After the method books

[mswaller]

Hello

Suggestions on a plan of attack after students finish working through a set of method books.  I realize the method books themselves can be debated, but that's what I've chosen to use in my teaching (Piano Adventures to be specific).  Anyways, after my students finish a set method I have, in the past, begun Bach 2 and 3 part inventions, Burgmuller, Czerny
op. 299, among other things.  The problem is that it feels at times a very random approach.  Any suggestions on how to progress with my students.  Maybe some suggestions on book references.

Thanks

[hyrst]

Hi,
I also use the Adventure series.  I find level 4 is compulsory to start extra pieces - which gets students into the habit of working with a variety of composers/ periods. styles, etc. 

I start teaching specific techniques from level 1 onwards using the Dozen a Day books (I only use the Adventure lesson books, not the whole set).  In level 3 I use DD book 2 and level 4 or 5 DD book 3.  After that students are ready for some actual studies, like the simpler ones by Czerny. 

I use Burgmuller opus 100 from level 4 or 5 as artistic studies - these have a great range of tempos, styles and techniques.  (It is a bit early for some students, but it starts their experience outside the lesson books.)

At level 4 I use simplified famous classics and simple pieces from the Baroque and early Classical.  Such pieces as the Notebook by Bach are good here. 

After level 5, my students have covered nearly all major and minor scales.  Their practice includes scales, studies and artistic pieces.  They should have a routine established in this by then.  That means I can take them through a selection of as much repertoire as possible at grade 3 to 5.  Composers such as Tchaikowsky, Schumman, Beethoven, Scarlatti, Kuhnau, Grieg are fitting.  As many different styles, keys, movements, tempos, etc as possible.  It is a simplified approach of the later levels.  Students begin to develop interests in particular composers or styles.  They can begin to organise studies into periods as is done in the later grades.

I find that the approach is not too random if you know why you are choosing pieces - are they learning something new and that they need to learn.  Are they getting enough variety?  At this level, it is too arbitrary and restricting to simply work through all the 2 part Inventions because it neglects a lot of other styles and techniques.  Develop a programme that systematically contains harmonic / scales study, technnical study, and pieces of various periods or styles.  IMO this creates a balanced, experienced student learning experience.

I don't know if this is what you were really after, but I hope it helps.

[musicrebel4u]

I use Soft Mozart approach, when I have a huge library of musical  pieces and ability to introduce them to students in different visual presentations: with visual hints and without.
Thus, students introduced to 10-15 pieces a month and they can improve their technique with more elementary music presentations and read banch of easy pieces with traditional.

Music is a language. The best way to 'get it' is interaction and self - motivation. Unfortunately, no method book is capable to provide that. Moreover, teacher with method books stucked with basic mistakes for too long. Kids at home forget 75% what was said during last lesson and next week suprize us being completely unloaded 

[mswaller]

Thanks for the great feedback hyrst. 

In spite of arguments against the use of method books, I still find them helpful.  I am not only a piano teacher, but also a school teacher.  As much as I would love my students to always be intrinsically motivated to learn, it's not always the case.  I find that the use of method books in my piano teaching give my students a great way to track their progress.  I do agree, however, that one must not simple teach by transmission, but instead allow the students natural curiousity to assist in guiding the lesson. 

 

 

[hyrst]

There has to be some method for learning and for teaching the rudiments of music.  Whether it is a software solution like Rebel's or theory exercises accompanying simple pieces or a good method series.  I think the Adventure series is excellent because the music is diverse, theoretically and technically progressive, genuine aesthetically pleasing music (mostly) and introduces learners to famous composers and works in a manageable way.  Also, as you pointed out, the students have some marking of their progress.  I know this isn't a debate about method books, but I don't think you need be so apologetic.  The books are simply a tool, not the centre of the teaching-learning.

I am glad I could be of some help.  All the best with your teaching. :-)

[a-sharp]

Good topic... we spent an entire semester on this in my pedagogy class - and still, I am not sure we covered it thoroughly. On the one hand, it can be more fun b/c you get to work on 'real' music... on the other hand, at least for me, there is SO much material, the options can seem overwhelming... and above all, you want them to stay motivated & interested - yet challenged.

I'm curious - how far do you go in the method books? PA goes up to Level 5 - but does anyone really use the method books that long? Just wondering....

Often I refer to the CM (certificate of Merit - if you are in California) repertoire list as a reference when looking for pieces in a general level... There is also the Pianist's Guide to Standard Teaching & Performance Lit. by Magrath. In my class, our project was to create our own Intermediate level version of this - adding in our own comments about each piece. This is obviously an on-going project....

