Teaching at a young age

[eddie92099]

Without naming any names, it concerns me that many people younger than myself already have many students of their own, when often they don't seem to know enough (judging by what they sometimes write in their posts) to be given the responsibility of a child's musical development. Any thoughts?
Ed

[Hmoll]

Any thoughts?
Ed

You bet. They range from: The students get what they  pay for. to : What are the parents of these students thinking?

If it's worth the time, effort,and money to study piano, it's worth having a competent, expericned, mature teacher.

[chopiabin]

I agree. How can someone whose musical education is not complete teach a child whose musical education is just beginning?

[bernhard]

I don’t think it really matters.

1.      The really good teachers are few. They would not have the time to teach a large number of students anyway. So it is important that there are lots of inexperienced teachers (how else would they get experience?) and piano correspondence courses and internet courses – you name it. Students who go for it are not really worth the attention of a good teacher. Therefore such courses have the merit of attracting useless students that otherwise would be crowding over the good teachers, and perhaps taking the place of worthwhile students.

2.      But there is a deeper reason why bad teachers are not that important. Have you ever heard the saying “when the student is ready the teacher appears”? People take this phrase superficially. If we examine it more deeply, we may ask: When is a student ready? And the answer is that you are never ready. There are always more levels of readiness beyond the ones you are in at any given moment. So imagine you are a complete beginner. Are you ready to be taught by, say, Marc Andre Hamelin? (assuming he would be willing to take a student). Surely not. So you end up with the nice old lady that lives up the street as your teacher. Or the 15 year old who can play (badly) some Chopin etude. Does it matter how good s/he is? No, because for your level, you will learn something from him/her. Once you have learned everything you can from him/her (even if it is wrong and misguided), a new teacher will appear. S/he may then add or correct the knowledge you have previously acquired. Again, you must try to learn everything from the new teacher, since once you do, a new one will appear.  Until you get to have lessons from, say, Hamelin. So it does not matter how bad is your teacher, if as a student you have the correct attitude (which is: I will learn everything I can from my teacher. I will follow his/her instructions – not blindly but to test if they apply to me personally – I will research and discuss issues with my teacher – I will stretch my teachers capacity to teach me to the maximum). It is the lack of this correct attitude, rather than the lack of a good teacher that will wreck a student’s musical (or any other) education.

3.      Conversely, it does not matter how good the teacher is. If the student is bad, there is very little a teacher can do for him/her. Music (or any other subject for that matter) cannot be simply taught (irrespective or how well or how badly). It must also be learnt. And although it is the job of the teacher to teach, it is the job of the student to learn. If a student is determined not to learn, it does not matter who teaches him/her. So I am quite happy that there are a few bad teachers out there so I can refer my bad students to them and they can spend some time talking to each other.

4.      But the rule “When the student is ready the teacher appears” also has it converse, which is “the level of the student corresponds to the level of the teacher”. So if as a teacher you have an unusual number of nightmarish students, chances are that you must better yourself before you can attract better students. And I am not talking about credentials and qualifications here. I am talking about skills.  So maybe there are a number of people out there who know little and have no teaching ability. However, if they are sincere in their desire to teach they will learn by teaching the worse students around – and there is no better training. And no lasting damamge will be done, since these wre bad students anyway. ON the other hand, if they are not sincere and are posing as teachers for the ego trip or for the money (ha ha that’s a good one! ) they will get stuck at that particular level and after a while they will get another job.

So does it concern me? Not at all. For a long time now I have been of the opinion that one does not fight evil, for to fight it is to give it energy. Instead one makes energetic progress on the way of good.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[schnabels_grandson]

You took the words right out of my mouth, Bernhard!  

[bernhard]

[Hmoll]

Bernhard,

What you say makes sense. However pragmatically from a student's or parent of a students perspective, you should want the best most experienced teacher that is available.

Also, I don't agree that it doesn't matter how good a teacher is. A bad teacher can cause a lot of damage ranging from promoting bad habits that take a lot longer to unlearn if the student is fortunate enough to eventually get a competent teacher, to not recognizing problems that can lead to injury, to not being able to communicate the beauty and joy of music, etc.

I'm not against young people getting experience teaching, but I always hear of kids with a few lessons under their belt, taking on piano students. That tells me that the parents of the students don't take the musical education of their kids seriously enough, and are looking for a cheap alternative. A better way to obtain teaching experience is to study piano pedagogy, and work with experienced teachers as an assistant/apprentice. Rushing into teaching when you don't know anything, and using a trial and error method doesn't help students, and doesn't help the confidence and reputation of young teachers.

