I have several students (5th-9th grade) who are rapidly losing interest in piano. I asked them what they would like to play. They said contemporary, popular music. Fine. I agreed to teach them that stuff.

Then the parents became stubborn. These parents insist that their kids continue with state testing (CM) and climb through the levels, year after year. It has become an exercise in futility talking to these obstinate parents.

What would you do? These parents pay for the lessons, so to a degree they can demand what kind of music their kids learn. But since no learning is going on, it's frustrating for everyone involved.

Ouch!

I always try to lighten things up a little with a pop tune or two (Lady Gaga comes in mind...), but ultimately I try to stick to classical and the general "plan". Parents don't seem to mind really, although I do get the odd eye looking at me when I go "pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-pa-poker face... " and so on...

No, really, isn't there a chance you can link classical music with something they do know and like? Through cartoons perhaps? Or a cool show? Or maybe some computer game/film music that used a track they'd like to hear?

Better expectations up front in the future.

Not much you can do now outside of siding with either the parents and have a less than enjoyable music experience or side with the kid and have a short span of lessons with the kids.

I would be more concerned with parents using the "I expect you to ... because I'm paying you" line. I respect that it is their money to spend but it is not their place to tell you what to do simply because they have little green pieces of paper with dead people on them.

AZN,

Is it time for a family conference with everybody at the table? Or is that not socially acceptable within the context of these families?

I can see a case for giving the kids the opportunity to talk to their parents with the teacher present. With you in the room the kids may be emboldened to speak up a bit on their own behalf, and the parents may be a bit less imperious. Just a thought.

Also, in that set of circumstances you could make the point to both parties (the kids and the parents) that this isn't necessarily an either/or situation. One can learn some pop classics along with the classic classics. The kids and the parents may be able to strike a deal, with you as the intermediary brokering the process.

Piano*Dad:

I'd think these families are "modern" enough to accept family conferences. One Mother is particularly obsinate because her husband is the stubborn one, and there seems to be no communication between them two. When I offered to talk to him directly, she said no. Okay...

I also work for a few polarized families. Mom supports piano, but Dad doesn't--going as far as to tell his kid to "STOP PRACTICING THE PIANO!!" One of these kids finally quit. He's one of my best students, too.

Oh, this is a difficult question for sure!

I've had this happen a few times, and really you have to decide what is best for each student and their families. Even in a few cases, I have sent the student to another classical teacher.

I don't usually get in the middle of the parent and the student. I tell the student to go home and talk to the parents. As teachers, we shouldn't get in the middle of it. If the parent calls me, fine, I'll give my opinion.

So, tell the student what you think is best, then let the student and parent make the final decision together.

I personally wouldn't meet with the parent and student!

The problem isn't really between classical and pop in my opinion. It's the levels they are expected to progress through at a certain pace. There are tons of very rhythmic classical pieces you could teach them. But I'd go further and say the kids just aren't all that interested. I'd let them go.

It would be a shame if the kids lost out, but "no learning going on" has a dark sound. I don't see that you have anything left to lose by having a very frank talk with the parents. Offering them an alternative that gives the kids something they're capable of doing now, while keeping the parents' desires as a goal, might have a chance. Maybe a letter, carefully and tactfully worded; give them a little more time to absorb it; less immediately threatening to "face." A firm focus on the kids' abilities and benefit, emphasizing what "progress" actually is, in their case, might be the key.

I wish all of you the very best luck on this one. Holding the right balance of firmness and flexibility is going to be a high-wire act.

Why not? Why is this not a case-by-case issue. If you see a situation that you know is not sustainable, and a parent conference is the last step before you either remove a student or expect them to remove themselves, why have an absolute rule that prevents trying to bring both sides of the issue to the table?

Yes, you can get burned. A parent can lose their cool at such a meeting. But what does this matter if your skin is thick enough. No risk no gain. If you see something worthwhile in a particular student, why NOT make the effort? On the other hand, if you have a dozen other equally good prospects in your waiting list, I can see avoiding the potential conflict. I guess I'm just unclear as to why this is a situation in which hard and fast rules should govern things.

