Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Questions from a parent -- Conservatory related

Perhaps you have an aversion to memorization because you yourself have had issues with it. As a teacher, that can sometimes be a perfectly legitimate reason to not do something, but sometimes it can be a detriment to your students. I don't know which is the case, so I'll leave that up to you to decide.

I often will have beginners come back to me with a song memorized, if not all of them. I don't demand it, however. During the course of learning a piece, if it is well-practiced, it will naturally be memorized, even after a week (lengthy advanced pieces in exception here). That is because once they are out of the sight reading phase of learning a piece, they begin memorizing. The music becomes less and less of a necessity to play in the natural course of things.

Memorization is useful in many practice ways: being able to play for family and friends when books aren't around; really solidifying a piece in one's mind (I still have pieces from my childhood memorized!); truly gaining an understanding of the form of the piece, which is usually necessary to memorize; allows the pianist the ability to focus on nuances rather than simply getting the notes right.

I'm sure there are more, but children have an amazing capacity to memorize, and without knowing exactly what the teacher is asking of the student, what pieces the student is currently playing, etc. we can't know for sure if he is being unreasonable in his demands. Considering the fact that the OP stated their daughter was very interested in a career in music, I think this may not be a bad thing for her to be doing.

double post.

My daughter's teacher asks her student to memorize Chopin Ballades No. 1 in one week.

And your point is? Are you complaining about your daughter's teacher? If that is too much for her, then perhaps you should find another one.

.

I give "air hugs" to the little girls. I'm dead serious.

If I'm really excited, I'll say: "I'm not allowed to hug, but that was really great, and I'm really pround of you.

Then I hug myself and say: "Air hug!"

They get it. They understand very well the issue of "hugging and touching".

I do think being enthusiastic, warm, supportive, etc. is important.

But there is another side to this. If I'm not a bit "hard" sometimes, then my students believe they deserve praise for poor work or none at all, and I think that teaches the wrong message.

Just a couple thoughts…

What???

Yes. No complaint. Just to let BusyMom know what some top conservatory teachers expect of their top students.

Consider yourself fortunate to have found a great teacher--I see a lot of students who even after a couple of years cannot read well. Most of the better teachers around here put most of their students in exams at least occasionally because it gives them an objective standard to measure their playing, receiving the certificates in the mail is really motivating for many students, and the exams test a variety of important musical skills.

Meri

This all sounds very strange to me. If I understand correctly those who wish their children to study seriously will send them to a conservatory and those who want them to play for fun go to a community teacher. Is that right?

In Tamworth there is no conservatory. The nearest conservatoire is in the city of Birmingham. There is a junior school but you have to audition. They will only take gifted children who have already achieved high standards. The staff there would not dream of taking on a 7 year old from scratch. The only choice for parents to make is which private tutor to employ.

I wonder why this is different in the U.S.? Why would anybody want to make the choice between playing purely for pleasure and playing seriously? It sounds like if you want your kids to be any good then you must go to a conservatory. If you choose not to then they will never achieve much. Am I getting this wrong?

Chris, I think unintentionally, you're reading something into this thread that's not here.

What most are saying is that students sent to a conservatory are attending because the parents wish a serious music education. The converse, that parents would send students to a conservatory, just to dabble, simply is out of the question. And the conservatories would give the student the boot quickly.

Perhaps we should use the term, preparatory conservatories, as technically, conservatories generally are for students who have completed secondary school.

However, there are many private studios which teach at the same level or even better as many preparatory conservatories. And as you point out, many communities do not have conservatories.

Thanks John but I am still confused. Are there conservatories which will take young children at the very start of their music education? If so, why would any parent choose to go anywhere else? It seems that if you are a private teacher in a town with a preparatory conservatory then it will be difficult to attract good students.

One of my favorite authors on education wrote a fascinating article on the subject of "fun."

The gist of it was that we tend to describe the emotions of children on a linear scale. On the low end of the scale is "Boring" and on the high end of the scale is "Fun."

This represents the lives on children very poorly. It is very possible for fun loving kids to be serious, and for serious children to be silly.

Something we tend to forget is that there is room for many things in the lives of children. There is no point in being happy 100% of the time or having fun 100% of the time. It's not even human. However, it is important for the lives of children to have time for fun, time for work, time for play, time to be silly, and time to be serious. Ways to deal with boredom and being alone, and ways to enjoy the good times and make new friends.

I subscribe to a philosophy that says the point of teaching someone to play the piano is to train them to play the piano. In the case of our original poster, I'd say everything seems fine. I would only find a new teacher if your daughter if the lessons are unproductive or uncomfortable/unpredictable. This doesn't seem to be the case, so I'd stay with it, it'll be well worth it in the end. If at some point she starts dreading each lesson or stops growing musically, then it's time to make a change.

Tough or demanding is not, in and of itself, a good reason to quit, and I'll tell you why.

Whenever I meet someone new and they ask me what I do, I tell them I'm a piano teacher. What follows is a fictitious response that I have never heard:

"Oh my, I remember piano lessons. They were awful. My parents made me practice constantly, and all I have to show for it is that I can play a few Chopin waltzes and a couple sonatas by Mozart and Beethoven."


This, however, I've heard about a few hundred times:

"Ah...I used to take lessons when I was a kid. I wish I would've practiced more, it sure would be nice to be able to still play. My parents should've been tougher with me."

In this area, there is also no "conservatory school" to go to. There are teachers in this area who claim to be superior because of their degrees and/or schools they got them from.

I'm in the process of fixing damage done by one such teacher, who has a doctorate from Juliard. I won't say more about him, because it would appear like character assassination.

