A great teacher can make a great willing student

[asianpianoer]

hey guys

so a friend of mine told me when she found a great teacher who taught her for 2 months, her skill level doubled and this was when she had finished 8th grade.

So is it luck, that you have a good teacher or that you have teachers that pass you on the great ones?

is it possible that someone with talent could have lost oppotunities as they haven't had the right teaching???

[m1469]

These are great questions and definitely ones that I'm still working out a bit.  What I think right now is a pretty mixed bag of things.  For example, I feel there is definitely something 'to' having the right teacher at the right time.  It is said that when you are ready, the right teacher appears.  But, I think it's possible to have the wrong teacher, too, or at least some kind of mismatch.  You could argue that if there is indeed a mismatch, that the student becomes ready for the right one by realizing s/he has the wrong one, and doing something about it.  But, I think that's a little too idealistic.  I've definitely been mightily surprised in my life though, and in really good ways .

Something I'm really unsure about is the idea of "missed opportunity".  It would be extremely easy for me to feel like my life is full of it.  But, whether that means I won't fulfill my potential (for lack of better wording), I am not convinced.  I don't know that I am any worse off as a human being because of it, either, even though I suspect I might have more repertoire under my belt if things had been a bit different (and maybe I would have had more performing experience).  As long as I fulfill my potential though, what have I actually missed?

What I do believe though is that there are diamonds in the rough.  It makes me feel horrible to think of if I hadn't met certain people and at certain times, and I feel horrible to think of there being individuals in the world that are inwardly starving for the right education, but not getting it.  As a teacher myself, I think about what particular students mean to me, and how rare it actually is to find those one or two students with whom I can truly connect in a way that allows me to seriously pass large amounts on to them.  As a teacher, I have been just as burning for the right student(s) as I have been as a student for the right teacher(s).  What I have realized though is that there are plenty of teachers who don't feel that way, and for a burning student, that can be pretty rough.  I have come to realize it's a mismatch to have a burning student without a burning teacher, or a burning teacher without a burning student.  Strangely, learning can still take place in either circumstance.  But, to think of having a student show up to their lesson every week having looked forward to their lesson all week, to have piano study be the highlight of their life, to adore their teacher and to be working and practicing hard and making progress, and to have a teacher who couldn't seem to care less ... that's ... well, it gives me indescribable thoughts and feelings.  From my perspective right now, I can't imagine doing that to a student but it does happen in the world, and I don't imagine those students are getting the best end of that stick.

Right now though, I don't know how I'm going to be thinking tomorrow, even.  My perspectives are going through drastic changes lately and sometimes things are happening that completely surprise me and haven't been expected at all.  I'm also extremely sleepy  .

[drorperl]

hey guys

so a friend of mine told me when she found a great teacher who taught her for 2 months, her skill level doubled and this was when she had finished 8th grade.

So is it luck, that you have a good teacher or that you have teachers that pass you on the great ones?

is it possible that someone with talent could have lost oppotunities as they haven't had the right teaching???

There's definitely always some luck involved in my opinion

I Think that a good teacher can definitely play an important role in the student's development and studying with different teachers and different approached would eventually shape the piano students a little (or a lot)differently. Having said that, I think that each students brings with him to the lessons his talent, abilities, passion, curiosity etc  and if a student has a great attitude, talent, dedication he surely will find his way to get far one way or another.. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dror Perl. Pianist, Composer, Teacher.

https://www.sheerpiano.com/

Sheer Piano: The First Full Color Piano Music Books
simple jazz & contemporary compositions that are fun for beginner pianists & up

[pianist1976]

is it possible that someone with talent could have lost oppotunities as they haven't had the right teaching???

The crude and sad reality is YES. I still never heard of any great pianist who hadn't had a good teacher and/or a teacher who had inherited the learning of a prestigious piano tradition/school. Talent is great but without canalizing, taming and refining this energy, it's a brute force that has little real value.  

[keyboardclass]

Pianist is right.

