Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Exercises

Hello again

What kind of exercises do you use before Hannon ? I am looking for easy 5 finger exercises.

Thanks

Hanon #1 is about as easy as it gets...basically 5 notes in a row, at least for the ascending (RH) and descending (LH) parts.

A Dozen A Day

How about learning the major and minor pentascales, meaning the first five notes of each major and minor scale played with fingers 12345? Good practice for incorporating sharps and flats into your exercises, and once mastered they can be played legato, staccato, forte, piano, with a crescendo, etc.

I also second the recommendation for the Dozen a Day books.

I second the above. He is referring to Dozen a Day by Edna Mae Burnam. If you are teaching students using another method book, they correspond well with those (Level 1 of DoD with Level 1 Faber Adventures, etc).

Before suggesting anything, one should know the purpose of the exercises.

Dozen a Day 1 does not correlate well with Faber 1--it's too advanced for a Faber 1 student. I suggest you look over the Dozen a Day series. It starts with a mini book, next level is preparatory, then Level 1.

I have a few students doing Dozen a Day with Level 1 of Piano Adventures. I start them after they can already do C, G, and D scales (one octave, hands together). For most this happens about 1/3 of the way through the Faber book. This is more for students who are at least in 2nd grade (not any younger). I think technical ability can precede reading ability. Most of the dozen a day exercises, I am helping them with reading and we find patterns before beginning exercises. (I also do *most* of the rhythms by ear) The kids seem to love the books and think they are more like "big-kid" music than the Faber books.

Sorry, this is definitely dependent on the child and the teacher. I do a lot of listening and general patterned exercises with students along with just reading. I should have made this more clear. Just handing the student Dozen a Day and sending them home would probably be a bit much.

Not to beat a dead horse, but I second Dozen a Day. The progression of the series is excellent.

I have also had very good luck with the Dozen a Day books. Depending on the child, I have done a page or 2 a week, or as much as an entire group at one time.

In between Dozen a Day books I usually work in major and minor 5 finger patterns, scales, and arpeggios.

For slower students who struggle with note reading, I have also had luck with the Finger Power series- I have them say the note names as they play them.

Skip the Hanon all together and go with Alexander Peskanov's Russian Technical Regimen. Some more difficult for the beginner but still plenty of practical studies that you will see in a lot of the music you play. While his regimen is nothing new and I'm sure you could scavenge up everything in the book or even write it down yourself but for the money and time it's worth it because it's nicely layed out with fingering throughout and very detailed instructions. Have yet to see anything that remotely resembles Hanon exercises in any serious piece of music. I'm sure Hanon doesn't hurt, just not a big help for me. Kinda like doing aerobics if you plan on running marathons, much better to just jog...

One shouldn't teach technique one isn't familiar with.

Well you've gotta start somewhere... and experiment once in a while. How else will you grow as a teacher, pianist, and human being?

Not by experimenting on a student, I would hope.

Who publishes this collection?

Experimenting is an interesting word.
For me it kind of conjures the image of wierd lab experiments with rats and monkeys.

Staying with the scientific analogy, Medical Doctors call their work "practicing" medicine. I think that's a better term.

Each student is a unique individual, and sometimes the educational plan succeeds best by adjusting to that unique individual. I consider that part of "practicing" the art of teaching.

Minniemay had said that one should not teach technique that one is not familiar with. Depending on what is meant by "technique", I agree with this. Your medical "practitioner" has studied medicine, and then had an internship where he/she observed other doctors, and was observed. There should be understanding of how technique works and how the body works before setting out to teach, or you can hurt someone, or if not that, create future problems.

If you do have that knowledge, you still need to "experiment", using what you know, to help students since each person is different. But the knowledge should be there. That is what I am agreeing with.

Technique is a hands-on physical thing. If the book is trying to introduce new physical things, it's best to work with someone who has experience with them. A book cannot teach this adequately on its own.

