Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum The economy and students

Interesting comments from all...a little history on my perspective. I learned classical piano all the way through to the highest level, had a horrible teacher who didn't inspire me musically at all. Somehow managed to do pretty well, won some competitions here and there.

Quit lessons after high school, played in some church worship bands, then i discovered JAZZ. Opened up huge doors, the music resonates with me. Luckily I've got the technique for playing, but I had to change the way I approached it. Was motivated to learn and basically soaked up all I could.

Now I am pursuing a jazz career and hopefully good things will pan out.

Listen, for all teachers out there ( and I used to teach as well), let your students play what they LOVE, whatever that may be. Jazz, rock, pop, country, classical...teach them to play the music in their hearts.

It is your job to guide, open their ears, but never force your expectations on them. When they are self motivated, they will be eager to learn. Find the music that speaks to them...then show them how to express it.

My area (Southeast Texas), hasn't been affected that bad. But, yesterday I had a student who told me that she is taking an extended break, because of finances. They are going to reevaluate when the new semester starts in August.

Ah yes. I have had a few of those students too. They can play the music but it's practically robotic. The theory is there, they know all the dynamics and other things, but they can't play from the heart because they just don't feel it.

I think tho, and this is JMHO, that many people wouldn't notice the difference. Unless one has the musical background, or really had a knack for recognizing music, those people are going to think that robotic student is playing well and to a point, he is. This student can play what's written perfectly, but there is a difference.

What do others think about that? do you think an untrained ear can tell the difference between playing what's written and playing from the heart?

Always a silver lining. Rest assured there are always teachers that will work with all types of students, even if they're not what some might call ideal (and I'm not saying that about you here :))

Ah yes. I have had a few of those students too. They can play the music but it's practically robotic. The theory is there, they know all the dynamics and other things, but they can't play from the heart because they just don't feel it. Again tho, to me it's more important that the student is loving the music/piano. If he is than I am certainly never going to tell him he doesn't have what it takes. One doesn't need to do something well in order to enjoy it!! (not saying you're not good at it, just in general). I kill more than I grow in my garden, but I keep trying

I think tho, and this is JMHO, that many people wouldn't notice the difference. Unless one has the musical background, or really had a knack for recognizing music, those people are going to think that robotic student is playing well, and to a point, he is.

What do others think about that? do you think an untrained ear can tell the difference between playing what's written and playing from the heart?

I sure wish I could have talked my English teacher, Math teacher, Science teacher, French teacher and Gym teacher into this philosophy! I wouldn't know very much, but sure would be happy!

Perfect! It is a difficult question for me to answer when I hear "what kind of music to you teach" because I ask the kids what they like and go from there (I do add other genres in of course for exposure) I have had other teachers tell me that I should be doing classical music at my recitals etc... Nope. Again, I let them pick the music. I hope I can help the student find what they love to do too! That is highly rewarding to me, more so even than someone mastering a piece. If they are loving it, than I'm happy

thanks for bringing that up!

Interestingly enough it *does* apply to English, math, science, and probably (tho I don't teach them) French and gym (I do teach dance).

When I'm teaching math to returning-to-college students I make it a point to apply math to topics which they find compelling, and certainly to make a point about where they "must" use it in everyday life if they want to avoid scams Do you like cooking? Fine, let's apply math in cooking. You like racing cars? Let's apply it there. You wanna know about black holes? Let's talk black holes. You just read some statistic on the net about swine flu and it worries you? Let's see if we can make sense of it. You want to major in psychology, or hazmat studies? Let's get you the foundation you need. For some of them the introductory levels of math are all they'll ever *need* and they might not ever explore math beyond that. A few will get into the sheer beauty of numbers and systems and go beyond even finite dimensional vector systems

I was not interested in physics at all in high school, and got C's because I didn't study. But my freshman year in college we started learning about astronomy and relativity and it sparked a life-long interest - enough so that when I was in my early 40's I went back and took a college-level physics class. Got an A in it.

I've seen people who have the proverbial two left feet love folk dancing enough that after a few years they're teaching it.

So if your English, math, science, French, and gym teachers had actually taught something you found interest in which would have motivated you to learn some of the basics that you otherwise didn't find interesting - you might actually know *more* about them than you do now, and be happy to boot

John has said in the past that he is happy to refer students to teachers that teach a different repertoire than he does. He also offers a "recreational piano" option for students who want that (tho he's had no takers). From what he writes here at PW I suspect he puts some effort into finding pieces for his students that speak to them. So I think there are few teachers who are at such an extreme that they don't pay any attention at all to what a student wants to learn, and few who teach students *only* what a student thinks they want to learn in details, and for very many students/teachers there's a self-selection in matching what they are interested in with what a teacher teaches. Perhaps that is more so with adult students than with children. But *most* of us aren't teacher-ogres or such immature students as to think we don't need to learn some things that bore us in order to be able to do the things we want to do.

