching will be hit-and miss.

If you agree that sight-reading can be improved by practice, then it must be that sight-reading can be learnt. And if it can be learnt, we, as teachers, can help people learn that skill. Doesn't that mean that we can teach it?

Brian

I think practically all the above responses complement each other rather than contradict. It's so true though that it's not a simple skill to be seen in isolation. It does improve with practice and yes I DO think it can be taught.

For the later grades a knowledge of theory does no harm at all. For instance for chord progressions, it's half the battle if you can second guess what's likely to be coming next (from what went before). Proficiency in Scales and arpeggios will also reap dividends (as has been stated) insofar as all music is made up by them. As one's scale playing is, so one's whole playing / performance will be.

I agree about the Paul Harris books; they're immensely motivating, with their (admittedly) sometimes inconsistent standard of theory questions, but they come into their own with the mark out of 50 for the week's effort. Many pupils are keen to raise the bar that bit higher each week.

LR

I'd recommend starting on very easy stuff and aim to get it at the correct rhythm and in the right key. Then do a lot at that level before moving on very slightly.

The process of how to tackle it can be taught.

John Kember has also just published a set of sightreading books which I think are better than Paul Harris' because Kember is actually a pianist. I agree with others that a little sightreading needs to be done each day and it certainly does improve. I have spent the last week trying to improve mine this way and it has got marginally better!

What you're saying, Briantrumpet, is very valid - especially with regard to hearing the notes in your head, and the body responding accordingly - which is why those with perfect pitch are usually good sight-readers. And there are certainly certain aspects of music-reading, generally, that need to be helped and taught before sight-reading stands a chance - note values, counting, and so on. But I still think sight-reading, as in making a good stab at something at first sight, is more of a skill than an academic thing. (Sorry - too early in the morning for me to think of a better word than 'thing'. ) The muscles will remember where to go and what to do when the eyes see a particular combination, which obviously needs to be understood, but the ability to actually do it can only be nurtured by the individual, through practice - like playing darts, snooker, riding a bike. We need to be armed with a certain amount of knowledge and guidance, but nobody else can 'learn' it for us. Like many aspects of music-teaching, I think the role of the teacher here is consultative. It's up to us to choose material at the right level, or which includes certain things that the pupil struggles with in order to ensure they stand the best chance of improving - but the improving, I think, is largely up to them.

I absolutely agree about the academic/skill 'thing' - I often have pupils that have a thorough academic understanding of all aspects of music, but are poor sight-readers, frequently because of deficient rhythmic skills (hence my comments about pulse & groove).

And the learning/teaching thing applies to all aspects of music - it's really about how you define teaching. If you define a teacher as someone who helps learners to learn, then "choosing material at the right level" and helping them to develop the skills to be able to master that material is teaching. Therefore, I would suggest that you can, by definition, teach sight-reading. Yes, improvement will only come if the pupil responds to your guidance, or finds some other way of learning the skill, but that doesn't mean that the various skills can't be taught/learnt.

We'll all have our own sorts of activities that will aid learning of these skills. Mine include:

pulse/groove - walking round the room in time to recorded music, stepping different divisions of the bar
subdivision/counting - clapping while walking in time to recorded music
scales/arpeggios - not just being able to play them, but recognising the patterns on paper
pitching - singing intervals & degrees of the scale
and so on.

What activities I choose depend on the abilities & weaknesses of the individual pupil. A deficiency in any one of these skills can make sight-reading problematic. Most of these skills are a combination of bodily skill/sense and academic understanding. Indeed, this combination of high-level body skills and high-level academic understanding is what makes music such a fascinating thing to be helping others to learn. Or to teach, if you will.

Brian

I think sight reading can be taught somewhat
You can help sort of by having them read new pieces infront of you and informing them of what to pay attention to as they go through it

ie. remember shapes or chords, notice arpegios of chord shapes (see: thats a C minor arpegio!) that makes it more instantly recognisable, oh look at the fingering there etc. etc. I've found this has helped a bit but you know can't do it too much or they might get thoroughly depressed, the most important thing is they keep practicing !!

it becomes much easier to practice at higher grades because it isn't such an arduous task reading new music as when you're sooooo slow

I agree with Brian too that all the elements he mentions have to be internalised by the pupil for sight-reading to be successful. I would like to sum up what he says in one word - TECHNIQUE. It is essential for the pupil to have control of the instrument. The mechanics of fingering, correct movements and, of course, the understanding, must all become automatic so that the pupil can concentrate TOTALLY on the music.