It seems that so many teachers are looking for the right book to do the teaching. It's not the books -- it's the teacher. A book is only a medium.

For me the image is more of paying careful attention over a period of time to what seems to work and what doesn't. We know from design of science experiments that memory tends to be selective, sometimes extremely so, and that keeping good records can greatly assist this process. It takes a while to become a skilled teacher partly because you need to watch a student develop over time, but partly because you need to have experience with many different individuals who react in different ways, and you don't get all types the same year.

I bolded a piece of the snip from keystring.

I would suggest being observed is the single most beneficial thing one could add to speed the process of gaining teaching mastery. And, one of the most threatening!

So right!

Why threatening?

I would suggest otherwise. As a classroom teacher, I've been observed for my formal and informal evaluations countless times, by first-time administrators, master teachers, and experts who have been teaching for 40 years. What have these observations done for me? Not much. In fact, it was quite entertaining to have administrators who know nothing about music to observe and "evaluate" a music teacher.

But a very important medium.

Take those Suzuki books for example. There's only so much a non-Suzuki teacher can do with those books.

Then I would suggest it is a poor teacher . . .

Just to add on for what ANZ and MM said here...
Of course teacher is more important than books (medium), but a very poor design method book will also kill a good teacher's teaching, she has to constantly seek supplemental to complete the current method book. So, if a method book (medium) is already excellent in design of its pedagogical sense, a good teacher can save a lot of time for seeking supplemental but put more concentration into teaching the book.

That seems quite unusual to me. Usually the only people who don't benefit from some constructive criticism are those either observed by an utterly incompetent person (and sometimes even they notice something you can use) or are simply unreceptive.

When I was in grad school for Clinical Psychology, we all had to bring in tape recordings of therapy sessions for our peers and professor to critique. None of us liked that! but it was necessary part of becoming a professional. It would be even more useful 5 or 10 years later, when we had the experience to take the next step to mastery, but it's rarely available.

Can a piano student learn to play completely on their own, without a teacher occasionally observing and critiquing? Sure, but .... most don't. Can a teacher learn to teach completely on her own? Sure, most do. But.....many could improve.

It's very hard to interact with another human in real time, with full attention, and have the ability to also observe your own actions. Each process interferes with the other. That's why another person is useful, even if not expert; but of course the more skilled the observer the better.

Once you're "good enough," learning stops. Many become competent, few become masters or even expert. Time alone is necessary but not sufficient.

I'm finishing my 4th year directing a handbell ensemble. I made steady improvements the first three years, but not that I can tell this year. So now I'm going to find a music teacher who can sit in and coach a bit, and see if i can get to the next level. I'm also going to video rehearsals for later analysis. I know I won't like doing that, but I see it as necessary.

Not to me. Have you ever spent any time going through what AZN has gone through? Do you have any idea of how many nitwits are around with degree A B and C but who have never spent a year in a classroom actually teaching?

I would suggest that most of the valuable insights come from other students - or students themselves - and even more often from parents who are IN the lessons and observe.

I get incredible ideas from my students and the parents of young students, who brainstorm with me in lessons.

Do you completely dismiss this article then?

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/03/111003fa_fact_gawande

TimR, I read the article some years ago.

I have also been under observation as a teacher on various occasions. The first is the obvious one that every teacher goes through when they do their "practice teaching" (internship). You begin by observing the master teacher, and then you get feedback during your own teaching. I interned with 5 teachers, the last being a specialist in "French immersion" teaching. Once in the profession there was the school principal during the probationary period, superintendent of schools, and specialist in learning disabilities.

Useful feedback came from people who were highly competent in my field. A good teacher is also attuned to her students and others, so this feedback to my style and personality into account. Since they knew their craft inside-out, they could see the strengths in how I worked, and also had suggestions for weak areas. The best of these were the immersion expert, and the LD specialist. The specialist pointed out something good I'd been doing instinctively, namely using both visual and auditory cues in classroom teaching. This was good for the mix of visual and auditory learners.

