Sorry, I'm in a "learn" about music phase this week!

I know this is not set in stone especially with second instruments but why does it take a child and/or adult to take a year to generally progress to the next grade? Why does it take that long? Is it down to practice?

So if an average ability student practiced once a week it would take them 3 years and if they practised 5 times a week (as if!) it would take them less than a year?

Or are there specific stages that have to be mastered that take 6+ months to teach so it is more down to the teaching time required? If so would that mean having a lesson twice a week would speed this up.

By the way, I have no intention of speeding up my children's learning, getting multiple teaching slots. It's just purely out of interest. Yes, I find odd topics interesting!

It's very much a generalisation but does seem to be true for a lot of people, particularly at the lower grades. But in my experience on some instruments, most often wind, especially for those who already read music, progress can be very much faster. A lot depends on the teacher. One of ours (violin/viola) didn't do grade 1 for two years then did an exam a year with his not very good teacher until he got to grade three, and a new teacher, with whom he made rapid progres and had done grade eight within less than five years. It depends on the teacher, the student, the instrument and how much practice they do.

I think it is much less to do with how long they practise and how often, and much more to do with quality of practice.

I'm not sure more frequent lessons would help much - it is what goes on between lessons that really makes the difference (assuming of course that the lesson is not ##### to begin with!),. But I suppose if a child is motivated to do a week's practice in half a week because the lesson is coming round sooner, it could work.

General motivation and keenness must also play a large part. I sometimes think that if the next grade is the main aim something is missing.

What I'm asking then is if a student put a years practice time - say three times a week - into 5 months of everyday practice, would they get to the grade quicker or does the teacher have to teach them a set number of technical and theory parts that takes over 5 months?

Hmm - I'm sure there are too many factors at play to give a simple answer to this one.

What is regarded as important to cover between grades will of course vary from teacher to teacher. But certain aspects of understanding and technique have to 'gel' and often these things can't be rushed. It takes a skilled teacher to sense when a pupil is ready to 'move on' to a new topic, a new technique, a new level. It's not just a set of boxes that can be ticked. So in some cases it might be possible but the simple answer is that it's not that simple!

So I can't apply my scientific brain to music then.

Perhaps the grade a year thing is just an illusion created by the time restrictions of the exam slots? Perhaps if you could take your exams at any time then a wider variation in time between grades would emerge?

I'm sure with focussed practice a person would accelerate their progress. I would think that there is an optimum amount of practice to maximize progress - but I have no idea what it is. It would have to take into account building muscle strength and dexterity without over working the muscles and creating strains on the body. At higher grades knowledge and understanding of the music and it's historical setting would (I guess) be required to facilitate a performance that captures the spirit of the piece, but also includes personal interpretation - that might require a level of maturity that comes with age not playing hours (I don't know).

So I would say - more hours = more rapid progress as a general rule, but there are many confounding variables such as teaching style/ability, quality of practice, motivation, physical attributes (a young body is going to get that left arm position (violin) easier than an old one. . . and so on.

Now where's my ruler and that piece of string. . .?

So if a child of 10 was capable of grade 6 would it be better for them to avoid it and wait until they could understand the emotions of a piece, even if technically they were very good? Can a 10 year old play a passionate piece or a piece relating to anger if they are not mentally mature or do not have enough life experiences to draw on?

It depends whether you want your child to go through a sausage machine, or become a musician. With enough practice, an able child could easily pass two grades a year or even more. What is then ignored is repertoire. Sure, they would be learning pieces from different eras, but only as pre-selected by the examining board.

Our eldest is now 14, gained a good merit last year at Grade V piano, but his teacher said that she was not really prepared to put him in immediately for Grade VI (and Grade V theory!). She felt, and she's 100% correct, that exposure to a much wider range of music is an indispensable part of becoming a musician. What has happened, almost by chance, is that, in being given lots of new pieces to learn but not necessarily to perfect, his sight-reading has improved immeasurably, so that tackling new pieces isn't the tooth-pulling torture it used to be. He's getting some nice repertoire under his belt, and he seems to have forgotten about Grade VI for the moment. As a pianist of sorts myself, but not a teacher, it falls to me to "help" him in his practice, and I'm much happier doing this for an assortment of pieces than the same old same old three exam pieces that have characterised the last few years.

Edward

It's not just about practice or the lack of it. It's about progress. In the early stages one person doing a reasonable amount of practice may understand what they are trying to achieve and progress will be quick. Another person doing the same amount of practice may not make the same progress.

