I only teach things I can play well. That means to professional standard (BBC radio performance, for example). It is a simple rule which has served me well.

Recently I've been giving flute lessons to a woodwind teacher who taught flute to diploma level. It soon became clear that this teacher literally wouldn't have passed grade one. They have now decided to be a specialist in their own instrument and related (reeded) instruments and so have discontinued lessons. The finality of the decision reinforced by presenting me will all the flute teaching materials which now won't been needed.

I'm learning to play the classical guitar and have lessons an hour away - as that's the nearest teacher. One of my pupils spouses' wants lessons but cannot afford the time for a three hour round trip, and also, my teacher does not teach in the evenings. And so I agreed to some non-lesson shared practice time. I emphasised that in no way was I teaching guitar but could help with reading notation. I certainly shan't be charging a lesson fee.

I suspect this is how people slip into teaching instruments they can hardly play themselves?

It's also because music services insist on having a "brass teacher", a "woodwind teacher" or a "string teacher" rather than individual specialists for each instrument, to save money presumably.

Chris

Yes - same here. The school music service send me their teachers for flute lessons but won't let me loose on the school pupils as I can't be employed as a woodwind teacher because I won't (can't) teach clarinet and sax

I always have a little suspicion of this when I see people advertising as teaching a number of instruments. There are limited numbers of people who really can play several instruments to a high standard, and obviously there is an overlap in instrument families that I would be more tolerant of someone teaching clarinet and sax with no separate sax qualification/relevant equivalent experience than clarinet and piano. But I was pretty horrified that the schools service lumps all strings together. I can't play the cello. I have an idea how to play the cello, but I can't and I don't. I wouldn't know which string was which on a double bass, yet the service would put me to work merrily teaching cello pupils.

I suppose people diversify to fill full time hours of work, and the market gets what it wants. I am sure it will happen over time that people will find out I can make a passable job of piano accompaniments for lower grades and ask if they can tack on piano lessons. It's going to be a tough job to say no when someone is waving money and saying they don't mind because to their untrained ear you sound good enough. Where is the fault when the pupil or parent reassures you they don't mind and they understand they are taking lessons from someone who would never begin to advertise in that capacity? If you've made it clear what they are getting and they still ask for it it's hard to see how that can be the teacher's fault, but I still don't want to do it. They often think they will go over to a "real" teacher if and when the child gets good enough, but the early stages are so critical that it doesn't serve a pupil well to have to unpick a load of fundamental posture problems at grade 5. People do keep advising me I should teach various additional instruments. If I get the same opinion from the woman I have booked a master-class with then I will go for it, but until then I shan't consider any of them decent opinions.

What?! That's crazy, how can you teach someone the flute if you only play, say, sax yourself? I only play/teach piano, so maybe woodwind instruments are much more similar than I realised, but I would have thought it would be nonsense to use the approach described above. Is it better than nothing, or is it damaging to have a teacher who can't play your instrument? It's also total rubbish if the parents think they're signing up little Timmy to learn flute from an actual flute teacher, and instead he's getting lessons from a sax teacher etc.

Not impressed. Thank goodness piano isn't lumped with guitar as a 'chordal' section or something!

Yes, but it is not entirely immune from the problem. A lot of people think all "keyboards"are the same, when actually the piano, harpsichord, clavichord if you can find one, multiple varieties of organ, synthesizer etc are quite different instruments.

Come to think of it even grand piano, upright piano, and electric piano each have their own particular techniques to get the best from them.

I also find this very weird, but I have come across this quite often. Bad enough if the teachers get forced into it by the schools/music services. I play the violin to a very decent standard, but I wouldn't dare to teach it, neither would I teach piano. It's simply not enough to be able to teach on the grounds of playing an instrument well, not to mention NOT even playing it ...

You sadly also get the kind of teacher though who thinks they can teach everything - especially singing, because "everyone can sing a bit, and I have a half-decent voice myself". Or piano peris who try to snap up your singing students to get some additional business

Am excellent point, wittily made

Rather 'made in a complicated way' - just read this again myself.

A lot of people have to teach clarinet, flute and sax, and it usually works as at least they make sure they know all the early stages of learning them, and sometimes pupils are passed to specialists in their instrument after a certain point. Double reeds are a different matter, and I don't like being asked to teach those. Admittedly it is more teaching kids to read music/musicianship skills at the beginning as well.

They are worst of all when it comes to recorder.

