Teaching/Learning from other Diiciplines

[green]

Do u practice other diciplines other than playing piano? It can become such a focus in a stds life, that it is easy to forget that it is only one of many disciplines. Making music, dance, writing, acting, martial arts, walking, meditation, swimming...everything that involves motion towards some purpose. Motion that is activated by thought. We can do better with an aim to perfect.

It can be useful when teaching or learning, to point out such relations. Or have them pointed out/shown to us. Many 'principles' relate well between disciplines.

Here is an article by Bruce Lee. With a little re-writting, it could easily be an introduction to playing piano!

Very interesting are resonses from readers and Lee's explanations:

https://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001330.html

[faulty_damper]

Yes, having experience from other disciplines have made me better at 'stuff'.  Using examples to demonstrate:  I used to be involved with lion dance -  an art form involving percussionists and dancers in a lion costume.  I got pretty good - very good at it in fact - which got me ousted from the troupe because the ones in charge were threatened by it.  Anyway, the dance requires music to be played with the lion's movements.  At this time, I was not a musician; just some guy who beats a drum with two sticks.  Now that I play the piano and have a better understanding of music, I am more knowledgable about the percussion of the dance.

And about practice, when we were practicing that form of dance, we only spent 2 hours a week to practice it.  After piano, that is clearly not enough.  I often wondered why I was excelling and all others were dragging behind.  This was because I was practicing at home almost every day.

I also race bicycles.  Training is an important part of it.  Since training dictates if you are able to compete with others, it is like a carefully planned form of art.  If you don't train enough, or train properly (nutrition, rest, etc.), or don't have the handling skills, you are not going to podium.  To be stronger, you must push your limit.  Riding within that limit will not get you stronger.

Relating training back to piano and lion dance: don't expect to see huge gains in a short period of time since it takes several weeks for the conditioning to net significant results.  Piano practice sucks if you are not pushing yourself.  If you practice the same homotonous (redundency) thing everyday, you won't get any results.  You must push your limit.

In short, everything is inter-related.  This is how we learn: by attaching the hook of a fishing rod to stuff that we can later reel in should we need it.  We do not have knowledge of stuff if that stuff is just out there and we did not bother to attach the hook to it.  It would be very difficult to find it in the deep lake if we were to cast the line randomly to find it.

[faulty_damper]

According to Lee, a lot of the things or rather most of the things that the martial arts schools teach are rather useless to their students.  Some of that being practicing the horse stances, kicks, punches, etc.  The reason this is useless is because it has no function in a fight because the student would not know how to use them in such a confrontation.

Bernhard says that learning these techniques outside of the purpose of self-defense is the logical way of teacher - useful for the teacher, useless for the student.

Lee says that teaching techniques in actual situations is the best way since it shows the student what he can do in such a situation to defend himself.  This is the pragmatic approach to teaching which is the primary way we learn.

So what this means in piano teaching is that considering the tradition of teaching in logical steps which are initially meaningless to the student is not the effective method.  But teaching pragmatically, showing the student how to play scales, chords, arpeggios, etc., as they confront these challenges in a piece are an effective means of teaching.

But teachers do not teach pragmatically.  Consider even how school is taught.  It is taught in the manner most efficient for them to get their paycheck.  This logical approach to teaching a student will mean that if a student lags behind because he could not understand a step, he will forever be lagging behind because the step has already been 'taught' and will be expected to be applied.

Students in schools, at least the ones I've been to, have asked teachers repeatedly this question: "What does this have to do with anything?  I'm never going to use it."  They're probably right at least 95% of the time.  The teachers in highschool don't have a good reason why they should learn math or history or even how to write.  They reply: "It's better for your future.  When you are older, you'll understand.  It will help you get into a good college."  

College teachers seem to be more forthcoming.  They usually don't bull-flower: "You won't use 95% of the stuff you learn in school."  Or they may start bashing high-school about how horrible a job they did teaching things that are not accurate or even true, especially in the area of history.

