Dictatorship teaching methods

[quantum]

Personally I'm against such methodologies, but some teachers do subscribe to and practice them.  What are your thoughts?

I treat teaching as a dialogue rather than a "do this or else..." mentality.

Some profess that they have achieved high student exam marks because of such dictatorship teaching qualities, but is this really the goal of taking instrument lessons?

[m19834]

I am very recently coming out of what seemed to be some sort of incredibly deep sleep about teaching (well, it extended beyond just teaching) -- who was the prince charming that kissed me ?  

Okay, but that's actually true  .  I won't give the entire skinny on how it's all been working, but I will say that here, on the other side of that coma, it's definitely a little more of a dictatorship than it even used to be.  I have always been pretty bossy ... haha ... but, this is different.  My entire perspective has changed and the things that I am asking of my students now, I know *exactly* why I am asking them of these things, where they will lead to and so on and so forth.  It has completely changed everything for now and re-energized my own attitude completely.  The funny thing is that I can tell that my students are actually getting more out of their lessons in an emotional way now, too (though in a literal way, too).  I was afraid to really ask of them certain things, but as it turns out, they are so far happy (in the lessons anyway) to oblige.  We just had our student recital about a week ago and that kind of forced me around a corner with my teaching.

Right now, formal marks on exams are not something I am concerned about.  However, I am very concerned about individuals living up to their potential, about me passing along something of true value, about keeping certain arts alive and about us using our time wisely together.  You could even say that I am passionate about it   (though generally speaking, I am not at all a passionate person  ).  Now, I will admit that I also use bribery  , and I am also fairly cunning when it comes to tricking them into thinking they have choices and decisions to make ... hee hee.

[lostinidlewonder]

I believe sitting an exam is not about getting a high mark. The work before/after the exam is much more important that the exam mark itself. I personally believe that exams should be abolished and  people should be completely marked on a broader basis, that is work over the entire year, not place emphasis on a single instance, a snapshot in time of their work. It places unfair stress on a student and depending on variables which have nothing to do with the exam or music, they may not make a good result. I believe that exams are an old fashioned way to sort through students although it is still prevalent in this world.

Getting a high mark in exams however could prepare you to do well in public performance. The stress that you may have sitting an exam might help you with the stress you face in performance. Exams however have this "one time only" effect, what I mean is that when you get a high mark in an exam in say 2001 who is to say that in 2010 you will still be playing at that standard? Some people become complacent that they did so well in their exam so they can relax and don't have to do any more work. This is another way that exam results can trick us into not considering the work we do seriously and rather just something where we need to perform in small spaces of time. How many people are cramming experts!!! They work their ass off for a small time to get the high result then go back into their inefficient rate of learning.

I show many sides of the coin (the good the bad the in-between) so that the students don't feel like they are being dictated to in lessons (eg: there is only one way and don't consider the existence any others or teacher will GET YOU!!). Some young students are not developed enough to fully appreciate approaching things with a complete view (they struggle to maintain a single new concept while playing let alone observing multiple simultaneously) and simply work better being told what to do and it being enforced. When trying to dictate the correct method or approach to children I will try to present strong contrasts as to what is good or bad, however as all experienced pianists know as we develop what is good and bad becomes a much finer line, it is however important to highlight right and wrong in a more obvious manner to begin with then we become more and more subtle. As we become more developed pianists changes to our approach really is a situation of "less but more" in the way that you have less change to your approach which produces a much more refined sound/technique. For beginners usually it is the other way around, you put in a huge amount of change to produce baby steps towards a proper refined sound/technique.

[m19834]

I have to add a couple of things to my original post.  I think the main thing with me is that I am teaching mainly people whom need actual building blocks still, and not just artistic opinions.  In all honesty, I have been pretty confused for quite awhile on what, exactly, the basic building blocks even *are* (that has actually been the very main source of my confusion in general about piano playing for quite a while) ... and even though I have been exploring for years different concepts which people would claim are the basics and fundamentals, I didn't feel like I was really, truly solidifying things enough to justify me really *requiring* various things of my students, and I certainly didn't know how to systematically go about doing so.  I mean, for a long time, I could see that certain things would help, but not until very recently did some very specific things come much more fully into focus.  

