This may seem like a dumb question, but please stick with me. (Incidentally I did a quick search but couldn't readily find an answer, so my apologies if this has been raised before).

I would like to know if there are any competent piano teachers here who cannot actually play themselves.

I learnt when I was six, well over half a century ago. The teacher was a large lady, very strict, who administered a wooden ruler frequently over the knuckles to correct many bad habits and reoccurring mistakes. This made my elder brother give up the lessons after a very short period, but I carried on, whilst the knuckles became redder & redder with each passing year.

The teacher in question consistently obtained very high marks in her pupils exams, and was considered one of the very best teachers in the neighborhood. I must confess I certainly never heard her play during the 5 years I had lessons, although at the time I never gave this even a passing thought.
My elder sister who also took lessons for much longer and made excellent progress recalls that she was at a party one day in the local church hall. It was a childs' birthday, and suddenly someone called out, "Oh there's Miss XXX (the piano teacher), please come over and play 'Happy Birthday To You' on the piano in the corner!"
The piano teacher suddenly seemed to be struck dumb for several moments, then after a very long pause, made some apology or other and quickly left the room in a very embarrassed and distressed state.
The motive behind this rapid loss of face was probably lost on most present, with the exception of my sister and one other pupil. But it was painfully clear that the teacher could not in fact play the piano.
I believe this must be very unusual, especially a teacher being well known for getting high grades.
Does anyone know of a similar tale? Or is this not so unusual.

Although I would expect most teachers here could play Happy Birthday off the cuff, I doubt very many could play the National Anthem. You see, what you're really asking is whether a teacher should be able to play any tune upon command. Some teachers I know have made it a point to memorize commonly requested tunes, just to avoid such embarrassment, although, she really shouldn't have been embarrassed at all. She could have said, "Oh, I'll be more than happy to play for you. In the future, please make arrangements with my agent, and in the mean time, I'm certain you'll agree, in front of everyone, to pay union scale."

While I don't agree with the whole "ruler over the knuckles" routine, your former teacher's reaction was no indication of not being able to play piano. Some people get very nervous playing in front of others. Some people need to have the music. Some need to prepare a piece and be warmed up. In all of these possible scenarios, the person in question can still be quite an accomplished pianist.

I think that not all good piano teachers are good performers. Not all good performers are good teachers, either. But a good teacher must know how to play piano, even if they do not perform (or perform well).

Here we go again chaps ... the ducking and diving that goes on amongst some of our piano teachers defending the pose of not needing to play the piano ... this is like learning to swim from a chappie who can’t swim ... the very thought of one of our number not being able to play "Happy Birthday" is scary.

No wonder the public at large have such a poor opinion of knuckle-rappers ... we need to get our act together folks.

btb,
I was never taught how to play happy birthday. I was always taught to play from the written score, and was never given one of Happy Birthday. My teacher never encouraged me to figure things out by ear, compose my own music, or improvise. I am not in the majority. Now as an adult and teacher, I have learned how to play by ear and to harmonize, and I teach that to my students so that they don't experience this. However, there is a part of the past where this sort of thing was not encouraged or taught.

No one is saying that a teacher shouldn't be able to PLAY, but there's a big difference between 1) begin able to play and being able to perform and 2) being able to play from a score and being able to adlib something. That is what John & I are talking about, and in no way, shape or form are we saying that a good teacher should not have to be able to play (or have been able to play prior to arthritis setting in).

Nor was anyone condoning knuckle rappers (in fact, I think this is not a good way of teaching piano at all). But given the story and no other background information, one cannot deduce that this teacher in question couldn't play piano. That is just not apparent from the information available.

Why do you always jump to such conclusions, btb? Or do you get something out of ruffled feathers?

Actually, when I was in college, my professor almost never demonstrated for me. I have my way of picking obscure pieces that nobody knows. I just needed someone who has the experience to be able to analyze a piece and recognize its technical demands.

I tell my students the same thing. There are pieces I'm teaching right now that--if I practice 2 hours per day--I can play just fine. I just don't have 2 hours per day to practice. However, I know enough about music to be able to find the difficulties within each passage and to guide the student toward the correct way of playing.

Seems like everyone is getting pretty rude about the whole "teachers playing the piano thing". I mean, it isn't a harsh question or request. If someone sees a piano teacher, they want to hear the person play the piano. Piano-playing is a skill meant primarily for enjoyment, so those who have the skill usually like to, or are expected to, share that with those who don't have it. I'm cringing just imagining a get together where the hosts cheerfully ask the teacher to give a small performance for everyone's enjoyment to be met with a cold "I'm afraid you must contact my agent before arranging these things, and I take cash and credit card".

I think it's inspiring and encouraging for teachers to regularly play for their students. It doesn't have to be an entire sonata or nocturne, but a little snippet is always good.

I will admit that I do not readily play advanced classical repertoire at the performance level that I used to play when I studied in college. I also don't teach advanced repertoire either, as my focus is more on beginners and early intermediate level students. But I love to perform for my students and their parents, to share with them what they will eventually be able to do if they continue with lessons.

Each teacher is different.

I attended a workshop recently on how teachers can teach improvisation in their studios. There were teachers there who were had far more credentials than I will ever attain, who were outstanding teachers.... yet they fumbled trying to make up a RH melody using a 5-finger scale in G, then add a simple LH accompaniment.

These are the teachers who would have a difficult time plunking out 'Happy Birthday' at a moment's notice.

I think the question here is: Are teachers performers themselves?

I have seen three sides of it. All my past private teachers demonstrated to me how its done ... some have even played to be some related pieces and higher up pieces so I would have some sort of a listening experience. One particular one I remember wasn't a great pianist herself, her technique was appalling and I almost fell off my chair to know that piano was her first instrument. She did give many criticisms in refining the performance but she never demonstrated ... she would either say "softer here" or "you need to work on your phrasing" ... her feedback wasn't really insightful...

Another teacher I had was a performer, with teaching he made a living out of performing. Performing to him was something that ALL musicians had to do and he always made sure that his students performed, sharing the joys of performing. He was always happy to perform or play for a student and he always did. It was through this example where I understood that performing was more than just playing in front of many people, I saw that it was sharing something that you worked hard for. I have encountered several teachers like that in the past that also make their living out of performing and they seem to be the believable in the advice they give as they do perform a lot themselves.

At the same time I have encountered that excellent teacher that gives very insightful advice but never demonstrates. That teacher I once had still plays but only for pleasure, it seemed that she didn't perform as a musician and her job was purely music education. She was a great teacher but she never really urged students to perform and get out there ... she did create excellent musicians and great pianists but she didn't seem to stress the fundamental importance of performing and the joy of it.

I think to if you are going to teach a subject, no matter what it is, you need to know it.

Currently, I am shameful to say that I am way out of practice, and I do not currently perform because of it. But the fact that I have performed and played advanced repertoire in the past, is like riding a bicycle... you don't forget how it's done, therefore you can instruct.

Now, if someone asks me to play Happy Birthday, no problem... just to be clear. Luckily for me, with a little warming up, I could probably pull off the National Anthem. But if you ask me to play an advanced level piece, I shamefully would not want to try. That is not to say I don't demonstrate advanced level pieces, if need be. I just give a sample of how I think it should be expressed, etc, mistakes and all... my students get it.

I also have taught pieces I've never played before. Personally I LOVE to do this, it is like playing and learning the piece yourself, but the students are doing the work, with guidance from me, great fun!!

An example of teachers that don't perform in their medium, but do teach, to name a couple: ballet instructors and sports coaches.

Here’s my copy of "Happy Birthday" which all my students learn in the first month of taking lessons ... there might be an awful lot of memorisation before sight-reading kicks in ...
but sounds of this cheerful ditty in everybody’s household does an awful lot to advertise the guru skills of the piano teacher.

All those who can't play this oft heard birthday reminder by tea-time, qualify for presentation of
"Ye olde WOODEN SPOON".

happybirthday

I will not play in front of a group, ever. I loathe being the center of attention, and that is probably the biggest reason why I totally pulled away from performing in public in my mid to late 20s.

If someone asks me to play in front of a group, I politely say no. If someone pushes me, eventually I am no longer polite: "What part of NO don't you get?"

But I always play for my students.

Theowne, there are many reasons that teachers might be uncomfortable improvising at the last second, or what some call a "command performance." Some were listed here, some have been listed the last half dozen times this subject has come up.

That said, we live in an era when people pride themselves on being professional, and one of the characteristics of professionals is to render their services in an appropriate setting, namely "The Office." You wouldn't ask your MD for a medical opinion when he was a guest in your home, would you? You wouldn't ask your plumber friend to do a pipe repair in the middle of a party, and not expect to pay his going rate plus overtime?

