This subject seems to be coming up in a lot of threads so I thought that it deserved it's own topic.... I think that it will be interesting to hear teachers' views on what they percieve their role is; and students' views on what they expect from teachers.

Obviously during the earlier grades, and particularly for younger students, the teacher needs to provide frequent guidance for all things that the student is expected to do (backed up by parents if appropriate). As a student develops though, in order to become an independent musician, the teacher should be able to stop 'hand-holding' so much and become, over a gradual process, an advisor with a second opinion rather than an instuctor and prescriber.

Discussions about the frequency and duration of lessons are quite common at the moment and it seems that many people are saying that one can't learn to play very well without a lesson each week. Certainly in the early stages this is the ideal (although not necessairly precluding the possiblity of learning with less-frequent lessons) but is it really necessary at the higher levels? Would it even be appropriate (never mind desirable) to be having a weekly lesson at diploma level? Surely if one is trying to gain a professional qualification one must be able to demonstrate a reasonable amount of self-sufficiency. Maybe this is appropriate if the lessons take a suitable form: one where the teacher is in an advisory role and makes suggestions for the student to consider and discussions about interpretation and overcoming technical issues are had, rather than the teacher saying: play that bit like this, bring out that note there it sounds better... If someone passed a diploma by doing this then surely that wouldn't be right as they're playing someone else's interpretation.

Other discussions have been about grade 6 players, this could equally apply to grade 7 or 8 players, saying that one shouldn't have more than a week away from one's teacher because , amongst other things, mistakes might get practised in and be difficult to reverse. Whilst I appreciate that practised in mistakes are difficult to reverse, surely someone who is grade 6 standard should be able to practice a piece for more than a week without the need for teacher intervention there's plenty of material to be going on with and practised in mistakes can be rectified. I think that the risk of the occasional practised in mistake is well worth it compared to the risk of becoming someone who cannot work independently and can only perform someone else's interpretation, or at least when told most of what to do by someone else. My computer can play the Beethoven Piano Sonatas beautifully when instructed precisely what to do (via a microphone) by Alfred Brendel, yet no one would call it a musician.

I'm not suggesting that guidance is not valuable at high levels, indeed I am a firm believer that when one stops believeing that one can learn from others one stops learning, but is it not the case that too many people are over-reliant on their teachers? Maybe the problem is not lesson frequency, which is good to keep high if the lessons are taken the right way, but how people use their teachers or how their teachers teach them in order to get them to learn a specific piece, rather than teaching them to learn pieces generally though a series of pieces. I know that some people will be naturally more able to grasp and do independent learning but I believe that it is such an important part of a person's musical education that it can't be ignored: just as not learning to read music would be considered a gap in someone's eduaction surely not being able to play it without being told exactly what to do should be.

Any thoughts?

For me, the learned-in mistakes tend to be tiny but irritating ones of sheer carelessness. For example, holding a note a fraction too long, not because I cannot read the music and see that it should be dotted-crotchet-then-rest, not minim, but because I have simply forgotten to lift my finger a few times when playing it through. I think three is the magic number: If I practise it wrong 3 times, I have learned it wrong. To learn it right, I have to practise that bit three times every practise session, before playing the whole piece through. Sometimes mistakes creep in when I introduce pedalling to a previously learned piece.

These mistakes are not dreadful, or even very noticeable - merely annoying when my teacher finally points them out, and I slap my forehead with a wet kipper. I am learning a valuable lesson from all the re-learning I have had to do: Take care the first time around!! I hope that by the time I am working on grade 7 pieces I will have learned to be more careful. Certainly I feel I am past the point where my teacher needs to demonstrate pieces to me, although I might sometimes want guidance on fingering with a particularly tricky bit of digital gymnastics.

I think a lot of the problem with people depending too much on their teachers to spoon feed them goes back to our perception of what a teacher is. We all had them - at school, where we were children, they were in charge and ruled our lives. If you did something they hadn't told you to, you were more likely to be punished than rewarded (ah, happy days ). In some ways, those were the life-mistakes, learned-in and learned wrong. I think some of us (myself included) need to be reminded, nudged into realising, or whatever, that we are not at school now, these lessons are our own choice for our own benefit, and we must take responsibility for our own learning.

-

Ever since I did grade 4 I have been only having bi-weekly lessons, which seemed to work ok. If I practised in mistakes, it never took long to sort them out.