I thought it was in the style of Oscar Wilde: "The only thing worse than thinking you can teach an instrument because you can play it, is thinking you can teach it because you can't play it."

I feel so sorry for parents and pupils who perhaps don't have much previous experience with music and get taken in by 'teachers' like this. Unfortunately, many people seem to believe that they don't need an amazing teacher when they are just starting out, but in my opinion, this is precisely the time that you need the very best teacher that you can find.

There is so much harm that can be done to beginners by dodgy teachers and this is something that can take years for subsequent teachers to sort out (that is, unless the pupil gets totally fed up and quits). I had a not-so-good clarinet teacher when I just started. Looking back on it now, I think she didn't have much specialist knowledge on the clarinet and she was very much a sax player herself and taught clarinet as a kind of after-thought. When I found out about all the bad habits I had picked up, I almost wished that I hadn't had lessons at all for those four years i spent with this teacher, and I felt as thought I would be in a much better situation as a complete beginner. Grrr.

I don't get what you mean so I shall have to guess in case I have accidentally offended anyone. When I see someone who is advertising to teach, let's take your signature info, piano, theory, singing, flute, it sounds a lot. It doesn't mean I think it's impossible to teach all that to a high standard, but it does mean I would have more suspicion and perhaps look for more information that someone who sticks to saying I am a piano teacher and it's all I do. I would want to establish if the person has a first love and an add-on instrument. If they went to a music college did they do a joint first study or a first and a second? Are they current on each instrument or do they play in an orchestra just on the flute and hardly touch the other instruments any more, having got qualifications under the belt some years ago?

It's more of a job to weed out those who have entirely dedicated themselves to music, are very talented and really can manage all that from those who have started out teaching an instrument they are properly qualified for an just tacked on others as they go. Having had violin lessons from someone who resented every violin lesson she had to give wishing they played viola I do think it's also crucial to make sure the person isn't investing more time and effort in the instrument that is the one they really wanted to teach. It's an extra alarm bell of something to check out, not an assumption that it's impossible, it's just rare. You have to be careful.

It's definitely possible to teach several things well, but of course we should be able to play them well, AND know how to teach properly (whether qualified teachers or not!). I teach recorder, clarinet, saxophone and flute, insist on good technique, use a wide range of repertoire, lots of sight reading, a programme tailored to the individual, etc. My pupils practise, enjoy their learning, perform regularly and usually achieve good exam results. I think I'm good at what I do, but at the same time, it's good to know one's limits. I tell people from the outset that flute is my 4th instrument and that I will have to pass them on when they reach about Grade 6 level. I've gone much further than this, but don't feel comfortable teaching beyond that level. I'd certainly never try to teach the oboe or bassoon, because I've never played them and don't know how to.

Absolutely - and I think your stance on the issue is perfect.

I teach clari, sax, flute and recorder, like you elliewelly, and I've been asked to teach oboe and, amazingly trumpet before now, and have always refused. I know quite categorically I would be damaging pupils techniques on oboe and trumpet, and I won't go there...

There's a whole Monty Python sketch in there somewhere. Michael Palin as the naive student clutching a brand new oboe and John Cleese as the teacher who isn't quite sure whether to suck, blow, or use it to hit people with, but must pretend that he's an expert.

But best of all is the person who asked you. I guess that would be Terry Jones as the Headmaster.


Steve

LOL Barry - I have been asked to teach the guitar!! Needless to say, I said no!

I agree completely. One of the things that I found mildly horrifying about gaining my PGCE (in secondary maths) was that apparently I'm legally qualified to teach ANY subject at secondary school, including languages I don't speak and subjects I have never studied (I'm not entirely sure what "Non-Resistant Materials" is, let alone have the foggiest how to teach it!).

Still more horrifying, if I understand the setup correctly, is the American school orchestra class, where the music teacher is apparently presented with about 40 students and the same number of (different) instruments, enough to have different sections, at any rate, and has to turn them into an orchestra. None of the students (or very few) have ever played an instrument before, I don't think they have to be able to read music, and after a term they can swap instruments! They only have an hour (or whatever) of "orchestra class" every week - and there are no specialist instrument teachers involved at the same time!

Hmm. On second thoughts, that sounds like the latest reality TV show offering from Channel Four...

