Everyday lessons.

[0range]

I know that a certain poster has mentioned that he only gives lessons on an every-day basis (or possibly a 5 lessons a week basis). I'm curious if any other teachers out there do the same.

If so, what are your experiences, hurdles, or thoughts. What kind of progress have you observed in your students opposed to students given once a week lessons.

If not, why not? Why do you think it wouldn't work for you, or for the student, or for both.

Thanks. (We could also talk about which Chopin Etude is most difficult, or what order you should learn the Beethoven sonatas, or if I'm ready for the Fantasie Impromptu if nobody's interested in this topic.) 

[pianistimo]

I'm curious what parents can afford this.  I'd try it tommorrow if i'd be paid for the efforts.  It used to be that i had this high ideal and thought about giving some free lessons, too - but in this economy  - it's hard to contemplate that.

What seems to be more economical is to get all the students together once a month or at the end of each week - and give a 'master class' where they can perform what they have practiced.  Either they will remember the lesson - and show improvement...or embarrass themselves.  It would be a good motivation because they'd be playing for peers.  This would be, in my case, a very modest 'master class' and more of a chance for students to improve their performance skills and learn the basics about the composers.

On the topic of 'everyday lessons' - do you think that this could best be reserved for those 'special students' that you find every ten years?  Someone you invest much in if they show a lot of interest?  Or, would that be unprofessional and cause other students to be jealous. 

[hyrst]

I know there is another thread about parental involvement, but for young children I find excellent progress with those who are positive and willing to be involved and take with them the things I teach to help the child practice.  This is a kind of version of me teaching them everyday.  It really makes a difference to have someone working well with them daily - it is worth while. 

Young students whose parents are not supportive make very slow progress.  They would be better off if they had daily short lessons, but the parents in such a case would not invest in the inconvenience or cost. 

Those who are outstanding of my students, I have 5 who are exceptional, already have active parents, everyday careful practice, etc.  One of these has 2 lessons a week - one on technique and theory and one on pieces - and even then it is hard to fit everything because she learns so fast.

There would be far fewer students if they had daily lessons.  Sure supervised practice everyday woudl mean the student is assured of regular, good practice - but I think learning how to learn on your own is also critical.  Those who would commit to everyday lessons I think would also be likely to be careful with practice most days anyway.  I guess I am not convinced that this is as useful as it is ideal.

[0range]

I'm curious what parents can afford this.  I'd try it tommorrow if i'd be paid for the efforts.

This is easily enough solved. If parents are paying x amount of money for an hour of lessons a week, could they not pay the same for four lessons lasting 15 minutes in length?

It is not only feasible, but eminently more desirable. It has been proven time and again that doing something everyday for 10-20 minutes is much, much more effective, whether in learning an instrument, language, etc.. than doing it for 2-3 hours a day or two a week.

What seems to be more economical is to get all the students together once a month or at the end of each week - and give a 'master class' where they can perform what they have practiced.

I think this idea is very widely used, the idea of an end of the month, or semester, what have you, recital. It can be done with either weekly, or daily lessons.

On the topic of 'everyday lessons' - do you think that this could best be reserved for those 'special students' that you find every ten years?  Someone you invest much in if they show a lot of interest?  Or, would that be unprofessional and cause other students to be jealous.

No, yes, and no.

First, no, I don't think it should be reserved for special students, in fact, I'd say the opposite. The special students are the ones that "get it" and probably don't need the kind of meticulous, detailed every day instruction as much as your average. Not that I don't think this student would not benefit greatly from the extra instruction.

Secondly, yes! I do believe that the first criteria for this type of intensive instruction to work is interest and desire on the part of the student (or the student's parents, but preferably the student). I know many people who have said that they just want to be able to play a little, or to learn a couple of songs, or that they want their child to benefit from the supposed peripheral niceties of learning an instrument. For this level of interest, I don't think daily lessons are appropriate. Although, it would be nice if you could provide inspiration or motivation to the student to want more out of it.