However as I got to later on, I started to feel that I wasn't sure how much I was actually gaining from my lessons, particularly when it got around to my grade 8, and I was starting to feel hopelessly unprepared. It began to fel like I was really on my own, and then once every two weeks trotting off to somebody's house to be told that everything was going fine, when in my opinion, it so obviously wasn't!

So now, I'm not doing lessons anymore. I'm playing for my self, and playing pieces I want to play, and if I practise in mistakes to theser, no-ones really going to notice, and to be honest, no-ones really going to care! And if/when I attempt to retake Grade 8, I'm fairly sure I can prepare just as well for it by myself as I managed this time round. Although if I come to it, I think I will gert some support.

I'm not quite sure what my point is here, perhas that when lessons become bi-weekly the relationship and trust between a pupil and teacher can become weak? That bi-weekly lessons implies the teacher hasn't much left to pass on, even if there's a lot left to learn?

I don't know.

This is a very interesting question (and has been too on similar threads although I've not contributed up to now)

I honestly think it depends on the student. Ideally - yes - a grade 7 or 8 student "should" (nasty word ! ) be able to study independently, and many can, very effectively. But I have known some who couldn't, and who seemed to think the teacher was being a bit hard when mistakes were pointed out that had not been corrected. There are some students who will only find time for practice when their next lesson is less than a week away. There are others who can work systematically between lessons that are 2, 3 or 4 weeks apart.

I have had a grade 8 student come to see me for a trial lesson, with pencil marks all over the copy from a previous teacher, and listened to exactly the reasons why the pencil marks were there in the first place, in the form of wrong notes, missed rests, etc etc etc. They had clearly been pointed out - but even then ignored.

Some of my adult students have fortnightly lessons, with weekly lessons when an exam is approaching. That often works well.

Just a few random thoughts ......... In the long run, a teacher's greatest success surely might be that he or she is not needed any more ?

Maggie

I believe that Gordon Green, the respected piano teacher, used to state that the teacher's aim was to "make himself dispensible to the student". I heard this from one of his pupils.


To put it another way, and without meaning to go all philosophical, there's also that saying/proverb that goes something like:

"Give someone a fish and you feed them for a day;
Teach someone to fish and you feed them for a lifetime."

-

I think if a student isn't getting anything from a teacher then probably both the teacher and the student need to look hard at whether it would be better to move on to a new teacher... it can be beneficial to get input from a different sort of person.

Tamsin: it's impossible to really say when I don't really know you even let alone your teacher... but if the teacher is saying things are fine when they obviously aren't... I don't know - it would seem to me the teacher is not doing their job properly... rather than it being the "fault" of the bi-weekly lessons.

-

QUOTE (Rhapsodin @ Feb 3 2005, 11:20 PM)

In these later grades, a teacher's role changes to  that of counsellor and facilitator.   Lessons are more discussion and advice and perhaps showing you some tricks or approaches to technicalities that might be bugging you.

That's exactly what my piano teacher did: as soon as I started working on the higher grades, progressively more of the lesson was her asking 'What do you think could be done here?', and less of 'Put a rit in there, it'll sound better'.

When I'd finished grade 8 she said that she wouldn't teach me, per sé, any more - lessons became 'consultations'. Every so often, depending on what I thought was necessary, she'd come around for an hour or two. I'd play through what I'd been working on, ask a couple of technical questions (advice for working on certain trills, whether I should or should not put a spot of rubato into a baroque piece...) and she'd comment on my performance - as she said though, it was just 'her opinion' and I was free to interpret as I thought. I'd see her more if I felt I had something specific to show her, or some questions to ask. Also, given I went away to university after grade 8, I had to not see her for weeks at a time so I had plenty of opportunity to teach myself.

Perhaps if one is more musically self-motivated, and wants to learn to play the piece for art's sake, rather than because their piano teacher is coming and they'll get a stern talking to if they clearly hadn't done any practice, the weekly visit is less important. Perhaps it'll even improve what one gets out of the lesson: there's always the temptation to say 'I can't be bothered to think how to solve that problem myself, I'll just let my teacher tell me how to do it', so if lesson time is precious it forces one to think through and tackle the easier issues oneself and save the truly tricky stuff, which one actually needs guidance for, for the teacher's attention.

Tamsin: I applaud you for not letting exams cloud your enjoyment of the instrument Often people become too engrossed in taking grade after grade, getting caught up in 'must have a bigger number on my piece of paper'. I'm sure it's doing you a world of good, and your musical sense will be all the better for it.

