Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Dilemma: computer piano teaching....

All the kids know is they think it is fun to play the piano, and the faster the better. As for the parents, they usually do not know what to think, and that is why they come to me - they usually want to be assured that their child's musical activity is on the right track (but they are seldom very passionate about it). OK, fair enough.



That is an interesting idea. I will look into that and see if I can get print-outs of the music in question.

By medical analogy; accurately diagnosing a tumor does not guarantee an effective procedure of treatment. There are options, maybe all of them bad. When I have mere children arriving at my studio playing Chopin etudes at top speed from these programs (yes, you read that correctly) and they cannot identify one note on the printed page, I have a mega-challenge as a teacher.

The solution is as easy as it is boring - I can teach all the notes one by one - and the adolescent will find it intolerable. Or I can abandon the child to illiteracy. And if the youth has by this point deeply ingrained negative habits of fingering - that will take a long, long time to fix, if ever. I am scheming to find a way forward toward musical literacy in these strange circumstances (but increasingly common) that does not feel to the child like they are now sentenced to a musical concentration camp of punishment. My willingness to innovate is being tested here, but perhaps I can become an even better teacher because of it.

This is all beginning to look to me like damage control. In these cases I feel like I am running a musical Emergency Room at the hospital.

Simple things fluently? Sure. And in a couple of cases, well beyond simple.

Murray Perahia said in an interview that throughout his youth he was an unmotivated, hum-drum piano student, ordinary and no prodigy at all. But when he was 15, something snapped in his mind, he was suddenly galvanized to achieve on a great level and his ambition took off like a rocket. He cannot account for this sudden reversal.

Had he been taught by this computer program, he would not have been in a position to leap forward, only stumble backward. I will not take that risk with any student.

If you not accurately diagnose a tumor, then it would be a guarantee of failure in treatment.

In this case I have already deduced an accurate analysis of the malady.

As a music student more advanced in years, I have to question whether this and similar styles of notation are just something that's unapproachable and foreign to me or whether, in fact, traditional notation, as distilled through several centuries, offers something that this notation never can.

The weaknesses of this notation, IMO, is that relatively little piano music is written in it. If it were to happen that these students might really wish to play a piece that wasn't already encoded in this notation, they might, perforce, be motivated to study traditional notation. Or not.

And therein lies the condrum, because they have experienced ease which gives them confidence, but they did not get any technique that will let them play well. Worse, the collapsed joints are already habit and undoing this is harder than forming it right in the first place. There is another habit as well: how to practise and what practising entails. They would want to practise as they have been doing, because this is what they know and in their eyes, they have "results".

Another aspect is that they will not hear weaknesses that you hear (lack of power). If they have virtual instruments it will make up for it as well. In fact, the recorded lesson sounds impressive because of the reverb and other effects.

Have you managed to broach technique - the collapsed fingers or other things - in any way? If so - response?


As I thought. But this might give you a teaching handle: something to build on. If you know which pieces from the program they worked on, and maybe found one that would be suitable to hang your teaching hat on. For example, their sample piece is in A major and has the I, vi, IV, V chords. There are also specific chords: vi being F#m for example. Maybe you could take one or more of these things and build on them, and eventually lead that into what you usually teach.

The other part I noted was the "Intro - |:| verse chorus |:| end". Well, traditional music also has form and structure, and part of playing involves recognizing patterns and using that. So that might also be a bridge to what you might normally teach.

If the students can be made aware that what you offer makes them independent, so that they don't need to go to a site for any piece they want - and limited only to the pieces offered by the site - this may give them motivation to move over to your camp.

These are off the cuff thoughts.

The trend towards turning a task into a fun exercise via a video game is called "Gamification". We're seeing it a lot more now, what with the big craze over Rock Band in the past 10 years. People got so hooked on the game, that they have taken the next logical step (for Guitar) and created games like Rocksmith and Bandfuse. These games are fun and engaging, but really very limited in the long-term.

Knowing how to read music, combined with my knowledge of theory has been helpful for me. Not so much for my husband, who isn't a trained musician. He noodled around on bass as a teenager, and now that he's approaching 40, he'd like to get serious. We got him Rocksmith as a way to keep him engaged and learning while he built up calluses (actually, both of us, as I decided to learn guitar). We have been finding that while the game gives you the music at a fairly easy-to-learn pace, it does have its limitations. It doesn't teach you to read either music or tabs. What it does give you are some fun games to learn chord recognition, and the reinforcement that slow-to-fast repetitive practice earns results.