You wouldn't, David, but some do. The problem is when you have a run-in with someone who does, it makes you wary in the future.
A prime example being the first 'recorder' teacher I found, who taught clarinet and recorder. When we had the first (and only!) lesson, we were doing the introductory chit-chat thing...it turned out he hadn't formally studied recorder at all (not necessarily a problem of itself); he'd started on descant, gone up to tenor, then as the tallest boy in class gone to bass. He'd never played a treble recorder, the main instrument of the family! As a result he wanted to concentrate on descant playing, which effectively limit to G5 from a syllabus perspective (I didn't expect his knowledge of repertoire to be wide, once we got to this point in the discussion).

So after this, looking for my next teacher, I was wary about people who taught X, Y, Z and recorder. I found adverts where it would say "I teach oboe, voice, theory, piano and recorder. My qualifications are oboe LRSM, voice DipABRSM, theory G8, piano G8". No mention of recorder anything. So I was dreadfully put off by these people - rightly or wrongly.
The teacher I have now lists himself as teaching "Flute, Clarinet, Saxophone, Recorder, Music theory" so initially I thought 'woodwind teacher with recorder tacked on'. Then I saw the words "baroque specialist on recorder" which was enough to make me brave contact Turns out his A, two Ls and F are all on recorder, which is his true love. So as/when/if I need to search for a new teacher, the experience of the second "X, Y, Z and recorder" has hopefully negated the first!

Maizie's reply is excellent. You need to investigate individual teachers and probe a bit into their qualifications etc. My son is taught by a specialist trumpet teacher who has improved SJ's technique no end. But he only teaches trumpet and is therefore, as someone else said, confined to independent schools and private pupils.

On the other hand, when SJ turned to the euphonium, we came across a truly gifted brass teacher who does teach across the board of brass instruments, and he would have been my second choice for trumpet teacher. He's on the local county music teachers' list.

Personally, I only teach piano because that's what I have the music qualifications in and I am confident to do so. I also sing well in an amateur fashion, but just because I have had training days, or attended masterclasses in singing I would not dream of teaching it because I would be too afraid of doing damage. (I've also heard enough to know I don't know enough! )

When my father-in-law was appointed as a peripatetic music teacher many years ago, he was expected to teach wind instruments in the schools he visited, although he was a trumpet/cornet player. He used to tell us how he learned to play the various exercises the night before he had to teach them! Hopefully things have moved on since then!!

'Fraid not

I am afraid I am suggesting not everyone is as honest as you are. As much as you get dishonest people in every walk of life you get them in music teaching too. I've had a "lesson" with someone who didn't play as well as I already played and knew very little about any of the things I had gone to the lesson to find out about (technique, examination requirements, etc.). You can get this with a single instrument teacher also, but I am afraid it's more common with those advertising for more than one instrument. You have to play to the odds and there are, sadly, higher odds that someone who advertises lots of instruments is not correctly estimating his abilities.

I will emphasise again that I do not think it applies universally to everyone in that position, I do agree there are a minority of people genuinely experienced enough to cover several instruments, I just need to check that the teacher I intend to pay money to for the experience is actually among them. I don't think you "must be" less committed to one than another, just that I would wish to rule out the possibility that you might be. I am sure it would take about 5 seconds in conversation to establish you were a genuinely multi-talented person in speaking to you, but I'd have to ask the questions.

The trouble is David, so many of us are just not as well qualified or talented as you! Anyone accuses me of crawling and I'll come round personally with Michael Palin's oboe and show John Cleese exactly how to apply it, which coming from a piano teacher is saying something very foolish

Some teachers do have strong playing skills on just one or two instruments, those who are genuinely competent on many are as rare as hen's teeth. There you are David a compliment at last, you are as rare as hen's teeth!!

Now (thinks very carefully) I think there is a beer called something like that, wonder if I could use a bottle of that to help drown my hubby's swine flu?

Christopher Elton (Professor of Piano and head of the department at the Royal Academy - with too many distinguished students to list) is a top class pianist AND a top class cellist.

At last something I have knowledge of. Old Speckled Hen? Well known to cure all known ills - for as long as you are drinking it.

Actually I do have something to ask (as an adult pupil). I have certainly made a point of going to a specialist for my instrument but I am under the impression that peri woodwind teachers often have to teach the whole family of instruments. Am I right?

I'm also a bit curious about something the OP said at the beginning. That this teacher had been teaching flute to Diploma level but wouldn't have been capable of passing Grade 1. Were they not rumbled by the diploma student(s)?