Lastly, I think that if you were to take one or two of your students and do a little experiment by giving these two daily lessons, and then giving a recital with all of your students, it would damn well inspire jealousy in the other students, which would hopefully lead to them demanding the same everyday lessons. I don't think, however, that choosing your best students for the special treatment would be good. You should instead take a couple of the mediocre ones and see how they stack up with the talented ones after a period.

I know there is another thread about parental involvement, but for young children I find excellent progress with those who are positive and willing to be involved and take with them the things I teach to help the child practice.  This is a kind of version of me teaching them everyday.  It really makes a difference to have someone working well with them daily - it is worth while.

Definitely. I don't think anyone would argue that the parent's involvement in the child's education is anything but vital. I think that even with everyday lessons, it would be far better for the parent to sit in, at least in the beginning, to get an idea of what it is the child should be doing. I think in this case too, the child, through the parent's increased familiarity with the learning process, would benefit from daily lessons. At least until the parent is sufficiently able to coach the child, or the child can do that for themselves.

They would be better off if they had daily short lessons, but the parents in such a case would not invest in the inconvenience or cost.

Emphasis added. I think you've hit on the biggest stumbling block to the deal. It would be a hassle to take the kid to his lessons everyday. I do think, however, that a parent who is serious about providing his child with a musical education would do so. Examples abound in other activities like martial arts, sports, clubs, etc..

As for the cost, I think that you could pitch it that it is actually cheaper to do everyday lessons.

For example, I would charge $300.00US for one month's lessons. The student would receive five 30 minute lessons a week, so that is roughly 20 lessons per month, which is, in total, 10 hours of instruction, or 30$ an hour.

This is quite reasonable.

One of these has 2 lessons a week - one on technique and theory and one on pieces - and even then it is hard to fit everything because she learns so fast.

Yes! How many times (and I speak only as a student, having had this frustrating situation occur time and again) do you have the student come in, having their entire week's progress blocked by something that takes you five minutes to sort out - at least to the point where they can practice it on their own - like a rhythm, or notation, a theory problem, maybe a technical problem, whatever.

With 4-5 times a week, the feedback is doubled or quadrupled, and one can't help but believe that progress would reflect this.

There would be far fewer students if they had daily lessons.

I think you may be right. However, I would argue that it is a possibility that you could end up with more students this way. If the few students that you have are all progressing at a rate that is commensurate with the instruction (that is, 4-5x faster than someone taking only one lesson, compared to 4-5) that people would flock to your door to attain similar results.

This is, of course, if you accept that the number of lessons would have a direct correlation to progress. I do believe, based only on my experience in comparison to other students that I've observed, that this is at least close to being the case.

I think learning how to learn on your own is also critical.

Learning how to learn to play the piano, or, the methods that one goes about mastering pieces, how to analyze piece, good practice methods, how to sight-read, etc.. as you've said, is the name of the game. However, I think that, in the beginning, at least, that you should not be developing these methods through your own intuition, because probably your methods won't be very good, if they were, we wouldn't need teachers. A few months of persistent and methodical guidance from a teacher can instill the basics of good learning habits (assuming that what you're teaching is indeed good, but this is a whole unrelated topic).

Those who would commit to everyday lessons I think would also be likely to be careful with practice most days anyway.

Certainly this is true. The only point I would make is that, given how specious the human memory is, and how terrible some people are at following precise instructions after the fact. Even if one is following to the detail the lesson plan, there is no assurance that the student won't be practicing with improper technique, or making rhythm errors, wrong notes, etc... all of which will have to wait a week until the next lesson to be corrected. That is, if they're corrected at all that week - as you said, it is sometimes, especially with motivated learners that are juggling multiple pieces, to cover everything in a lesson. So, worst case scenario, the student has been practicing, perhaps diligently and in a highly structured manner, but nevertheless improperly for weeks at a time. I think this is absolutely detrimental to progress.