I think, in the end, it's as what was already said ... to some degree you have to understand the individual student, choose pieces for some reason - to address a particular technical issue, or expressive touch etc ... choose some pieces just for fun - some to challenge him/her ... And *then...* at some point - let it go - like, stop worrying *too* much - it's just music - and it's not going to be the end of the world if you choose something that ends up being not "perfect" for them - what's the worst that could happen? They hate it so you put it away & pick something else, or it's too easy - so they learn it quickly & you move on - or too hard - put it away & come back to it later. I have to remind myself of that ALL the time, LOL. It's not like I'm going to *damage* them by giving them one wrong piece.

In any case... I have no idea if that is helpful or not - but good luck! ... I like the PA series too BTW ... the kids seem to respond to it well. It's not *perfect* by any means, and I've learned to skip over some stuff - but it works for me. I'm interested in the American Popular Piano series actually ... thinking about trying that. But that is another topic....

...
The only other thing is that to some degree, I try to involve my students in the choice. The hardest part about that these days is all I get is "I don't know...*shrug*" LOL. Some kids just seem to have NO idea what they like or what they want to do, or just don't know how to say it. Getting them to voice an actual opinion is like pulling teeth, lol.

[m19834]

It's not like I'm going to *damage* them by giving them one wrong piece.

Actually, this is not altogether true.  There can be a lot of damage done both physically and psychologically if a piece is given without the proper guidence and knowledge to back up the learning process and experience. 

If, for example, the student is (extremely) determined but lacking in ability to actually play the piece successfully, this can very easily create a (lasting) negative experience if the student doesn't truly have perspective on what the problems are or why they are occurring.  Mental stress can be created surrounding performing and practice, which can cause physical tension, making everything feel difficult and sound badly to the learner (and this can very easily turn into a cycle that becomes a complete entrenchment).  For a (sensitive) student whom is aware that things are not properly working but has no idea what to do about it (and is not getting the guidence to help with that), and thinks it 'just takes more practice,' this can be an incredibly defeating experience that may very well affect them for years to come (if not for the rest of their life). 

The pieces being given always depend (very much so) on the learning circumstances that the piece will be learned in, and it can *really* matter how that all pans out.  Of course, part of that all depends on the individual student, but there must be a very careful eye in determining just what is going on for the student.  Some students will not care if you start and then stop pieces, others will.

This may seem dramatic, and I think that it is in some ways a matter of extreme cases and not how the majority of individuals function, but it definitely happens; I have seen it first-hand and continue to learn from the experience.

[hyrst]

Hi Karli,
I think you pretty much said it yourself - damage can happen if the prone student is given the wrong piece.  However, in most cases, and especially if the student is used to working with a  lot of pieces for different amounts of time and to different levels, most students won't be so driven or even notice the piece put aside.  We all give a piece we think is not so hard or we think is likable, to find it doesn't fit the students AT ALL. 

If I did have a student who was stuck in a piece, I would come to them with something new and be excited and say what a great opportunity we have moving onto this new one.  Get them excited about it, help them change focus.

From my own experience, it is general attitudes that influence confidence rather than specific pieces.  For example, my intermediate teacher would overlook ornaments and comment that they were played quickly and I was not ready for them - couldn't play fast enough.  Rather than show me how to work through how to play them, we avoided them.  I still freeze whenever I come to ornaments and I usually have to realise I am trying to play them too fast before I actually make them fit rhythmically.  It is frustrating.  She was a wonderful teacher who nurtured my love of music, but there are things like that we must beware of in our general approaches.


Hi A-Sharp (interesting name),
I also find some things in the Adventures a little out of place or not useful - I wondered if I was missing something important and that I shouldn't skip over these parts.  It is encouraging to know that others do the same.  It would be interesting to know if they are the same sections/pieces.  (For example, I understand the use of fingers 234 on the black keys moved to CDE, but I find this is confusing for some students who are unable to remember to move 1 to C when they start using 5 fingers.  I wish there was a way to teach the value of following fingering without creating set key positions, and I know the Fabers try - but maybe it is part of the process needed for some students.  Perhaps it is not using different fingers on the same keys, but playing pieces form different key positions or transposing that would help.  I am still trying to figure that out.  I also find their placement of the New World theme is theoretically correct but the piece is too advanced for that level in every other way.)

Your college assignment sounds very interesting.  It would be great to be part of a group like that, organising repertoire. 