[deirpg]

What do you consider enough experience to teach?  A grade 9, a grade 10, an ARCT, a degree, a masters?

I had a teacher who had all of the practical qualifications but absolutely NO personal skills and no ability to relate to children.  Does the practical experience make her a better teacher than someone who has their grade 8 but is able to explain and relate to kids?  No way.  For my daughter, I will be taking her to somebody who can instill a love of music, not necessarily someone who has a masters or an ARCT for that matter.

But I am curious to see what everybody figures is an appropriate level to teach.

Deirdre

[eddie92099]

One of my best teachers could not play well herself. Also, it is often the case that the greatest pianists aren't great teachers too - they happen to do the correct things by instinct and have trouble translating how the correct method can be learnt to mere mortals. What does concern me is the number of people who teach without the required experience or knowledge of music or technique. They could seriously damage a student who otherwise might turn out to be very good,
Ed  

[bernhard]

Hmoll said:

What you say makes sense. However pragmatically from a student's or parent of a students perspective, you should want the best most experienced teacher that is available.

Certainly. I couldn’t agree more. And if you want the best and most experienced teacher available you will not get lessons from some 15-16 year old with no experience. You will investigate the options. You will ask around, you will want to meet the teacher, talk to him. If (like me) he has explanatory materials explaining his/her methods you will want to read and perhaps discuss issues with him/her before commiting to a course of lessons. You will want references and you will want to know how do his/her students fare. If you are after lessons for your child you might want to sit on the first few lessons. So far so good. If you follow such steps you will get a good teacher and it does not matter how many bad teachers are out there.

However over many many years I have had the enlightening experience of meeting people who are not after a good teacher. They are after:

1.      A cheap teacher. Even better, a free one.

2.      A teacher that wants payment per lesson, so that they can go on holidays and cancel lessons and pay less at the end of the month.

3.      They heard about the many benefits of music lessons, and do not really care for music, but want the secondary benefits – I call this the shopping mall mentality. If my neighbour got one, I must have one too.

4.      They do not want the children around (very common in the UK). They already dump the kids at school from 8:00 am to 3:30 pm. The kids already go to after school club, art class, Spanish club and karate kids club. A piano lesson will cover that last slot on Friday, and then the kids can go straight to bed after dinner. They don’t want a piano teacher, they want an overqualified child minder.

5.      They want 30 minutes lessons because that’s what they are prepared to afford (otherwise, how can they go to Tenerife every half-term for holidays, and afford the Jaguar and the Porsche?).

6.      They want to use some crap keyboard, since buying a piano is not on their plans. If they do have a piano is some monstrosity their neighbour was going to throw away and let them have it for free if they would just remove it. Don’t even think of suggesting that the piano should be tuned. They cannot afford it, and if one or two keys are missing is that so bad?

7.      They want you to go to their house, since bringing the little Mozart to you is surely inconvenient and you should see that.

8.      And do they really need to buy all that music? Can’t you pleeease let them borrow it so that they can photocopy it?

9.      They want their little darlings to progress without any practice, since the piano noise interferes with the TV soap they all watch. And anyway, they are just beginners, beginners do not need to practise do they? It is only concert pianists who practise. Everyone knows that. And besides they cannot practise because they have homework, sport activities, art classes, Spanish club, you name it.

These days it is very rare that such a parent/student will actually contact me. But when they do, boy, they are in for a surprise.

So a student like that more than deserves a bad teacher. Any good teacher would be completely nuts to take on this kind of student. Would you?

Also, I don't agree that it doesn't matter how good a teacher is.

Actually I didn't say that it doesn't matter how good a teacher is. Of course it matters how good a teacher is. It is of the utmost importance. What I said was that it does not matter how good a teacher is if the student has a bad attitude. This is especially true of teenagers.

Children are more malleable and because I like challenges, I will take on a child with a bad attitude to see if I can change his/her attitudes (I reckon I have a 50% success rate).

But at one point (I should have known better) I took on an adult student (42) who was really after therapy, not piano lessons. He wanted someone to talk to, not a piano teacher. In such a case I stand by my assertion that it does not matter how good a teacher is.

A bad teacher can cause a lot of damage ranging from promoting bad habits that take a lot longer to unlearn if the student is fortunate enough to eventually get a competent teacher, to not recognizing problems that can lead to injury, to not being able to communicate the beauty and joy of music, etc.

No, s/he cannot.