[hyrst]

You seem to have very strong opinions on the topic already.  Did you really want other opinions?

There seem to be a lot of suppositions in your statements about how teaching is approached and how students respond to it.  I would have to say that I have rarely seen a student unable to progress during a whole week because they have not resolved one problem (literally about two lessons out of all my students in one year) - any lack of progress has been due to an inadequate approach to practice in general (and these students would be a nightmare to have every day because they like the idea of playing but are unwilling to really work, even during the lesson). 

I can't imagine how 10-15 minutes of practice could suffice anyone at a higher than preliminary level, there are just too many 10 minute tasks in an advanced piece - it would take a year to work through one piece at this rate! 

I try to resolve concerns about remembering the right way to do things by writing in detail tasks, processes and feelings - as well as colour coding the score and other reminders.  I also encourage parents who are involved to ask questions and they mostly write notes nearly the whole lesson and attempt tasks themselves - even if silently to the side - so they have an idea of what to aim for or do.  I also encourage and have a number of parents who actually record or video the lessons and the students' work so they have clear reminders during the week.  This seems like the optimum approach to me - and I wish it was suitable and useable for everyone.  It promotes independence while providing a reliable resource (hopefully) and without taking a lot of additional time (I have some students travel 45 minutes to lessons and the average is 10 minutes - it is unrealistic to expect people to travel that far for a 15 minute lesson every day.  Even as a totally committed and enthusiastic student, this would quickly tire and thus demotivate me.)

I also think that daily lessons takes a progress marker from the students.  Isn't it nice to know you have a task set, and it usually takes a few days to learn and ingraine something new, and to have that aim and achievement by the time you get to the lesson?  Of course you need to have a teacher who recognises and acknowledges what you have done, even if it isn't yet 'perfect' - but don't you want that anyway?

[icanpiano]

Its' a very good idea.

You can divide the lessons so one day they play, the next one they learn harmony. the next one they read the 'life of Bach'  etc, etc…

I think this progress is the right one.

The problem is of course money. That should be solved some how.

In any case – make the student practice at home is not really working for the majority.

You may convince the parents to do so if:
1.   You would take 50% - 100% more for 5 lessons then for 1.
2.   Lower the time for a lesson to 20 minutes.
3.   Teach very little every lessons.
4.   Convince the student and parents in a way so they don't have to practice at home because they do it with you. (They can if they want) And… They don’t need to buy a piano from the start. (This can convince them)

I think it is a very good idea and i am pretty sure that you will get better players and maybe more students.

Then again the only problem is money but putting some more thinking to it this might be solved.

Good luck - i will start thinking about it. In terms of teaching it seems to be a winner, at least for the student

[pianistimo]

I can see both sides.  I think what Hyrst is making a good point about - is why would a good student want to be babied?  However, Orange made the point that he would pick two of the failing students and help them get caught up a bit.  This is an intruieging idea to me and best used on students that live in the neighborhood or nearby so that gas is not wasted.  As a teacher, i have always been willing to make an effort if the student is at least desirous of an outcome.  These types of students might be handicapped in some area, actually, and need ways to cope and move around 'learning blocks.'  Some students today have trouble learning to concentrate correctly.  They are constantly distracted by outside sounds, noises, etc.  Perhaps everyday repetition of how to get into the 'concentration mode' of practice - and how to establish a good routine.  You tell the good students this - and they 'get it.'  The others might not have the same structure of mind...and need some direction.

After taking a class in tutoring many years ago - it was suggested that you give less and less lessons - and expect more and more - so finally the student is flying on their own and proud of how they got there (with their own effort).  Maybe it could be a deal with parents to get a flying start.  Every other day to start - and move down to two lessons per week the next year.  And, finally one.  With tutoring school related subjects - the idea is to first help the student get organized.  Then, to establish a sort of 'process' for each thing and learning about where to find resources.  Also, to make a schedule and learn to take time to put in the actual amount of time required at whatever it is.  Students today can be too casual in spending less time on the hard stuff and more time on the easier.  Rewards do motivate some of the younger students - and also approaching the same topic several different ways. 