The factors I think, as a non-musical parent which increase progress are:

Support from teacher appropriate to particular student.

Parental/other support (school, other music teachers, friends)

Access to appropriate resourses (CD's, repertoire, not just exam material, string, reeds etc)

Playing opportunites at the students standard, both regularly in ensembles and irregularly at school or Forum concerts.

Suitable instrument

Musicality (not talent), confidence and a personal desire to succeed

Someone who has this will make good progress with practice.

In the early stages people may be able to squeeze in two grades a year (if we are talking about an exam year).

I think it's more important to take an exam when you are read,y or when you have the skills to do it justice ( they might not have 3 perfect pieces at the closing date but student has the skills). I don't see any point in young children particularly, punching above their weight.




I don't think they can personally. I suppose at the end of the day it depends what parent/teacher are happy with as to whether they should take the exam or not. I think this is something I've come to understand over time though and in the early stages it's not something I gave consideration to.

The "learning curve" is a scientific invention which should really have been called the "learning wiggle". The number of circumstances to take into account in the way a child learns, the way he grows, the way he matures intellectually, the way he matures emotionally, the support or otherwise of parents, the health of the child at any given moment, the pressures of school work No musical journey is the same and the exams, as the AB so rightly says, are just sign posts along the way. Hitching up a Grade a year isn't necessarily producing a musician.

My problem is that as we can only have an examiner once a year I have to take a long term view of how to pace the taking of exams - who will or who won't in any particular , who can skip a Grade, who needs two years between Grades and so on. Unfortunately that also has to be balanced against the fact that unless I can provide 3 hours examining time the Board may refuse to send an examiner. It's a juggling act and quite challenging.

Adult learner perspective here.

I began oboe 3 years ago next Tuesday (but who's counting? ).

I had previously played (many years ago) viola (though not to a high standard), had done a fair bit of singing and was "currently" dabbling with recorder. So I had experience of reading music and playing.

I went from 0 to my first exam (Grade 3) in 2 sessions (8 months roughly) then took the next two exams at 8 month intervals (up to Grade 5). Oboe is a slow start instrument until you build up stamina. I have habitually practiced 5 or 6 days a week for between 15mins (at first) and 1 to 1.5 hours (now) per day. I have always had a one hour lesson each week.

Up to Grade 5 I covered a reasonable amount of repertoire (certainly not just exam pieces) and felt well prepared for each exam including all the technical elements. I have managed a merit or distinction in each of my exams so far.

I decided that I would take a litle more time between grade 5 and 6. There is a subtle change in marking reflecting a higher expectation of a candidate's ability, a stack of scales to learn and I wanted to cover plenty of repertoire and tackle some "higher" aspects of technique (vibrato for instance). I figured a year would be about right. I'm at that point now and have decided to leave it to the next session as I don't feel happy with my level of technical ability and at the moment my scales are all over the place. I want those things to be, as near as damn it, automatic before taking the next exam. I do however, suspect that more time spent getting this stuff right now will allow for more rapid progress in the higher grades than if I fumbled my way through Grade 6 now.

I'm sure you can apply your scientific brain to music (as I have applied my engineer's brain). Yes, if you put in more practice you should progress more quickly, but I'm sure there is a limit somewhere. You need resting time to let things sink in. So I think 2 sessions between exams (8 months) is probably a reasonable minimum (I certainly don't think an exam each session would normally be attainable), though higher up the grades that might be pushing it. This depends on regular practice and (I believe) regular lessons. You need a teacher you get on with and trust and you need to do what they say.

I'll just add that I'm only taking exams as a way of setting myself targets and measuring progress (it works for me). The piece of paper isn't important, the ability to continue improving is what matters. In that respect it doesn't matter to me how long I take between exams (though at my age I feel a desire to get good as quickly as possible). A teenager hoping to study music may have different aims and a need to reach Grade X by year Y. That could inform the amount of practice required.

..