As a game? Great. As a way to stay engaged and build calluses? Wonderful. As a way to learn to read music and associate it to the fret board? Not so great. Ditto feedback on your technique. If you want to learn anything not in the program, you're sunk.

Maybe this is something you need to discuss with the parents and the students, and let them know the limitations? Possibly ask the students if there is anything they'd like to learn that isn't included in the program, and demonstrate how a solid knowledge of reading (particularly sight-reading) skills can help them achieve this goal? Perhaps wow them with a few pieces of your own repertoire, and reinforce that you learned this quickly by relying on your ability to read? Maybe ask them to choose something from your own sheet music, and show them how you can play by reading?

Games are great, but we still need to reinforce to students that there is no shortcut to solid learning.

(and, just to let you know, we're not relying on Rocksmith for the Husbeast's musical education...I have him grudgingly working his way through Barbara Wharram's Theory for Beginners - hilarity ensues when a cynical 36-year old uses a workbook intended for 10-year-olds - and the Hal Leonard method books, as they seem to be one of the very few choices available for bass & guitar.)

But.............this is huge.

Tim, your previous post seemed impossible to respond to because the way you painted things made this system seem so obviously good - there was a disconnect of some kind, but how to get at it.(?) You are painting a simple theoretical picture: lessons that will end with students quitting after a few years, never playing fluidly and maybe never playing after that, vs. students playing easily and fluidly. Clearly the latter is nicer than the former. But it's also simplistic and not necessarily reality.

The sample on the site is repetitive: the same short line of music with a few decorative notes and occasionally an answering line. Repeating something over and over is an easy thing to get fluid and automatic. How will his technique be? We already have an answer to that: collapsed fingers and poor fingering. -- Will we hear phrasing or anything other than a succession of notes? The demo is made to sound impressive through electronic tricks like reverb. Above all, there is DEPENDENCE. The student must passively follow this program for anything he wants to play. And chances are, if the music has any substance, it will no longer work or become tedious.

We already have programs in place where students can get at music early and fast. We have to watch out for the in the "adult" corner in the "fast and easy" department that leaves the student high and dry.

The thing is that that hard part of teaching is the skills part, and it's skills which foster independence. If somebody starts "fast and easy" then they miss the skills and keep on missing them. That leads to a dead end. And getting at those things later on is a lot harder than building them from the ground up. And when habits are already established, they are a lot harder to rebuild.

It just isn't as simple as you seemed to make it in your previous post. And it's not that "huge" if that fluidity carries other things in it. I do think that Jonathan has something to deal with here, and was right to post about it in the forum.

Yes, I find it irresistible to discuss technique in every lesson with every student one way or another according to the situation. As for collapsed finger joints the only solution is to constantly make them aware of it when it occurs, again and again and again, until they start paying attention if only to avoid being corrected once more. I don't enjoy teaching in an obstinate way, but at some point the proverbial rubber must hit the road, and the fingers must be guided by their master (the student) or the fingers will rule the student by dysfunction, and I tell them that, too.



Well, that is what I say, but it is on a par with their mother telling them to eat their spinach because it will help them grow up healthy. Younger students want what they want right now, and adulthood is still an abstraction for them. To tell you the truth I sometimes have the same challenge with adult students.

I am visualizing a computer program that is fun, yet teaches students to read manuscript music. I can see it in my mind's eye. I will hunt around and see if anyone has done it yet.....if not, I have my business cut out for me.

This is an interesting subject. I recently took a couple of years worth of courses and CUNY here in NYC (earning a Masters degree in the subject, but I do not otherwise use it) studying childhood development research, and how children learn through symbolism and games. I teach children in a light-hearted playful way not to indulge them, but because the child's mind absorbs information more efficiently through various approaches of 'play'. I am all for 'gamification' if it actually succeeds in teaching us something. If it doesn't then we have been robbed of time and money.



That's putting right on the mark. Again, interesting.