[musicrebel4u]

Accordong to oficial statistic any method book publisher compony is selling 100 books for first year of learning to 10 books of second and 1 of the third.

Money mostly made from very beginners.

[mswaller]

Great points Karli

Thought you might be interested in an article I read by Hirsch

In it he states:

How people learn:  "learning to learn" versus "piling up of mere facts" in four principles

1.  The ability to learn something new is not primarily a general, formal skill.  It is chiefly a domain specific skill.  For instance, the ability to learn something new about math, music, or history depends on the knowledge that one already possesses about those subjects (this is me again: Check out Bloom's Taxonomy ).  This means that learning to learn always entails acquiring relevant knowledge about specific domains.

2.  General ablility to learn is highly correlated with general knowledge.....learning ability depends chiefly on having relevant prior knowledge.

3.  The best way to learn a subject is to learn its general principles and to study an ample number of diverse examples that illustrate those principles (good argument for method books perhaps?)...A broad range of examples should be studied, but studying too many is a waste of time.

4.  Broad general knowledge is the best entree to deep knowledge.  After students gain a broad context by developing a sense of the whole domain, they can mentally fit the various parts that follow into that whole, and make sense of them.

Hope this helps.

[musicrebel4u]

Great points Karli

Thought you might be interested in an article I read by Hirsch

In it he states:

How people learn:  "learning to learn" versus "piling up of mere facts" in four principles

1.  The ability to learn something new is not primarily a general, formal skill.  It is chiefly a domain specific skill.  For instance, the ability to learn something new about math, music, or history depends on the knowledge that one already possesses about those subjects (this is me again: Check out Bloom's Taxonomy ).  This means that learning to learn always entails acquiring relevant knowledge about specific domains.

2.  General ablility to learn is highly correlated with general knowledge.....learning ability depends chiefly on having relevant prior knowledge.

3.  The best way to learn a subject is to learn its general principles and to study an ample number of diverse examples that illustrate those principles (good argument for method books perhaps?)...A broad range of examples should be studied, but studying too many is a waste of time.

4.  Broad general knowledge is the best entree to deep knowledge.  After students gain a broad context by developing a sense of the whole domain, they can mentally fit the various parts that follow into that whole, and make sense of them.

Hope this helps.

What you just had described is the one main rule of natural cognitive learning:  human brain can adapt and process only 25% of brand new information, when 75 % is already 'digested' previously.

Due to the fact that that our eyesight capable of focusing only on one subject at a time and even linear reading is a challenge for beginners, perception of multiple lines and spaces of Grand Staff and multiple keys of piano is not a skill that could be easily established from scratch.

Therefore, no matter how colorful and entertaining 'method books' for beginning, they all based on exploiting muscle memory of students and artificially create pieces that fasten fingering to piano keys.

After such learning only the most dedicated, patient and talented students can advance to the more advanced level. The rest of the students drop out, because their eyesite never been trained how to read multiple lines and spaces of Grand Staff and similar looking keys of piano and how to divide focus between book and hands.

'Method books' leave students in the middle of desert after year or two of 'learning' with method books 

[hyrst]

So, MS, does this essentially mean to support learning broad exposure (with scaffolding, instruction, modelling and purpose) provides access to a knowledge base that is flexible, but for secure learning this must progress towards more refined and deeper knowledge or refining of expertise? 

(I'm not sure if I am saying anything here - I can't quite explain what I am trying to say.)

[a-sharp]

Actually, this is not altogether true.  There can be a lot of damage done both physically and psychologically if a piece is given without the proper guidence and knowledge to back up the learning process and experience.

Perhaps... I don't know this for a fact - but I think the point I was trying to make was - *respond* .... so, if you sense that after a week or two it's not working, simply re-direct. Certainly nobody has ever died from playing something "inappropriate" for a couple weeks. Or else, I'd have been dead a long time ago.

that's all I'm sayin'.

[a-sharp]

Accordong to oficial statistic any method book publisher compony is selling 100 books for first year of learning to 10 books of second and 1 of the third.

Money mostly made from very beginners.

wow - that's insane. I know there's about 8 with the faber series - if you use all their books - which I don't necessarily. 100 - sounds freakishly out of range - but what do I know.

[hyrst]

Certainly nobody has ever died from playing something "inappropriate" for a couple weeks. Or else, I'd have been dead a long time ago.

Me too!    How many life points do you think we get? 

[a-sharp]

LOL... I dunno - depends on the piece I suppose!

