Teaching qualifications

[pianowelsh]

This is something that I have pondered for a while now. There are SO many and lets be honest most of us have no clue what they mean..practically. Ok I know GRSM is a graduate of the royal schools of music BUT what did they do to get it?? and what is the difference between an LRAM(PfT) and a LRAM PfP except the obvious teaching and performance bias. Also what is and ARCM is it the same level as and LRAM or GRSM or on a different stratosphere??  Its very difficult when looking for a teacher to know wht is what and which qualifications are comparable.  example is a GRSM equivalent to a graudating rectial of an undergrad course or was it a qualification you took as a graduate of the Royal schools??   BMus MMus, DMus/phd is much more straightforward.   

You see some teachers with huge strings of letters but with qualifications which double up and some who are extremely well qualified who are modest and only put their most reccent qualifications up etc.

Im sure many of you are diploma holders and may have even graduated in the days before BMus degrees were around.. perhaps you could enlighten us as to the real meaning of some of these acronyms so as to make the mine field a little less bewildering.

[john v.d.brook]

pianowelsh, you raise a question I, too, have pondered for years.  What is it about the ability to play an instrument that qualifies you to teach that skill?  Some of the worse teachers in history have been concert artists!

In the USA, there are only two certifications (that I'm aware of) which reflect teaching ability as measured through student success.  They are the certification by the American College of Musicians which is awarded to teachers based on student accomplishment at annual Piano Guild Auditions, and the Well Prepared Pianist Institute which certifies teachers based on evaluation of student recitals.  All of the other certifications are statements of teacher learning. 

Teacher learning is a necessary prerequisite, but subject knowledge doesn't translate into effective teaching, IMHO.

[Bob]

I think a lot of colleges are selling their degrees nowadays.  It's a business.  Doesn't matter if you are qualified, or if their degree is worth anything, but they will train you a little as long as you pay.

Not that that answers the questions, but I see a lot of schools and degrees and wonder if they are worthwhile or if I should get one of those degrees/certificates.

[pianowelsh]

My point with diplomas such as GRSM, ARCM, ALCM, FRAM, LRAM etc is that most are no longer available. LRAM is still an exam you can take as part of the BMus course at the RAM but the others are long since gone. Teachers display these lists of qualifications after their names But noone these days knows what they mean.. I have know of someone who has LTCL, LRSM(PfP) LLCM etc and they are all basically the same qualification in performance. They even played the same pieces for some of them. so it look slike they are vastly qualified - if you dont know what is really required for them.

I was always taught it was good manners that if you had BMus MMus Phd, and ABRSm, LRSM, FTCL etc that you should write it thus:

___________ Phd, FTCL(PfP)

as it is assumed the rest will be take in progress to these.

Fair enough if you did an MA in art history and an MMus in Muisc and you took an FTCL in teacheing and and FRSM in performing..write

____________ MA (Ahist), MMus, FTCL(PfT), FRSM(PfP)

But there is a legitimate questin when advertising for music lessons whether tyhe MAwould in fact be 'relevant ' or whether most would consider it superfluous.

I would like to see a table produced of the diplomas explaining what is the fundamental requirement and level of the qualification so that at least we would know did this person do the equivelant of an undergraduae or a postgraduate and does that mean they studied performance to a professional level or did they major in another branch etc.

[pianowelsh]

OK - everyones gone chicken on me!!

Try this then: Which qualifications do you hold and what did you have to do ie period of study and ie major recital, major thesis, teaching internship etc??? in order to get it?

Dont be shy

[stevehopwood]

OK - everyones gone chicken on me!!

Try this then: Which qualifications do you hold and what did you have to do ie period of study and ie major recital, major thesis, teaching internship etc??? in order to get it?

Dont be shy

OK, to answer your basic question. My primary qualification is: GRNCM (Graduate of the Royal Northern College of Music). This is the UK university degree equivalent qualification that the RNCM was able to award back in my day (1974). Modern students are awarded a BMus.

The RNCM is one of the UK's leading music colleges; winning a place there means that a student is one of the best of the young generation of musicians. Students of the RNCM are gifted and brilliant young performers. I was one of these, all those years ago.