[birba]

That may be, but there are certainly cases where the perfect gifted student brought about the fame of a very ordinary teacher.  It's very true that a gifted teacher is going to bring out the best of a gifted student, but a naturally gifted pianist always has the edge.  If, for example, you get a good gifted student studying with the top teacher in Moscow, and an exceptionally gifted student studying with a so-so pianist in New York, who has the advantage?  In my life, I've seen the popularity of teachers (I call them flavor-of-the-month) and schools attracting the creme de la creme, and, consequently, turning out top pianists.

[m1469]

What I really wonder about though is, what if there are two people working together in a glass house way down under the sea?  Or, on the moon?  Or, in the center of the earth?  Or in a cave on a cliff?  Or, in a house with a mouse?  Box with a fox?

And, furthermore, what if nobody else knew but these two?  Are they still gifted?  Did they still accomplish anything?  Is it still something at all?  What if, in fact, they believed they were only very average ... or, if they never thought about it nearly at all even?  

Of course, something is only something if recognized as such by all the right persons.  I wonder who knew first?  The chicken or the egg?

[lostinidlewonder]

Personally I do not believe that a good teacher makes a successful student but it depends. If the student relies on a teacher for everything then they need a good teacher. I had many bad teachers through my childhood who even made me cry but did I give up the piano? I learnt the piano on my own terms not anyone else. Even when I studied with some of the worlds greatest pianists I felt what they could only provide was the networking in the musical industry. Bad teachers teach you a great deal as well as good teachers. You do not always have to have positive experiences in life to learn a lot often we learn a great deal more from negative experiences but it is our own fault if we live in negative experiences and not get ourselves away from it and improve. Some people experience something negative and let it get them down, do not know how to use it to inspire, some do not realize that they are in a negative situation, like a frog in water that slowly heats up.

There is really no magical golden rod of knowledge that a teacher can transfer to their students although some of us would like to imagine there is! There is direction but there is no magical instant change instruction, you must take a concept and work hard with it yourself and use your teacher as a guide, the teacher cannot do the work for you nor can they motivate you to be consistent. I motivate all my students during lessons but I can be certain that this inspired feeling to do work vanishes pretty fast as soon as they are left to their own devices. Self motivation comes not from a teacher (you may learn about its existence and what tools we can use to motivate ourselves) but from yourself and how you deal with life as a whole. Self motivation and discipline is what makes you go far, you can spend a million dollars a year on piano lessons from the best teachers in the world but you will get absolutely no where special unless you actually work on it yourself by yourself.

In the end the student must want to do well and work hard at home the small amount of time with a teacher every week is hardly enough to contribute a large percent to the overall success of your musical journey. I do believe that you can have a bad teacher and not realize it, and also not realize what is best to learn at the piano for yourself or what interests you. I believe that a teacher should be used as a tool to improve the rate of your learning not necessarily as the basis of your learning. People have to start exploring music themselves, make decisions themselves then use their teacher as a compass to ensure that they are still on the right track. Unfortunately most people treat their teacher as the sole source for inspiration and direction in their music which sets them up for troubles (this is ok for a child but when does the teacher encourage them to make their own decisions and acquire a musical taste? A teacher who allows their student to become reliant on them for direction is setting up their student for trouble and insecurity).

In the art world we must walk it ourselves and enjoy it ourselves, then teachers or people who have taken the musical journey much further than yourself can direct and suggest what you should do. I retract in horror for the student who relies completely on their teacher, usually these students do not last long since their motivations do not come from themselves but are created from other peoples expectations. If I meet someone who relies on everything I say I often get them thinking on their own during lessons, when I have students who think they know it all and "do not know that they do not know" I will take them aside and suggest direction, there is always this opposing force you must work against.

For a childs mind a great teacher is very much required. A child can be emotionally crushed by bad teachers or bored to tears and hate music. Often I have had new young children who came from other teachers and find that they have learned only early pieces which sounds like C major scales . These children have even said to me that classical music is boring because of this! They only have this small window and their previous teacher never revealed to them the wonderful, mysterious and various world of music out there.

So for the young mind the best teacher should be sought (if you know that they are very interested in the piano and it is not just a passing curiosity), for adults we can put up with bad teachers (take the knowledge that works for us and discard the others) and learn to move on, but children need to be carefully nurtured. A child can feel trapped and frightened with a bad teacher and adult merely can change teacher.