Honestly, I think there is a fairly widespread confusion on what the building blocks truly are, when it comes to pianism and musicianship.  Look at all the confusion and differing opinions on whether or not to play exercises, whether there is a true HOW to play it, what THAT is and such.  And, I suspect that there is a mass of individuals whom had entered into (mostly inadvertently) a kind of "school" of piano playing where the fundamentals and foundation were not actually established thoroughly, or somewhere along the way they became confused and muddled.  And, the interaction between student and teacher too quickly entered into a kind of democracy because the actual fundamentals were unclear in some respect to both parties, and "artistic opinion" is what was left to fall back on.  And then, over decades, the craft has gradually morphed into being much more about opinion than building blocks and truly defined SKILL.  

I think there are specific skills and specific building blocks, though perhaps there are several ways to build some of those skills and establish the fundamentals, and between TEACHERS, there can be a differing of opinion or preference on how to go about doing that.  I think though that there are many methodologies which never quite get there though ... or else the individuals whom were practicing them somehow never quite embodied the complete ideas.

If I were dealing with individuals whom truly had all of the foundation in place, and they themselves were utterly familiar with the repertoire as a body, with music as a language, that would be another story.  

[quantum]

Lost, I very much understand where you are coming from with regards to exams.  Through much personal experience and that of my students, I do not believe an exam is a true reflection of one's worth of knowledge, musical skill, or ability to apply such knowledge and skill.  Unlike other subjects such as mathematics where in a majority of cases an exam grader could come to a fairly objective decision to weather a question was answered successfully or not, in music this is not the case.  Additionally, in the above scenario multiple exam graders marking the same paper would most likely come to a similar conclusion, where as a musical performance exam could result in widely contrasting opinions depending on the examiner.

Lost and Karli, you both touch on the subject of the cognitive ability of a student.  Sometimes it is necessary to get to know one aspect before a person appreciate diving into a plurality of opinions.  So the question extends, when is a student ready to start such discovery? 

As we become more developed pianists changes to our approach really is a situation of "less but more" in the way that you have less change to your approach which produces a much more refined sound/technique. For beginners usually it is the other way around, you put in a huge amount of change to produce baby steps towards a proper refined sound/technique.

I like how you put this.


How would we define the building blocks?  I'd actually think they themselves encompass a sort of "school."  Are there building blocks that are present across different schools? 

[m19834]

How would we define the building blocks?

Well, I have been trying to think about how to put it into words on the page, and in the most concise way as possible, but what I have arrived at just sounds so ridiculous that it's taken me the better part of the day to work up the guts to write it.  Okay, here it goes :

The basic building block, or the basic concept of playing the piano, is about how we go from one note to the next.

Oh god, right ?  I mean, when I read it I just know it's such a stupid answer !  But, let me explain why this is some sort of epiphany for me.  I didn't have any formal training growing up, with the exception of a couple of years when I was 12/13, then I quit until college.  The main reason I am telling that now is because, the first time I ever saw a virtuoso pianist (or ever heard one), was when I first saw my University teacher play.  I could somehow identify so much with what I was hearing and seeing, yet it was also some kind of magic act to me.  When I finally decided to really study formally, and once I even had some idea of what that meant, mystery after mystery seemed to present itself in the form of people being capable of playing things that I simply was not.  The first time I ever saw a person perform a concerto, wow, what an experience !  But, it was as though it were a magic show to me ... how in the world could that be happening, I thought ?  So, the whole idea of playing started to become something of a magic act to me, something that was seemingly SO mysterious that I couldn't comprehend how it was humanly possible to be doing what those people did.  That threw me headlong into searching for some kind of basic, fundamental 'value' to how it could all come about.