I think we all have a tendency to think that if something is too good to be true, then it probably is, particularly when if you have any experience in learning or teaching an instrument, you do become aware of the pitfalls. So bad luck David, you are simply too well qualified and talented to be taken seriously . . . whoops . . . I think I said something tactless again . . . now let's see . . . I know, my swine flu hasn't really cleared up properly . . . and I'm still light headed from it!!!!!!!!!!!!1

About the flute teacher who could teach to diploma level and not play to Grade 1 level, I suppose it sounds bizarre, but it all depends whether they had any real knowledge of the flute, how it should sound and how good a musician they really were! And most probably how good they were at acting too

Perhaps something I should have prefaced with "in my personal experience and the universal experiences of friends with whom I have discussed it". I don't claim to have done objective research on the matter, and in the absence of such research all we have to guide us away from mistakes is what we can glean from experience. Experience often being the more powerful and accurate type of learning. Maybe you have friends who primarily have not had this experience, but perhaps the reason they have had this unusual positive experience is because they know you!!

Well it is not quite so simple.

Teaching and performing are not the same. At the highest level few football coaches were ever able to play as well as the players they coach. The same in athletics, tennis, swimming, ... Some top coaches were top class competitors in their day - but most were not. The best seem to have been good performers themselves, but some way short of outstanding excellence.

So in those fields you can, as a teacher or coach, definitely help others to reach levels you could never reach yourself.


I suspect the same is true in music, and in instrumental teaching. You have to recognize what is correct and what is not. And you have to know a variety of methods of getting your students from wherever they are to where they need to be - methods appropriate to their age, physical and mental uniqueness, previous experience, and aspirations.

It might be useful, but you do not necessarily have to be able to do it, or demonstrate it, yourself.


As for teaching multiple instruments, it seems entirely logical that teacher A, who, for example teaches piano and violin might well be an even better teacher if they restricted themselves to just one instrument. But it does not necessarily follow that teacher B, who teaches only piano, teaches it better than Teacher C who teaches piano, voice, and a couple of other instruments as well.

You just cannot generalize like that.

Well said!

So long as you restrict yourself to asking people who have never met you!

I found this a very thought provoking post. I certainly would not be comfortable teaching an instrument that I could not play myself to a very high standard - I would feel like a fraud, and I do like to demonstrate things to my pupils, whatever level they are at. To me, that means being able to play BETTER than them.

HOWEVER.....the comparison to the sports coach is an extremely interesting one. I don't know enough about sport to know if this is a realistic parallel or not.

Another point is that I am sure that we ALL know fantastic musicians who can't teach for toffee. Teaching and performing ARE definitely very different skills in some respects.

I agree with the comment about Sports Coaches. I think that when pupils are heading towards Diploma standard, they don't necessarily need the "nuts and bolts" teaching about sound production and technique. What they need is help with interpretation of the music and this could possibly be given by someone who has little practical knowledge of the instrument concerned but who is an able musician.

I have tried very hard to find specialists for my own children but I do get annoyed by some people who are highly regarded in the local area for their "ability to teach many different instruments". Their technical knowledge is at best patchy and at worst damaging. They spout their stuff at often impressionable youngsters who don't know any better. My then 8 year old corrected one who was barking an incorrect fingering at the cellos in the junior orchestra who then tried the sarcastic approach with her. As she is my child, sarcasm is something she can handle but to do that to an 8 year old is unacceptable.

In response to those asking how a non-flute player could be teaching flute to diploma level - this teacher is accomplished to a high level on another woodwind instrument and is able to instruct on what the finished piece should sound like. In addition, they took their own diploma with a teacher who couldn't play their instrument - and that teacher is an examiner. And so I think the coaching (thinking of Tom's post) at that level was more about putting together a program and the presentation of the right sound rather than the technicalities.

I should emphasise that this is a good and responsible teacher I'm writing about. Taking the decision to stop teaching something you've already had success at is a hard one and I admire their courage in holding their hands up and saying "I shouldn't be doing this".

A few months ago another local woodwind teacher had a single lesson with me to get them started on flute as they'd only played reeded instruments before and I now see it added to their list of what they teach on their musicteacher.co.uk profile.

It really isn't uncommon for someone to play flute, clarinet and sax up to a high level. In fact anyone doing much in the way of Big Band or pit work (not to mention woodwind teaching) is pretty much expected to. I wouldn't be at all surprised if said musician had reasonable piano skills too, and decent theory should be pretty much a given.