QUOTE (Fred @ Feb 3 2005, 02:43 PM)

Certainly I feel I am past the point where my teacher needs to demonstrate pieces to me, although I might sometimes want guidance on fingering with a particularly tricky bit of digital gymnastics.

If you're not past this point by the time you take Grade 1, you are being badly taught and are likely later to join or start one of the frequent threads asking how to learn to sight read. As I recall, only one of my piano teachers ever played a piece to me, and that was to demonstrate an overall stylistic point. Two of my horn teachers (both well-known professional performers) demonstrated technical points to me, but the third, who was an even better teacher, hardly ever did: he just described what I should do and feel (with great success) and chose studies that would improve my weak points.

I have been very fortunate to enjoy teaching many excellent pupils over 30 years, ranging from musically very able (who have, themselves, gone on into the profession) to the "hobby" musicians who play for fun and enjoyment.

Common to all has been my desire to nurture technical competence but, above all else, a real love of music and, as skills develop, independence to be a thinking musician in their own right. That said, I believe we all need reminding about aspects of playing from time to time and, to this day, I continue to have the occasional lesson myself - I don't believe any of us are beyond learning for ourselves. It's good to be reminded of points of technique, new interpretation ideas etc.

I agree with others who've said that between Grades 1 and 8 (and beyond) there is a change in role of the teacher from teacher/instructor to counsellor/adviser. I always aim to ensure that my pupils think for themselves about their music from the outset but I believe it to be essential that, from about Grade 6 onwards, they become self-sufficient in all they do. By about Grade 8 some of my pupils also begin to teach for themselves and it's then that they really grow as musicians. I know I have learnt more about music through teaching than through any other musical outlet.

I also offer my advanced pupils, under increasing academic pressure at school/college, the chance to have fortnightly lessons if they wish (some opt for weekly). I think it gives them longer to prepare between lessons and encourages this sense of independence to grow. We often combine that with a longer lesson so allowing more in-depth study of pieces etc.

I guess, overall, it's an individual thing but too much reliance on a teacher, especially at senior grade level, is possibly not ideal for most musicians.

QUOTE

If you're not past this point by the time you take Grade 1, you are being badly taught and are likely later to join or start one of the frequent threads asking how to learn to sight read.

Your comment Ken reminded me of a hunch I've had for a long time - that somewhere between grade 1 and grade 3 levels (not talking specific grades here, just a rough level of difficulty) a pupil needs to become more self-reliant, and where this doesn't happen problems set in, and they either struggle or give up.

I have a 10 year old who appears to come each lesson to "have his hand held" and to have me help sort out the things he couldn't quite make the mental effort to do for himself during the week. He is having difficulty moving away from pieces of grade1-ish level; we've done a couple of slightly harder ones but they've taken much too long to complete.

I have another pupil only a few months older who started at the same time who plays anything he can get his hands on and who has successfully tackled pieces of about gr4 standard. In one instance he found problems with the middle section, put it on one side for a while, then unknown to me picked it up again and finished it, bringing it along one day to play to me as a surprise.

I dislike comparing pupils, and they are quite different characters, nevertheless I'm anxious that while I seem to have helped motivate the second one, I seem to have failed to do that with the first, although he has always been pleasant to teach and seems keen to please. But it is as if he is starting to feel "this is a bit too hard for me".

I'm generally content to let pupils progress at what seems the right rate for them. But this child did grade 1 in 2003 and while I'm not bothered if he does grade 2 or not, I feel pieces need to move on in terms of interest and become a little more challenging.

Sorry to semi-hijack the thread - but it's kind of relevant - and I'd be interested to hear comments and suggestions. We have tried a wide variety of pieces including classical and the more jazzy ones. I suspect this situation may not be that uncommon - any ideas ?

Maggie

QUOTE (maggiemay @ Feb 4 2005, 09:20 AM)

I dislike comparing pupils, and they are quite different characters, nevertheless I'm anxious that while I seem to have helped motivate the second one, I seem to have failed to do that with the first, although he has always been pleasant to teach and seems keen to please. But it is as if he is starting to feel "this is a bit too hard for me".

Maggie,
I think this is quite on topic.