All I will say is that this all took my focus so far into regions that I could hardly find my way out of.  Everything about the piano began to look like something of a dense forest to me, and the piano music itself was something of a dense forest, and the sound itself was something of a dense forest ... it's like I could hardly see one thing from another, nothing was truly defined, everything was blurry and subjective and so entirely baseless, it seemed.  So, it's like I couldn't see the keys anymore, I couldn't feel my hands anymore, I couldn't hear the notes anymore ... I mean, obviously not entirely, but somehow that was what happened.  My every impression of the piano was entirely haphazard and there was almost zero logic to anything as far as I was concerned, yet all the while some part of me felt that what I was thinking and what I was feeling and all of how it seemed just couldn't possibly be true, that there had to be something that I was simply missing.

Anyway.  I know that the 'how' we go from one note to the next is what people do not agree on at the time, but there is something about that which is very distracting from remembering that we are in fact just traveling from one key to the next, and that's about all there is to playing the piano !

The very basic building blocks would be, establishing how we do that in one hand position, and then how we go from one hand position to the next.  I think everything basically boils down to that, whether we are playing advanced music or the simplest little thing.  Well, of course, there is a lot more in there somewhere.

[m19834]

The basic building block, or the basic concept of playing the piano, is about how we go from one note to the next.

(...)

The very basic building blocks would be, establishing how we do that in one hand position, and then how we go from one hand position to the next.  I think everything basically boils down to that, whether we are playing advanced music or the simplest little thing.  Well, of course, there is a lot more in there somewhere.

Okay.   Remembering that each stroke is making the stretch from silence to sound, that in some sense the only way those notes come into a literal sound existence is by you/me putting it there. 

Within the stretch between silence and sound, there lives a world profound.

That world profound is YOU/me.  Everything you have ever thought, everything you have ever learned is bridging that stretch from silence to sound for every, single note.  Of course, there are principles involved in playing the piano (efficiently), but that becomes only an aspect of who you are and 'how' you make that stretch.

Okay, sorry !!  I can't hardly help it.  I still get very excited about piano ... I still get very excited about discovery ... I even get *insanely* excited about a single note that comes into literal sound existence ... in my students.  VIVA LA PIANO !!! 

[CC]

I have always rebelled against dictator teaching methods but had no solutions to the problem until I researched the topic and wrote my book (home page below). Dictatorship methods evolve from a lack of knowledge of the correct teaching methods.  Assuming that the dictatorship method has some positive effectiveness (and most do; in fact, some of the best teachers use it) it is certainly effective in achieving a certain level of teaching.  My belief is that, that level is far below optimum because it is so wasteful.  With a knowledge-based, well researched, method, you can empower the students instead of chaining them to a wasteful lifetime of dedication to an arbitrary system because the teacher doesn't know anything better.  To put it crudely, the teacher is a hired, paid provider of services just as a plumber, and is there solely to provide the most bang for the buck. This myth about talented master musicians (the mask behind which the dictators hide) is mostly bunk -- the majority of people on this earth can become "talented musicians" if they work hard and are properly taught. Most of the "geniuses" we know were created.  What do Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Liszt, Chopin, Michael Jackson, Tiger Woods, etc., have in common?  They all had parents who knew how to teach, and started at an early age. And my understanding is that if we were able to research every "talent" that these "geniuses" had, you will eventually find that there is a way to teach that skill to us ordinary mortals. There is no question that some are smarter than others; however, with the right learning methods, everybody will become smarter, and with the wrong methods (especially dictatorships), even real talent will quit piano (especially the real geniuses). Why did the geniuses cited above succeed?  Because they developed sufficiently early to be able to shake the shackles of dictatorships (Liszt ignored Czerny), and become self-empowered. Today, teachers can provide that empowerment from day one of piano lessons, because knowledge is finally becoming universally available, especially via the internet.  The days of dictatorships are numbered.

[go12_3]

I'm  going to say something here about "dictatorship" because I don't believe in that word in the first place.  It's meaning implicates an order or a command.  Now, as a teacher of my students, there is NO way I would order my students.  Instead, I show them how to learn by guiding them along the way.  If they stumble and make mistakes, it's a part of the learning process. 