I have a friend who's an equally outstanding musician on sax and trumpet (which is rather more unusual) and teaches both at university / junior conservatoire level. There's a fantastic photo of her on stage at the North Sea Jazz Festival where she was part of the horn section supporting Seal. She's playing trumpet with a tenor sax hung round her neck - not a lot of people can do that!

EDIT: Personally, I've had some fantastic lessons from teachers who can't play a note on sax, although I consider these an addition, rather than a replacement to my sax specific lessons.

I think you are quite right to stick to only teaching what you really know.

We were in a similar position with one of daughter's studies. It wasn't anyones fault and the person who taught her to Grade 5 was very good, interested and fortunately didn't cause any major problems. We all knew the score and that was fine. The next teacher was someone at the Music Service who did well with her but by G6 she really needed a specialist teacher for the instrument. The teacher realised this and she was passed on to someone else. A term later it was a case of give up or seek specialist help. It's taken best part of a year for her to come to terms with the instruments personality.





Shocking!!

I think this is quite pertinent - whether a teacher is teaching one instrument or many. Good technique and practice should be established early on, and there will come a point at which this is fairly well understood, the demand of the teacher's job arising then - on the whole - from the demands of the music itself as opposed to the demands of the instrument.

However it can be in the early stages that potential problems can arise, because parents are simply not educated in the fact that one diploma plus some sort of teaching qualification does not necessarily mean that the teacher (who may happily admit to only teaching, say, to Grade 5 level on a second instrument), has the technical knowhow to ensure that good techniques are established in the pupil. In fact, they may not even realise that the teacher's qualification is not in their chosen instrument. The teaching may be sufficiently good to illicit a good mark in a Grade 5 exam, but with the use of techniques that will simply not work at Grade 8 and beyond. These will then have to radically reassessed by a subsequent teacher if the pupil is to continue. And it can actually look as if it's the second teacher who is inadequate, because it can be very hard to change bad habits; results in Grade 6+ exams will be lower as a result, and "isn't it a shame that Mr/Mrs X didn't just continue with him/her beyond Grade 5...?"

I've been in the position of looking for reasons to cite to a parent for a pupil staying with me rather than take the more convenient option of having lessons in school, and it is very difficult to be honest without appearing to discredit another teacher, or simply appearing not to want to lose the pupil. This is really not particularly to do with multiple instrument teaching, except in so far as one good qualification in a main instrument can mask inadequacies in another from someone who is looking for lessons.

EDIT - Two more points to add, which again, are really nothing to do with teaching several instruments as oppose to only one, as I agree with Tom that one can't generalise!

Firstly - Good qualifications do not always a good teacher make, and the reverse is also the case. As it can be hit and miss, recommendation is the best way to go, I feel, for a parent.

Secondly - the early stages are crucially important, and this is not the time to assume that 'anyone will do to get a child started'. Further along the line, (at, say, Grade 7 or 8?), the pupil will quite probably know himself what the calibre of the teacher is - assuming that the first one has been good!

This is an excellent point. In fact you need a really good teacher in the early days to make sure that technical aspects are up to scratch. (Incidentally, I am often irritated by the parents who want child to make speedy progress in the early days (on piano this is) whereas I like to spend that little bit of extra time to make sure the basics are really embedded.)

It's like teaching maths - the better teachers should be used to teach the less able groups. The more able pupils can fend for themselves much better.

OK, perhaps when I'm well and truly over the swine flu, maybe I could go out and advertise myself as a teacher of church music, including the organ? Now, I have some ability on the keyboard/piano and could probably cut the mustard if the local church was really desperate . . .

Seriously, I only feel comfortable teaching people when my own knowledge far exceeds my own, which is proably why I like teaching 5 year olds so much! And unless I can demonstrate competently, I'm not happy either. But Mad Tom, does make a good point about being able to teach football beyond a coach's own skills. But the coach clearly has to know very thoroughly what they are doing and what they want to achieve, and not simply wing it!!

Anyone else fed up with swine flu or dare I say it me complaining about it!

No, Jane, you go ahead and have a good grumble. I'm sure you feel ghastly and fed up with how long it takes to go. Lots of sympathy and tlc.