For adults usually if you socially connect with your teacher then this teacher will set up a good learning environment. Of course what they teach you must work as well, but I find if a teacher treats an adult like a child merely directing and correcting and acting as an authoritative figure it can belittle the adult student and no matter how good the teacher is the adult student will not be in a good learning environment mentally. Of course if you pay $500 a lesson you may not want niceties and merely want to learn a great deal every lesson but knowledge can be wonderfully transmitted when you feel it comes from yourself and comes with great gentleness and clarity, rather than being rammed into you and forcefully changing and acting against your current method. The best teacher can transform your playing without you realizing it most of the times, they can shape what you have, they do not try to recreate you but enhance your very own two hands with personal consideration to your method. If you pay good money for lessons you should expect this. Any teacher can teach the model of perfection but it takes a great teacher to deal with the tools that the students currently has.

A teacher who does not know how to socialize with their adult student should not teach adults, the teaching style should be friendly as such but with periods of serious consideration, in the end you need to be able to laugh at each other as you solve your own problems I have found this to work best with adults and not such much a sterile clinical approach.  

A teacher needs to maintain a good rapport with their adult student. This is of course essential for children as well but I have found that some young children do not require it so much as adults do. An adult want to make friends with their teacher generally where a child needs to respect their teacher but also know they can have fun with them.

[keypeg]

Unfortunately most people treat their teacher as the sole source for inspiration

A teacher for me is someone who transmits skills which I cannot get myself.  Inspiration is not really in the picture.  I self taught piano as a child and could only go so far.  Returning as an adult I had a single session with a retired piano teacher.  She showed me how to balance on the bench, and where I was tight in the shoulders.  In some passages I was using my hands awkwardly stiffening up.  I didn't really understand how dynamics are produced: strong feeling does not mean strong force.  That one hour already enabled me to do so much more than I could do before.  That knowledge grew as I worked with it.  It was then much easier to produce the music as I imagined it to be.  Before that, not knowing the physical ins and outs, I couldn't get close no matter how hard I tried.  We have to have something to work with.  We cannot observe ourselves with a practiced eye or hear things that a good teacher can hear.

So for the young mind the best teacher should be sought, for adults we can put up with bad teachers (take the knowledge that works for us and discard the others) and learn to move on, but children need to be carefully nurtured. For adults usually if you socially connect with your teacher then this teacher will set up a good learning environment. A teacher who does not know how to socialize with their adult student should not teach adults. An adult want to make friends with their teacher generally where a child needs to respect their teacher but also know they can have fun with them.

Have you yourself learned a new instrument as an adult?  I value the friendship with a teacher and it probably happens naturally.  However, social connection is not a priority for studying with a teacher.  As far as taking the good and discarding the bad, that is not realistic for a novice because we cannot tell what is bad.  To sincerely practice bad advice with the results that brings is disheartening.  I have described my experience of that single piano lesson.  I was having lessons in another instrument at the time so I was not inexperienced at that point.  For that reason I valued that lesson all the more.  Socializing does not enter into it.  When we want to learn a skill and an art, we work at it and want to have decent advice.  Consider how difficult it is for an adult to find time, and how precious those 2 or so hours per day practicing can be.  Please do not say that it's ok for us to have a bad teacher as long as that teacher is good at socializing.  Perhaps I am not understanding this as it is meant.

[lostinidlewonder]

Sorry keypeg you caught me during an edit of my post. I thought I should have clarified what I meant by social connection with adults which I did above but it was after you posted reply. I think a teacher must of course first teach but a teacher who can teach well and also have strong rapport with their students, this is where a students money is being spent well. I have always held the notion "Honey catches more flies than vinegar" when teaching and found that when applying this strategy it works all the time better than merely ramming the knowledge in. A teacher who makes the student feel that they are answering the problems themselves is a good teacher.

A teacher for me is someone who transmits skills which I cannot get myself.  Inspiration is not really in the picture.

The inspiration I meant was in choice of music to learn, what interests you in music. Some students have no idea what music they want to learn and merely learn what the teacher sets them. If you are learning an instrument surely you need to know what music interests you or how can you have personal long term goals? We need to work towards something that personally interests us, not blindly be guided and improved. Although some young children take time to develop a musical taste in that case it is ok to blindly guide and improve them! So they at least have a head start when they finally find out what actually interests them personally.