I definitely would get in the middle of it, too. You are the professional here, and you are giving the advice and leadership that you are being paid for. I would speak with the parent(s) and let them know what you are observing in the lessons. Tell them that in your experience, it is not necessarily good to force the student to do these competitions at this point unless they are planning on majoring in piano in college/becoming a concert pianist. Usually putting it that way will make them say something like, "Of course not!" (as if being a music major is a terrible thing, but anyway...). And if they say, yes they want them to major in music, then you ask if the student agrees with this. If the parent say yes to that, then it's time to go back to the kid and give them a talk about it.

If they say no, then you offer them a compromise: you'll continue to teach them the classics to improve their technique and general ability, but you'll also give them a piece to work on that they choose. If this is agreeable to t hem, then you talk with the child at their lesson and explain that their parents feel classical music is important, but as a compromise, if the student promises to practice the classical stuff, you'll work on other things with him.

It's important to work with both sides of the equation here to arrive at a suitable solution. If one party does not agree, then you can guess they will be discontinuing lessons soon.

I wouldn't get involved. Let them work it out. Too much drama.

When parents try to tell me how to teach, I ask them if they want to teach, or if they want a teacher? If the answer is the second, I tell them that I am flexible about what kind of music is played but will not bend on the subject of the music being covered correctly.

A sideways thought - besides the styles of music the students would prefer, I find that when it takes too long for students at the older end of this age group to actually master a piece they quickly lose momentum. Assigning pieces that can be learned well enough to flow within 2 or 3 weeks can make a world of difference (irrespective of the style). Plodding through material that takes 2 to 3 months before any sense of 'music' can be discerned while practicing is what turns off a lot of students at this stage..... (as much/more than whether it's pop or not).

I would like to agree with you, but I think the problem is definitely classical vs. pop. I have no problem teaching contemporary, pop, "fun" music. The problem is that the testing track requires Baroque, Classical, and Romantic eras.

The tough thing is to convince these parents to get their kids off the testing track after 4-6 years.

How long do these students spend on their Baroque, Classical and Romantic pieces? I'd be surprised if it's less than 4 weeks, but of course, I have no way of knowing - this is just my educated guess.

But I wasn't meaning that students should not learn contemporary material - in my opinion it is unethical to teach students to play the piano without teaching them to play the music of their own time. And that absolutely includes popular music.

Hi AZN,

Any parent who fails to respond to your well-meant bleat regarding the best interests of the student ... especially when negotiating a generation gap against humdrum parental conformity ... IS OBVIOUSLY MUSICALLY BARREN ... and not deserving of your further interest.

Any prolongation of the unfortunate stand-off is likely to finish in the student taking up

1. Drag-racing
2. The violin, or perhaps
3. The Foreign Legion

and the unfortunate Piano Teacher booking a session with his shrink (paid out of Petty Cash).

Nobody calls the shots in my school ... don’t let mugwump parents spoil your day.

Has the Algonquian word mugumquomp made the jump from American slang to the southern African community! I'm impressed. I wonder though, whether you are referring to party switchers or holier-than-thou types. I suspect the latter.

I suspect this applies mostly to students who have not yet risen beyond early intermediate by this age, and to students who have not developed an internal commitment to high levels of perfection in their playing (or both).

Azn -- I applaud you for realizing that testing tracks are not the only means of "progressing." Too many parents think that these tests actually "mean something" in the grand scheme of things. I was just having this conversation last night with one of my students and reminded him that in the end if two people were to audition for a spot in a music program at a college and one had 12+ years of Guild Auditions/CM, etc. and the other didn't they would still end up taking whoever played better (i.e. better technical facility, musicality, etc.)

I keep this simple for myself and don't get involved with CM or Guild and tell these types of clients to seek out teachers who are into these programs. Maybe give it a go with the parents and explain to them that 1 of 2 things happens at this juncture (especially with teenagers): #1 -- the kids continue on the "testing" track and eventually end up hating piano and/or quitting or #2 -- We can all realize that they're not headed for concert-pianist-ville, relax a little bit and let them work on things they truly enjoy. I'm always more inclined to train my students to love music as a lifelong hobby and educational endeavor. Good luck -- this is a tough situation!