Pianobuff has given you several examples of other teachers who don't perform - now think about other teachers, math teachers, English teachers, Latin teachers, science teachers, history teachers, who don't go to parties and get peppered with requests to ply their trade.

By the way, I have some mild arthritis in my right hand that comes and goes. If I'm having a bad day, I don't want to announce to the world that I can't play tonight became my hand isn't working.

Now that I reflect a bit on on the original post, the teacher's response should have been, "Sure, come over to the piano, and I'll teach you how to play Happy Birthday."

My thoughts went somewhere along the same lines.

But I have had another thought as well. I was told that in the old school, a person trained to be a concert type classical performer was not allowed to know how to play by ear because this would ruin their specialized skills in working with selected written music. If this really existed and if this teacher had been taught along that school, she would not be able to play anything off the top of her head. She would not be able to teach Happy Birthday without sheet music either.

KS

I have taken lessons with two excellent teachers who could not really play the piano. One of them had suffered from several strokes and the other was very elderly and frail and was losing her sight. Of course they had both been fine pianists in their day and what they didn't know about piano was not worth knowing.

I am a teacher, not a performer. Teaching takes up most of my time and I have little incentive or need to practice seriously. This does mean that if an advanced student brings an unfamilliar piece of advanced music to a lesson I am unlikely to be able to rattle it off at first sight. That doesn't mean that I can't teach it though. Obviously I am not talking about 'Happy Birthday'. I have lost count of how many times I have had to play that one on request.

My teacher, a Japanese lady, is a wonderful pianist who has a wide repertoire and excellent sight-reading skills. As an example, I've come to love the Schubert Impromptus - she can play them all, either from memory or by sight. I expect nothing less from someone who sets themselves up as a 'piano teacher'. The inspiration I get from hearing her play the pieces I'm struggling with is, perhaps, the greatest lesson of all.

LOL! That's a great response!

But not by ear. That is the point here. Being asked to play something in a lesson where a teacher can practice and prepare for such things is one thing, but being asked to play something on the fly that one normally wouldn't practice (unless they anticipate this happening) is different.

Keystring brought up a point that I find particularly interesting. It seems as though nowadays teachers are expected to offer a smorgasbord of different skills in their teaching, whereas in the past things were much more specialized. Because of this, we cram as much as we can into 30 minutes: sight reading, ear training, theory, composition, improvisation, and repertoire (I'm sure I missed some, too!). As a result of this different expectation, however, and perhaps as a result of my own realization that my teacher never taught me to play Happy Birthday, I make sure that my students can learn a piece by ear and harmonize it. Whether or not it is right for someone to ask, I think many people do with the expectation that you will play without regard for any of the above possible reasons. I think it's important to be prepared in any case.

I wouldn't want a teacher who can't play well themselves, both of my main piano teachers (I just started lessons with a new one, after 4 1/2 years of learning from my boyfriend, because he recommended that I go to an outside person and because we were in a financial position to allow me to do that)--I went from elementary literature to early advanced stuff in that time), I would want my teacher to be able to play the piano parts of my clarinet student's pieces, because I'd want to hire them for more than as a teacher!

Meri

I know this is a controversial topic, and I agree that piano teachers can't be expected to play everything by ear and/or know all of Piano's Greatest Hits by memory.

But...Happy Birthday is a fairly simple tune that can be easily harmonized with primary triads in the LH. It's unusual in that the melody starts on scale degree 5 and is a pick-up to an accented non-harmonic tone, but even that's Freshman/Sophomore level college theory.

I have met piano teachers who were unable to sightread pieces out of a late-elementary duet anthology. In my mind that's unacceptable. I think piano teachers should be able to read well up to an intermediate level, and I think piano teachers should be able to play the standard teaching literature they use. I also think they should have a basic grasp of keyboard harmony and technical fundamentals.

Kreisler, I mentioned further up that I am aware of a(n older?) school where the ability to play by ear was discouraged or forbidden as ruining a specialized skill. That kind of musician would not be able to play Happy Birthday by ear and harmonize to it. They would only be able to play it if it was memorized from prior sheet music work. This elderly teacher hit knuckles with rulers - she must have been quite 'old school'.

Kreisler, I don't know about you, but I frequently use Happy Birthday with my students as an example of why it's important to be able to harmonize, in fact, I run through all 12 keys.

But that begs the question. Why should piano teachers, alone among the professions, be expected to perform on a moment's notice, without remuneration?

In my humble opinion... Kreisler is correct.

Come on guys, Happy Birthday is 3 chords. You don't have to play the melody because everyone is singing it. How hard is that?

If you need to get paid, what would you charge?

I just played it and it takes all of 12 seconds.

H1

To someone who is not a professional musician or teacher, *playing* (note the verb) music is fun! You can do it as easily as saying "Good morning." so what's the big deal. The would-be musician dreams of going up to play in front of someone. They are giving you a chance to do something that you love and enjoy! For you it is work, and your livelihood. That is not easy to see for an outsider. They are also honouring you by asking. This is the attitude.

Nobody imagines that this is work. Some student is probably thinking, "Boy, I wish someone would ask me to play. More likely they'd find an excuse to leave the room. Lucky guy!"

Keystring...I have to disagree with you a bit. I would think that *playing* (note the verb) music
should be fun for everyone, regardless of whether you are a professional, or not. Otherwise... why do we teach, or perform, or play in church, etc. Why do something that is not enjoyable? Is it just for the money?

I'm sure that the answers will vary.

H1

I agree. Given the setting was at a party and the requested song was Happy Birthday, it seems very casual, and whoever asked the teacher probably did so to show her respect (asking the best player in the room). It would be different if the request was for a Beethoven sonata, or if people in the room were asked to stop other activities and attend to the performance. I think it's reasonable to be paid for a performance (though I think it's a bit over the top for playing Happy Birthday at a birthday party). But casually playing a simple tune at a party is pretty common for people who can play piano, no?

Just to be absolutely clear...

Happy Birthday--I can play that in my sleep!

National Anthem--I can pull that one off, too, without preparation.

Standard piano literature up to Kuhlau Sonatinas--Not a problem! Just yesterday I played through several pieces in Burgmuller Op. 100. I've never played some of them, yet I can sight read them as if I knew them well.

Bach WTC (the ones I haven't played), Beethoven Sonatas (the ones I haven't played), and Chopin Etudes (the ones I haven't played)--I can sight read through some passages, but I'd rather direct my students to available recordings by professional pianists. It'll be a big waste of lesson time for my students to hear me plodding through their pieces.

It is impossible for teachers to be able to pull off any piece from the standard advanced literature at a moment's notice.

Is it clear now?

H1 - if you go back and reread the original post, you'll note that the teacher was singled out and asked to play. If instead, the general call was, "Would someone like to accompany us as we sing . . . ." then that would be a different scenario. If there are no takers, just sing a Capella.

We have no idea why his teacher didn't want to "perform" on that particular day, and it's rather presumptuous of people to think everyone who plays the piano is just champing at the bit to climb on stage and show off. I know that speaking for myself, having played many tens of thousands of hours, and all week long, week after week, that having a day of rest is really important.

Oh dear, I can't play it!

'Tis about time though, right? ...and I think I had better learn it, 'just in case'!

Current my answer would be "geeze, louise, would you believe I have never learned to play it? .... but would you like to hear Malaquena, Chopin's Military Polonaise (or some such thing to dazzle them)!

And then I'd start up the singing before anyone thought too hard about it!

John....I understand what you are saying, however
have you ever heard "happy birthday" just played and *not* sung? The OP did not state if this was the case or not.(I did read the original post)
Do people (non musicians) know the difference between "accompany" and "solo piano"? I don't think so, unless it is explained to them.

It is a childs birthday party, and as I said earlier....the song takes all of 12 seconds...
this, to me anyway, is not showing off, or performing.

If someone needs a day of rest,(which we all do from time to time), then don't go to the party in the first place. Stay at home and rest.

My opinion, which is worth absolutly nothing in todays financial market.

H1

Tweedpipe would like to know:

For the life of me I can't imagine someone who could be a piano teacher without being competent at the piano in decent performances of piano literature.

Can you be a teacher of anything without the capacity to explain it accurately and speak and do the language of it? Walk the walk and talk the talk?

What comes to mind is: imposter, wannabee, actress/actor, facade.

How could anyone be caught up with someone like that? I don't know, but I know there are many like this "teaching" right this minute.

Without the gift of being able to play piano literature themselves, this person described does not reflect the name "piano teacher".

IMHO,

Betty

As others have pointed out, there's a world of difference between being asked to hammer out Happy Birthday for a singalong and being asked to play a Chopin polonaise for the eager audience. You make your own decision about both, of course, but for me the former is a no-brainer. Of course I'd do it. I have always played by ear as well as by reading, right from the beginning, and for that I thank my first teacher (thanks, Dad!). I'd have no trouble playing the national anthem (yours or mine!) in any key you liked. And it's such a useful skill that I try to make sure my students at least have the tools to start on this.