[m1469]

I can't keep my hands out of this topic!  Even though, somehow this is becoming a strange discussion to me.  It's like I can't stay out of it because I'm fascinated by it, but it's as though more and more I can't relate to it, for some reason.  I don't think that we have a soul just to keep it all to ourselves.  I think we are meant to share our intellect, our soul, our wisdom, knowledge, and understanding with others.  And, I think there are people who we can share these aspects with in very unique ways.  Unique maybe to the fit of the two people together.  Somehow along those lines, I think it's interesting that Horowitz, for example, mainly looked up only to Rachmaninov.  It's as though Rachmaninov were the only soul that could somehow handle Horowitz, and even if that's "all" the binding factor was, that's a lot!  You could even say it's golden .  No, it didn't make Horowitz, but Horowitz wasn't the same without it (so I understand him to have felt).

I definitely feel that way about certain things (okay, not "things" but people ... but I'm allowed to be a little shy still once in awhile).  I feel like I've learned a bunch mostly on my own, but there had been something missing for a long time despite what I was learning on my own.  I think it's odd to be critical of individuals who may get stuck in strange or negative situations.  Of course we can learn from negative experiences, but are we truly better off because of the negative experience than if it had been positive all along?  People like to act as though they would know the answer to that, but we don't!  I can tell you something for sure though, there are certain things I thrive on and I know it, and when the right circumstances come together, there's a form of learning during that time that just can't be beat.  Okay?  All I can think is that if people think a teacher is not important, then they have never experienced what I am talking about.  And, perhaps if they don't feel the need to, then that's perfectly fine!

[m1469]

And, btw, there is definitely a point where the student has to be willing to work during the week.  That's true.  But, one lesson can *definitely* affect even every moment after that.

[keypeg]

Your posts are also making me think.  Sorry to have responded over-quickly.

A teacher who makes the student feel that they are answering the problems themselves is a good teacher.

Thank you for clarifying.

This one made me think:

The inspiration I meant was in choice of music to learn, what interests you in music. Some students have no idea what music they want to learn and merely learn what the teacher sets them. If you are learning an instrument surely you need to know what music interests you or how can you have personal long term goals?

What interested me the most when I took lessons and will interest me again was what lies within the instrument and behind music.  It was more like being handed paint brushes, colors, types of brush strokes in terms of the instrument: what can this instrument do and what can I do with it?  In terms of music, I would like to know different kinds of music, even music that I might think right now that I hate, and really learn about them.  Theory, history, genre to get the sense and be able to bring more out.  None of these are specific pieces.  But I think that by being exposed to so many things and getting the insights from an experienced teacher, that in itself forms tastes.  I could not form my long term goals in terms of pieces or type of music at this point.  Can you relate to that?

In any case, I like your definition of inspiration.

[keyboardclass]

There's an old Taoist saying: Of a great leader the people say "I did it myself!"

[m1469]

There's an old Taoist saying: Of a great leader the people say "I did it myself!"

Three things:

1.  I think you made that up, actually.  
2.  The same thing could be said of having no teacher/leader at all, a lazy one, or an otherwise non-effective one, which makes the reasoning pretty fishy.  
3.  I used to believe that fully, and then after that I at least thought I was supposed to.  Now I pretty much think that's BS.  Yes, of course learning can't happen without a student, but why in the world should a student walk away from lessons as though they had been sitting in a room all by themselves?

I'm curious if anybody would care to give a concrete example representing what, exactly, that's supposed to mean?    

[birba]

I think what he's saying is that a great leader will convince the people that they are doing it themselves.
I'm getting the feeling that there is a mix-up in the terms "teacher" and "guru" here.  I, too, had my "guru" who gave life to my love of music and the piano.  She's the one who started me on this trip.  But, after that, I searched out the ones who could give me what I sensed I lacked.  And I got something out of every one of them.  Even the worst of teachers has at least one thing to offer.  But all this esoteric talk about finding the "right" one, being in the right place at the right time, etc. is a little unsettling to me.  Can it be that we're looking for an excuse for not progressing or obtaining what we're striving for?