Ummm...... Up until Grade 5 many of my pupils can take an exam every 2 terms- but only if they are practicers! After one exam, we begin scales for the next grade immediately so that scales are constantly on the go, and for Grade 3,4 and 5 I have sight reading books (Harris' Improve your Sight reading) we do most weeks. I also will get the next Improve your aural book on the go. I like these books, as they aren't just preparation for exams. I have set things I make pupils do between these grades, to build technique etc. However, I ban exam pieces until half term. If a pupil is capable of progressing through the grades quickly, they should be able to master pieces for the summer session exams if they have the music at the beginning of March.
However. after Grade 5, there is so much repertoire specifically written for the instrument (clarinet I am speaking about) I feel that there should be a year's gap. Sometimes the repertoire we explore is on the syllabus, sometimes it is not. For grade 6 and above, I allow the pupils to begin to concentrate on exam repertoire a complete term before I make an entry

However, I have many young pupils who progress much more slowly at the lower Grades. In Clarinet, there is a big jump between Grade 1 and 2. If the pupils don't grasp reading the higher clarion notes, then the gap is often 4 terms. However, in my opinion, in clarinet the gap between 2 and 3 in terms of pieces is pretty small, so very few of my pupils take as long as a year to get from grade 2 to 3.

Gosh Aquarelle, having only 1 session a year is very difficult! Poor you! I would like more than 3 sessions a year (for those whose preparation I have messed up usually- ie I miss the exam entry date and then realise she would be well ready to take GR 1 in March!!!!!)

There is no reason why doing an exam a year, or even an exam every couple of terms, should mean a pupil misses out on repertoire. Son 4 is currently playing a huge number of pieces in every conceivable style. Some are 'grade 4' pieces, in as much as they're out of the grade 4 book, but he's not doing the exam as he has other exams this term. The plan is to prepare for the exam, and cover the scales, etc. but not actually do it. The other pieces are either for fun or for competitions. He thrives on having a lot of different things to play so he can make progress and experience lots of different music at the same time.

On the cello things work slightly differently. His teacher doesn't like him to spend ages on pieces at his current (grade 4) standard. He learns lots of pieces but doesn't keeep many of them for more than a few weeks. He also does position work and scales and so on. With both instruments he plays lots of music but is also (or maybe because) making fairly swift progress. But he has the luxury of time to do this. If he could only practice two or three times a week then he would be hard pressed to cover so much.

Another question!

Why do teachers skip grades? Now I can see why in the case of DS who has just taken up the double bass and is basically at Grade 1 level now so he'll probably sit grade 2, but what about when it is inbetween grades? So going from grade 3 to grade 5? Is that a sign of a good teacher who does not want the student to be constrained by the exam syllabus or are there other reasons?

Our piano teacher is not in favour of skipping grades as she thinks essential technique can get overlooked. But occasionally it's the sensible thing to do if, as you say, someone is clearly beyond the next grade or circumstances prevent an exam being taken at the right time. Exams are meant to confirm a pupil's level not be an end in themselves. Son 3 didn't do grade one sax as he already read music and it was just too easy for him. On the cello the techniques needed for each grade seem to form a very sensible path of learning so following the grades works well. I'm sure we're not the only family to find that you make more effort to get the practice done when there's an exam coming up, so that in iteself is very helpful!

If I have a pupil who is likely to progress at a faster rate than one exam a year I ask them what they would like to do. Some really do enjoy taking and passing exams, whereas others would prefer to take not more than one exam a year but take part in festivals or other performances (these are not mutually exclusive, I hasten to add!). Both types of pupil end up covering roughly the same amount of repertoire, scales etc.

In answer to your original question, another factor to be taken into consideration is the length and number of music lessons during the academic year. My school pupils have only 15 hours with me over an academic year, whereas my private pupils have more like 24 hours. Whilst the amount of practice at home makes a big difference, the amount of contact time with me has an effect too.

Hear, HEAR!!!

I'm afraid the current education system encourages a 'box-ticking' mindset - and I'm afraid I really don't think this is the way human beings learn. As a generalisation, we all learn - I mean REALLY learn - over a long period of time and with LOTS of repetition. And, as Aquarelle says, there are so many factors to take into consideration.

Also - sorry, but this measuring everything by grade gets to me sometimes (sorry, GOW at the moment). Many countries in the world have no grade exam system but students just learn MUSIC.

Wow this thread is very difficult to answer.

The thing about a grade a year...I think its a generalisation. You can't really apply 'I practice three times a week, or five times a week' how many more years will it take compared to so and so who practices twice weekly. I'd be wary about telling yong children how many grades they should be doing and how often. If someone told me a grade a year at 8 or 9 i might have felt intimidated or worried I was underachieving if I didn't get it.