Having said this, I wouldn't want to judge why the teacher in the OP wouldn't do this. It could range from an inability to do it by ear (and I've seen plenty of advanced pianists who have no clue about this) to a fear of being the centre of attention to many other things. We don't know.

As to performing a piece for people to sit and listen to, well, it all depends on the gathering. I have quite a few things I can trot out from memory if I feel like obliging (though generally I don't build up my memorised repertoire any more as I'm too busy reading and learning new stuff for accompanying) - but if I don't feel like it I won't do it. Say what you like but I can't help thinking of the fee I would have received if the same gathering had booked me to play, and I can't really afford not to think this way. But a gathering of friends - well, I'll play all night if I'm in the mood .

Oh, and as to the question of whether piano teachers should be pianists, well yes.

Should they be performers? Not necessarily.

Should they be able to play intermediate literature at sight? Yes.

Should they be able to play advanced literature without preparation? No. Do concert pianists?

I agree with currawong here. And let me add this: I always try to play for my students the pieces they are learning. My own philosophy is, "if I can't play it, I won't expect the student to play it."

The melody in degrees of scale ... spread in 1/8th-notes

Happy (5..5) birthday (6...5...) to (1...) you (7.......)
Happy (5..5) birthday (6...5...) to (2...) you (1.......)
Happy (5..5) birthday (5...3...) dear (8...) Mummy (7... 6...)
Happy (4.4.) birthday (3...1...) to (2...) you (1.......)

5..5|6...|5...|1...|7.......
5..5|6...|5...|2...|1.......
5..5|5...|3...|8...|7...|6...
4.4.|3...|1...|2...|1.......

I tend to agree, but I also see this side of the issue:

Person - Hello doctor, would you take a look at this rash?

Doctor - Well, not right now, but come into the office next week and I'll have a look.

___


Person - Hello piano teacher, could you play something for us?

Piano Teacher - Well, not right now, but my next concert is, well...um, I don't actually play the piano in public, so I guess you're out of luck.


I think that's the perceptual problem piano teachers have. We trust that lawyers can practice law because they do it every day in full view of the public.

This is the biggest reason teachers in all fields face so much skepticism from the general public. Teaching is one of the only fields in which your ability in the subject is taken for granted. After college, math teachers don't ever have to take a math test again, English teachers don't have to write or read, political science teachers don't have to keep up current events, and music teachers don't have to involve themselves in music making.

This isn't true of doctors, lawyers, construction workers, or bank tellers.

What's also funny and adds to the suspicion is that teachers seem combative and resistant when asked to prove their knowledge or abilities - even at a low level.

How would a piano teacher feel about their child's math teacher if, upon being asked to add two fractions, that teacher said: "I'll add 1/2 and 3/4 for you during my conference hour on Monday. It's not something I feel I should do 'off the clock.'"

Well, we're not discussing playing for students here, and as many have noted, they play regularly in church or other venues. What we're talking about here is playing command performances - and we still don't know the reasons why Tweedpipe's teacher declined to play. He's only speculating that she couldn't.

When was the last time you asked your teacher to add two fractions - in a social setting?

PS Maybe we should add playing "Happy Birthday" to the MTNA & MTAC Certification programs.

That analogy is a little different, though and that's why it's hard to find a direct equivalent anywhere else. Because when does a teacher ever stop being a teacher? What math teacher, when approached by a student outside of class wouldn't take some time to answer a math question "off the clock"? Only a bad one. However, answering a math question is not the same as performing, either.

On the other hand, nothing gets a teacher more attention than when they perform. People will ask if you teach if they hear to play, even though many performers don't make good teachers. The general public sees the two as the same, and so when a teacher declines to play, it is assumed they can't play. They simply don't understand that the two are very different. As a teacher, I can sit there and give an excuse for not playing, but that won't change the public perception.

I was in a similar situation once at a church I was playing for and they asked me to play happy birthday, and I didn't know it. I gave it a shot and stopped halfway through because I hadn't ever thought about it before. I had never been asked to play it before and said just as much, and we laughed together and it was no big deal. However, I was embarrassed because I was taught the "old school" way. I went home and corrected that situation by writing my own arrangement, but now I've learned how to do it by ear.

Not sure whether this is good analogy, after all, the teacher was not asked to give a workshop to the party-goers.

I'm asked at parties pretty often to explain some scientific concepts that come up in the conversation, usually because they are in the news. My economist friends are asked at parties questions such as "so what do YOU think about the economy?" I think it's very natural and I have never felt that someone is trying to judge how much we actually know in our fields. It's a party, people are relaxed and friendly, and they want to have fun and want to talk/do things interesting.

And by the way, I've actually seen the "hello doctor, would you look at this rash" scenario happening at a party, and the doctor took a very quick look.

Just curious, for those of you supporting a policy that teachers should be ready to rip off a stirring rendition at a drop of the hat, which key to you support? E is a bit low for me, but probably works for most people. F or F# is in my main vocal range. I prefer G, but I have to stretch for the top note. Ab really sounds nice, for a group of singers.

Or perhaps we should start off in E, modulate up several times, with classy modulations between each verse, and maybe on minor variation just for chuckles.

Now that's just silly

H1

:D

I prefer F Major. Just about everybody on the planet can sing in that key, and it's really easy to pull off. E Major isn't bad, either, but I'd have to think about it before playing.

"And so much more........"

Oh, I just do it in C, because that's easiest. For off the cuff, that's all they're going to get . E Major is probably the most singable though.

H1 - what's your preferred key?

Any key.....but for the sake of ease....C or F

H1

C seems a very low singing pitch, at least for me. F is what I usually use.

Me too....if it is in C, I will just sing it an octave lower.

H1

For 'Happy Birthday'? I usually do F.

I'm not sure how this turned out to be a Happy Birthday thread, but I'll "play".

The last time I was at a birthday party, people began singing on an F or G. Right around there. So key of Bb or C, or maybe B. Then came the octave jump, and people could not reach the note, so amateur-people-singing-modulation!

D would be a comfortable range for most non-singers, D to D, the range of the song, so key of G would be my choice, on the fly.

I can't even imagine how someone could teach something they could not do, or knew nothing about in terms of subject matter, which is what this is suggesting. I've never heard of such a thing, although certainly lots of teachers (particularly of children) are not necessarily professional pianists nor could they make a living at it. But to not even be able to play the piano and yet teaching it? Don't think it is possible.

Besides, anybody who's ever taken lessons knows that teachers always play something sooner or later, to demonstrate something (how something should sound, fingering, whatever), and I had piano teachers beginning around my 4th-5th year of studying who would play duets with me or two-piano reductions of concertos or whatever. So it would never be a mystery as to whether one could play or not. Besides, why would you take from a teacher without finding out their credentials, which often include performance degress in a music school.

the OP's assumption because someone wouldn't play happy birthday at some event seems off-base to me. There are lots of reasons someone might not want to play that in public at some church event. Who knows, she could have some phobia or just not like being called on to play happy birthday like that, she could have even been sick or didn't like the person who asked her. Just because she didn't play that song on command doesn't make anything "painfully clear" at all.

I tend to agree, Christina. I'd at least reserve my judgment - we just don't know.

And Happy Birthday? Usually F or G, according to whim, but I can recall playing it in E and F# too. I think D is a tad low, and A flat verging on the too high, though when someone in the choir I accompany has a birthday they manage B flat well, and do a respectable off-the-cuff 4-pt harmony .

Not furthering the debate here at all, but I haven't been asked in years to play HB. I used to improvise variations on it. There was one in minor to the "Moonlight Sonata" lh, that was pretty funny.

Wasn't it Denes Agay who arranged all the variations of "Happy Birthday" in one of the "Joy" books?

All you would ever want to know about Happy Birthday!

I teach Happy Birthday at the first lesson as a fingering exercise in Middle C position. Since everyone can sing it, rhythm doesn't come up as a question, and with "ad libitum" anything goes.

Play it as you sing it!

betty

I recently accompanied a violinist who was playing a set of variations on HB (can't recall the composer) and it was a hoot. There was one in the style of the Monti Czardas, and another that morphed into the waltz from Rosenkavalier.

I teach Happy Birthday in the key of C, with I IV and V7 chords. It's great for breaking totally out of a five-finger-position barrier, since it requires an octave leap or stretch and a cross-over…

I'd add more thoughts about teachers who can't play, but this thread seems to be going in another direction.

Gary, since you mentioned it, exactly who are these teachers who cannot play? Just because some teachers, myself included, do not get a big rise out of playing in public (perhaps because of thoughtless comments like, "Oh, you know you missed a note in the 253rd measure!" "Excuse me, but why don't you sit down and show us your skills?") it shouldn't be inferred that they cannot play.