I have not seen the Wharram book, but I consistently prefer children's books over adult books, and if I accept an adult beginner I start them with the children's books. The way I do it they take in good humor. The problem with too many adult beginner books is they accelerate too fast - they make the mistake of assuming the adult will fill in the blanks of what is not explicitly illustrated. Big mistake. Children's books are usually more conscientious to avoid that presumption and spell everything out in slow motion they way it should be.

The faster their an adolescent's fingers acquire facility, however twisted, the further away there is of any chance they will slow down to learn any reading or theory skills. It is almost a mathematic ratio of dysfunction.

Food for thought - Do games developed by adults for children, esp. electronic types, allow young children to play and use their imagination, or stultify it? When you have a building block it can be a car, a person, a house or a mountain. An adult preconceived character has its shape, personality, and narrow role.

I visited a Waldorf school while researching alternate education for my youngsters. The toys in the kindergarten were vague and undefined. Dolls had no faces, and story time featured deer in a forest, where the forest was a few pine cones. Yet I remember the story vividly.

If a picture speaks a thousand words
pictures

What chance do children have to explore textures, shapes, sounds, and use their bodies in exploring their world in a free way? When you build with clay or wool or wood, and have to interact with the properties of that material, it is different from sliding your finger to a small point on a screen, or poking keyboard keys on a computer. Yet what is playing a musical instrument? Does it get reduced to more key pokes for more general instant sound (notes)?

And I would wager, playing skills. Is there anything in their playing besides fast and faster?

I don't have a large exposure to piano students. I do get dragged to the occasional recital of friend's children or if they're using my church's facilities. In my experience fluency is rare, but admittedly my experience is somewhat limited. What I hear is beginners playing easy material in a halting manner, and more advanced students doing the same with hard material, maybe a little less obviously. I've talked to a number of adult students who say it's their biggest frustration. I've played a number of church services knowing there were people in the congregation with far greater skills than I, who nevertheless would not attempt to help out for this reason.

So when I hear this program produces fluency, I think it's doing at least one thing right, even if it misses many other necessary ingredients.

Collapsed finger joints and bad fingering? That's also a complaint about transfer students in general.

Not reading? Yes, that would be a problem. Maybe they are reading, with a different notation scheme.

I don't think this program works, to the extent it does, merely because it motivates them to practice more. (though it clearly does that) I think it also requires them to play in real time, at tempo, like students of guitar and other jazz instruments do. I suspect the ratio may be about 30% practice and 70% the real time nature.

I should clarify my previous statement. Having examined the program I see it as merely another rote system: memorizing one note at a time. I do not see that the program actually imparts fluency - the fluency belongs to the student's enthusiasm to control their learning experience and excel at it, but not to the feeding method of the program.

I think children respond to their control of the program (they can't control a real teacher so much) and the bright colors and video action nature of the program. I really have no complaint about any gizmo that actually works. I am optimistic that a program will be created that actually promotes reading simultaneous to playing - it is just a matter of time.

You could be right, but there could be another factor as well. Sometimes being forced to play IN TIME even if slowly can speed learning.

Most guitarists learn by playing along with recordings and bands, and not so long ago most good jazz instrumentalists learned that way as well.

Hmm, I would keep encouraging those boys to learn the same way. If they are getting good results why mess with it.

I too find reading sheet music a bore, it gets in the way of actually hearing the music in your brain.

You didn't say what kind of music they are playing, is it pop, jazz, classical? At that early age I am sure it's pop tunes.

I have some students who don't like to read. I don't force them to.

I was teaching a 7 year old the blues scale and that rhythm. Blues is all about feel and the beat. We don't use notes for that.

Perhaps your insistence on reading may not be the right approach for these boys. Reading music is overrated. FEELING the music isn't.

If you want these boys to be just like yourself, then your advice is unimpeachable.

But what if, in five years, they don't want to be anything like you, or me, but instead decide they want to write film scores, or conduct Broadway shows. What tangible survival skills have they acquired by then that will serve them?

Children do something unexpected: they grow up. They change directions and pursue their own agenda. They have brains of their own.

Literacy and "FEELING" are not mutually exclusive. The life and work Beethoven provides a robust example. Arthur Rubinstein, Oscar Peterson, and Leonard Bernstein could all read music (and really, really well), and nobody ever accused them of being disconnected from their FEELINGS.