You just have to see how things go. Good quality practice, for 8 hours a day with regular breaks, got my teacher grade 8 in 2 instruments in 2 years.I have been playing for a total of 12 months and I am pre-grade 1 violin (only really had proper lessons for 5 months) and grade 3ish on piano.

I think there are too many factors to take into account to make it logically answerable. Teacher, student, age, personality, time practicing, quality practice, theory learning, ability to learn, home environment, social life, home life etc etc etc.

Sometimes taking a grade isn't necessary. I skipped grade 2 BUT I learned all the technical aspects like scales and arps etc and I tried to push up my sight reading to a decent level and we worked on grade 2 aural stuff while exploring grade 3 pieces. Learning 3 pieces from EVERY grade is by no means essential. In fact I would get so bored. I hated the grade 2 pieces, and in no uncertain terms would I spend months learning them. Doing grade 2 would be detrimental to me because I would hate it! Some people like doing every grade, and thats fine. Others do nothing until grade 5, or 8 (after five theory). The grades aren't set in stone, I really only use them as a guide.

The grade a year is only a rough rule of thumb based on the experience of teachers, teaching lots of students over a number of years. Some will take longer, some will take less. There are lots of reasons why.

Personally I think the exams are best thought of as a tool which may (or may not) be useful in helping someone learn to play an instrument. But the goal should be to learn to play the instrument and develop as a musician rather than gain a piece of paper. Not all of these aspects are covered by the exams and not all aspects develop at the same rate. For some students a time off exams is helpful for all sorts of reasons, by the time an exam would be a useful goal again, their playing maybe approaching grade 5 rather than grade 4 standard. In this case it would make more sense to do grade 5 and "skip" grade 4. This doesn't mean that the work or repertoire hasn't been covered, it just means that a formal exam on it wasn't taken.

The AB approach is not the only way and should be used as a tool by a teacher when appropriate for the student, it should not be seen as something to be slavishly followed.
Well that's my experience anyway.

As a piano instructor I am horrified with my niece's instructor. My niece has just turned 10 and had lessons for just over a year. She has just sat her Grade 1 and went in under the impression she should come out with merit. She came out with a 102 pass. The teacher has now asked her to get her grade 2 book and they are now looking at pieces for the next exam! Having listened to my niece play and having looked at her music books which are filled with instructions and note names etc, I can only believe she is not actually being taught very much about the music, but purely how to play the pieces by rote and her success as a player will only be recognised by the number of certificates she gains. I've tried having talks with my sister about my own experiences in teaching but she seems happy to see her child make the grades as fast as possible. I can't see how she can develop as a musician if there's no inbetween and proper preparation through progressive lessons. As others have said, AB is not the only way and all exam syllabuses from any establishment should be used as a tool and fitted around the pupil, not the other way about.

Having been a learner of the piano for over fifty years (on and off) I have come to the conclusion that the speed of how one learns is governed by many factors. However, what goes into the understanding and conveying the music is something much, much deeper. I am pushing now for grade 8, it has taken me a lifelong journey to get there...and I feel I am starting out on my journey.

It is good to have measures, grades along the way, something to be achieve and yet I feel by doing so this is limiting achievement and indeed celebrating achievement.

This was brought home to me when I gave my latest exam result of 83% (TG) to the pupil who followed me on my last lesson. Her words were ' wow 83%...but that is still only a merit...I could have floored her...if only she knew how much that result had meant to me'.

So, I think we ought to celebrate achievement ...perhaps the last comment reminded me of the comment when my teacher told me I had just passed grade 4...little did she know how I was being bullied at school (sorry to have gone off topic).

The grade a year thing is broadly true for a lot of average students, but of course there is a huge range. Among my current students I have one who is struggling towards grade 3 after 8 years of lessons and another who has gone from grade 2 to 7 in 3 years. It isn?t always down to the amount of practice done, but broadly speaking, this is the most important factor. I have several students for whom piano is a second or third instrument. With plenty of AB exam experience under their belts, I don?t necessarily feel that taking the same grades on the piano will be a useful learning experience for them. I usually limit exams to one a year, because they seem to take so much time away from other activities. Occasionally a student will make rapid progress and be able to ?skip' a grade - meaning that they are ready for a higher level exam, not that they have missed out any technical/musical development.