He sure did. It's terrible.

John,

If you re-read this thread, you will see that *I* am one who refuses to play in public.

Let's get that settled first, then I'll be glad to answer your question in full.

But to get started, my high school teacher could not play my music. She assigned things, then sat across the room, on her sofa, to get the "big picture".

Typical comment: "Did you work that out?" Her way of saying something was wrong, but it could be anything.

She was one who "had a reputation". NEVER played even a short passage of one thing she assigned me.

NEVER wrote in a fingering or suggested a different fingering.

NEVER made other than general comments.

Told me I was tense but NEVER showed me how, or what I could do about it.

It was like taking lessons from the Wizard of Oz.

She was lazy, arrogant, so full of herself, you would not believe it.

And she had nothing but horrible, mean, condescending things to say about my grandmother, who I now realize, in spite of whatever she did not know, was a much better teacher.

I had another teacher in college who was also big on theories and who could not back them up with playing. When I finally figured out what was going on and left him, one professor said, "My only question is what took you so long."

My last teacher was superb. I had no idea what a good teacher could do until I began taking lessons from him. Instead of theories (that no one else on the facutlty agreed with), finally I had a player who could back up his suggestions by showing me how they worked.

That's why I'm a fanatic about being able to back up what I say, in a lesson, by being able to demonstrate that it is not just an idea or theory, and for the record, I don't think it is possible to suggest the best fingering solutions for passages that we can't play.

So this does not mean that we would have to play anything we teach, from beginning to end, but we certainly should be able to say, "Here are your options, and this is why I am recommending this fingering as the best solution for your hands in this piece."

Or: "This is what this section would sound like if you made a slight pause here, and brought out the melody more here, or show the counter-melody here."

And so on…

So I'm talking about lessons, not public performance, John. Apparently we are not on the same page…

Back to Happy Birthday. I find it easiest to play it in the key of F, although I could play it in any key, I would just have to think about it a bit more.

The National Anthem is easy... if you can play Happy Birthday, you can play the National Anthem.

Like AZN and Curra (or was it another poster) had said, I think it important to be able to sightread at an intermediate level, but know what it takes and has an understanding of advanced repertoire to teach. Understanding theoretical concepts is important as well.

Currently I have an advanced student playing Cat and Mouse, by Aaron Copland. I've never played this piece, but am teaching it and she is doing quite well with it. Next week I am planning on helping her with expression. Because of this, I am having to practice sections of this piece in order to demonstrate the feeling that needs to be expressed. This is part of my homework as a teacher. What really is interesting, is when you teach a piece you never played before, you really end up learning it yourself,mentally, so it makes it quicker to learn to play.

As far as someone asking me to play at a party, what is the big deal... if I have something prepared I will play, if I feel like it, if I don't I won't. What I usually do is improvise something, which is much more relaxing, that is if I feel like playing. Really I think most people understand if you say "No, I really don't have anything prepared, but thank you for asking, perhaps next time," or something like that. I don't think it is anything to feel angry about, it is just part of being a musician and people like to hear music. It is a little different than having a rash!


Gary,

I am so sorry to hear about your teachers. I do think that definately teachers should be able to demonstrate for their students to some degree. Although, I did have one very excellent teacher who never played, I did get a lot out of her despite the fact.


An added thought: One thing I do hate doing and that is being asked to accompany someone on the spot, unless it is not too hard of an accompaniment.

Can you teachers, accompany without practice?

Gary,

Just to set the record straight, I knew you, among others, felt as I do about preforming, at least command performances, since I do play, but not solo recitals/concerts.

I certainly didn't realize you'd had such a string of bad luck with piano teachers. In fact, your experience lends some credence to those over on the Adult forum who are teaching themselves, as you obviously did the bulk of teaching/learning. Congratulations. No wonder you yourself have become a fine teacher. You've learned from the worst!

Pianobuff, I have no problems accompanying on sight, at least 90% of material. Some stuff is pretty far out, an takes a couple of run throughs. I find myself having to sub for the regular accompanist with little advanced notice.

Where accompanying is concerned, it depends. I've had a few church jobs and can handle pretty much anything a church choir or P&W band would do at sight. I've played the three major oratorios (Messiah, Elijah, Creation) and some of the larger Bach works, so no trouble there, either. I can also do most of the standard high school solo & ensemble literature at sight.

Larger things take some time to learn. Ideally, I'd get a few months, but if necessary, I can learn pretty much anything in 2-3 weeks. Right now I'm getting ready for the local university's concerto competition - playing for a pianist (Barber), a violinist (Tzigane), and a saxophonist (Tomasi)

That being said, I market myself as both a teacher and an accompanist. I just started building my studio here in Iowa, but eventually, I hope to work up to about 20 students and accompany 8-10 recitals a year.

Piano Buff asked: "Can you teachers, accompany without practice?"

Yes, I did for many years in church jobs and in solo/ensemble festival at middle school and high school levels, allstate candidates, vocal and instrumental competitions.

It's a great feeling to be able to step into most music easily and make sense of it and be supportive to a young musician or the church's congregation.

It comes possible from having stepped up at a first time, and continuing to follow the path until it becomes doable to a high level.

If there are lots of practice areas in the music and you don't feel quite ready to perform it with the soloist, you need to have the time to develop the weaker spots, and some good practice habits that will help you meet the deadlines.

I have not participated in professional accompanying, nor college music department, but at the level of school districts and church accompaniments. This alone is quite demanding of one's schedule, as the school things come at certain times of the year, and the church things can be year round with seasonal productions.

Also, being a fast and good page turner is important. That's where I "flub".

Betty

Come on, Ladies & Gents..... we are talking about
"happy birthday" this has no relation to advanced
material....3 chords (primary) 12 seconds....keep in mind, this a party a for a child...

I guess I don't understand what the big deal is about this song. I understand that some people have an aversion to playing in public, but this is not a "command performance" or a "stirring rendition".

What is the problem? (I am trying to understand this, as it doesn't equate with my understanding of this issue) thanks for answers.

H1

As I'm mainly an accompanist now, yes, I do this all the time. Pianobuff, it really is a case of dive in and do it. The next time it's easier, and before you know it you're being handed Rimsky-Korsakov's trombone concerto at a competition and you think "yeah, whatever.." (I didn't even know he'd written one until this cheery and reckless player handed me the music). If it's a concert however, you insist on having the music in plenty of time.

One of the ways I've steeled myself for it is to have a pile of music I'm sightreading through, every day. No matter what's on the next page, I play it, cold. You know, I've come to enjoy that time almost more than anything else I do! It's like a version of skydiving (for those like me who would never contemplate the real thing).

I can sight read an accompaniment, but obviously I like to prepare at least a day beforehand. However, if you do enough of a particular repertoire (vocal pieces, violin, etc.) you tend to see a lot of the same stuff, so it's not so much sightreading.

I think most of us have said it isn't a big deal, we could do it. As for the OP, I'll say again we don't know why the teacher backed off. It was assumed she couldn't actually play the piano at all, which could have been true, but we just don't know, do we.

This is very true, but I've spent an awful lot of time in the last 10 years playing 19th-20thC French flute music and it surprises me that I don't seem to have come to the end of it all yet .

I don't know any pianists who "could play any tune upon command" if you mean just out of their heads like a juke box when you call out something at random that you want to hear. But I would certainly HOPE that most piano teachers are accomplished pianists - that being someone who is a competent musician, has good, advanced piano technique, has a firm command of advanced repertoire (and perhaps some still memorized that they could perform if asked, but the request has to come from their own repertoire, not just off the top of someone's head.....I imagine my own teacher, for instance, is able to play any of his recent concert pieces, but I wouldn't expect him to be able to toss off something I just pulled from out of my hat, although he probably could read through it credibly). Most piano teachers also will have good sight reading skills.

I can play almost anything as long as I know how it goes.

Seriously, there have been several times when people have been shocked that I can't play X but I just hadn't ever heard of it! (not happy birthday of course).

I have often had to accompany without any kind of rehearsal or preparation. I hate doing that. Usually because the soloist does not have a good enough grasp of the music so It is very difficult to follow. You know the ones who will skip beats, speed up, slow down, miss things out etc. Then they swear blind that it was all your fault!

This is exactly what I do.
In the long run, I think my experience has made me a better musician and teacher, because I had to work out so many things on my own. However, there is no doubt I arrived on the univerity level far behind other students in certain areas because of gaps coming from no help.
Do you mean without a single run-through???

It's good to have that cleared up!
I would not recommend anyone to work without a teacher. However, my experience shows how easy it is to be taken in by a "reputation".

Well of course I would warm up a little with the music, if you want to call that a run through, when accompanying.

I will be honest, I unfortunately never had any training when it comes to accompanying, which I feel is such an important ability to develop with our students.