I am trying to recall the exact stuff, Hyrst, that I skip... right now all I can think of is that twinkle twinkle little star - with color stars... it's a bit much - and I don't find it productive at that point (or ever? not sure)... so I usually just skip that. It's in the tecnique book I think. However, as for the nagivational things you're talking about, that is one of the things I actually like about faber b/c I think it avoids the getting-stuck-in-a-position flaw of some other methods. PA doesn't always have the same fingers on the same notes.... perhaps it is confusing at first, but what I find, is that it forces them to think and read a little more. Anyway - this is just the way I see it - I'm sure every one has different experiences with that or any other book. I truly just think of method books as a starting point - for me - it's a useful tool with some type of structure I can mold to my purposes, or for each student. When I first started teaching, I'd use the whole set of their books... now I might just use the lesson book & the theory book... and introduce something like Fingerpower later one... You know - whatever I think will work for the student.

Don't know if I'm making any sense or not - pre-coffee 'n' all.

[hyrst]

   I've had my coffee and I sitll don't know if I make any sense!?  LOL 

Anyway, I also think it is good that the PA books use different fingering.  It is also one of the things I like about the series.  I do find some students are slow to catch on.  The bright ones pick it up quickly and comment if I don't suggest they follow what is written.  For the slower ones, I point out that the fingering is different because we can use different fingers on the same keys - but I  don't make them stick to it because they get confused.  I guess the thing is here that 90% of my beginners are between 4 and barely 6 years of age.  If they were 8,  I would encourage them to understand the concept better. 

It is true that those who get stuck in C find it hard to move.  I try to avoid that by using different exercises and transposing and things at a level they can grasp individually.  For some it truly is an issue.  I am keenly aware of this matter because it is one of the few things I remember from when I started at about 5 years old.  My teacher totally drilled into me  that 1 goes on Middle C for both hands.  She almost would lose her temper if I didn't do it - week after week it seemed.  Then, suddenly, when I finally had that down, she changed me to another position.  I was totally confused and felt betrayed and lied to.  She made such an issue of Middle C, and then changed the whole thing!  I adjusted pretty quickly by then, but I never forgot that sense that somehow she had lied to me.  (I think I changed teachers soon after that.  Apparently my sister used to hide in the garden at the teacher's house so she would run out of lesson time.)  Perhaps a silly thing to remember, but it made me think a lot about how to approach teaching this to my own students. 

Is Finger power something like Dozen a Day, little technical exercises?  SO, do you take students roughly through the PA syllabus or do you use this to complement the work you are doing from other pieces?  I do use the PA through to the end of level 3 as the core - but teach  the concepts in my own way.  I think the lesson books have a really good selection of pieces and overall a sensible progression of concepts.  I switch in 4 and 5 to focusing on other more established pieces, but use the PA books to support the knowledge of chords, arpeggios and their are a few lovely pieces in these two books.  (Several of my  students have really started developing expressively after playing Chanson - that can be a very beautiful piece.) 

[keyofc]

It would be nice for those who have stuck with the method books to give a sampling of what they have assigned afterwards to say, 4-5 students.

I use Michael Aaron - and this method goes right into the classical pieces and so I think it's a very well though-out plan that helps me know what they are ready or not ready for.
Some of the pieces in one level are easier than others - Moonlight Sonata movement 1, is in the 4th book.

[hyrst]

It would be nice for those who have stuck with the method books to give a sampling of what they have assigned afterwards to say, 4-5 students.

Not sure what you are asking.  Sounds interesting, though.

[m19834]

Hi Karli,
I think you pretty much said it yourself - damage can happen if the prone student is given the wrong piece.  However, in most cases, and especially if the student is used to working with a  lot of pieces for different amounts of time and to different levels, most students won't be so driven or even notice the piece put aside.  We all give a piece we think is not so hard or we think is likable, to find it doesn't fit the students AT ALL.

Yes.  However, my point is that of a more traditional (as it seems anyway) approach that a person focuses very much on one or a few and tries to perfect them (and some students are more prone to want to "focus" in like that than others).  Perhaps one of the main points here is that of realizing it may be a good approach for students to indeed be working through more than one piece at a time and have bigger goals for the year than just a few.  Having that goal also ensures that the pieces need to maintain a certain kind of accessibility to the level/attitude of the student, vs. pieces that they are not equipped for mentally nor physically (or, that the teacher is not truly prepared for helping them through).  Though I don't personally know of anybody whom has died because of playing a "wrong" piece, I know there are plenty of depressed-over-bad-experiences pianists in the world.  All I say is more general to the fact that there are more readers for this thread (and forum) than there are posters, and one must keep a very watchful eye and know their students well.  