EDIT: and often we find those things that we thought would bore us, don't As adults we know that, and as children we learn.

Cathy

Cathy, FWIW, and I did go to school in a different era, my teachers taught to a curriculum, covering subject matter dictated by the school board. It didn't matter whether I liked the subject matter or not, my task was to master the material. We had successes (those who are/were your top professionals, for the most part) and failures. I totally detested gym class, but in those days, it was mandatory for four years of high school. There is/was no sport they could offer, other than sailing or fishing, perhaps, which could have interested me.

Actually, I am quite flexible, within certain bounds, as you accurately notate. For my older students, I generally play through several pieces, and let them select the one(s) which sound interesting to them. It often leads to surprised. I have a teen girl who chose The Stranger, by Schumann, over some more delicate and lacy pieces, and really got into it. I suppose it was the drama.

John - when I was growing up piano teaching was like your high school Which is part of the reason I didn't play for 35 years. Fortunately I now play what I love.

Too bad gym wasn't related to sailing, fishing, and piano tho. Great sports. Gym *is* related, of course, if for nothing else but stamina, but it probably took you 35 years to figure that out, just as it took me 35 years to be able to apply what I got out of piano lessons to what I wanted to play. And be able to do *more* than what I was taught for 2 years of piano when I was a teen. But there's too much to learn to be able to learn all of it in life, and for me the continuing to learn is the best part of life. I don't have time to worry about not having learned some things earlier , and I suspect you still love learning, too.

Cathy

Cathy, what I tell all my students is: "I'll teach you how to play, you can go home and play anything you want . . . after you finish your lesson."

I teach them the foundation, they decide what they want to play for recreation.

About gym, no, I still have no love of sports/physical activity. I do walks for health reasons, and hate every minute of it.

Most of the year we work on 'classical' repertoire. I find that is where they will learn how to play and sing the best. However, I go for less classical in style for the Spring Recital. We do Jazz, Blues, contemporary music, pop music, etc. We also do some classical thrown in there, but it's always fun stuff that the kids really like, and it's all collaborative. To be honest, most of my students end up preferring 'classical' music, both the singers and pianists. It is the most musically rewarding, IMO.

I would ratther teach students what they want to play than what I *think* I want them to play.

The catch is that they have to have the skills or knowledge to play what they think they want to play.

In the real world this means some level of compromise.

Overall I think the rebels in this world are never going to fit well in any school system. As a life-long rebel myself, I am naturally in sync with students who question everything and everyone, so long as they are reasonably polite about it.

I find that people are more likely to enjoy pieces they play very well, even if they don't start out thinking that they will enjoy them.

And they can come to hate things they dream of playing if it takes forever to get them up to 1/3 tempo, and they realize that it is just not working.

John, teaching music and school subjects are completely different things. Everyone has a love for certain kinds of music, and ALL people like music, it just could be classical, jazz, rock, pop.

The teacher's job is to give the student the skills to "speak" music, just like if you were learning a new language. Ultimately they become competent enough to express themselves.

I myself, to this day have never played any classical music after finishing lessons, I can not stand the genre. If you tried to force me to play country or heavy metal, I would puke, but jazz, then I am in heaven.

With my own students, I ask them, what is your FAVOURITE song? Then I teach them the scales, chords, fingering and technique to be able to play it. Funny, they all seem to be quite motivated and can connect how those steps will lead them to that goal.

Ebony... I totally understand your saying how some people play robotic... I will be starting a new thread, called "Musicality and Virtuosity" I will offer my thoughts on it, and some suggestions on how to be more "musical".

Betty, you sound like my old classical piano teacher!! You need to loosen up your attitude and remember, music and piano are for ENJOYMENT.

It is like when a newborn child is first learning to speak. Do you criticize them when they mispronounce "dadda or momma?".. No! You encourage them, every new word, no matter how bad it first sounds.

If I asked you to learn 10 sports you never tried before, you might have great success at 1 or 2, be decent or average at 5-6, and maybe horrible at 1-2. Same with students, not everyone is going to be a great player. And you have to realize that's ok.

You are equating your teaching abilities and expectations to that of how well the student plays piano. The question you need to ask is, am I AWAKENING and lighting the PASSION for music in each student, regardless of their current level.

Not, oh I played 10 notes wrong for "Fur Elise" so now I have to practice that arpeggio 100 times.

Ask your students, do they enjoy learning the piano, do they play music they like, do they have a desire to want to improve, what would they say?