One of my weaknesses, I suppose. I do play second piano parts with my students, which I do not have a problem with and love to do this, but I feel I do not do well with this sort of thing, cold and on the spot.

Guess I should start practicing my sightreading. I could use becoming more confidence at accompanying.

Thanks for the responses.

To me this thread is like someone asking if could you practice medicine if you were not a doctor...

Sorry if I sound discouraged by this thread but I'm a concert pianist/composer, been playing since I was 4, I'm 37 yrs old now. I have a Masters in Music Performance and Composition, and am about to begin my Doctorate. As for Happy Birthday, all my students can play it (most from memory), and as for the National Anthem, I arranged a version which I perform in my city's concert hall ever year...have done for the past 6 years.

I would never dream of teaching an instrument I wasn't exceptionally proficient in. For starters, while doctors nurture the physical body, piano teachers manifest in their teaching, the greatest artform ever, that nurtures the soul...music.

For one to teach music in this capacity, one must deeply understand the nuances, temperment, and potential, of the instrument that they use as a medium...you can touch a piano key 20 different ways and create 20 different sounds/effects/emotions.

In it's essence, the act and art of teaching is a great responsibility and honour...it's developing one's creative soul, enhancing one's physiological abilities, improving one's deeper connection to themselves and others and how this is expressed through piano, it engages the potential of oneself and one's instrument, and above all else...it connects that part of one's soul to their instrument in music..which the world is allowed to enjoy by listening!

Rant over. Thankyou.

Lotuscrystal, how about the art and science of teaching, though. Is this not a separate discipline which some do not master? I imagine that this is something that you have given thought to and developed, and now apply to teaching your students.

Some who teach know how to play, but they don't know how to bring the needed skills to their students. Or they think that the role of being able to play well is to "inspire" a student by playing wonderfully in front of a student. To me, that would be like watching somebody sit in front of a steak dinner and consume it in front of me. I'd rather be handed a knife and fork and part of the steak!

If, on the other hand, you are a concert pianist who has had to hone your craft, and you know the elements that go into good playing, then you might be less lax in stressing the baby steps such as proper posture and whatever other elements go into playing, and would work to ensure that we have these things to support us. You will know which elements are important because you are refining your own music all the time, and working with these things, or seeing them support you. I can be as musical and inspired as I want as a student - if I can't get control over the physical aspects of playing, I will hit walls soon in the quality and expressiveness of my playing.

If I have the choice between a teacher who can play well, but who cannot organize his teaching in an effective manner that will allow me to get the tools, and a teacher who no longer plays well but who knows how to give me those tools, I will choose the latter. If on the other hand a teacher simply knows all the rules and steps, but has never known how to play, then he may be rigid and pedantic, not knowing how to really impart what is important, so maybe the teacher who could play well (if he had time to keep up his skills) does play a role.

My most urgent wishes as a student is to get at the skills as well as the vision of what to do with the music and what can be done with it at the piano in particular. But in the beginning, it is especially the foundation of those skills that interest me. And for that one needs a teacher who knows how to impart it, organize himself, assign things in such a way that I, as a student, have something to work with which I can handle and grow out of. How well he can play in front of me is secondary or third in importance for me. How well he can teach me to play is another matter.

Lotuscystal, you sound like my own teacher. He is a concert pianist and he believes that as a musician it is highly beneficial that he performs and empathizes with his students. He is able to explain concepts and talk about his dealings with certain difficulties in music to students. Through this he can convey his understandings and his approaches to certain areas that he has had to overcome as a performer.

But I don't think that every music educator should be a performer. Some performers are awful communicators. My father is an engineer he's knowledge in mathematics is quite advanced but he confuses me greatly due to this communication barrier.

In saying this, from my personal experience, teachers that do perform are often very enthusiastic in approach. Their eyes light up and they encourage performing to students. They share this joy and I think this is a beautiful thing. I also think that sometimes their advice can be more convincing due to having personal experience to performing.

I think having a teacher as a performer is really the 'luxury' thing though, just because a teacher is a performer doesn't make him or her a good teacher, but when a good teacher is also a performer you end up with an enthused, passionate and empathetic teacher. (not saying that all full time teachers are not enthused and empathetic). Personally me, as a student I see two private instrumental teachers that are performers and both are exceptional.

In the past I have had teachers that aren't performers and just teachers, they in a different way seemed to enjoy what they do but the performing world was another realm for them that they didn't enter. It was just for students.

Its different when you have a teacher who performs ... you can talk about the performing world to them like a fellow musician and their love for performing is immense, this is contagious and the fact that they can relate to how you feel makes the whole experience worthwhile.

Lotuscrystal,
I know of several excellent teachers in my area who are not performers. They have masters degrees and have performed, but they decided that performing was not their thing. They are excellent communicators and pedagogues, and have been teaching for many years. Some of them do get stage fright. Some of them don't improvise or play off the cuff. But they all have students that excel and many that go onto study music in college that may have a career in performance. I do not belittle these teachers simply because they choose not to perform.

What about the difference between the beginner student and the intermediate student? Does this play a role?

Just some examples of how some teachers should perform . . . and "dress when they perform or teach"!

As a student, I would never "miss" a lesson! Ever!

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=XngXWmVQ-B0

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=1R2-BM8xLrE

I don't think so. One must be very knowledgeable to teach beginners to know all the basics and the proper order to teach them in. Fro Intermediate students, one must know how to develop the technique, know the repertoire, and the proper order in which to teach them. They both have nothing to do with the teacher being a performer.

Some might think that being a performer may add some insight to the student on how to perform. However, I had a teacher who was a performer growing up and she didn't help me perform at all. I had terrible stage fright and she knew it, but since she did not, she couldn't understand me. I had to learn to overcome it myself, many years later.

What I was wondering is whether some performing type teachers do not have the temperament for the slow slogging type work that goes into forming these first things. It is different to start bringing out musical elements with a student who already has the tools and can understand some of the concepts, as opposed to getting someone to sit up properly and remember where C is, and remind them the following week where C is, and that they have to sit up properly. But maybe that has to do with temperament and inclination on the part of the teacher. One thing for certain, teachers of beginners deserve our respect and should know how important what they are doing is.

How wonderful that you did learn that! Do you find this helps you help your students with the same aspect?

Yes, and many of them do get nervous to play. I try to counter this with group lessons and discussions among the students so that they can see that this is common. Then we discuss ways of dealing with it.

That is one of several reasons why I am always pressing myself onward to learn new things in music.

By doing so, I am always personally experiencing the struggle to learn...which is no different for me at a higher level than it is for a beginner who is struggling with remembering where is Middle C.

Whenever I feel exasperation coming on when someone does not "get it", I just think about what I am struggling with at the moment, and the exasperation goes away, replaced with empathy.

Unfortunately, this does not help when I become exasperated with students who have lost interest, won't practice, constantly forget to bring their music, etc.

Several posts in this thread suggest that a "good" piano teacher must be able to:

1) sight read music quickly and/or

2) improvise accompaniments over familiar tunes.

That alone does not a good piano teacher make! In my opinion, a good piano teacher is the one who can _teach_. I've attended so many master classes with "world class" pianists, and found them to be horrible teachers. There is a huge difference between those who can perform and those who can teach. Teaching piano requires advanced verbal and analytical skills. Good teachers can convey information to the student via precise wording and correct vocabulary, so that students can understand what is being taught. Good teachers must have strong skills in music theory so they can analyze any piece they're teaching. They must also have strong knowledge of the standard repertoire, and can make direct references to important historical facts and performance practices. Good teachers must also be good observers, so they can pinpoint the technical issues that students have and prescribe a practice regiment that will solve the technical issues.

That is one of several reasons why I am always pressing myself onward to learn new things in music.

By doing so, I am always personally experiencing the struggle to learn...which is no different for me at a higher level than it is for a beginner who is struggling with remembering where is Middle C.

Whenever I feel exasperation coming on when someone does not "get it", I just think about what I am struggling with at the moment, and the exasperation goes away, replaced with empathy.
[/b]
__________________________________

Such a great point! Do we ever stop learning! Really! This piano thing is endless!

Teaching is an action verb, isn't it?

Then there has to be interaction, communication, conceptual thinking, factual information, assessment, motivation, application, improvement.

Teaching needs the learner. The teaching must be accepted by the learner and retrievable into the future.

The learners job is just as difficult as the teaching job is if it's guaranteed to be effective and efficient teaching.

It's a constant challenge to work with a learner because the energy level and connection between the teacher and the learner are as important as the facts and routines being put into place.

Being with an open mind, and an alert interest, the learner and the teacher have to both make something of the opportunity. The time spent in teaching/learning is either successful or wasted, enlightening or lost.

One can never know too much about music it will fill your life with activity if you will pursue it.

What you make of music is your own doing.