None of this is important when it comes to earning a living. I have lived in areas where complete no hopers have 'taught' far more pupils than me because they have been established for years before I arrived.

This always changed as my expertise began to be recognised. What has always made the difference to me in professional terms has been making contact with fellow musicians who came to recognise my ability.

 

[pianowelsh]

ie contacts speak louder than qualifications . My experience too. I also graduated from a UK college with a degree and have a good knowledge of what was taught in colleges in the passed 30 years in the UK - through contacts. But the prliferation of letters is extremely confusing when a parent is trying to obtain lessons at the appropriate level. I always think EPTA and ISM should put a list of terms in glossary format for holders of the directory.

[john v.d.brook]

Hi pianowelsh - I've been watching this thread to see what others might offer.

Your underlying thesis (correct me if I'm wrong here) seems to be that credentials relate some how to your teaching skills. However, I must say that IMHO, a degree in performance, regardless of level, does not qualify you to teach.  Nor does a degree in music history, composition, or any other related field.  This is not to say that you don't need these skills and knowledge, but that having them doesn't make you an effective teacher.

Teaching has it's own set of skills and one must study pedagogy if one wants to systematically learn these skills.  Or learn them by trail and error.  Some of us come by teaching skills naturally, most of us have to work at it.

Real world example.  Today, we had a city wide piano playing event.  I entered 14 students.  They placed 1st, 2nd, and 3rd.  Of the other 14 teachers with students performing, ALL have more formal music education than I, with a long list of degrees after their names.

So, as a parent, do you want to have your child study with the teacher who is the most knowledgeable, the teacher who is the best pianist, or the teacher whose students are consistently the most musical and advanced?

[pianowelsh]

My dispute is not that diplomas are necessary.  I dont believe they are paricularly. Thats not to say they are of no value either. BUT what I want to know is how do they indicate the level of study and depth of experience of a teacher... Ie I wouldnt really think about sending a postgraduate level of student to a teacher who had one diploma to say they could play a 30 min programme with the music on the dest to an examiner in a closed environment.  Id be looking for someone who has probably at least a postgrad in music and maybe a specialist teaching diploma etc. What i have issues with is the huge long string of qualifications that noone knows the meaning of. eg is an ARCM an undergraduate level or a postgraduate level?? Did they attend a college to do that or did they sit it in their spare time whilst working for walmart? Did they undertakemajor research projects to gain the exam or shadow a worldclass teacher? or did they give a hugely succesfull recital..or are we talking about someone who used to be able to play the moonlight sonata a couple of bach preludes and fugues and a chopin Berceuse 40 years ago, who observed a handfull of lessons in a local school and wrote a short essay on a musical topic. The populice just dont know what to expect and yet the teachers with the string of qualifications make the higher lesson fess.  - is this justified and in which cases. Clearly if someone has a Bachelors level in perf from a major college and a specialist postgrad in a teaching option then they are intitled to charge more than someone with no qualifications but  someone with say dipLCM(perf) - also looks impressive after someones name but it is only just higher than a grade 8 which is college entry. 

[stevehopwood]

Teaching has it's own set of skills and one must study pedagogy if one wants to systematically learn these skills.  Or learn them by trail and error.  Some of us come by teaching skills naturally, most of us have to work at it.

That is what makes teachers so special. They cannot teach what they cannot do, or at least were able to do once. A really good teacher has: an understanding of high playing standards; an intimate understanding of repertoire right across the range they teach - in my case beginner to professional; the ability to communicate clearly and effectively; motivational skills; humour, empathy and warmth.

No wonder good teachers are so few and far between. 

Steve 

[mattgreenecomposer]

Interesting topic...  here in the States, basically anyone can teach. so there is an overflow of bad teachers.  I don't think a degree really means anything (although I have 3) it doesn't qualify me  as a good teacher.  Lord kows I had about 10 professors in college that were horrible!  I think it comes down to years experience and matching personalities with the student.  See what the teachers students play like. referrals etc.
mattgreenecomposer.com

[msadrienne]

In the USA, there are only two certifications (that I'm aware of) which reflect teaching ability as measured through student success.  They are the certification by the American College of Musicians which is awarded to teachers based on student accomplishment at annual Piano Guild Auditions, and the Well Prepared Pianist Institute which certifies teachers based on evaluation of student recitals.  All of the other certifications are statements of teacher learning.

