rote vs. note advice

[maryruth]

I need some advice about a student.

I have a 10-year-old student who started with me back in December 2004.  She's a pretty good pianist and I suspect she may have perfect pitch (not sure exactly).  I'm having troubles with the sightreading....her sight reading is a slow frustrating chore for her.  It's not that she doesn't understand the concept of it, she lacks the patience for it. 

She sight reads at a primer level, but in the past two lessons (this week and last week) I've taught her by rote Kabalevsky Op 39 No. 13 "Waltz".  So, in 2-20 minute sessions she's got the thing completely memorized hands together and up to speed. 

I guess my problem lies in the fact I feel so guilty for having taught it by rote as I am a firm believer in sight-reading....but I hate to hold someone back from playing.  She'll likely have the thing memorized forever.....I try and supplement with fun "easy" stuff to sightread, but she doesn't really like to do it.  I make her sight-read for 10 minutes or so at each lesson.

Would you approach it this way, too?

I've only been teaching a year, so any advice would be much appreciated.

[arensky]

Different students have different abilities. I think this young lady is frustrated with sightreading because she can play things back in 20 minutes, why does she have to read, which is probably difficult for her; does she like to read books, or is that a chore too? Good at math? Find out what else she likes in learning, and what she doesn't like. I'l bet you she's good at math and sports, and doesn't like reading or English. I've seen it before, kids who don't like ANY kind of reading usually respond well to rote methods.

And if she plays well, let her do it her way TO A POINT. The music is the sound, not the notes on the paper. If the final product can be acheived in 40 minutes, send her to me! 

Seriously, it sounds like she's a natural; don't mess that up by imposing a dictatorial system that is alien to her; I've found that with kids that age a little give and take will earn their respect, and is they respect you they'll do what you want them to. So if you teach her Anna Magdalena and Kabalevsky and Schumann by rote, the deal is she has to work on the sight reading, OR; play a bunch of pieces for her, and ask her to pick the two she likes best; teach her one by imitation, but ONLY if she agrees to learn the other one at home and with you by reading it!    this way she gets what she wants AND you fulfill your mission as a teacher. The deal, diplomacy; sounds like she's a keeper! If you can negotiate this two way street, you'll both be happy. 

Rote vs. note; you know, I think the two can be used together, all of one or the other is bad, because we should be able to read; we don't have to ((Errol Garner) but ideally it makes things easier, as long as it doesn't become the end in itself, because that's not music. Nor are "rotebots" musicians either, because they don't know what they are doing. By the way, I have a student like this, the same age, and I find that the above solution is working. She reads pretty well now, although not as well as my other girls I've had since they were all 7. Keep us posted on how this goes, this is a good and pertinent topic!

Take care,  arensky

[maryruth]

Yes, I'm doing the I'll teach you this by rote if you learn this by reading....So, I have this book with easy one hand at a time versions of classical pieces she loves.   So, last week we inch our way through a very simple 5-finger rendition of Pachabel Canon.  It also has a teacher part, which usually really motivates her as she loves to play with the teacher parts...

This week she came back with her own version of Pachabel.  She'd transposed it to C and added her own chordal/arpeggios in the right hand to supplement the left.  I was actually quite impressed (I'm easy to impress with ear playing as I don't play by ear at all...) She'd heard me play this song in a more advanced form and was tryinig to replicate that.....of course, she'll never go back to the easy version now that she's concocted her own more satisfying version...Hmmmmm? 

[Bob]

Do a little of both.

The kids has success with rote teaching.  It's just one way to teach.  I've heard how 'evil' rote teaching is so I avoided it.  Then I got frustrate with a few students and tried it and got some results.  So now I don't know what to think.  It can be useful.

The student here sounds like she's doing some composition or improvisation which isn't necessarily bad.  That's pretty neglected in the traditional format.

I imagine you can still teach theory with what she's doing.  That's good.

Maybe she can write out some of what she does.  Work "backwards" that way toward reading music.

Sounds like she's got more technique than reading ability too.

Maybe there's a piece of music that's on her technical level, but also one that she can't figure out by ear.  You don't teach it to her at all.  You let her figure it out, and you explain that she needs to be able to actually read music if she ever wants to play a piece like that on her own.  Maybe split this hard piece into bit size readable pieces.

