Lenka,The links shared are public - pretty much free of charge. Therefore, they are not going to be the best things available - things that are free rarely are!
I would love to buy equipment and software that did a better job - but I find it difficult enough, as a single mother, to pay the loan for my piano and raise my family on my income. I know I am not the only person who has a life like this!
Do you not agree that it is better for teachers to find other supportive and creative means, even if they are not the best, to supplement learning? If they cannot afford something else, should they not use the resources they can find? Do you not think that the fact that these links have been found point to a group of teachers who are willing to give up their personal time and effort in order to find resources for the sake of their students?
Can you please explain the theory behind the idea that the human mind is unprepared for music notation? I would be very interested. As a teacher with a Masters in Literacy, I would have assumed that reading music was very similar to reading and writing other languages, combined with maths. I have been invited to write a PhD on this topic (literacy deveopment), and am interested in associations with music - since I have chosen now to teach piano rather than English. It would be interesting to look at the theory and research you have with music and compare the findings with literacy. (If there is a lot of info, you are welcome to write personally - and any effort would not be under-appreciated.)
Also, with the understanding that probably many of us cannot afford the system you have developed,
maybe you could share instead the ideas that you have found helpful in teaching - not where the old system fails, but the things that could be explored in our own teaching. I would like to learn any "intelligent and productive ways" to teach - but the principles are the useful things, as there is no way I could consider purchasing anything. I simply cannot afford anything.
Hi,I read your links. It looks like the system you have developed is very much like the way someone else here discussed their method of note teaching a few months ago (Except you have integrated it into computer software, whereas she used more manual means) - with the colours and lines on the side and everything, from what I could make of it. (There was a discussion on methods of teaching reading several months ago. Have you read the threads? They were excellent.)
I know a number of us use some very interesting and creative methods in this area - I was quite inspired by the earlier discussion. I use very kinaesthetic methods and a lot of colour when I teach - especially the beginners, but all levels I use colour and patterns. 90% of my students (of 5 years +) are past the basic reading stage within 2 months.
I can see that the principles of your system could be supportive. Do you ever have problems with students making transitions from the vertical to horizontal lines or the thick lines to normal thin lines?
Is there more to your system beyond the early note recognition? How do you approach intermediate learners?
I didn't find very much about the relationship between learning language and learning music. There was a paragraph or two, but do you have any research or anything like that?
Did you mean that your software is free? (BTW, I really do mean that financially I am stretched - I have invested what I can into my studio and all I need to do to be professional and efficient, with quality instruments and music scores, but we don't even have bedroom furniture! I am investing in the present in the hope that the not too distant future will be better - but I am still getting on my feet and have to be very selective.)
I start by having them memorize what I call the "musical phone number" (and before this, they have already learned all the names of the white notes and how to find each of them on the piano). I have them repeat after me each letter in sequence until they have said aloud the entire 7 letters :G -- GGB -- GBGBD -- GBDGBD F -- GBD FGBD FA -- GBD FA GBD FAC -- GBD FACGBD FACE -- GBD FACEThe next aim is to say this from memory (it can be done almost immediately after they learn it, for most people).The next aim is to be able to say this backwards.And the final aim is to be able to say this backwards or forwards, starting from anywhere within the sequence and arriving back to where one started, all from memory. For example, I may have them start at "A" and tell them to go backwards : AFDBGEC
This single musical phone number will eventually allow them to read any note on the entire Grand Staff, both lines and spaces alike, and even ledger lines ! And I do start with the entire Grand Staff as thee staff. I do not separate out into "treble clef" and "bass clef" (I also do not teach the clefs as "treble" and "bass" but as "G clef" and "F clef").
Then I pull out a big foam board with a Grand Staff on it and starting at the bottom of the staff, we name all of the lines up to the top (with a red line drawn in for middle C -- In this photo, it's difficult to see the "middle c" red line in the middle of the staff, but it's there.) :Then I bring out another big foam board with a staff drawn on it, and I set that on the back of the piano keys. This shows them how the staff relates to the piano :
Then we play some games aimed at engraining the tools to find the names of the notes (and it REALLY works !). One of the favorites is one that I have just started with them. I made a spinner that has all of the letters of the musical alphabet on it, and bought a magnet/white board on which I drew a permanent grand staff : They spin and whichever letter it lands on, we find that letter in line notes (we start with line notes and when those are mastered, we go to space notes) and then we place a magnet on that line (I have found that using these magnets works much better than having the student draw the notes in because it is much more precise and takes way less time -- especially for the little ones who are just learning how to do any of this stuff (including writing and drawing)).
If you're talking about teaching music like a language -- building up the musical vocabulary, making sure they can fluently read and hear things -- I'm all for that. I think Lenka has a software program that fills in the gap between keyboard layout and music notation, along with solfege ear training. That's my impression at least. I haven't read through all the posts.