With regard to younger children taking higher grades, I think it is sometimes possible for them to tackle the more emotionally demanding repertoire, but usually I would be looking through the syllabus for pieces more suited to their age, and it is almost always possible to find something appropriate. I wouldn?t stop a 10 year old from playing Chopin Ballades, for instance, for the fun of it, if that?s what they wanted to do, but I wouldn?t want them performing them in public or for an exam unless they could deliver them with the requisite musical maturity.

I am having an almost indentical experience with our DS and his teacher and I am concerned at the gaps and my half-baked attempts at trying to fill them - no doubt teaching him incorrectly.

I feel sometimes that I'm the lone voice in the wilderness...but...has anyone ever considered what learning an instrument would be like without exams? To me, whether people do a grade a year or otherwise seems an impossible question to answer, but surely, it misses the point. Surely, learning an instrument is about enjoying music, and all that offers us. It enriches our life and gives us skills which can be used in many different circumstances. If a pupil chooses to have their abilities tested at various points on their musical journey, then, when managed well, it's a good thing, but it shouldn't dictate the learning. I've never thought of exams in terms of how frequent they are of when we should be doing the next one. They just come up as and when we reach that point. Some pupils choose to take them, and others choose not to. For me, the most important thing is that the learning has continued, and that they are making good progress.

Yes - most of my friends in college studied music in the US where there are no grade exams. Progress is measured by entry into state and national level bands / orchestras, summer camps, festivals and so on. I'm in total agreement with you about progress being the important thing.

The only mild criticism I will make of the non-exam system is that you can end up with students who are accomplished performers but know little or no theory and history. I feel that this is a deficiency, because I think that if someone is a good performer, they could be an even better performer with a bit more knowledge. However many people in the US don't feel this way and who is to say that they are wrong if they are already accomplished performers?

I think that's true of many here too.
I bet there are quite a number of grade 8ers who saw the grade 5 theory as a necessary evil and didn't actually allow themselves to learn more than enough to pass the exam and forget almost immediately after.

Totally agree. I suppose we seem to have a culture in this country where generally, you don't learn something unless it appears on a syllabus... This is sadly, how many teachers choose to operate.

And some people learning instruments expend an awful lot of effort in making sure they don't accidentally learn any of the theory their teachers try to include in their music lessons.
Which I always find a little strange in those who choose to take their playing on to higher grades.....

Playing devil's advocate - I did also see in the US some instances where the opposite was true and performance was all that counted, even for students studying music at the university level. At the time I was there, I heard of one school where a prof was given a hard time because he refused to exempt some star performers from passing a theory course. I cannot find any documentary evidence of this now, but I remember us talking about it.

I'm all for moderation, myself..

I'm sure the pressure to do grades has increased over the years. When I was growing up I didn't know anyone who'd done all the grades - people did an exam occasionally, certainly not every year and "skipping" a grade was seen as normal your teacher just entered you for whichever level they thought you were at.

Well, to be fair, I wouldn't say it's how many teachers choose to operate, but for most of us teaching in schools, it's how we have to operate to keep our jobs. Schools like to publish exam successes, children like receiving certificates in assembly (particularly if they're the type of children who maybe don't excel in sports or academia), parents want a measurable yardstick to show how well their child is progressing. I currently teach in just three schools, and out of all my 50 ish pupils, there is just one (very talented, Russian) girl who is just interested in progressing and isn't bothered about exams, and neither are her parents, and she's uniquely unbothered by peer pressure.

Ho hum, I thought I was breaking this rule with room to spare. Now real life has taken over and I'll be lucky to do a grade a decade

Hello from the US I would say that I mostly "learned" my instruments without exams; though I did grade 8 and DipABRSM piano, I had reached a decent level of proficiency before then, and on viola I have never been examined. Most of my musical friends have never taken a single exam - in fact, I can only think of one who did, not including my teacher's other students.

When I began learning viola properly (i.e. I had some idea of the basics, but hadn't spent much time practicing) at around age 11 or so, I used the series of Suzuki books. Since I have never used any other method books, I don't have a point of comparison, but the idea seemed pretty standard: each book would have a number of pieces, supposedly in order of difficulty (though emphasizing different techniques), and the pupil would generally start at the beginning of the book and go through to the end.

I have to admit that at age 11 I was mostly interested in improving so I could be better than my friends Going through the Suzuki books was like a game for me: I tried to see how fast I could be "passed" on each piece, how soon I could reach a certain book number, etc. Having a targeted plan of study made it more fun for me, and certainly increased my drive to practice. As I grew older and more interested in the viola as music than sport, the books became increasingly less important and my teacher and I explored more repertoire outside them until at around age 14 we stopped altogether (I was probably playing grade-8ish level pieces).