One good check is to have a mirror in the studio - when you are there in your respective role, do you have a smile going, and is your posture good? If not, you are shutting down and not responding to the content of the lesson, nor to the uniqueness of the partnership in music with the teacher/with the student.

Waiting for the clock to "Ding!"

It's a totally different experience when you enter in to the music, not just sit there on the bench looking "at" the music.

Music drives me. It can drive you, too.

Betty

Teaching is the art of turning "learning" into an action verb.

My original post was addressing the thread topic in question...I do believe that a piano teacher should be a pianist, with formal training. Whether that pianist chooses to be a performer is entirely up to them and their life path choice. I personally find that the more proficient one is on their instrument, the more they have to share and impart.

I regard the art of teaching music exceptionally high...I currently run workshops for my advanced students to teach them 'how to teach', because it's a precious gift that should not be done poorly. Most of the advanced students are in their mid to late teens, and this works in perfectly for them, as they take on part time jobs. I currently have beginner teachers that are making $30 per hour working in the safety and comfort of their own homes, as opposed to earning $7 an hour working at Macdonalds being treated 'less than' by "managers" who probably haven't finished highschool. I coach them on how to run their small business, I frequently sit in on lessons with their students in order to moderate and give feedback. I help them design curriculums, run 'refresher' workshops, and spend a great deal of my coaching on the 'art' of communication, compassion, empathy, patience, music analysis, music history, and imagination...Whether, they pursue music as a life path is not at all essential. I am equipping them with a skill and proper training of that skill that they can take anywhere and use at any time. When they eventually go to university, most to study non-music degrees, they will be able to teach piano proficiently as part-time, well payed work.

So yes, for any of you who think that a performer cannot be a great teacher, as has been subtley suggested...I consider the craft of music and the craft of teaching on equal par with each other.

With that said, I have studied with some awesome concert pianists in my life that were terrible teachers, and I've studied with some awesome concert pianists that have been amazing teachers...I have chosen to take a page out of the latter teacher's book

Optimal teaching should be inspirational ... most of us are cowed by our limited vision ... but if the ikon makes it all look so easy ... we can snatch a moment when our boosted psyche takes a brief leap into hyper-space to become aware that we CAN do it.

A night out watching Lang Lang should have the same effect ... but wouldn’t it be marvellous if piano teachers added inspiration to their
lessons ... where students would race home to jolly up their piano.

Having a supermodel as a piano teacher would be really inspirational too...but I digress.


I think it is important to be comfortable performing as a teacher. Not because it makes you a better teacher, but because it makes the student perceive that you are a better teacher, and brings an additional level of trust and comfort, giving you a platform of authority to ask students to be great. Perceived value is the cornerstone of marketing.

I could not agree more.

Unfortunately, NOT being able to do these things can cause barriers to rise where the student may have difficulty trusting a teacher's expertise. We as teachers can try to change everyone's mind, or we can spend a couple of years practicing sight and keyboard harmony, and just remove that barrier completely.

-P-

Yes I agree. I feel that you don't need to be a profesionall pianist, however you should be able to play any song they are learning well. This is why I only accept a certain level of students. I do not want to show incompetance in my playing.

Do not attempt what you are not good at...I am horrible at sight reading, but the little duets in the books are easy to play, but I'll tell the student that I need to look at it a few times to get comfortable playing with them. The kids understand this.

I play for all my students, fast songs, songs I know well. I do not play unless I know a new song I can play for them. This always keeps me practicing and on my toes.

One time I tried to play a song I had been practicing, and it was on a keyboard with lighter keys and I kept messing up on the runs...the kids were like how come you keep messing up. I stopped and told them that I was still learning the song. From then on I learned to pick the appropriate songs for the right tools

I feel that you don't need to get a PHD to teach beginners piano. You should be able to play happy birhday, and look through some books to see what level of music you can play up to. Form your students to YOUR skill and you can't go wrong.

.....As long as you are one page ahead of the student, you are teaching?...


This.........does not sit well with me....at all...

H1

Ditto on Highlander One's comment.....this does not sit well with me at all....for shame!

Ditto, ditto, ditto!

Betty Patnude

I didn't mean it in this sense at all. I would not teach if I were only at a beginners level or I was just saying to be honest about your playing level and that if you can only teach beginners then only teach beginners.

Just a thought:

How many football coaches in the NFL or NCAA can throw, catch, or kick a football at anywhere near a competitive level?

When was the last time Bela Karolyi did a summersault?

EXACTLY

A lot of coaches have played at a pro or college level....at one time. Age is what keeps them from competing.

Piano is different.

Just another thought.

H1

I absolutely agree with Kreisler, there are also ice skating coaches, dance teachers (that's a big one), choreograpers, etc...

As for Highlander One... okay, maybe you have a point, but my god, because we choose to teach are we then confined to life of practice and performing for life because we teach??

If that is the case, I QUIT!

I think having more life experiences in other realms of artistic mediums enhances music and the art/craft of teaching. Why limit ones self?

One other thought... lotuscrystal mentioned the comparison of teaching piano and being a doctor and practicing medicine.

Does a doctor practice medicine full time and teach as well, maybe yes some might, but not forever if they do, because, there is life outside of work.

Also, There are doctors out there with degrees in medicine, practicing medicine, who are lousy doctors! There are also some fantastic homeopaths w/o degrees in medicine.

I do think it's important that as a teacher you don't just sit around letting your skill go. It looks professional to always play at recitals--doing something different at each one-- staying in lessons, or taking a class at college. Whatever helps you to keep your skills up.

For me I am always buying new music, either to learn new techniques on something or just to play for fun. I am in college trying to get my degree, but I'm in no rush. I don't need to teach my 5 year old how to invert 7th chords or write 4 part harmony (yet), however it keeps me going and improves my knowledge.

I know a friend of mine in school who is afraid to teach because she doesn't believe in her own skill. I keep telling her that teaching is not about a certificate or a PHD. It's about giving what you know to someone else and also keeping up with yourself.

I also think that we all have our own personal views on teaching and at what point of skill level should we begin teaching. I am absolutely positive that there are some crappy overpriced teachers out there because I had a voice teacher who i didn't learn a THING from. I actually think she didn't even know how to sing...even her singing sounded forced, and she had no idea of how to show me proper technique. I learned from this that I wanted to feel qualified enough before I started teaching. I decided that I could feel comfortable teaching beginners and then after college take on some more advanced students. I feel I will learn enough through school to make me feel more confident in that skill area.

To teach piano should we put ourselves through a performance degree first, and live a lift of performance? or go with what we can give and feel satisfied with ourselves.

but that must be the musician in us to only be better, and sound better.

Its interesting that you mention singers. As a vocal student myself the constant repetitive advice I have been given is to: find a good teacher. (fortunately I have a good teacher) The "good" (voice) teacher is expected to be some sort of performer and to sound somewhat decent when it comes to singing. This seems to be different in the world of piano teachers ... it seems that a piano teacher doesn't need to take part in performing, s/he doesn't have to be an exceptional performer.

I think a piano teacher should just be a pianist as the thread title questions!..I don't see, and never will, how a great piano teacher could not play piano her/himself.

I don't think a piano teacher necessarily needs to be a practicing performer giving concerts etc; unless that teacher is preparing students for performances/concerts. The art of performing piano is a craft in itself.

But you wouldn't seek composition lessons from a teacher who wasn't a composer. Why would anyone seek quality piano lessons from someone who doesn't play piano?...The complacency some have on this board is astounding to me.

It's a COMBINATION of pianistic ability coupled with the gift for teaching that makes a good teacher in my books...and some formal training in either or both fields enhances it even further.

As a student, the FIRST priority for me is that the teacher knows how to teach. He also has to know how to play the piano, which assumes that even if he is not presently in top shape, at some point he could, and could again if he had the time to practice sufficiently. But if that teacher cannot present (teach) the material in a way that I, myself, as a student, can get at it, and also practice it effectively, all his pianistic prowess does me not good whatsoever.

So far in my experience, getting skill at an instrument often consisted of smaller subskills. Seeing the full combined version and trying to emulate that may not serve me - it may be discouraging. Again, the teacher has to be able to teach in such a way that I can access these things as a student. He has to know how to teach so that I as a student can do my job, learn.

However, hearing one's teacher play is important for another reason. We can absorb nuances that we don't understand, and we may be doing it subconsciously. We may also be absorbing some finer physical actions or what is behind an interpretation before we can learn them formally, or instead of. That can only happen through exposure to a teacher's playing.

I just came from practicing a piano study. I have a violin teacher but who can also teach piano. I can hear phrasing and snatches or interpretation which sound as though they came from my teacher, even though it is a different instrument. These are things that I have absorbed from hearing my teacher play over the years.

Also, if you have been struggling with a technical thing even though it was taught, but now you have explored it, if you see your teacher play, there can be lightbulb moments.