Useless or harmful feedback came first of all from poor quality teachers. One, during my internship, did not have control of his classroom - my academic advisor assessed his assessment my pointing out the shoes scattered in the hallway which was "typical" of this. The school principal wrote a glowing report during my trial period because they were desperate for teachers to stay in that poor region, and then a scathing report when he had a pregnant teacher on hand who was about to get tenure if he was supportive. Neither the glowing report, nor the scathing one, were useful.

For those running school systems, this or that approach will be in fashion. These days, over here, it's using red and blue counters to teach negative numbers - nothing messes up kids worse. Senior teacher told me to appear to be doing the fashionable thing, but in my real teaching, do what works. If you are inspected for teaching per fashion, that's useless stuff.

A superintendent ---- who obviously does not teach ---- wanted to see my "matrix". No teacher I have talked to has ever heard of a matrix. I created one. It was marginally useful.

Useless advice comes from those who have read books about how it should be done, or who have built theories on how it should be done, without actually doing the work themselves, seeing what works, what the real obstacles are, and the real solutions. It also comes from those who have an agenda. Useless advice can also come from colleagues who have developed their own rigid way of doing things, and think everyone must do things the way they do.


How is that article contrary to the idea set forth, of listening to the feedback of parents and students, in one-on-one teaching? Isn't that the same thing?

I wrote of my experience as a classroom teacher. But once I got into one-on-one, I found the best feedback came from the students themselves. This is especially so when you teach a number of students, and the majority tells you the same thing.

Two posters rejected the idea that an external observer could be useful for either learning to teach or improving their teaching skills.

That is a bit of a surprise to me. What other field exists where external input or evaluation isn't helpful, or even necessary? Tiger Woods has a teacher!

The entire process of learning piano is one of continuous improvement through practice AND the input of a teacher. If an external input is valuable for improving how we play, might it also help in improving how we teach? If we want to continue to improve?

It's a fairly long article. And I'm not a surgeon. Excuse me, but what is your point?

For the record I don't deny this at all. What I am is VERY VERY VERY careful about whom I follow as a "coach". The surgeon talks about coaches, but also athletes. I'll wager top athletes are very careful about picking people to critique their game.

So does the number one tennis player in the world, and also every top player I can think of going back a long time. But again, I doubt the top players even care about assessments from people they do not trust, and furthermore I would suggest that they avoid people who might damage them.

Again, getting "help" or "coaching" involves chemistry. The wrong "coach" can destroy. And that is a factor you are not taking into consideration.

I assume that I am one of the posters whom you assume are completely dismissing your ideas. If you state them differently perhaps I might agree.

The article is long, but fairly well known among performance musicians.

The theme of the article is improving the performance of already skilled practitioners - not students. It uses surgery as an example, but resonates with a lot of musicians because of the obvious application to other fields.

It seemed relevant to the direction the topic had moved.

What I quoted came directly behind the post of a teacher who had written of working with the feedback from students and parents. This is the SAME as what you are writing about, and not a rejection of it. That is why I asked my question.

Meanwhile, I wrote a fair bit about feedback on teaching in the same thing you are quoting. And it addresses what you write.

I'll wager that if I ask the pianists I know about this article, most will not have read it.

I do not reject what I assume is the basic premise the article is based on.

Basically it seems to be this: if the greatest surgeons and athletes can lose their sharpness without feedback from someone trusted, the same thing can obviously happen to anyone else.

I'm not sure anyone is disagreeing with this idea. I am not. Instead what I am focusing on is the damage done by listening to someone who seems wise but who is not. Such a person can create great damage.

It would be interesting to start a new topic in the Pianist thread, which has quite a few performers, and maybe also the non-classical, which has other performers, and see how well known it is. I'm familiar with the article, because linguists know of it. But linguists don't perform.

I think the article made some good points. However, there are also things like this:

I doubt anyone will say that about playing the Rachmaninov 3rd Piano Concerto. Playing the piano on a very high level is fiendishly difficult, and even attempting to teach someone else to play on a much lower level of performance mastery is never anything that goes on autopilot.