I have a special interest in developing ease and good co-ordination at the piano right from beginner level. Some pupils will be naturals - others will struggle.

I'm still trying to work out how I became a good sight-reader. I thought it was due to my playing through all the music I could lay hands on in our very musical household (both parents were teaching piano in their later years). I don't remember being 'taught' how to sight-read. However, I must have been able to just 'get on with it' without any trouble or I would have walked away from the piano. Maybe it is just an innate ability as I was also a very well co-ordinated dancer with a strong technique. A feeling for music must be essential in the first instance and it is up to the teacher to develop and nurture that feeling.

BB

I'm trying to work out where I lost it.
At the start I could sight read at my playing level (I find that my piaon students are pretty much able to make a reasonable attempt at first play through too) but somewhere along the way it got to the point of too many notes to take in I suppose.

True.
My 'practical' sight reading is better than my exam sight reading but I do wonder whether exam sight reading expects too much of a perfect performance. I even approach it differently.
My sight reading mark in my grade 8 exam would seem to suggest this (I know how well I played it).

Hi all, thank you so much for all ur tips and suggestions!! will definitely work on it with my students!

That's exactly how it was for me. I think there is a big crux to this - the exam system is way over-used these days. As a result the average pupil does not get the time and the resources to help develop this essential skill. (Some might argue that sight-reading is not essential but I just making a point for the purpose of this thread).

Also, parents might not support the time and effort needed because they see 'exams' as the essential benchmark of progress.

Sorry - I could start a rant on this but.....I will stay calm

I have always been able to sight-read whatever the instrument and used to use this skill instead of doing proper practice for quite a while when I was a child I have no idea how I learnt to sight-read and these days I am more bemused by the fact that I can sight-read something well and then play it abysmally on my second attempt.

I successfully taught my daughter to sight-read on the cello by initially separating pulse from pitch and working on it systematically every day for several months. She was then able to transfer these skills to the trombone (which she took up last September) and her trombone teacher told me one day she was a "natural" sight-reader.

I think this is a very interesting discussion. The great skill of teaching is not to be able to teach someone to do a certain thing, i.e. to play a given piece, but instead to be able to nurture the development of a skill. Apparently one of the reasons university degrees are so highly valued is not their content at all (most of it isn't relevant to the everyday task of work) but is the skills that people learn in being self directed in work. In teaching pieces a poor teacher can 'get away with' simply instructing a student what to do on a certain piece and that's it. This is much easier, and much less useful, than teaching the student the skills of learning a piece themselves: equiping them, through learning several pieces, with the abilities that they need go forward and learn more pieces. As others have said I think the exam culture unfortunately encourages this style of teaching: learning 3 grade X pieces under the instruction of a teacher is very different to developing the skills to learn these pieces oneself, or with some guidance from a teacher (and of course from skill of learning grade X pieces in a more independent way, we can begin to the development of the ability to see grade X-2 pieces being learnt with great independence to a good standard; rather than the grade X-2 pieces being actually no easier, which is what we see in the other case).

So teachers can teach pieces by direct instruction without actually imparting any skills to the student; fortunately most don't and independence clearly depends on the aptitude of the student as well. Sight-reading, however, is a skill, it cannot simply be taught in this way: the equivilant would be enumerating every possible piece the student could possibly be given and teaching them all of these in detail. Clearly this isn't possible; therefore in attempting to teach sightreading one has to do the hard thing and nurture the skill rather than teaching individual pieces separately. Teaching pieces can be done in one of two ways: the skill developing way, i.e. the student learns to do things themselves, play this bit staccato because... and if the same thing happens in another piece you'll know to recognise this; rather than just play this piece like this because I say.

Sightreading is something that needs practice above anything else, and it is a skill to develop, but certainly a good teacher can nurture the development of this skill and enable each student to develop it better and more quickly than they would have done without the teacher. Having said that, the best of teachers will not be able to teach someone to sightread if they refuse to practise.

I always tell my pupils there are two kinds of sightreading.

There is the kind where you actually intend to learn the piece properly. That is when you play through it slowly, making sure to get all the notes correct. This kind of sightreading is practised whenever a new piece is being learned.

The other kind is that which is tested in the exam, that's when they want to see if you can get to the end of a piece, staying in time, at speed, getting the key right, with as many correct notes as you can. This is the kind of sightreading you need when you are playing along with other people. Pianists need this type of sightreading when people (usually headteachers in my experience ) put something in front of you and expect you to play it straightaway.