I reckon there are physiological differences (of little significance outside learning) that have received scant research but are there all the same. .. Based on empirical stuff, we know the cortices of the brain tend to specialise: the left hand cortex concerned with procedure, routine, logic; the right-hand in judgement, insight, visual memory, creativity, and that people tend to fall into reliance more on one than the other (for whatever reason).

Computer programmers are very in touch with their left cortex; artists and creative people with their right. Over 10+ years in organisations/groups etc, I've met no computer programmers capable of creativity or insight. Likewise, I've met almost no artists who (I judge) would make earth-shattering programmers. Yes, there will be exceptions but as a generalisation it seems to hold out.

I'm unsure where music fits in here - but the difference could be physiological, which suggests that some well-meaning students may find music very hard work. Doesn't mean we have to give up on them or that we aren't motivating them, just that (in the words of Walter Cronkeit) that's the way it is. It may mean, though, that a big proportion of pupils are basically not musicians and may never be made self-reliant. So...if they still like their music and are prepared to pay, is there anything wrong with keeping them going?

We have rather been talking about developing the few true aspirants; claiming how we should aim with them, instead of enthiusiasts who just like it - like people who like jogging but have no wish to become athletes.
Maggie - how does your slower pupil make out with art - graphics etc?

R

Thanks Rhaps for a thoughtful response.

I 'm broadly familiar with left / right brain thinking, but hadn't thought of it in this context. I have to admit that - unusually - I don't know what his art is like - and I must find a way to get him to draw something for me. I usually leave the first page blank in a new notebook and invite pupils to create a title page, draw a picture, whatever they like, it's their book. The results are often very interesting - BUT - this particular child brings his own notebook and the pages don't lend themselves to doing that, so maybe I've subconsciously missed a trick there. I will think on it.

QUOTE

So...if they still like their music and are prepared to pay, is there anything wrong with keeping them going?

Abolutely nothing, and I am more than happy to do that, if so be it. I guess I have been a bit anxious about the possibility of his getting discouraged, losing interest, pressure from parents to do grade 2 when not ready (they haven't yet but they must wonder when!), etc etc. With most pupils I find continuity and momentum count for an awful lot. I don't think he is enjoying his current pieces much as he has found them a challenge, but I don't want to fall into the trap of not challenging him enough.

Although we have done only 3 pieces from his current one, I think I will look for a change of book for him, but he always takes a while to settle into a new book, (whereas most of my pupils grab a new book with relish and usually get a fresh spark in their eye).

Thanks again

Maggie

QUOTE (maggiemay @ Feb 4 2005, 09:20 AM)

I have a 10 year old who appears to come each lesson to  "have his hand held" and to have me help sort out the things he couldn't quite make the mental effort to do for himself during the week. He is having difficulty moving away from pieces of grade1-ish level; we've done a couple of slightly harder ones but they've taken much too long to complete. I have another pupil only a few months older who started at the same time who plays anything he can get his hands on and who has successfully tackled pieces of about gr4 standard.  In one instance he found problems with the middle section, put it on one side for a while, then unknown to me picked it up again and finished it, bringing it along one day to play to me as a surprise. I dislike comparing pupils, and they are quite different characters, nevertheless I'm anxious that while I seem to have helped motivate the second one, I seem to have failed to do that with the first, although he has always been pleasant to teach and seems keen to please. But it is as if he is starting to feel "this is a bit too hard for me".

Sports physiologists now have tests which they can apply to a budding athlete or oarsman to see what their potential is. I think this is very useful, because it means that the individual will not put in vast amounts of work in pursuit of an impossible goal. I never took any such test; I just decided that I was so lacking in talent, compared to my friends and acquaintances, that no effort to achieve sporting competence was likely to succeed. Similarly, most people acknowledge that configuration of hands, jaws or teeth may impose limits on what a musician will be able to achieve on a particular instrument. Why, then, are we so reluctant to admit that individuals will be limited in their musical achievement by their intellectual potential? Of course, judgments should always be provisional - people can surprise us by achieving, with hard work, beyond our expectations of them - but intellect and personality influence both the extent to which a student can make progress on his/her own and the degree of autonomy s/he will attain as an independent musician.

Thank you Ken for another interesting reply.

I'm not convinced it's an intellect thing, although it's certainly possible it's an attitude problem.

I guess I just want to make sure I'm not selling him short in some way, and as long as he can achieve what he is meant to achieve and enjoys it, that's fine. I want to avoid a slow decline into "music's not for me" whereby he becomes disillusioned, bored and negative about the whole thing.

Maggie