Where there is to me an obvious correlation is with going over basics. It is very easy to go on autopilot there, and then a deadly plateau can be reached much like the one the surgeon is talking about.

But you do not ask a five year-old for feedback when doing surgery, nor do you ask his/her parents for suggestions as to how to work better with the child while the child is doing surgery.

And if you are in the midst of cutting someone open, you will ask neither the patient nor other patients for feedback about how you are doing.

Piano teaching is not surgery, and it is also not coaching an athlete, although frankly I see more connection between the piano teacher and the athletic coach. Or between the person being taught how to play and the athlete GETTING coaching.

In what I do you can, and you will get valuable feedback. But it is not the same as teaching a small child how to do surgery while showing the parent how to work with the child at home. There too you can get incredible feedback from parents about what works - and what does not.

There I think you've hit on one of the major obstacles. It's not easy to find ANY coach, let alone a master coach.

(as it also is not easy to find any teacher for an adult student, let alone one who's good at it. do I digress? maybe, maybe not)

This is a problem I haven't solved for myself, yet. My current thought is to make contact with a group of my peers and see if we could set up a schedule to review each other's rehearsals over the next year. We don't all belong to any single association so there will be some effort to putting this together.

Failing that, I'll probably resort to video, maybe share it with some other musicians.

But I'm starting from the viewpoint that coaching is a good idea, and that improvement is always possible, and that it's impossible to attend to everything you're doing in real time. Music isn't like carpentry, where you can stop and check, then sand some more. Once the moment is gone it's gone forever.

The resistance the observation suggestion has met here does not support the idea that any of you agree.

For completeness I should add the other half of the problem. The idea of somebody watching us critically is very intimidating, even if the intent is positive.

The brass players I associate with are familiar with it, and it has been widely shared on a number of musical forums. That is sufficient for me to believe my statement is basically accurate. If you are determined to prove me wrong or incomplete fine. The article could still however be relevant if no musician had ever read it.

The idea I find interesting is that there may be a peak age for certain activities. An example is given of an athlete peaking at an early age. Reading it brought to mind when I was 17 and was a cross country runner. A professor (friend of my dad's) pointed out to me that I would probably never again be in as good shape as I was at 17. (Like that is at all helpful.)

And I'm reminded of the NCAA tournament (men's college basketball) last night. Coach Pitino (at least age 60) has proved that he is definitely at the top of his coaching game.

What I find inspirational is that teachers can continue to grow and "peak" in older age. Yea!!

heres the link
http://peskanov.com/Merchant5/merch...re_Code=cvc-usa&Category_Code=APPROD

I don't think there's any upper limit on this one, barring some kind of illness or dementia of course.

But I also think it doesn't happen accidentaly - it needs some effort. And "good enough" is fatal to progress.

I agree there is no upper limit on teaching, provided that the person doing the teaching is still mentally sharp AND still wants to grow.

As for "good enough", there are different kinds of "good enough". At some point "good enough" may mean, "I've done all I can with this for the moment, it is 'good enough' for now."

That's different.

MiguelSousa, I have read your post, here:

What kind of exercises do you use before Hannon ? I am looking for easy 5 finger exercises.

Thanks

_________________________________________________


I don't understand the purpose of doing what are called exercises.

If you are just starting to play the piano, as you play everyday, your fingers get stronger. I understand reading the scales and playing them.

I understand reading and playing pieces, but I don't understand why anyone would want to do exercises and what purpose any exercise would serve.

I understand that certain pieces contain sharps, flats, jumps, leaps, etc.

When you learn to play the piano, it says in the books to say the name of the note when you play the note.

So in exercises do you read and say the note as you play each note in the exercise. And again what does any exercise accomplish. Any explanation is appreciated.