I'm learning that as a teacher, we have to do the same thing.  To make actual notes of our students and think about learning styles for each student.  Temperaments could also be a factor.  Some students do not want extra help because their temperament is to do it all alone.   Some thrive on extra help because they like the social factor.  In fact, duets might be the 'thing' to get them sightreading better and still socializing.  You could almost make more money and have more fun doing the second and third lessons of the week with several students at a time that are somewhat equally paired. 

[0range]

Did you really want other opinions?

I believe that's what I asked for, yes.

If not, why not? Why do you think it wouldn't work for you, or for the student, or for both.

(Repeated here, in case you're not stupid, but merely unobservant.)

Seriously though. It is precisely because I have strong opinions that I want other people's.

There seem to be a lot of suppositions in your statements about how teaching is approached and how students respond to it.

It may be that I am missing your point, in which case, please elaborate. But it seems to me like you're attempting to make some contrast between my opinions, and your own. Mine (namely, giving lessons every-day and the effects thereof) being mere supposition, and yours (or, namely, giving lessons weekly and the effects thereof) being something else entirely. Obviously this is asinine, so I will assume that I am indeed missing your point.

I would have to say that I have rarely seen a student unable to progress during a whole week because they have not resolved one problem (literally about two lessons out of all my students in one year) - any lack of progress has been due to an inadequate approach to practice in general (and these students would be a nightmare to have every day because they like the idea of playing but are unwilling to really work, even during the lesson).

I can't say my experiences as a student have been similar to those that your students have had, which is good for them, because I frequently went through what I described above, and it was a hugely unpleasant experience.

I can't imagine how 10-15 minutes of practice could suffice anyone at a higher than preliminary level, there are just too many 10 minute tasks in an advanced piece - it would take a year to work through one piece at this rate!

10-15 minutes of practice is more than enough to work on a piece for a day.

And anyway, I'm not really interested in having a debate on practice, but rather teaching, and everyday lessons.

[...]record or video the lessons and the students' work so they have clear reminders during the week.

Obviously your teaching approach is very well thought out, and I would imagine you have had successes in it, or you wouldn't keep doing it. I can see how doing things like this are part of that and if I do teach someday, I think I may implement this as well.

(I have some students travel 45 minutes to lessons and the average is 10 minutes - it is unrealistic to expect people to travel that far for a 15 minute lesson every day.  Even as a totally committed and enthusiastic student, this would quickly tire and thus demotivate me.)

This is definitely the biggest obstacle that I see. Although there was one fellow student of mine who traveled around 45 minutes (depending on traffic) for three lessons a week. I don't know if I could do this, though.

I also think that daily lessons takes a progress marker from the students.

I disagree. It creates, instead of one progress marker every week, a progress marker every day. But again, obviously our experiences have differed.

[...]why would a good student want to be babied?

I dislike this term as it is extremely vague. In my mind, a good student has nothing to do with skill or proficiency in any task, but rather with their discipline, attention to detail and ability to follow detailed instruction. I'm unsure if it is this type of student, or merely one that is skilled that you're referring to, but I think it is probably more skill-oriented, correct me if I'm wrong.

For a good student who is also already proficient in piano (doesn't need you to provide things like fingering, can do his own analysis, rarely has technical problems, in short, an advanced student) I don't see the lessons as "babying", rather as coaching, working on musical interpretations, performance issues, etc...

After taking a class in tutoring many years ago - it was suggested that you give less and less lessons - and expect more and more - so finally the student is flying on their own and proud of how they got there (with their own effort).  Maybe it could be a deal with parents to get a flying start.  Every other day to start - and move down to two lessons per week the next year.  And, finally one.

That's the idea. Eventually a student doesn't need lessons, but benefits more from masterclasses.