When I start children, I have no idea what they will do years later. Many will decide after one year that they really don't like playing piano, and they will quit. This will happen no matter what I do. Partially it has to do with parents who allow their kids to start anything they want and quit any time they want. We all know what kind of problems those kids will have later.

(I'm not saying it's always a mistake to play for one year, then quit. I've done that with a few things. But it's done way too much, for reasons that are usually not the best.)

Then I have kids who enjoy playing the piano and like me. They have no huge drive to make music the center part of their lives, but some do play well (in my opinion) and I know for a fact some have continued to play, because a few have been in contact with me recently, from around the country—emails.

Finally, there are the rare suprises. These are the few students who start out with the idea of trying it, perhaps as one of many things they might try, but they make a connection, love it, and are dedicated.

Regardless, I believe that sooner or later that if playing seriously is not *also* playing for pleasure, playing will stop.

Therefore these establishments must take on 7 year olds with no previous experience right?

I don't wish to offend Meta but it seems like making that decision could cost a child any chance of ever succeeding as a musician. The local piano teacher is for those who only want to play for fun and not take thigs too seriously. We all know that in reality this means they will not practice much and progress will be slow. The chances of getting into that conservatory in two years time would be slim.

I started at a conservatory at the age of eight (1972!). My instructors were all rigorous; that's what conservatory instruction is about. It's like college, not good-time, feel-good, everyone-gets-a-trophy stuff. Even as a child I appreciated this and knew I was very fortunate to be getting such excellent instruction.

My first teacher was a true conservatory instructor. She was stern, but she was one of few teachers that would take children at that time. After she retired, I got stuck with a series of grad students for a couple of years.

Finally, my dad made a brilliant move. I had several public recitals a year, along with students of other teachers. My father watched and listened very carefully to all the students and made note of which ones sounded the most proficient and polished. He began to notice that all of them studied with the same instructor. My parents immediately looked into getting me signed up with him and eventually did. He was my instructor for the rest of my consevatory years (sixteen total) and proved to be fantastic.

And you think piano's bad...you should see how conservatory ballet instructors treat their girls!

Don
Kansas City

Unfortunately, "good-time, feel-good, everyone-gets-a-trophy stuff" applies to most colleges these days as well.

Upon starting a job at a mid-sized university here in the US (that boasts a music school with 400 undergraduate and over 100 graduate majors), a friend of mine encountered this quote:

"You'll be so proud of me - I actually got 3 hours of practice in."

"Every day?"

"Just yesterday. Are you really going to require us to practice every day?"

I guess I can't be offended if we are coming from totally different angles. The kid is 7, I don't have any pretense that he is going to Juliard or MIT or Harvard. The conservatory here does accept brand new players. Your point is exactly why I don't send them there. The culture there (teachers AND parents) is that the 7 yr olds going in are going there so they can be trained to be professional pianists.

I live in a Boston burb with a highly educated populace. I suspect that there are multiple high-level piano teachers that can do conservatory level teaching without the cultural issues (as I see them). I hope we found one.

I'm a physicist. I suspect that the majority on the board would cringe at the notion of me taking my son to a strict physics program at 7yrs old and having him "practice" his advanced physics with the intention of turning him into a career physicist. What about all the other career options out there? NO, HE'LL BE A PHYSICIST.

I think it is better to let them experience lots of things at a somewhat high level and then futher that with deeper training if they find they like it.

That said, my son spends lots of time in my lab and office and is enjoying *tinkering* with spare parts I have around. Should I stop this silly experimenting and make him work on something publication worthy? After all, he has to publish if he wants to be a successful physicist. It's absurd for physics and equally absurd for music but more socially acceptable, esp in affluent communities and on piano forums.

Finally, I don't think doing things without a career goal equals everyone gets a ribbon. How about if you don't care whether you get a ribbon and just want to learn to play the piano? If you only knew how little I cared whether my kid gets the trophy, gets into the conservatory, or gets into Berklee, Juliard, MIT or Harvard. My true goal is to make him so well rounded and well adjusted and educated that he can choose whatever he wants to do and wherever he wants to go. So far I see that he is on this path.

Maybe some of you should think about this approach before you try to pigeonhole your 7yr into being a career musician. What if he/she would have been a great mathematician or *gasp*salesperson.

Meta

:b:

Several of my private students' parents are engineers. I'll be sure to tell them this analogy.

But back on topic of "preparatory conservatories." If parents do send their children to such a place, isn't it their intention that their children will grow up to be concert pianists? If so, that's their choice! It's like Olympics gymnastics. In some countries (China, for example) the talents are discovered young and rigorous training also starts young.

To follow your physics example--I think I've seen on TV news examples of children (geniuses) working in the labs. They are, of course, very rare.

I'm not sure "everyone gets a trophy" is quite the correct analogy, because certainly not everybody gets a diploma. In fact, lots of people drop out of college, or switch majors, or change schools, etc. etc. etc.

In my experience, going to a large university, students are treated like numbers. We show up to class. We take a test. We get a grade. We never hear from the professor again. We are merely black dots on a scantron.

I remember trying to get professors to write me recommendation letters for grad school. I was lucky that Music Department is small enough so I have regular contact with my professors. I felt bad for my classmates (English Majors, especially), most of whom had different teachers for all of their undergrad courses.

My college experience left me with the impression that most professors just don't care about the students. Teaching is just something they have to do in between doing research and writing books. And if students want to get stuff done, they really have to go out of their way to get it done. Certainly not "everyone gets a trophy." We are left to fend for ourselves from a world of apathy and antipathy.