But even in college, they teach in the same manner as highschool was taught.  The only thing interesting is that now that the student is more at an age in which they will soon be entering the workforce (and making, hopefully, lots of money) they pay attention more.  That degree means something - a larger paycheck compared to someone without a degree.  Money is what motivates students to get that degree, even perhaps learn something.  But actually learning something is still not something students want to do.  Students often cheat on exams to pass the class and barely do any learning.  They will eventually get a degree which supposedly certifies they know ''something".  And when they do enter the workforce in the area of their choosing, they will be ill-prepared.  And since they cannot cheat at work - they will be immediately found out they know little - they have to get by somehow.  But wait!  He remembers that he won't use 95% of the things he learned in school.  Alas, he is saved from his knowing little.  He only has to use that 5% he learned and he will get by on that 5%.  That 5% is what will give him the large paycheck.  Ah, he's living the good life.

So what does this have to do with piano lessons and teaching?  This was posted in the teaching forum and perhaps a criticism of how piano teachers teach.

My teacher, for the most part, teaches using the logical method.  I've had to learn and relearn certain scales and arpeggios simply because I can't remember them because those 'exercises' bare little to the piece I am learning.  I'm not taking any ABRSM exams nor do I intend to so what is the point of knowing a bunch of scales and arpeggios that does not relate to what I'm currently learning?

And what about learning those 'exercises' like Czerny or Hanon?  She hasn't assigned me any Hanon even though I have the book (it was bought when my sister was taking lessons).  But she has assigned me Czerny.  Many times.  I did not know the relevance of learning Czerny a year ago.  I still don't yet she still assigns me them.  Do I practice them?  Yes.  Do they mean anything to what I'm currently learning?  Perhaps less than 5% of the technical abilities I learn in Czerny I actually use.  

She says: "It will help you play Beethoven's sonatas."  I did tell her that I really liked Beethoven's sonatas.  That was a year ago when he was my favourite composer.  Not true any longer.  It's now Alkan.  He's a completely different composer and now those exercises really mean very little.  And I have no intention of learning Beethoven's sonatas anytime soon, except to finish the last movement of his Op.27-2.  Which of Czerny's exercises will help me with that last movement?

I'm sure many of you teachers teach using the logical method.  Why?  Because this is how you were taught.  My sister now teaches a couple of students at a music store once a week.  She teaches using the logical method.  Hanon?  You bet!  I don't talk to her very much about her teaching methodology.  Should I?  For her students' benefit, yes, I probably should.  But that's just arrogance, right?  But I'm an arrogant person concerning things I know more about.  I analyze everything.  She does not.  And many of those piano teachers are like her, am I right?  Do you not assign your students Czerny and Hanon just 'because' even though it has little bearing on the pieces they are learning?  I'm sure you do.  Mine does.  My sister does.  Anyone else want to raise their hand?

"Liberate yourself."

fD_S.F.

[willcowskitz]

I pretty much agree with faulty_Damper here.

I took piano lessons when I was a kid. The teaching method was to force me into certain model but I just wouldn't apply to it - I couldn't be forced into methodical, systematic learning process. I didn't develop my skills very fast and I grew very negative towards the piano. Then one day when I was practicing my dad was "giving me advice" on how I played: I couldn't play in constant rhythm, I played fast the parts that I had in memory and when the part came where I would have to sight-read, I slowed down - ETC...  So I just hit my hands on the keys and yelled I quit piano lessons and while I'm at it I'm quitting soccer team too (lol). But enough of my childhood traumas - The point is that I have my own ways of learning things, I only have to see inside them and understand them to become one with them. That is, how I "learn".  I feel that I would be a natural teacher, even though I lack knowledge on theory related to subject, I could help people get into the music. Theory DESCRIBES music, its supposed to help us understand music and it's rules or characteristics, but not everyone needs to go through the base forming by mathematics and laws of music to GET INTO it, especially for children the methodical teaching is bad... You can't force them to progress in certain way and get the best out of their abilities - you're supposed to see into the child's mind and understand how he/she sees what you're teaching them and then adapt yourself.

Of course, this is just my opinion. But I tell you I felt like playing with handcuffs on those lessons. I'm glad I found music on my own later.