]4.   Convince the student and parents in a way so they don't have to practice at home because they do it with you. (They can if they want) And… They don’t need to buy a piano from the start. (This can convince them)

Good point!

[hyrst]

Well, Orange, a good debate.  I hope it has caused you to think as much as it has me. We all come from our own experiences and assumptions and these debates hopefully challenge and bring our assumptions to the surface - daring us to look at things potentially from different positions.

Pianistimos' ideal is well founded on educational theory and I think it is a great idea.  I wish there was some way of practically making it happen.

From a business perspective this kind of arrangement seems difficult to manage and it seems that those who would really benefit from this kind of support often are not ready yet to make music that kind of priority.  I often think how much I want a parent to be positively involved with students - and it really is because they have the possiblility then of providing that daily lesson environment and support.  It makes a big difference.  It would be good if it was practical to start daily with new students and 'wean' them off after a number of weeks or terms, or something - and yes, especially the struggling ones.

[musicrebel4u]

I know that a certain poster has mentioned that he only gives lessons on an every-day basis (or possibly a 5 lessons a week basis). I'm curious if any other teachers out there do the same.

If so, what are your experiences, hurdles, or thoughts. What kind of progress have you observed in your students opposed to students given once a week lessons.

If not, why not? Why do you think it wouldn't work for you, or for the student, or for both.

Thanks. (We could also talk about which Chopin Etude is most difficult, or what order you should learn the Beethoven sonatas, or if I'm ready for the Fantasie Impromptu if nobody's interested in this topic.) 

Another scam: to get as much money as possible from slow and non productive way to teach students how to find right keys to right notes. 

[0range]

Well, Orange, a good debate.  I hope it has caused you to think as much as it has me. We all come from our own experiences and assumptions and these debates hopefully challenge and bring our assumptions to the surface - daring us to look at things potentially from different positions.

Indeed, spot on... it makes me feel extremely fortunate to have access to the internet.

It would be good if it was practical to start daily with new students and 'wean' them off after a number of weeks or terms, or something - and yes, especially the struggling ones.

I think, aside from money and logistics, as have been mentioned, the biggest problem with this is, as you said, that the ones that 'need' it the most actually do not need it, simply because they haven't made the necessary commitment to make music a big enough part of their daily life.

Thank you for your input, hyrst.

Another scam: to get as much money as possible from slow and non productive way to teach students how to find right keys to right notes.

You shouldn't be so hard on yourself. I'm sure your notation is not that bad, and you seem rather well intentioned, so I wouldn't go calling your pitch a scam. Cheer up!

[musicrebel4u]

I'm sure your notation is not that bad, and you seem rather well intentioned, so I wouldn't go calling your pitch a scam. Cheer up!

I wish to see more people learning  piano effectively, because as less of them learn - the less want to learn for themselves or their kids. My priorities are - the most effective methods. If you would find something more effective then this, I would be happy and won't call it SCAM.

[a-sharp]

This is not a bad concept. How about small group classes - like 2-4, 3 days/week, for a month or 6 weeks? It's a good idea for a summer program... if you had at least 2 pianos, or a few keyboards....

OTOH, if someone has the kind of $$$ to pay for daily lessons, they'd probably want some super-star teacher - I personally won't hold out for the idea someone would want me for that, LOL.

[alexalin]

See don't worry if your teacher is coming from basics then it would be good for you to know better about piano and piano lessons.

[morningstar]

I wish to see more people learning  piano effectively, because as less of them learn - the less want to learn for themselves or their kids. My priorities are - the most effective methods. If you would find something more effective then this, I would be happy and won't call it SCAM.

And I was thinking you were actualy leaving 6 months ago...

[00range]

And I was thinking you were actualy leaving 6 months ago...

I'm pretty certain he's just a bot. Scans posts for keywords and responds with plugs for it's rubbish notation software.

[morningstar]

I'm pretty certain he's just a bot. Scans posts for keywords and responds with plugs for it's rubbish notation software.

I wonder what words it responds too...? "Crap" for one...