A thought: You may not reach at age 60 what you might have reached with similar training at age 17 (or what you did reach). But supposing that what you have been doing up to now has been inefficient and poor, because nobody ever taught you, or you were lazy, or you didn't know what to do. If you start learning now, then you will become better than you were, and you might even become better than you were at 17, because you did things so poorly at age 17 due to lack of knowledge etc.

I used age 60 because that will be my age next year. I discovered that there is so much I didn't know and wasn't taught. (Incidentally it is also why I'm cautious about the "fun-making" idea in the other thread, if fun means sacrificing skills.)

I'm going to take a wild guess here and speculate that you do not have a teacher, or you would have asked them for and received an in-depth explanation.

Broadly speaking, exercises, etudes, Ãœbungen, etc., fall into two categories: for helping increase dexterity and for working out musical performance techniques. Of course, some cross the line and can be used for both purposes.

Hanon is a prime example of the former; Heller is an example of the latter.

This afternoon, I was working with an 8th grader working on a Spindler exercise. It introduces turns to the student, an ornament which students will encounter frequently in Baroque and Classical era music and used well into the Romantic period. Performing them with the correct timing and good articulation constitutes the dexterity portion of the exercise. But how the turn is voiced with respect to the preceding and following notes constitutes the musical aspect of the exercise. Also the timing. FYI the etude had plenty of other musical problems for the student, I was just providing one example.

By the time you start the Liszt and Chopin etudes, your technical foundation had better be as solid as a granite rock. You will be working on major musical problems as you work through these.

John v.d.Brook, I have read your post, here:

I don't understand the purpose of doing what are called exercises........... Any explanation is appreciated.

I'm going to take a wild guess here and speculate that you do not have a teacher, or you would have asked them for and received an in-depth explanation.

Broadly speaking, exercises, etudes, Ãœbungen, etc., fall into two categories: for helping increase dexterity and for working out musical performance techniques. Of course, some cross the line and can be used for both purposes.

Hanon is a prime example of the former; Heller is an example of the latter.

This afternoon, I was working with an 8th grader working on a Spindler exercise. It introduces turns to the student, an ornament which students will encounter frequently in Baroque and Classical era music and used well into the Romantic period. Performing them with the correct timing and good articulation constitutes the dexterity portion of the exercise. But how the turn is voiced with respect to the preceding and following notes constitutes the musical aspect of the exercise. Also the timing. FYI the etude had plenty of other musical problems for the student, I was just providing one example.

By the time you start the Liszt and Chopin etudes, your technical foundation had better be as solid as a granite rock. You will be working on major musical problems as you work through these.

_________________________________________________

John v.d.Brook, you are correct, I am 63 and am self-taught as of a year. Thank you very much for your detailed and helpful reply. I have limited experience in exercises as opposed playing music as a beginner; however, I now clearly understand the difference in the context of advanced classical music - which I hope to get to before I die old age. Thank you very much.

Russian Technical Regimen is Published by Willis Music Company. It occurred to me this morning that I actually teach to learn. Of course we always say that the best way to learn is to teach. But it goes beyond that. If I were truly teaching solely for the benefit of the student, I would develop the most effective teaching method, style and approach and apply it to all students. That also means adjusting for the level and abilities, needs of each student. But it would be a constant/adjusting teaching approach. Afterall, if it works beautifully, why would you not continue to use it. But that is not what really goes on when I'm teaching. For example, right now I'm intensely researching, studying, reviewing, and playing jazz. Particularly Chris Norton's method. Why would I be reaching out for a different method, a different sequence when I have sucessfully taught numerous students to play jazz? Because I want to learn it. That is the hidden unrecognized, unacknowledged truth. And that also applies for many others pieces of music or books, even technical approaches. So in the end, I suspect many of us are doing the same. We are designing our lesson components to respond to our personal desires. Oh, I can hear the objections. But think it over. There are some teachers who have been teaching the same page by page books, exercises, pieces for years and years. But I don't think that's most of us. All this conversation just got me to thinking.