If the answer is no, then you need to change your ways so their answer is yes!

Welcome to the forum, jazzed23.

I agree 100% with you that one of the best ways to make sure students are enthusiastic about piano lessons, and to stick with them, is to incorporate the styles of music they like into the curriculum. Some students (more often adults, I'm guessing) are strong-willed like me and would, in fact, not enter into a teacher-student relationship unless the teacher was willing to let the student have varying degrees of input into the pieces learned. There are teachers who would not accept that degree of control on the part of the students, and that's perfectly okay as long as they're upfront about it during the interview process... it just means that they wouldn't be the right fit for a stubborn student like me.

What I think is unfortunate is when children/adolescents (or adults) start to get bored with lessons and then drop out because they're not playing anything they relate to. Had their teacher been more flexible at that point, they might have kept the student in lessons and perhaps even succeeded in convincing them later on of the value of their preferred curriculum.

Jazzed23, I couldn't agree more! Well said. ENJOYMENT. Most of us will NEVER train a professional, but if we can keep them AT the piano, we have done our job.

In my English classes, we called that form of argumentation "Asserted Conclusions." If it's true, then your conclusions may or may not be true; if it's false, your conclusions may or may not be true as well, but it lends the argument a certain authoritativeness, which is not actually supported.

We teach music in our schools, at least in parts of this country, so music is, in fact, a school subject.

If you come to me for piano lessons, I will teach you how to play; your learning pace will be rapid and thorough. What you elect to do with your new-gained knowledge is entirely up to you.

I don't suffer misguided enthusiasm very well when it is directed to me by addressing me alone by name.

I doubt you have anything new to teach me about anything in piano teaching, I am among the older generation on the forum, age 65, 38 years of steady piano teaching.

I get dazzling results from my students in a short time of study, my kids have smiles on their faces when they come in or go out the door. My latest two entries, a girl 5 weeks ago, and a boy having his second lesson here yesterday are full of smiles with what we are doing at the piano, it's not that I don't know how to teach or what to teach. I "lesson" student's knowledge, there is teaching and learning going on, and accountability, and scrutiny, and they are helping me do it. Already! The half hour goes by fast but it is filled with content they need and they soak it up.

This emphasis you put on enjoyment is very misleading. Enjoyment is only one factor in our lives. Enjoyment centers with many people around their belly button as they have been the center of the universe since they were born. Me, me, me along with instant gratification.

It takes education to help you realize you are NOT the center of anything except yourself and that you have to mingle with many others on the planet if you are a contributor toward the outcome of the good for all people and the planet itself. There are many other things we have to learn about being mannerly and productive and responsible.

Our best efforts start when we work at music. We were not born knowing enough, but it seems to me that some teachers who post here are very naive about what music enhances in your life, the benefits we get from music, because of our efforts, energies and time spent in music study. Music is a huge encompassing subject, and it's a complex subject if you choose to go that road.

It is not only the notes, sounds, rhythms and coordination alone which provide enjoyment or entertainment. Music making affects our entire being, mentally, physically and emotionally, as well as does wonderful things in increasing our brain and being power. Why would we not want to follow this road? The quest of pursuing music is multi-dimensional in our lives.

I work every day, sometimes for hours, reading, studying, researching, breathing in music, learning how to teach and reach people. I do it because I enjoy it and use what I learn. If someone else has that kind of commitment, dedication and self-discipline, as a piano teacher, and has "earned" their place, I'll certainly listen to them with interest.

When the teachers who say it's all about enjoyment tell me that I need to change my ways, I really feel badly. Our students need what we have to offer.

People are happy to be in my presence, they come back again and again, 8 years is now the longest record of keeping a student involved, but many achieved 5-6-7, so how do you compute that enjoyment is not one of the attractions? However, to me, the role of education in music is a much more important benefit to attain. I've been getting some work done during the enjoyment part. It does not have to be one or the other. It can be work, enjoyment, and many, many other things that we accomplish.

If the goal is enjoyment, there is no question about it, it's there in every lesson I give. The goal is also learning to the max, and we get that in too, because it's what propels us in our enjoyment.

It's annoying to find this post first thing this morning and to realize that I'm one of a few dying out committed piano teacher who is proud to have been a piano teacher and to have been able to include so many other very important things that contribute to music in our lives that surpass just feeling good.

Piano is our vehicle to self-actualization, hasn't anyone noticed?

Betty Patnude

Betty, I don't think anyone that says "music is for enjoyment" meant that it didn't include all those other things that you talk about.

But I take offense at:

Why do you assume that we aren't committed or proud? I am not teaching for "just feeling good" as you say, but without that, the rest is not important, is it?