The thing that I found out which was disappointing is that a lot of student don't want to learn that comprehensively. I would like to teach them more theory and solfege so they can read things more like a language. But if they want the traditional 30 minute lesson a week and want to play pieces for enjoyment or for achievement, they may not be interested in spending the amount of effort and time it takes to study music more comprehensively, like a language.
I think most people are taking piano lessons for enjoyment of some type and aren't really willing to invest the time it takes to learn music like that. Later on as a student progresses, they might though. And then there are students that will do the full learning, but I just don't see a lot of them.
For me at least, I've found I'm stuck teaching toward the traditional way because it what people will pay lessons for.
They want that (somewhat) immediate reward of being able to play a piece of music, not necessarily understanding, reading, or hearing everything they play.
I can still touch on those areas and then see if the student is the type that wants to know more in those areas. I do the theory with students, but if I do too much and they aren't playing enough pieces or making enough progress, then it's a problem.
We also start memorizing "landmark notes" -- G2, F3, G4, F5. They know the bottom line of the Grand Staff because that's how the "musical phone number" begins, and then they know the "F" line up from that because the "F clef" reminds us with its two dots where that line is. They know the "G" line in the treble clef area because the "G clef" reminds us, and they learn the top line "F" as it follows a recognizable pattern of GFGF. I also have them learn "middle c" as a landmark note at this stage :It's amazing to me how quickly they start to find their way around the staff at this point. And they love it, too ! .
Then, we continue integrating how this all fits into relating the staff to the piano. For this I play another game with them where I hide flashcards in various places around the room. We start with flashcards that only have line notes on them, and I leave the second big foam board up on the piano while we play this game. They have to find the cards one at a time (and we often incorporate a game of "hot and cold" into the finding process (they LOVE this)), and first they name the note, but then they find exactly where it is on the piano using the big foam board as a reference.
On top of this, I will give them sheets to take home that ask them to name the line notes on the staff. I used to do this without any supplement games, and it took WAY longer for them to learn what they are doing. The games cut everything down into a fraction of the time. I also start to have them read music that focuses on line notes and we go through the music together, highlighting the "landmark notes" in specific colors.
My primary goal is to get the indivual finding their way around the staff and piano, and seeing how the two relate, as fast and as efficiently as possible, no matter what age they are.
I can see a lot of sense in this approach at this stage - plenty to think about. Thanks for taking the time to really explain the concepts, Lenka.
I think there are still different types of learners, though - this system would be very suited to visual-intuitive learners in particular - and these are also the ones who struggle with the verbal, 'logical' teaching methods (such as those used in normal schools) and they are often more creative / expressive (so when they have some security in music they are often very good).
Strange as it seems, even to me as a teacher, there are actually students (like Bob said), who want to learn / expect to learn from method books and traditional drills. For example, I have a 10 year old who started last February. She is now on level 5 of the Faber Adventure Series. I have tried to supplement her learning with other peices and acitivities - but she has explicitly told me not to do it! She knows her own mind and her current goal is to finish the books. She has said that then she will allow me to find her other music to play! (She even came to me having, by herself, invented mneumonics for the notes - an approach I avoid.)
Also, I have found that nearly all my students don't care what music they are playing - they don't have any more interest in particular pieces than in studies and method pieces, again much to my surprise - they are satisfied that they are playing anything. I only have two students who are different: both have a lot of music at home - popular and classical - and want to play things they know - one of these plays popular and classical, the other just wanted to learn Fur Elise (which we have done).
It has frequently surprised me that students love to play lesson pieces - but that is my learnt bias, as I don't see many of them as 'music' but as exercises and learning tools. I often want to teach other things and the students don't focus on them - they want the method books, although not as much as the ten year old insists. I guess it gives them a sense of progress because they can 'measure' they have gone so far. They also have no better idea what Bach's Minuets are (for example) than they have of 'The Clockwork Mouse' from the lesson book - only I Know!
But I also have a couple of learners who I am trying to find ways around their stalled learning - they can read notes and intervals but struggle to coordinate this with playing the keys. I can see that Lenka's system might support these students pass this stage.
Still, whether or not we like it as teachers, apparently there is a perception about how lessons should operate - maybe because many parents, who have children start lessons, learnt when they were children using old methods (it is sad how many parents say they wanted to learn but didn't like it and they are amazed that their kids are enjoying lessons and practicing of their own motivation - perhaps there is a lot that has changed, but I wouldn't dream of repetitious and punishing approaches, so maybe it's that).
I guess that it is a different 'market' of students who would learn using software - perhaps a market not bound by preconceptions or one that is actually looking for a different approach. So, if a teacher used software as a primary teaching tool, the prospective students would need to be aware - prepared with their own comparative set-up so students can practice - and the software would have to be the centre of any advertising by the teacher.
But, there must be manual means of using these principles, and others, to improve students' grasp of concepts - especially for visual and kinaesthetic learners. There must be a way to incoporate better understandings of learning processes into the curriculum without contradicting the students' expectations or requiring specific layout of materials by students. This is why I was so impressed and inspired by m1469's work.
Topic: Some thoughts after following your links of 'Favorite Websites' topic 