Aww thanks Susie!! I'm feeling better already for the commiserations!! . maybe not, sorry here I go again

Good job emsoboe isn't a Forum member you would be very sorry you said that

I currently consider myself a clarinet and saxophone specialist in that I can play them both to a high standard, I know the techniques of each instrument, and I know how to teach each instrument. I am currently properly learning the flute so that I can hopefully also become a flute specialist and be able to teach it. I agree with TSax that it's certainly not unusual for doublers to play all 3 to a high standard and it really is a requirement if you want to get into pit band work. This is one of the other reasons I'm upping my flute playing as I've missed out on some work because of not being able to play the flute well enough. However I also know there are a lot of doublers who have their main instrument and aren't necessarily as competent on the other two. I can also tell from some students I've inherited that they were taught by someone who doesn't necessarily play the instrument very well themselves - things like odd fingerings being used as the main one, and incorrect embouchures etc.

I actually have a little bit of teaching at an independent school now and I am the clarinet and saxophone teacher there. I'm hoping that once I get my flute sorted I can try writing to other schools and offer all 3 to see if I can get some more work. I would never teach an instrument I wasn't confident I could teach and have the correct technique for, which is why I don't teach the piano.

Lucid

As someone who is struggling to afford the fees of many exams I feel there must be a number of people out there who are great teachers but who have not had the same opportunities, time and finance as those with a string of letters.

It also depends a lot on what the qualifications are actually measuring. A number of people reporting back on their DipABRSM experience are saying the exam really focussed in on the grade 6 level and not a great deal on beginner stuff. Someone could get through this and I am sure many other exams without having a good grasp of how to deal with a student who arrives for lesson 1 never having seen the instrument before and no clue how to read music - it's a totally different skill! And for classroom lessons I have had someone say to me that they could "see how the process of actually being a good teacher was interfering with my ability to be measured as being a good teacher, as they are so often different things" something I heartily agree with in many aspects of the schools system, and perhaps the music teaching system if a parent, for example, is measuring success by high grades at low ages and hang the general musical development of the child.

Of course some people who can do cannot teach becuase they can't explain how it is that they do, they just do. All here can clearly read and write, but how many of us would know how to teach someone else to do it?

as a generalisation, i find this unjustified. it might be true in a few cases, but certainly not all.

for example, i have been more or less living on the breadline for most of my life (a brief period in my mid- to late 20s aside, when i finally found the performing jobs i had been working for so hard - only to find that i actually don't enjoy them as much as i thought i would), and i still managed to get a postgraduate diploma and, later, an additional hnc-type qualification. both full time-courses, and still i worked at least 20 hours while studying. sometimes i would only sleep 4 or 5 hours a night. i certainly don't say that's healthy, but it was the only way at the time, because i had no financial support. i was only lucky that my first study was free in germany (the second wasn't however and cost me a lot, both financially and personally), but there was still the cost of living etc.
i am back to the point these days where i can just about pay my bills (out of my own free will, because tuition is much more fulfilling to me than everything else i have done so far).

so yes, maybe it is the case with certain qualifications like abrsm or trinity, but i also know a lot of people who literally have no money and still go back to uni/conservatoire as a mature student. i don't think it's all black and white.

i agree however about grades and exams - one reason why they are not the main focus in my teaching practice.

nearly forgot: if you are in scotland/greater glasgow - the pda in music tuition is ila-registered ...

It's not meant to be a generalisation or black and white. The words are chosen carefully: "I feel that there must be a number of people" - not that they are a majority, a minority, any particular number or percentage of people, just that there must, I feel, be a number of such people. I agree it's relatively easy to finance degrees, HNDs, etc. if you don't mind the fact you will have to put the money back in sometime, but it's easy to sign up for the big debt and do it. It's when you come to AB things that are unfunded that it comes to pieces financially. Of course if you simply cannot work more than a certain very small number of hours per week without serious medical consequences then it's much more difficult to stretch finances. I can't work a few extra hours here and there to get more money for a particular thing. Not ever.



What is the pda music tuition? I am not in Glasgow but if it's a small number of contact hours per week I might be able to get there.

'Professional Development Award in Music Tuition' at Stow College/Glasgow
http://www.stow.ac.uk/courses/coursedetail...US&cmode=PT

As far as I know, it is vastly based on home study/assignments with the odd attendance unit. I was thinking about doing it myself at some point, but I just can't find the time at the moment. I already have the ILA stuff lying about, but I think I'll still need to leave it for a while ...

Ooh, would be interesting to speak to someone that has actually done it. The blurb says it's focussed on the pedagogy angle, and since I have an education degree I fear it would be a lot of going over old ground. I can do a mean essay on "how to teach" it's just sad that my experiences in real life have been "god no, that's just for essays, you can't actually teach like that!"