I think a teacher has to attain the knowledge in order for the student to comprehend what needs to be learned in a piece.  But, teach with an open and a warm heart because that is the true essence of  teaching a young musician.  It's all a process, the interaction between a teacher and a student when it would benefit both of them.  If there is no positive reinforcement in the learning process then the student's progress would indeed hinder.  The whole body down through the arms and fingertips would affect the ability to strike the keys.  Is there a correct teaching method?  Yes and no.  I feel that each teacher has their tools and skills in which to teach their students because students have diverse skills and abilities, whether it be innate or a learned experience. Talent verus gifted, it depends upon the environment in the teacher's studio and at the environment of the student's home. 

I think sometimes, we get so caught up with the technical aspect of music through our teaching students, that we over look what is in the best interest of the student and what they would desire to learn and accomplish in their lives.  Music has to touch the mind as well as the heart.  It's not just a mechanical objection we achieve because the meaning of music will be taken away and then what would we have instead?   

[m]

To put it crudely, the teacher is a hired, paid provider of services just as a plumber, and is there solely to provide the most bang for the buck.

Sorry, Mr. Chang,

The way you put it sounds not like a plumber, but rather as a prostitute... And here we are talking about a teacher--somebody who takes rather important part in the life and education of the child/student, i.e. giving the knowledge of the language of beauty and imagination, called music.

It is my belief, a doctor who studied piano (or any other instrument) is a much better doctor if s/he wouldn't have. It is my belief, a lawyer who studied piano (or any other instrument) is a much better lawyer if s/he wouldn't have. It is my belief, a plumber who studied piano (or any other instrument) is a much better plumber if s/he wouldn't have.

Indeed, we provide a service.  However, trying to reduce this service to the level of cleaning sewer line?  Excuse me!!! (As a side note, no disrespect to plumbers here).

As for me personally, it is not the student who pays me for my services, but it is me, who choses students, whom I would like to educate as cultural people and have a relationship in that long term journey.

Best, M

[pianowolfi]

Well the concept of dictatorship is per definitionem rather a negative concept. I don't imagine that this approach has any positive affects at all. People who teach with authority and know exactly what they're doing, and why they're doing it, cannot be called dictators.

[lostinidlewonder]

...Through much personal experience and that of my students, I do not believe an exam is a true reflection of one's worth of knowledge, musical skill, or ability to apply such knowledge and skill.

Exactly, and also exams highlight no value of discipline in the student. I have students who do exams at the end of the year get a great result, then have a 2 month break (since summer break happens in December in the southern hemisphere) and do absolutely nothing piano wise! Then we come back the next year and they have forgotten technical patterns for exams (scales, arpeggios etc), pieces are in disrepair etc etc.

 Unlike other subjects such as mathematics where in a majority of cases an exam grader could come to a fairly objective decision to weather a question was answered successfully or not, in music this is not the case.

You can get terribly tough markers and then you can get ones which are overly lenient! More often than not however the result is a fair result and well thought out on the examiners behalf. But I had similar experiences with English Literature examinations, my teacher didn't like my stance on topics and use to mark me down because she disagreed with my ideology even though I presented facts and reasons why I believed the things I did. Piano music is very much the same and your own opinion in an exam might get squashed with a bad mark even though you present a valid argument!

How would we define the building blocks?  I'd actually think they themselves encompass a sort of "school."  Are there building blocks that are present across different schools?  

...... The very basic building blocks would be, establishing how we do that in one hand position, and then how we go from one hand position to the next.  I think everything basically boils down to that, whether we are playing advanced music or the simplest little thing.  Well, of course, there is a lot more in there somewhere.

Building blocks in music, now that is a deep question and can go quite far starting at early childhood musical learning. I think the first building block is understanding what is Beat and Rhythm, we learn it through nursery rhymes, or childrens songs. The next building block is being able to hear sound, if a note played in a piece is right or wrong and what sounds pleasing to the ear as opposed to dissonant. After this comes development in coordination, perhaps being able to tap two beats or rhythms at the same time, being able to coordinate the body to do multiple movements at once if we learn an instrument, early childhood musical learning might get the kids to play with sticks to tap a beat while other children use Xylophones hitting either one or the other note with a specific rhythm etc. Children learn to understand what type of notes are used in modern music, this building block allows us to finally represent musical actions on paper a very important step.