[m1469]

I think what he's saying is that a great leader will convince the people that they are doing it themselves.

I get the concept, but an example, please?  Also, what I don't get is the point?  What in the world is the point of trying to convince somebody they are doing something they are not?  It's like convincing a drunk guy he can fly, so why not go jump off that building?  A parent is supposed to convince a child that they have raised themselves?  That's ridiculous and false, and breeds false confidence.  I am supposed to be convincing my students that they have been learning all on their own, in fact, and that they needn't bother ever listening to another teacher?  Of course hard work is needed and that they have to do, but I personally believe it's much more appropriate to not aim to trick them into believing they are accomplishing something that they in fact are not.  It doesn't actually breed the needed skills, nor an actual confidence (as in, actually built on *something*), nor even necessarily a trust in oneself.  It can actually be *incredibly* destructive.  Why in the world can't it be OK for a kid to know they started by having their shoes tied for them, then they were shown how and guided until in fact they had sufficiently built the skills to *actually* do it on their own?

I'm getting the feeling that there is a mix-up in the terms "teacher" and "guru" here.  I, too, had my "guru" who gave life to my love of music and the piano.  She's the one who started me on this trip.  But, after that, I searched out the ones who could give me what I sensed I lacked.  And I got something out of every one of them.  Even the worst of teachers has at least one thing to offer.

No matter how a person calls it (though, I acknowledge there can be a difference in how individuals affect us individually), my own thoughts are still the same.  There is a really huge difference between ACTUALLY doing something on one's own or actually being completely alone, vs. having somebody there who is simply convincing the individual of something that isn't true (and, I am beginning to believe that if a teacher needs to convince a student they have done it all by themselves, then the teacher hand't much to acutally offer).  And, there is a huge difference between a neglectful teacher vs. one who is actually working, and the result absolutely can not be described as the same.
 

But all this esoteric talk about finding the "right" one, being in the right place at the right time, etc. is a little unsettling to me.  Can it be that we're looking for an excuse for not progressing or obtaining what we're striving for?

I used to have one teacher say to me "bring me your doubts and I'll give you more" as though that were supposed to be words of deep wisdom.  Seriously?  It's not that I didn't get the wisdom, but I finally realized we needn't interact any longer.  An unwillingness to handle the kind of fear that seems to come with living is very different from simply wanting the right education and teachers.

[fleetfingers]

A good teacher doesn't convince their student that he/she is doing something they are not. A good teacher guides them to make their own realizations. I recently saw this quote from Horowitz: "I think that a large part of the problem in this country is that people are taught how to be taught by someone else, but they are not taught how to be their own teachers."
As a parent, one of the things I've learned is that you have to find a way to get the child to reason and judge for themselves. Otherwise, they will not internalize any given concept. It's kind of like giving them a fish vs. teaching them how to fish. So, it's not so much fooling them into thinking they did it themselves, it's about actually having them do it themselves. I believe this principle can be applied by any kind of teacher or leader.

[keypeg]

I think of it this way:  First off, I do not like the idea of convincing a student he has learned something by himself if he was actually taught.  It is dishonest, and any dishonesty is confusing because we sense what is real and false.  If we cannot trust our senses, that is a downfall in music. 

Another side however is that we are born as learners.  We have an instinct to learn, and we have innate ways of learning.  We can sense the right direction and right solutions even if we go off on wrong tangents.  We see patterns, and we are geared toward certain things.  These kinds of instincts should not be killed off by the wrong kind of teaching. A teacher can go with the student's learning nature and use it.  Situations can be set up where a student finds solutions, and the student can be given time to find those solutions.  These would be guided rather than random.  Or if a student discovers things and shares those discoveries with the teacher, then the teacher can show interest and confirm what is right, what is on the wrong track, or redirect the exploration.  Here the student *is* in  fact doing the learning by himself.  It isn't something untrue he is being convinced of.

I think there are times for direct teaching, and times for this other kind of teaching, and that sometimes it crosses back and forth or is a bit of both.

[m1469]

A good teacher doesn't convince their student that he/she is doing something they are not. A good teacher guides them to make their own realizations.