What it is NOT: checking out how well your teacher plays to see how good he is, being impressed by his prowess, being "inspired" by virtuosity and trying to grab that virtuosity on your own lock stock and barrel, grab the whole of the playing of a piece and make it your own through pure imitation, get at the piece by hearing it played instead of through understanding and study.

This is what I see as a student.

I refrained from posting in this thread for many reasons, but I guess now I'll throw my two cents in. The teacher doesn't necessarily have to be a pianist per se; she doesn't have to concertize and tour. But she must have deep knowledge of all aspects of technique and artistry, and be able to call upon that knowledge to demonstrate. So in other words, a teacher needs to have the ability to give a concert given the requisite practice. She just doesn't need to give the concert.

I've been giving this some thought since coming back from the WPPC. I had the chance to play on some of the world's best pianos there, and truth to tell, anyone would sound good playing them. All actions were responsive and light-feeling but not light. Nuances appeared where I intended them to appear. Color and texture were as I desired. I've never had a high opinion of my own playing but after listening to myself on a Fazioli and a Shigeru Kawai I started thinking seriously about putting together a recital program. The act of playing was joyous.

Maybe all we need is a change in our paradigms to see that we can give recitals. If only some of my students could play on those pianos. They'd never be the same.

I sense what you're saying is that if you teach, you must then be prepared to perform at any Tommi, Donna, or Harriet's request is just a wee bit unreasonable.

Minaku's point about instruments is interesting. Perhaps that's a reason why teachers should have the highest quality instrument possible.

Over the years, I've asked all my students what they want for Christmas. None of them have said a "New piano," so I tell them that if they did, they'd probably get it. I wasn't smart enough as a child to ask for a better piano, so I got stuck practicing for years on a clunker.

I can't imagine that a piano teacher can teach without also being a capable musician, a good communicator, a resource to the students needs, knowledgable in theory and technique and music history. Not to mention being interested in their students, enthusiastic and motivated.

Isn't the piano teacher a role model?

So choose carefully because you might some day sound like, look like, play like your teacher and that's either going to be a wonderful or a horrible experience.

Betty

The title of this thread is probably misleading:
This would make more sense:

Are most piano teachers good[/b] pianists themselves?

That leaves room for many questions, still, but at least, but surely we can agree that a piano teacher needs to be able to be able to play the piano!
I don't think you have to be a "practicing performer" to teach students how to do this IF you have performed earlier in your life, but I certainly believe you must have done it at some time. How else can you know the kind of pressures and obstacles that a performer faces?
I have met people who thought were kind, thoughtful teachers who just didn't know enough about playing the piano to teach it well, and I've met pianists who are obviously very fine players who simply don't teach well. So yes, I think you need both the ability to play and to teach.

This is ridiculous. I feel you are not a very good teacher unless you do prepare your students for perfomances/concerts. You do not need to be concertizing yourself in order to do this. Of course, you do need experience in performing at some time in you life in order to prepare students to perform. But you do not need to be a performer to teach.

THAT is ridiculous.

Excuse me.

You have just said that I am not a good teacher. I do NOT prepare students for performances/concerts if they tell me they are uninterested in this. I have adults students who play for their own enjoyment only.

I also have some kids who like to play for their families and friends but who want no part in playing in any pressure situation.

I have politely kept my mouth shut up to know, but I'm sick to death of the ridiculous idea that anyone who doesn't enjoy playing in front of others has been badly taught, is not serious, or has a bad teacher.

On the other hand, if you are teaching someone whose goal is to play in high-pressure auditions or for exams or for competitions, you darn well better have personal experience doing that yourself or you can NOT understand what such situations require.

Be a bit more careful before throwing the word "ridiculous" around if you don't want it thrown back at you the same way.

WOW ... aggressiveness! I would have to agree with you Gary, some people do just take lessons to play for themselves. There is no 'wrong' in that.

I think sometimes people do deprive themselves of performing without trying it, or having a bad memory that stuck to them as children hence not ever performing due to that frightful memory. I find performing to be a joyous experience but there are others I know that loathe it.

But this is just my personal opinion, I just think that a teacher should encourage performing to students not force ...

Whoa! Okay I'm up for a little late night brawl.

What I meant is, that personally, I feel a good teacher needs to have experienced performing some time in their life if they are going to be able to give their students the option of performing, which, I think they definately should, that is, give them the option and encouragement to perform.

I think it is *ridiculous* to assume otherwise!

Sorry to interrupt the brawl.
An interesting thread that I’ve only just sat down to read.
A few disjointed observations from several pages back. I don’t know of a doctor who wouldn’t be happy to give passing advice at a social gathering, to refuse seems more impolite than to seek medical advice in the first place.
In my medical training I’ve come across various professors of surgery etc who between have them lent credence to the well known adage “if you can’t do it teach it”.

Unrelated to medicine, like the original poster my wife had a piano teacher who used to rap her across the knuckles with a ruler. Unconfirmed reports state that the same teacher ended up in prison on some paedophile related charge– which seems to ring true with me at least.

Later in the thread Santa Fe Player said
“I don't know any pianists who "could play any tune upon command" if you mean just out of their heads like a juke box when you call out something at random that you want to hear.”

One of my colleagues at work can do precisely that, and I have no doubt that my piano teacher can do it too.
My teachers standard rendition of Happy Birthday To you starts with the opening bars of Mozarts K283 in G as an introduction and launches into the HBTY half way down the first page – it sounds great.

Unless it was someone like Lang Lang who’d suffered a stroke or Jools Holland rendered too intoxicated, I wouldn’t be happy to take lessons from a teacher who who was incapable of banging out HBTY at a social gathering for reasons of either psychology or ability.

I hope some of that was of interest to the debate.

That's exactly what I meant by my post pianobuff...It's seems we all agree so what's the arguing for?

Perhaps my wording was misconstrued, but my point was that a piano teacher does not have to be a performer or have had performance experience, unless they are in the market for preparing students to perform. In this situation, I would see performing experience essential, as well as updated performance practice knowledge and technique. Seems we all agree on this. I'm a concert pianist and I can accept our agreed point. Two thirds of my students perform (that's out of 60 students) and the rest don't. I'm happy to teach all of them. I certainly don't think that every student will have a future as a performing pianist, thus force them into performing. I would think that to be a slightly elitist and unrealisic view of teaching piano. At the end of the day, I'm here to teach music, not create mini me's at their undesired expense. I personally don't think it correct that you insist on your students performing, but if that's how you run your successful business, all the power to you.

Furthermore, pianobuff, it's not appropriate to make value judgements on other teachers. ie "you mustn't be a very good teacher".

This forum, as far as I see is to support each other, not attack another because they disagree with you or you have misunderstood them.

If you want to know if a teacher is a "good" teacher, just look at the piano students who are being produced and declare if there is musicianship being taught and content in performance, whether that "performance" be for an audience or for one's self.

I think a "good" teacher also needs to have a mutually invested relationship with the student, as music is not learned and enjoyed in a vacuum.

A "good" teacher and their student communicates over relevant goals and plans for their partnership in learning. They trust and respect each other, cooperate and collaborate.

We as teachers can get our well rounded performances through being accompanists, church musicians, and play for social entertainment. The criteria being playing for the public, and being paid professionally.

Those who have more ambitious concert careers and renown most likely are interested in grooming pianists like themselves with college degrees and career paths.

I would think that a "good" teacher has a busy studio with not problem in being "found" by students. This teacher is probably good at marketing and communicating what his or her studio has to offer.

I differ with John, in that, I think any music that is being taught, needs to be playable by the teacher so that the teacher knows the difficulty factor and has appropriate lesson plans to support the piece. That doesn't mean a memorized performance of the piece, but a musical representation of the composer's intention.

There are many teachers who do not like to play a piece for the student, but I would be one to play it for the purpose of enjoying it and dreaming about the day it will be finished and part of their repertoire.

I think of that as a taster - as in "Bet" you can't eat just one bite!" Palates and taste buds being what they are!

Betty

I'd like to add that a "good" teacher should be flexible enough to allow students to change their goals. Some of my students currently on the testing track are probably better served if they come off that track. Sometimes these goals are articulated by the parents, not the students.

Betty, if I said this, it was a typo on my part and certainly isn't my policy. I can and do play 100% of assigned repertoire. I didn't mean to mislead you or anyone on this. I firmly believe that teachers should be able to play, and play very well, in fact, all repertoire they assign.

Wombat66, to clarify if I haven't already made my opinion clear, that what I do not like, because it's just plain RUDE[/b] and THOUGHTLESS[/b], is out of the blue requests to perform, on command, in a social setting. There are many reasons - I am socializing, and that means if liquor is being served, I've had some. And that means that my reflexes aren't necessarily working up to par. And from time to time, the arthritis in my right hand is not conducive to good playing, and this is quite frankly, nobody's damn business, except my wife's and mine. If you think this is an out in left field opinion, read Rubinstein's autobiography. He hated these requests with a passion, and he was arguably one of the best pianists of all time.