~Jennifer Eklund

Jennifer,

I suspect you'll get an argument from John Brook, especially if you really think that the testing track necessarily produces piano-hating teens. I can guess what he'll argue. The testing track helps organize life for many kids. It can also give them clear mileposts of accomplishment that can motivate them to work harder and learn more. In other words, be careful about over generalizing from your own preferences.

Actually, I have never sought the 'testing track' for my own son. That's probably an accident of not having him with teachers who participated in Guild. He has done the Federation stuff, but that's so light touch in comparison to Guild or CM. I didn't consciously avoid testing, but I don't think he has particularly missed anything by taking a different pathway. He has gotten his motivation in other ways.

Bingo!

This is probably quite shocking, but I have two higher-level CM students who actually told me they want to sit out one year, next year. And I let them! Both of these kids have been testing for the last 6-7 years and they feel burned out by the test-preparation process.

I guess part of their reason is that they feel they've put so much effort into something that, for most kids, is "if you can breathe and put fingers on the piano, you can pass." The reward does not fit the effort

I haven't heard the word "mugwump" since I was a rugrat! What an interesting look-up it turned out to be.

In my dad's mouth, it didn't have the connotation of "big chief, war chief, or important (or self-important) person," nor "bolter of Gilded Age political party associated with patronage and corruption," nor even "fence-sitters, with their mug on one side and their wump on the other (though in color that one comes close)." And I would never have guessed it was a worn-down derivative of an Algonquin word.

Well, the topic of the stubborn parents was hopelessly depressing. Though in their defense, I will say that it's well known that teenagers are extremely lazy and sometimes really need the parents to light a fire under them; I've known of some very unfortunate cases where this did not happen. Having a big goal, or a structured learning program, is ok. Some flexibility is ok too, though.

Sometimes you can get somewhere if you can convince these guys it was their idea in the first place--- and you were against it. Conniving; no doubt about it. Some wouldn't stoop to it.

AZN,

Maybe what kids are objecting to is the formality of the "classical events" of performance and evaluation.

Give a "Piano Party" with casual dress ("Come as You Are") and let the students play their favorite pieces whatever they are. Don't require memory from them. Do keep the no talking while someone is playing rule.

Put a balloon bouquet on the piano and have cookies and punch in the social area. Take candid pictures and use a video camera tape the event. Encourage socializing and getting to know each other. Emphasize casual and comfy.

Consider it an "Entertainment Event" and you will probably see a new dimension to your students. And, surprize them by playing some groovy music of your own.

Ask me how I know.

Betty

Is there any reason why the students can't learn loads of popular music as well as continuing to prepare for the testing the parents want?

Because some parents refuse to pay for anything longer than a 45-minute lesson in which I have to cover theory, technique, sight reading, ear training, and [gasp!] repertoire. For these problematic students, I already pick the shortest pieces allowed for each level.

The part that takes the longest time is technique. For these kids to learn 5 scales, play 5 chord chord progressions, learn broken chords and arpeggios, and correctly play primary/secondary triads is ilke pulling teeth.

That's a problem, isn't it. Time is the ultimate constraint.

Actually, the parents seem to be the constraint in this situation. You can talk yourself blue with these sorts of parents but experience has shown me that this is a situation to steer clear of.

Really? I don't seem to have that problem and I have students prepared for CM from Prep-Advanced.

Why do you think they are having trouble pulling this together? It would be interesting to hear your approach and how your students progress through the skills.

I teach almost all 45-minute lessons. I have one student that comes for an hour.

Just a question, but are private piano teachers really expected to teach music theory as well?

Except for very basic knowledge like key signatures, time signatures, dynamics markings, italian terms and all, I always thought that theory worked better in a classroom much like math and science, so I was always signed up for classroom courses to do music theory. It's kind of expensive to be taught these things one-on-one.