Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Time to change teacher?

I'm a beginner piano student, I've been studying on and off for 7 years without making much progress, and I'm just on a level where I can play easy pieces after some practice.

I've been working with my current teacher for a year, he self admittedly hasn't worked with anyone beyond basic level. At this level he seems to struggle with the pieces that I'm currently practicing, but I still think I find value on the tips he gives me, I also find value on him listening after I have practiced, he also gives me really great tips on how to practice particular pieces.

Should I look for a new more advanced teacher? How much more should I ask from my teacher?

Thank you

This is a tough question for a student to answer, but the teacher in general should be the one to realize when it's time to pass a student along to someone more advanced. Some don't always recognize this, or worse, they need the money and so they hold on.

It sounds to me as though you should begin a search. You could even tell your teacher that you feel you need a more advanced teacher and ask if they have any recommendations. You can continue with your current teacher until you find someone else, and be sure to interview that teacher and take a trial lesson (some offer for free, others charge you). It is well worth it to make sure you end up with someone who can meet your needs technically while being able to connect with you on a personal level. A more advanced teacher doesn't necessarily have to be mean.

It's always time to look for a different teacher. Every person has a different approach, and it is best to know as many approaches to music as possible: that is how you will really learn what is going on and be constantly challenged. Back when I was a student, I routinely studied with 3-4 teachers at the same time. IMHO, it is a better approach because it makes you responsible for what you want to learn (i.e., instead of blindly following the progression of any one teacher). By asking for specific help, the ability to compare the different teacher's approaches/solutions has tremendous advantages in the learning process.

Thanks for the insight, I wish I could afford more than one teacher, but I don't have the money or time currently. I'll try to find some test lessons and see how they measure.

We need a bit more information here. For example, what are some of the pieces you can play after some practice? What pieces can you read well at sight?

What if the 3-4 teachers all disagree vehemently with each other? Who's right?

I think it's better to study with 3-4 different teachers, one after another, but not simultaneously.

Why would teachers vehemently disagree with each other?!? They are not there to disagree with each other, nor is it a student's place to inform a teacher that they were instructed a particular way by another individual. That makes no sense; that is not how professional lessons are structured. Of course, they will all have a different take on the music, but that is entirely the point of having variety. Teachers are limited to their experiences; they are human.

The only thing I have witnessed interfering with the success of the multiple teacher approach, is the overinflated ego of teachers struggling with control issues.

I can play all of the songs on this book
http://promusica.ie/really-easy-piano-collection-50-popular-songs-piano-solo.html
and been working on some Beatles easy songs I found on internet,
We're working on Alfred Adult all in One Book and we'replaying Scherzo right now, I can't really sight read, I know the notes but I still have to work a lot with the metronome to get the rhythms right

Your teacher is struggling with music at the "real easy music" level?

No kidding! If the teacher is struggling with Alfred Book One, then it certainly sounds like a good time to find a new teacher.

Or find a teacher to begin with. This person isn't a teacher if they can't play this stuff.

I can see the arguments not to sent students to tests. But I definitely see a need for the teachers to go through comprehensive tests.

And while we're at it, let's find 3-4 of such "teachers," take "piano lessons" from them at the same time, and see how they offer different takes on teaching Minuet in G.

Oh, wait, they can't play Minuet in G. My bad.

How about the competence of all teachers involved?

What if one teacher really knows whats being covered, and the other knows far less?

What if teacher A is really good, but teacher B really isn't? And teacher B is the controlling idiot?

Studying with more than one teacher is fine for advanced pianists. When I was a conservatoire post grad I had 4 different teachers over 2 years and learned different things from each. By that time you are technically proficient and fairly sound in your own views on musicality. You are able to take on board a variety of ideas and approaches and make good use of them.

For a beginner I think it is very different. Every teacher will have a different approach and conflicting views which could be very confusing. It doesn't mean that one teacher is right and another is wrong, just that there are various ways of achieving the same results and not everything will be covered in the same way or sequence. Certain teachers have different expectations than others and may work well (or less well) with certain types of student.