Both kinds are important, for different reasons.

Hi,
so far the only way I've been 'practicing' sight reading is by trying to learn new pieces (as many as possible) but I am aware that I do take my time and this is not the way you are tested in an exam.
I have the book from Paul Harris and sometimes I'd like to open it up and 'pretend' I am in exam and just 'play something' I've looked at for just 30 seconds. However, if I do this on my own at home, how do I know if and where I've gone wrong???? Can I practice this way home alone or is it no good as I won't know if and where I've gone wrong?
My teachers (both piano and violin) do not do any sight-reading with me apart from the famous 3 lessons before the exam

I tend to find that students who do a lot of sight reading improve rapidly at it, even if they don't know whether what they are doing is right or wrong. So I encourage them to try out lots of things.

One thing you might try, jojo, is recording yourself. You'll find you pick up quite a few mistakes that way when you play it back. You could tap a steady pulse whilst listening to the recording, for instance, and see if your playing matches it. This method also has the benefit of developing your aural skills at the same time.

In fact I often think that in the early stages, the requirement to sight-read in an exam is a stumbling block in the learning process. We're trying to cement certain reading skills, which can means stopping, and then all of a sudden, for the exam, we have to tell them that the most important thing is not to stop, however many wrong notes are played. This can mean that they often start paying absolutely no attention to getting the notes right at all, as the main goal is to get to the end. Once students get to about Grade 4, and musicality is developing, they are much more likely to be able to 'bluff' the tricky bits, without either stopping to correct, or motoring on with no regard to correctness whatsoever. It's for this reason that I feel that while sight-reading should take up considerable practice time in the early grades, it would be better not 'examined' until about Grade 4 or 5 - or, in the case of TG, Grade 6.

I never thought of recording myself doing the sight reading test then listening back funny enough, it's quite an obvious thing to do as well now that you mention it! Thanks Andante in C will do that

As a parent, rather than a teacher, I hesitate to enter this debate. I agree with lots of the previous comments but here a some additional thoughts on things that have helped my children. Admittedly these are focused more on the getting ready for an exam type of sight-reading - but it was poor exam sight-reading skills that started off this thread.

I think playing with others is the best way of practising keeping going and ignoring the odd wrong note. Someone has already suggested duets. For the early stages on the piano, that might just be playing one hand of a simple piece while the teacher/parent plays the other. Many children are more familiar with the treble clef, so make sure they get plenty of practice doing the left hand. Reverse for cellists! Accompanying others is also useful (except for real beginners). I do a lot of accompanying for my children and though I’m really not much good at all as a pianist, my sight-reading has improved enormously as a result.

For piano, try covering up the pupil’s hands with an open book, so that they can’t see them and have to concentrate on looking at the music and feeling their way. Parents can help with this at home by holding the book. Personally I find sight-reading much harder on a grand piano than on an upright - the music is higher up and it’s not so easy for your eyes to flick between music and hands. The more practice you get at not looking at your hands the better and this is probably especially important for someone who doesn’t normally play a grand but will in an exam.

I agree with this. The best way to get good at the exam kind is to play with other people - in a group or orchestra - where the standard of playing is a bit beneath your ability. It's no good trying to sightread stuff which is way too hard. The trouble with pianists is that they spend all the time they are learning doing it on their own, and then as an adult pianist they are expected to accompany singing etc and keep the pulse etc, having had little practice at this.

One thing I don't think has been mentioned in this thread is the ability to look ahead at the music. I know I am very bad at this - tend to concentrate on the dots I am actually trying to play - but if I force myself to move my eyes along the stave my sightreading improves. There are ways to teach this skill, but I've never tried it with pupils.

The other thing to remember with sightreading is that music is built up of repeating patterns. Therefore practising common rhythmic or melodic patterns in isolation is a good way of improving sightreading. Many of my pupils will play dotted crotchet, quaver, crotchet as three straight crotchets in a sightreading test. So we have a big blitz on spotting this rhythm all over the place until it becomes instinctive.

** goes away to prepare some rhythm sheets to use with all pupils in the coming term **

http://forums.abrsm.org/index.php?showtopic=25333

I hope I'm allowed to do this when another thread is still current.
I just thought that thread was relevant to this one and might be interesting for anyone who has read this one but not that one! It highlights the WAY in which piano students read at different stages in their progress.