Hello! I am new here and this is my first post. Great topic -- something I and some of my teacher friends talk about all the time. We certainly see a very wide variety of qualifications (or lack thereof) here in the U.S. Many teachers I know have either a performance or music education degree (or more). But there are others who are teaching without any "official" certification. There are probably dozens of teachers in the area who are not members of the two big organizations in town, so I don't know their qualifications at all.

What concerns me is that the general public may not know how to evaluate a teacher's qualifications before beginning piano lessons. The Music Teachers National Association (www.mtna.org has a fairly rigorous National Certification program, but yes, as john v.d.brook says (above) it is mainly based on subject knowledge.

There is a performance component and the final phase of the certification exam is either a portfolio or 3-hour written response to a series of pedagogical questions. There is also a requirement to prove 2 years of teaching experience, including the option to submit teaching videos. Three letters of recommendation are also required (this is off the top of my head -- the exact requirements are online in .pdf format).  Anyway, I believe the MTNA is attempting to provide the general public with a way of identifying "qualified" teachers through this program. I should mention that it is available to anyone in the U.S., not just members. I have not completed the program yet, as I run a full-time studio and haven't had the time.

Oh, in answer to the first post, I have a B.S. ed in K-12 instrumental music, and an MM in piano performance. I have no other certification, including the NCTM I was talking about. I've been teaching for 15 years (4 in one state, 2 in another, and 9 here). Maybe someday, but then -- I have a full studio and my students are routinely performing in public, so is it really necessary? I don't know.

Looking forward to following this thread!

[pianistimo]

i agree with much of what is said here.  especially john brooks assessment that the best form of compliment is to have your students playing well and receiving the benefits of their practice.  also, what he said about 'pianoside manners.' 

i think for many years i was well suited for the ages that i taught.  i started actually in highschool - teaching a few students who were about 7-8 years of age.  i told them at the beginning of lessons that i was working on my bachelor's degree and that whenever it seemed appropriate to them - that i certainly would not be offended if they chose to switch teachers - or if they wanted i could ask my own teacher if he would take them on.  a bit presumptuous possibly - but i had a lot of faith (and still do) in my college prof that i had.  he would really take the time to explain things.  he was a REAL teacher and not checking his watch at the half hour mark.  in fact, for students that practiced - he often went overtime.  sacrificing his own personal time for others - to finish an idea or a thought.

then, after graduation (and recital) for BM in piano performance - i ended up doing a lot of accompanying and vocal accompanying for my husband.  we travelled all over up and down southern california performing church music, etc.  but, i knew that my solo piano skills had to be kept up.  so after a few years - took more piano lessons and worked some mozart.  i was so happy to be back at it.

we also had three children and moved about four times.  when i was just out of college - i taught piano lessons on the weekend and a few during the week.  i joined mtna and used the syllabus for each grade A LOT.  i still use it for general reference.  also, i went to mtna summer seminars occasionally.

but, what really helps, too is taking something - anything !  to do with teaching.  i got into teaching reading as well as music - and took a tutoring class which showed us the 'cycle' of a student coming in fully dependent and moving them to independence and thinking for themselves and utilizing information themselves to their own best advantage.  i realized that i had done a lot of handholding (and still am tempted sometimes to do that) - but you really have to ask questions and do a lot of extraneous things that help them learn a 'process.'  i'm a fairly detail oriented person - and so sometimes i would explain too much.  i also learned that within all this detail there are limits to each age - and not to overdo with the younger aged children.  to let more 'just be.'  and then as they progressively age from year to year - (month to month - for that matter) - you start showing them what you expect and really hold to a standard that is realistic for their age and comprehension.  sometimes it's not age but the student themselves and how much they are used to learning. 

something that stuck in my head from a particular youngish side master chorale conductor is how much a good teacher inspires students to work.  the enthusiasm combined with real knowledge is - imo - an incredible gift.  to be able to motivate students by showing them what is possible in a set amount of time.  to let the time go indefinately shows them how lazy they can be - versus setting a time to really be proficient at something.