[lagin]

I have a student similar to this as well.  Next week I'm going to start her on a piece in which the left hand moves down by octaves hitting four Gs, then four Cs, then four.......
What I am planning to do is have her work out with me what those notes are first, and play them for me.  Once she figures that out, I'll point out to her that it really is just the four Gs on a row, and show her like this........  That way she's being stretched to work and identify what the notes are and show me on the keyboard what they are, and then if needed, I will demonstrate for her what she just showed me, but at tempo.  It combines a bit of by note, with by rote.  Teaching her to work on her sightreading, but also ending with the satisfaction of having it down even if I need to show her a bit. 

Sometimes a student will ask me to play it for them first.  If I know they are just going to watch my hands a mirror it, I will usually say, "Let's play it together instead."  Then I play up an octave, but I watch them to make sure they aren't looking at my hands but at the music.  If they're watching me to lead with my hand first, I'll just wait for them to lead instead.

One other thing.  Maybe try to stear clear of pieces she "knows."  If she knows it, she doesn't have to count and can figure it out by ear.  Let her "discover" a new piece instead, and use the more famous pieces as supplementary material.  It sounds like you've got a nice balance going, though. Perhaps just make sure that the piece she does have to sight read on her own is not one she already knows by ear, or will know if you play if for her.  Let it be a puzzle.  A game, for HER to unscramble.

One other though, again .  I don't know how everyone else teaches, but personally I have my students sightreading two levels below their own.  For example, I do not expect a grade three to sit down and sightread their piece that I've just given them.  I expect them to work it out slowly, and piece it together over time.  But if I were to put a grade one piece in front of a grade three, I would want them to be able to sightread that, but not at speed.  Just at a steady pace, however slow, as long as they keep the beat.  I guess I'm wondering at your definition of "sightreading."  If she's just in the primer, I'd want her to be able to sightread one line/hand at a time provided there weren't any jumps.  At that level, sightreading steps and skips, one hand at a time is what I'd personally expect.  Also, I wouldn't demonstrate their pieces for them at that level.  The only reason I usually demonstrate a whole piece at that level is if I think they would be encouraged to practice if they heard what they will sound like when they're done.  Once they move into more advanced pieces then I would play them or if I didn't know them, send a tape home so they can pick their pieces out of ones I've selected for them.

That's alot of info, so take what you like and dismiss the rest!  It doesn't all relate exactly to what you've asked about, but it bunny trails around a bit.   

[bernhard]

Good advice from everyone above.

I agree with everything Arensky said. The source of the problem is that now she is so good at doing it by ear/rote, that trying to do it by sight-reading becomes very frustrating.

You could try to give her a piece that would be impossible to learn by rote – the complexity would require if not sight-reading, at least “reading” the music. Any counterpoint will do (Bach’ s 2 voice inventions and sinfonias, for instance – which although technically manageable are musically very complex).

But I think you could try a completely different approach. Do not “force” her to read music. Instead, teach her sight-reading completely outside the context of pieces. This is done in two different ways (only at the beginning – eventually both ways meet)

Way no. 1: Follow the score while listening to music (again, counterpoint music is ideal for that, since you can “see” the several melodic lines on the score whole you “hear” their blending). Make a game of it: where is the music on the score right now?

Way no. 2: Spend five minutes (no more) every lessons working on the fundamentals of sight reading in a completely abstract way, the is do not relate what she is learning to her actual playing. The aim is to master a specific skill, rather than to read music. By making the aim immediate, she will experience success, which is a great motivator. Observe when she will start joining the dots and making the connections. A very good map to this territory is Howard Richmann’s “Sight-reading secrets”, but there are others as well.

So for instance, in one lesson you must spend five minutes drilling the names of the lines and spaces (EGBDF – FACE – GBDFA – ACEG) in both clefs. The point is that the reason you are doing it is simply to learn it, not for sight-reading. This will make a lot of difference because the aim is immediate and easy to achieve. Keep to it week after week, five minutes (or less) every lesson, until she gets it. Then add another skill: being able to play with eyes closed. And so on and so forth. You get the idea.

At no point try to apply this knowledge to the actual learning of any piece: let her figure it out by herself. You may be surprised how quickly she will progress if you follow both ways in parallel consistently every lesson.

Meanwhile, devote the rest of the lesson to what she likes doing. (And teach by rote without feeling guilty about it).

I hope this helps.

Best wishes,
Bernhard

[maryruth]

Well, I sent this child home last week with a copy of Bach's Prelude in C as she wanted to learn it.  I told her I would allow her to write the note names in, but she had to figure them all out on her own.  This week she had the first half of the song learned---hopefully she learned some note locations out of the exercise...

I made up a book of sightreading exercises (over 100 one liners) and I've made a graph in the front with each students name so I can mark off the boxes--this student loves these exercises as she wants to be the first student to "cross the finish line". Great!