If I did have a student who was stuck in a piece, I would come to them with something new and be excited and say what a great opportunity we have moving onto this new one.  Get them excited about it, help them change focus.

Of course this sounds nice and probably works for most people, but this simply will not work for all people if they will feel like a failure unless they "finish" the piece.

From my own experience, it is general attitudes that influence confidence rather than specific pieces.

 

Well, yes, but that is exactly a huge element that must be taken into consideration when considering pieces for students.  The piece needs to match the learning circumstances, which of course includes the attitudes of the student.  Obviously you know this, but again, there are more readers for the thread than there are posters, and there are enough teachers whom I think don't truly consider these things more honestly.

For example, my intermediate teacher would overlook ornaments and comment that they were played quickly and I was not ready for them - couldn't play fast enough.  Rather than show me how to work through how to play them, we avoided them.  I still freeze whenever I come to ornaments and I usually have to realise I am trying to play them too fast before I actually make them fit rhythmically.  It is frustrating.  She was a wonderful teacher who nurtured my love of music, but there are things like that we must beware of in our general approaches.

Yes, now imagine the attitude about ornaments filtered through every movement toward/about the piano.  This is what I am talking about.

In any event, I have just seen plenty of pianists with pieces that are not fit for the learning circumstances, and I have never seen that go well.  Yes, we need to be challenged and we need to be challenging our students, but there can be a very fine line there, depending on the circumstances surrounding the learning process.  I think it's a good idea to be aiming quite right when picking out pieces for a student, from the very outset, and I don't really think a teacher can spend "too much" time and energy finding the right one(s) (and there is no shortage of possibility).

[a-sharp]

Hyrst ... (delayed response sorry )

for my students - I don't think the confusion is so much changing fingering (as I mentioned I actually like that), but that, for so many of my students, even after 6 months of lessons, they still don't even seem to know which is their right hand or left hand, let alone which finger is which! I find myself sayng "right hand 2... right hand 2 ... no, right hand 2... your other right hand ... ok - raise your right hand - no, your other right hand" ... AAAaaaargh! Course, *most* of the time, these are the kids whose families have too much time/money/activities, are constantly going on vacations and don't get involved enough to make sure the kids are practicing - and just general laziness. BUT, I've found, at least with some, if I just stick to my principles (meaning, keep requiring that they think and LOOK at what is on the page & figure it out for themselves mostly), they get it eventually. And, I think that point at which they do is so important, that it's worth the process getting there ... does that make any sense?

Yes - Finger Power is something like Dozen A Day... but different... I like both (and used Doz A Day when I was little), but I kinda like finger power better.

Truthfully - I've only been teaching for a little over a couple years, so I've not gotten past level 2 of anything... I'll have to see what I do then - in regards to sticking with PA (or whichever method) past that.... Many of my colleagues around here also recommend the Snell theory books... so I'm finding myself kinda wanting to use those - on particular method book as a sort of core, with finger power for technique, Snell for theory - and then whatever else tossed in for fun & repertoire. ... I do find myself *improvising* a lot ... like when a student comes & forgets their books  ... last time that happened I picked up a book off the shelf and we started learning stuff she hadn't seen yet, and we learned a bunch of new things rather quickly, so that was fun, and motivating for her too.

I'm rambling on... sorry.

Funny story, yours, about thumbs on middle C ... this is often a little odd for me - I don't ever remember doing this as a kid! I learned with the John Thompson book - basically - here it is - play it! LOL ... everything was on staff right away - sometimes I'm tempted to just use that , b/c somehow it worked for me! I still really like the songs in that book.

...a.

[squinchy]

I started in 3rd grade, working through the Alfred series, dropping it after the 4th (magenta) book. My teacher moved me onto an album of 21 Bach favorites, Burgmuller's Op. 100, a sonatina album, and Schumann's Album for the Young, I think. I wasn't a fan of Schumann, but I really liked Burgmuller. How proud I was to get thick books of real music!

Side note: The Alfred series gave me a great aural foundation--for example, some of the pieces ingrained the sound of chords in their various inversions so deeply that I can refer to the sound of those pieces, instead of listening for a maj/min 6th. A great help.

[rvapianoteacher]

I do believe that students can be damaged by one piece. In my case, my fairly-well-known undergraduate college teacher gave me Gaspard my senior year. I was/am a very musical player but I no more had the technique to play the last movement (or even parts of the first) than I could fly to the moon by flapping my arms. I spent hours and hours trying to do something that I simply was not prepared to do.

I can't tell you how many hours I wasted on that piece.