i think something else, too, is important.  that is - not being closed off to other expressions of music - ie opera, musicals, poetry, art, etc.  - because it all ties in together.  in fact, science and math for that matter, imo - are just as helpful.  the  infinite world becomes more open when you see it through different lenses.  to have a teacher who is well rounded in many subjects makes them more of a mentor - able to give wise advice in many situations - and not just dealing with music only.  i never thought that a piano teacher who was also a friend was a bad idea.  it is only in this modern age that we think we should be so 'private' and 'dignified.'  one teacher i had when i was much younger - after seeing how much i was practicing would even let me housesit when he and his wife went on vacation.  it was such a heartfelt gesture of trust and friendship and helped me get ready for several recitals - which i couldn't do at home with the level of concentration needed the last few days before recital.

with inspiration from family and a friend who also played piano - i went back to attempt a graduate degree from west chester.  i would highly rate west chester as a good music campus.  they have a great music/listening library - a NEW music building - and very fine faculty.  also, they are now an all steinway school!  most of the teachers are graduates from julliard - and play extremely well and are very knowledgeable.  we took some field trips, too, when i was there that made my day/year/lifetime.  we went to steinway hall, steinway factory, and also carnegie hall and julliard.  i never EVER thought i would see all this.  it was mostly at my piano teachers expense, too, i think.  i mean he drove all the students and we got to see things we'd never find on our own(at least not all in one day's time).  even the ny metropolitan museum of art!  we took one trip one year and another the next year.  we saw probably at least three places each trip.

[pianoexcellence]

In Canada, one needs a university (B.mus) or a conservatory degree (ARCT) to become a registered music teacher.  (RMT)

The royal conservatory degree must be the specific "teachers" exam which was enormously practical in nature. Performers ARCT require 3 years of teaching experience to qualify.

Of course, anyone who can play reasonably well will call themselves teachers...

[joyfulmusic]

If I only had a dollar for every student who comes to me from another teacher who was demanding, grumpy, unapproachable, insensitive to the student's wishes, etc.  The proof is in the pudding.  If the students are doing well, then the teacher is good.  I started out in college as a music ed major and was shocked that there was no expectation that I would have time to devote to piano lessons and practice.  No... we had to study Psychology, English, three months of each major instrument group (which made me qualified to lead an orchestra or band in a public school system YUCK).  I dropped out.  Changed to a fine arts degree.  Still frustrated with the time spent on topics for some ego driven curriculum plan I dropped out of that oo.  Later made a living performing jazz and putting together my own group.  I've got a waiting list.  I've got inspired, articulate, passionate students.  Go figure.

[stevehopwood]

Brilliant post joyfulmusic. If your teaching is even half as enthusiastic as your writing then your lessons will be happy events. 

Steve 

[pianowelsh]

Im totally with you all Qualifications DONT necessarily make a good teacher. What Im trying to get at is that parents and students think by and large that they do  and Im often asked by people is this teacher any good he has FTCL, FRAM, LLCM, Phd DipMus etcetc to which I usually say get a consultation because thats the only way you know.  But think of it this way.  If you were going to hire someone to do your accounts would you consider takking someone on when you had no idea what their letters meant and even whether they were at an undergraduate or postgraduate level. Its about appropriateness.  For a small book keeping job dealling with only a few hundred pounds you might take a risk. If you were running a business and thousands were going through per week you'd want to know Ok this person has undergone intensive training they can do the maths..now I;ll look at a few who are of this level and I'll decide which one I get on with best.  I have to say I wouldnt consider studying with a teacher who wasnt a graduate of a univeristy or music college  and who has considerable perofmance training and expertise and who has studied the art of teaching in depth because i myself have very considerable training and I dont want to pay good money to be told what I already know or for someone who knows less to try and take me in a different direction without really knowing what they are doing.  Whilst knowing what someones letters mean dosent safe guard this completely it gives an indicator of their experience and level of study and training.  Which is undeniable important - I believe for all students beginners up, but particularly so for the intermediate and advanced students.