The reason is simple. If the student is after a good teacher and did all his/her homework (interviews, references, discussed the methodology with the teacher, met other students, perhaps attended a recital of the teacher’s students) s/he will not get a bad teacher that can cause a lot of damage. And even if s/he does, this should become quite obvious after, say, six months. Six months of even the worst teacher in the world are unlikely to cause permanent damage.

On the other hand, if the student (or parent) is of the nightmarish kind described above, then most likely he will have 30 minutes lessons once a week 2 or 3 weeks of the month (s/he needs a holiday break!), No lessons at all during the summer holidays. The student will not practise anything. And even if s/he does it will be a minimum and not related to anything the teacher may have said. Therefore, no permanent damage will be done.

A better way to obtain teaching experience is to study piano pedagogy, and work with experienced teachers as an assistant/apprentice. Rushing into teaching when you don't know anything, and using a trial and error method doesn't help students, and doesn't help the confidence and reputation of young teachers.

I couldn’t agree more (especially working as an assistant/apprentice of a good teacher). However, my agreement and your suggestion are not going to stop the cowboys from doing their deed, and it will not stop students from going to them.

So should I get concerned?(the original question) I don’t think so.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[bernhard]

Deirdre:

What do you consider enough experience to teach?  A grade 9, a grade 10, an ARCT, a degree, a masters?

Qualifications and credentials are of no importance. The only important consideration (as you suggested yourself) is skill.

What qualifications did Leschetizky had? None. What qualifications Claudio Arrau have? None. What qualifications did Chopin have ? None. What qualifications did Liszt have? None. However they had the skill. How do we know that? By the results they produced. So do you want to know how good a teacher is? Look at his/her students.

At the same time, no one has – ever – enough experience. Every good teacher worth his salt is continually learning.

I had a teacher who had all of the practical qualifications but absolutely NO personal skills and no ability to relate to children.  Does the practical experience make her a better teacher than someone who has their grade 8 but is able to explain and relate to kids?  No way.

You are absolutely right! But I would add that someone with no personal skills and no ability to relate to children has no experience either. At least not the way I understand experience.

For my daughter, I will be taking her to somebody who can instill a love of music, not necessarily someone who has a masters or an ARCT for that matter.

Are you contemplating weekly 30 minute lessons? If so I wouldn’t count on the teacher (no matter how large her experience) to be able to instill a love of music.

Let us not forget that although playing the piano is great fun, learning to play the piano is not. I believe it is the other way around. You do not take music lessons in order to develop a love of music. You take music lessons because you already love music and want to get more involved. Really instillation of the love of music should come from family and family environment. People like Claudio Arrau did not get to be great pianists by having weekly 30 minute lessons. Arrau actually lived with his teacher! I am not saying that you should aim for your daughter to be a concert pianist, but that you may have too high expectations from a teacher under the usual format of lessons. (By the way I don’t teach weekly 30 minute lessons for that very reason).

But I am curious to see what everybody figures is an appropriate level to teach.

Me too!

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[bernhard]

Ed:

One of my best teachers could not play well herself.

Why should she? Her expertise was at teaching, not at performing. And she must have been really good! Just look at you!

We do not expect the coach of an Olympic gymnast to be able to do all the feats of his/her pupils. We do expect him/her to have the pupil perform well though. So the test of a piano teacher is no how well can s/he play, but how well cah his/her students play.

And how good a teacher can a performer be? Do you really think s/he will have little Johnny’s grade 3 exam foremost in his mind? Or will s/he be completely focused on his/her practise for that next concert? A performer teacher can only help a student after a certain level. You would not go for an expert in English literature specialising in Shakespeare to teach your child to read, would you? For that different skills are necessary.

Also, it is often the case that the greatest pianists aren't great teachers too - they happen to do the correct things by instinct and have trouble translating how the correct method can be learnt to mere mortals.

Exactly!

What does concern me is the number of people who teach without the required experience or knowledge of music or technique. They could seriously damage a student who otherwise might turn out to be very good,

I will not be loosing any sleep over it. See why in my answer to Hmoll a few posts above.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[pianomexicocity]

I'm 22 years old, and just got a bachelor's degree in piano performance from the must important music school in Mexico where i live.
I started teaching when I was 19 after taking some piano pedagogy classes and currently I only have 2 students a 13 year old girl who never practices and a lady in her 40ties who practices but only takes it as a hobby, I hope to gain experience with them so late rI can be a great teacher for better students but you have to start somewhere and also you need to earn money!!

[eddie92099]

I think Eddie is 17

Indubitably,
Ed