Find a teacher who fits your needs and stick with them long enough to know if it's working out. This could take a year or so.

Don't take lessons from more than one teacher at a time unless everyone is happy with the situation. I currently teach in an independent school where many students are teacher and instrument hoppers. They take lessons for a short time and often have extra lessons outside of school with other teachers. It's very frustrating when you find markings on music that you don't agree with or have students tell you that their other teacher has advised them to do different things with pieces you are working on. The students get confused and it drives me mad!

I should not have dashed off a one-liner. Anything simplistic is less than helpful.

AndresD, you say:
- you're a beginner
- you've played on and off for seven years
- you've had the current teacher for a year

Sorting this out: seven years and "beginner" don't go together, but seven years without going anywhere does go with "beginner". I'm guessing that you self-taught and/or fooled around on the piano for seven years, and that the current teacher is the first teacher you ever had. This teacher got you after you self-taught for seven years.

Is that correct?

ks,
I agree with what you wrote but your math might be off.

If the student has studied for 7 years AND had a teacher for 1 year, then he self taught for 6 years.

If he can play those 50 pieces fluently he may have made some progress. But 7 years should take him past Alfred's.

I've tried self learning and a few teachers before, I haven't advance that much really (I said I was a beginner on the OP) because I've moved around a lot and that doesn't help for continuity, I also had an injury (DeQuervains Tendinitis) that stopped me form practicing for 2 years and getting back to practicing is a pain.

I've self study and tried a few teachers (even from different countries) and every one of them had a different method, this is the first teacher that I've been for more than a few months and even if he's not very good is the only one that had gotten me playing anything more than jingle bells.

His method has worked with me, but I know he's not super technical or the best, that's why I'd like some insight, there's no need to get aggressive people

AndresD, I'm in a kind of dual position, having been a student and still being a student, but also heavily into looking at the teaching side and I'm not alone in either of these roles. I'm pretty confident that I know what I'm talking about in what I'm about to present. I just don't know if I'll manage to present it clearly enough. Here goes:

We tend to think of learning to play an instrument as: you start with simple music, you get harder music, the method book gives some pointers, and somehow you get there. The emphasis tends to be on the piece, fixing what's "wrong" or weak with it (the piece). The (faulty) idea is that if you do that enough, then somehow you get the ability to play. Even many teachers (or "teachers") focus that way. (A note of caution: some teachers may appear to be focusing on pieces, but they are sneaking in the skills.)

Now what learning to play is actually about, is the acquisition of skills, knowledge, and ways of approaching things (badly). How you use your body as you play ("technique") is a skill. How to read, and what "reading music" means is a skill as well as an approach. What you do when you work on a piece of music - or work on technique - from moment to moment, and from week to week - is approach. What you develop in these areas affect what you can do, and what you will be able to do.

When you self-teach, and/or when you study under a poor teacher, then you are developing all of these things. You can develop bad body habits. You can have a way of approaching music or skills or practising which is ineffective. It's not neutral. You have to be doing something. Meanwhile, when you have self-taught, you are also able to go to a teacher who hears you play a piece of music that you learned. He hears the end result. But will he perceive what you can't do, among the types of things that I listed? Do you approach pieces and your practising in a poor manner? Are there holes in your grasp of notes, applied theory, and things which fuel your ability to read or play? Is your underlying technique hampering you? If you are weak in reading, what is underlying that? And what you can do, can mask what you can't. These are things this teacher needs to say, when you come in, and already have a history.

Imho, this is where it's at. You first have to grasp this yourself, otherwise you can't ask for it, or look for it.

Did anything make sense, or not make sense?

The thing is, if someone cannot play the most elementary of pieces - as you suggested in your earlier post - then he has no business calling himself a teacher. He, too, is a beginner. A real teacher would be able to sight read that stuff having. That means playing it at a high level (up to tempo, with all dynamics and articulations and expression) having never heard it or read it before.

If you think we are being "Aggressive", it is simply because we take pride in what we do, and people who give us a bad name by calling themselves our colleagues when in fact they should be our students and not taking potential students away from the real teachers in the community - well, it gets us a bit riled up.