I can keep rattling more and more early developments and steps, but lets skip over to now playing an instrument and choosing piano as the instrument. I would say the first building block in piano music is how to use all the fingers and understanding basic fingering at the keyboard. Be able to play 1 octave major scales, basic triad chords, being able to play standard LH support RH melody beginner pieces etc. The technique to play is not important we should not strive to play at a masters technique but merely what feels MORE right for our beginner hands, we may know what to avoid because it really sucks like using the same finger 2 times in a row for a scale or whatever other newbie error you come across. Understanding newbie pitfalls in playing piano is a key building block to their musical understanding albeit at a very simple level (which becomes much more complicated as they develop).

Coordination is a building block that is constantly improving in the Beginner and intermediate, it lessens more for the advanced as patterns become more and more familiar and what may look unique eventually boils down to a variation of what you have done before. I have some adult students who never had any musical training through their entire life and cannot do simple coordination issues such as patting their head and rubbing their stomach then swapping the hands and reversing the action. It is almost as if they never learnt to walk coordination wise, so we have to take them through the therapy with many games which challenge their coordinatino of their body. And there really are uncoordinated people out there, as a professional pianist I find it completely bewildering and thought at first these people are just joking around with me, but it is a real issue for some people, they literally have not that building block of coordination when it comes to playing music.

The building block of memory work is never ending but first must come the understanding of the existence of it! There are generally three memory types; Conscious Memory (sight reading and observing pattern in sheet music) Muscular Memory (playing a group of notes with one action of the hand that we can "feel" rather than consciously be aware of in logical conscious terms) and Sound Memory (being able to hear the sound of the piece in your head and how that effects the sound that you produce while playing [this also would include the building block of being able to listen to yourself, a very difficult skill to acquire and one which can get very complicated especially for concerting pianists who have to deal with different acoustics for different rooms and different pianos they play on])

There's more blocks of course, but I don't think I have to list them all huh.

[m19834]

hmmm ... When we are talking about a very specific thing, like let's say learning what and where the C's on the piano are, I say to my lovely student "they live here, now please find and play all of them" and they say "well, first of all, I think it's better to call them A and second of all, I like my life better right now if I don't find any of them, actually."  In principle, with regard to the basic attitude, what's the point then in us continuing ?  Sure, maybe they are "interesting" as a person as there is obviously something going on in there, but when it comes to actually learning about music, how do we even start unless they are willing to just do as I ask and learn the thing ?  Even if there becomes subjectivity later on (we could call it 'Do', for example), we at least need somewhere to start and something to stand on and it needs to be some kind of common ground between us, too.  I guess I just don't truly see the wiggle room, so why should I waste my own time and my students time by letting them try to wiggle something like that, especially in a direction that is missing the point ?  Of course there are other things (fundamentals) we could be doing with that time (if they are willing !), but eventually we will have to get back to the one, too.

I believe more and more that all of music is rooted not truly in subjectivity, but in fundamental 'values' and building blocks, from which a greater concept and expression can grow, but if those are missing that is audibly evident in the product and the product is lacking its core.

I think that true musical freedom is not actually rooted in "thinking outside the box" per se, and in never having had to follow a direction outlined by another.  I think that true musical freedom actually comes when every intention, every perception, every fiber of our being is focused in one direction towards the goal of creating music, and accomplishing that goal.  Yes, music is something that we as listeners and performers can feel inside of us, but I hear in others and have very much heard and experienced in myself a large disconnect between what we may be feeling as music inside of us, vs. what is actually coming forth from the instrument.  And, we can get so caught up in the feeling of playing and the feeling of this and that, that we don't truly even realize what's happening (or not happening).  I think that's primarily a matter of clarifying and more clearly defining fundamentals and building blocks, actually.

In any case, if all truly is subjective, my own subjective opinion for now lives on the side of believing that it is actually not entirely subjective, that there are concrete building blocks to be established, and that these need to be learned in one form or another before true expression is really taking place.

[pianoplayjl]

I think how a teacher teaches a student will affect how a student plays. I think a teacher should be more open to a student and some part of lessons should be hands on style.