At around this point, my progress began to slow, basically coming to a standstill within a couple of years. It wasn't that I didn't care about music outside a "method-book track", but that without goals I could work towards and use to measure my progress, it was hard to motivate myself. As corenfa says, in the US regional orchestras, competitions, festivals, etc. are used to mark progress instead, but because there are so many extremely talented, competitive musicians it's hard for more "normal" but still devoted students like I was to get a foothold. I'm guessing that many of your friends fell into the "extremely talented" category, corenfa (though I should say it's not only a lack of talent that dissuades people from competing - some people are just less aggressive than others)

I think that if I had been introduced to exams, I would have been less likely to lose motivation, since exams provide a way for anyone, at any ability, to benchmark progress and "compete with themselves" so to speak. It certainly helped my progress on piano. To be fair, I don't know how I would feel if I had grown up in Britain and been force-fed exams, but from here it seems like a good idea

Hoping you get this analogy - I reckon grades are a bit like levelling up in adventure games... it takes 1000000 experience points to get Grade 1 and they double along the way so you need 256000000 experience points to get Grade 8.

I did a similar calculation once. It took me one year to learn a 4-minute long Licentiate-level piece. Therefore it will take me 10 years to learn another 40 minutes, so in 10 years' time I will have finished learning the notes for an LTCL

On the whole I am anti exams as I believe it slows down progress. I think certain exams are of benefit as a measure of how the pupil is doing and to build their confidence (grade 1 for example) or once the student has reached a high level. In my case I will only ever sit an exam if it is at a level which I view to be sufficiently difficult, by "others" standards, and I will stick it on my wall!

I would be much happier if DS never sat an exam but unfortunately he needs the piece of paper to gain entry or scholarships as if he were to have an off day on the audition there would be some tangible evidence of his ability. I wish this wasn't the case though.

Aha MNW this appeals to my scientific (addled) brain too, so lets put some data in! - Let us assume that my daughter is perhaps more than averagely musically able, but not by any means prodigic.

She went from grade 2 (distinction) to grade 7 (distinction) on the violin in 24 months. She practised most days for one hour, had one to two lessons a week, (and hols), did an intensive summer course, weekly school and local orchestras. I estimate that over that two year period, she did roughly 680 hours individual practice + 100 hours of lessons, + summer course 50 hours, + school orchestras 72 hours - adding up to over 900 hours over two years.

Let us compare this with the piano - She did grade 5 last summer (average merit), and hasn't put in for grade 6 yet, though she will be doing it at christmas (and this year we are so doing individual lessons on summer course!!). she has a 45 minute lesson once a week, term times only, plus 1h group lesson each half term. She practises for 20 mins a day 5 days a week. She spends perhaps another 10 hours working on duets with friends. Adding up to under 250 hours over the same two year period.....

And the conclusion is (from this er, small study!) that hours of lessons + practice + orchestras + music courses = faster progress - But, unending enthusiasm, natural ability and an excellent teacher are also essential ingredients!

Didn't someone once work out that you need 10,000 hours to be an expert in almost any field?

That is the second piece of information that has confirmed my DC's are distinctly average. Whilst browsing yesterday I came across an 11 year old girl who got to grade 8 bassoon in 6 months from starting the instrument!

Progress is also dependent on the instrument. There are no opportunities for DS to join an orchestra and when he did take part in a short summer course the repertoire he was given was so basic that he only played around 5 different notes in total so he did not make any progress, unlike his flautist brother who had difficult repertoire to grapple with.

This has happened to me as well - but the opposite can also be true! i.e. bassoonists may be accepted into an orchestra that is slightly too advanced for their level, and which might normally audition, but really needs bassoons. Then, the player can quickly improve by playing harder music - mostly in sight-reading, but learning one or two high notes along the way. Of course, as you say the opportunities to join such orchestras may be limited.

Vexed to hear your going through the same! There are some great sites for games, fun theory, flash cards etc that you could do at home. Doesn't have to be intensive, but little and often might make all the difference. Are you in a situation that would allow you to look for another teacher? It's a pity if you feel frustrated. And by the sounds of it, your attempts to fill in the gaps can only help. I don't think he's being taught much better by the person employed for the job!Grrrr!!!