Ideally--yes! But if the student is playing advanced repertoire, the teacher might not be able to play it on the spot. I can't imagine college professors playing everything they are teaching, especially if their students are working on obscure, non-standard repertoire.

Right. I've almost never had a teacher play a piece for me before teaching it to me at the advanced level. Every once in a while it would happen. I've had a teacher most recently who wouldn't teach me any piece she didn't already know. Well, the problem is, there was a lot I wanted to learn that she didn't know, and there's just so much advanced rep out there, how can you know most of it? I did have teachers recommend recordings to listen to, however.

AZN & Morodiene, I don't assign repertoire I cannot play. Often, I have to brush up on it before assigning it. We're not talking college or university here, but high school students playing lower advanced repertoire. Conservatory settings may be different, but the teachers I know who teach at this level can play most anything and/or read it at sight.

John,

I was surprised by what I thought you said, and I'm glad you responded to correct that!

I know you have high school students in study with you and I would imagine that you have a very large classical repertoire yourself - so I thought there would be some sharing demonstrations going on between you and the student on the pieces you teach.

I couldn't imagine that you would teach something you didn't know well. I know you are an experienced teacher with high standards and a carefully managed piano studio.

And, I understand the "no to requests" at social gatherings, too. I think my problem would be that not that many would be interested in hearing what I would like to play, and the requests for "Can you play 'Porcupine Rag'?", would drive me nuts.

I did spend some time in playing in public and the noise factor and movements around the perimeter test your ability to cope beyond measure. That's where I learned to carry on a conversation while playing a piano and keeping it going musically, something I was amazed to learn I can do. I hated every minute of that situation, but what could you do but smile anyway and behave like Oscar Levant?

Oscar Levant I am not!

I'm Betty.

Furthermore, pianobuff, it's not appropriate to make value judgements on other teachers. ie "you mustn't be a very good teacher".
[/QB][/QUOTE]

I never said it like this. You are misconstruing again.

I do have opinions, and I feel that if you are going to teach piano, you do need some performance experience in your lifetime to be able to give those that wish to perform training in this area. But you do not to have to perform and teach simultaneously to be a good teacher.

I'm glad we agree on this.

We do have some common ground - I insinuated a lack of manners asking any professional work related favours in a social setting. But there are degrees of everything.
I think most people would be taken aback if they invited the vicar around for supper, and on asking him to say grace before the meal, he had a hissing fit, complaining that it was his night off, he had already said lots of prayers that day and anyway his throat was sore.
If asked professional advice at a party I always try and oblige (afterall I am actually interested in and enjoy my job).
The uncomfortable truth for you is that, like it or not, any piano teacher who is unable or unwilling to play happy birthday at a social gathering will be considered incompetent.
Under such circumstances the label of ineptitude is entirely justified.

Is it? Some musicians specialize in playing only with scores in front of them. Others may choose not to play (work) while at leisure, and others may have arthritis and similar conditions. This says nothing about that teacher's ability to teach. I do not plan on inheriting my teacher's hands or mind, but to use my own. And if a teacher has a signature piece that he knows students love to hear, that's nice, and pleasant, but it's not why I'm taking lessons.

It is important that teacher be able to teach a student how to play, and possess what is required to make that happen.

Wombat, we are working very hard in the USA to teach our children not to make judgments when you cannot possibly know the circumstances. None of us, not the original poster, nor you, know the personal circumstances of the teacher who declined to play. Nor do we know her level of competence. It doesn't matter whether the request was for twinkle twinkle little star, or Chopin's 3rd Ballade. Or anything in between.

At the recent conference I attended, one of the presenters, very famous pianist and teacher, was recovering from a stroke, and her left hand didn't function. However, some thoughtless twit will surely ask her to play, thus putting her in a spotlight and unless she divulges her medical history, will be thought incompetent.

If you want your piano teacher to rip off some selection while at a party, I suggest you ask them privately in advance, and if they say no, drop it.

Human relations, it seems, still have a long ways to progress.

By the way, the Vicar example isn't a good analogy. The Vicar is your spiritual Shepherd whether in Church or at your home, where as the piano teacher is not on call 24/7 to do your bidding.

By the way, I've edited this to correct a spelling error.

Good grief.

This is how the whole thing started, first message in thread:

How we got into all this other stuff is beyond me.

It seems to me that the answer is pretty simple: if you can't play the piano, you can't teach someone else how to play the piano.

Meanwhile, "Tweedpipe" never came back to answer any questions. We have NO idea why the teacher mentioned did not want to play (as John mentioned).

Talk about topic drift…

Gary, I agree! I know of no competent piano teachers here who cannot actually play themselves!

Correct me if I'm wrong. The famous piano teacher, Rossina Lehvine(sp?), did she perform while being a teacher? I don't think so. I think it would be rude to ask her to play Happy Birthday at a dinner party.
Can you imagine? :rolleyes:

PB that reminds me of a funny story that Dr. Martha Baker-Jordan tells. If you ever have a chance to attend one of her work shops, I'm sure you'll here it. It's the one about the party she attend a few years back, celebrating someone's birthday, and there was a room full, maybe 25 classical pianists, all of immense talent and accomplishment, but no one wanted to play happy birthday. I suspect it was in dread of hitting just one wrong note with so many critical ears. Anyway, she ended up belting it out, in a nice jazz version.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosina_Lh%C3%A9vinne

It seems the lady could play quite well.

I realize this horse is so dead it is possibly the same one that Gen Custer rode to his last stand. However apart from my family, my job and playing the piano, my favourite pastime is being right, and next to that, pointing out to others that they are wrong.
I beg the boards forgiveness while I give Custers mount a couple more lashes and indulge in one my favourite pursuits.
Mr Brook, we appear to agree on many things, among them that it is not unreasonable to expect the vicar to say grace in a social setting, and that it is discourteous to unexpectedly request professional favours at a social gathering.
Turning attention to matters upon which we disagree, my analogy of the vicar is in fact an excellent one. In the same way that it is reasonable to assume that the vicar loves God, I think it is reasonable to assume the piano teacher loves their keyboard. If this is not the case, the teacher could at least have had the common sense to choose a better paid occupation to dislike.
Assuming the teacher does actually love their instrument, it is bad mannered to refuse to play Happy Birthday in a social setting. To my mind a refusal to perform such a trivial request is more impolite than to have made the request in the first place.
The exception being that the teacher is not capable of performing the request.
I have just played Happy Birthday on the piano using my nose. Any piano teacher who is rendered so incapacitated that they are unable to play it should be in hospital awaiting transfer to the Intensive Care Unit.
Whilst you may be able to conjure up rare examples of the 0.001% of working piano teachers who are in such poor physical health that they are unable to play a tune as simple as Happy Birthday yet at the same time physically fit enough to attend a social gathering, these rare examples are to all intents and purposes irrelevant.
The fact remains that for the 99.99% of teachers who are not in such a poor physical state -which would be obvious to all party attendees anyway - refusal to play Happy Birthday can mean one of two things – either for reasons of ability or psychology the piano teacher can’t actually play the piano or else they are a stubborn bore who should never have been invited to the party in the first place.
Do I take it that you fall into the latter category?

As you're such a fun loving guy, why don't you play Happy Birthday at your next party, using your nose. I'm certain your guests will greatly appreciate it, and you can make fun of all the teachers who refuse to play Happy Birthday with their noses, thus adding to the general hilarity of the occasion.

Did you know that 99% of statistics are made up on the fly? :rolleyes:

In other words, you enjoy being an irritating jerk. Congratulations. You've done an excellent job.

Are we having fun yet?

Interesting Gary, Thanks!

I didn't know anything about her myself. I thought it was quite interesting!

Sorry teacher. Thanks for that little rap across the knuckles with your ruler.
I'll try harder with my next post.

Cute.

Comanche, the horse Custer rode at The Last Stand, survived the battle and became a celebrity. Upon his natural death, he was stuffed and exhibited around the country.

I think on issues like this one there is no "right" or "wrong"--just a difference in opinion. What's socially acceptable to me is not socially acceptable to you, and vice versa.

Can we please be civil to each other?

Ahh, Mme. Lhevinne...she's my teacher's teacher, so I guess I'm her great-grand "student." She spent some years teaching at USC, and her legacy continues there. That's why there are lots of great-grand "students" of hers where I live.

Doesn't sound like it, but this should lighten things up some!

Here's a job that one of you teachers needs to apply for. It requires receiving lots of money, a sense of humour, and world travel.

So who's up to take this gentleman's place and entertain the world!

But, you will have to play Happy Birthday!

I think this takes a genius to be honest with you!

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=NZaLo0JfT6E