A concrete example, please?  As far as I am concerned, the teacher's wisdom is still a governing factor and sometimes a student truly is not actually capable of judging for oneself.  Also, context matters.  Ultimately, an aim is present and there is a desire to reach a certain result, and whatever reasoning is taking place and by whomever, it is actually supposed to lead towards that aim.  All reasoning is NOT created equally.

I recently saw this quote from Horowitz: "I think that a large part of the problem in this country is that people are taught how to be taught by someone else, but they are not taught how to be their own teachers."

Do you happen to have a source?  Even if what he says were true (and I'm assuming he's talking mainly about Russia), did him saying that actually help individuals reading it get any better at what they were doing?  Did it actually somehow make them become what they formerly weren't?  Aside from that, there are many outstanding pianists who have come from the country, and as great a pianist and musician as Horowitz was, there were greater overall musicians, too (like Rachmaninov, for example, in my opinion).  Also, Horowitz himself was not exactly known as a legendary teacher, despite his own musicianship and philosophies.

As a parent, one of the things I've learned is that you have to find a way to get the child to reason and judge for themselves. Otherwise, they will not internalize any given concept. It's kind of like giving them a fish vs. teaching them how to fish. So, it's not so much fooling them into thinking they did it themselves, it's about actually having them do it themselves. I believe this principle can be applied by any kind of teacher or leader.

Definitely too simplistic.  There is a pretty huge chasm sometimes between incapability and capability, and the road and journey between those can't possibly be summed up or encapsulated in a paragraph representing a philosophy.  Ideas and philosophies are only so good as they are applicable to the situation at hand.  Any philosophy must have its manifestation in the actual and help an individual gain dominion over the challenge.  If dominion's not being gained, then something's missing.

[keyboardclass]

I shouldn't have been so lazy.  It's from Lao Tzu's Tao Teh Ching.  Here's one translation:
A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves.

[fleetfingers]

Do you happen to have a source?  Even if what he says were true (and I'm assuming he's talking mainly about Russia), did him saying that actually help individuals reading it get any better at what they were doing?  Did it actually somehow make them become what they formerly weren't?  Aside from that, there are many outstanding pianists who have come from the country, and as great a pianist and musician as Horowitz was, there were greater overall musicians, too (like Rachmaninov, for example, in my opinion).  Also, Horowitz himself was not exactly known as a legendary teacher, despite his own musicianship and philosophies.

Definitely too simplistic.  There is a pretty huge chasm sometimes between incapability and capability, and the road and journey between those can't possibly be summed up or encapsulated in a paragraph representing a philosophy.  Ideas and philosophies are only so good as they are applicable to the situation at hand.  Any philosophy must have its manifestation in the actual and help an individual gain dominion over the challenge.  If dominion's not being gained, then something's missing.

https://www.pianoteacherresources.com/html/teacher.html

This is the website where I found the quote. Sorry, I cannot verify it further. I just came across it a couple of weeks ago and liked it. Not knowing when or within what context he said it, I don't know what country he was talking about, but I assumed it was the United States. He settled here and eventually became a U.S. citizen.

In the quote, he is suggesting that people should learn both ways. I didn't mean to imply that a teacher's wisdom is not beneficial, or even requisite.

[m1469]

I shouldn't have been so lazy.  It's from Lao Tzu's Tao Teh Ching.  Here's one translation:
A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves.

Perhaps this is supposed to be profound, but I personally don't find it to be so at this point in my life.  Some of the music world's greatest leaders (not even mentioning other areas of existence) have a palpable presence even very long after their physical presence ceases to be known.   

[keyboardclass]

Hold on a minute.  Tao Teh Ching not profound?!?!?!?!!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

[m1469]

Hold on a minute.  Tao Teh Ching not profound?!?!?!?!!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Believe me, I'm totally buying all of this.  Yeah, its purpose has been fufilled and I feel I have done it myself .  Actually, not true even for a moment.  I didn't bother googling the name but it sounds super duper fake anyway.   Besides, that's not the only way to express that idea and I've already heard it a million times before.  Also, nobody's bothered giving a concrete example and instead aim to sidetrack.  

btw, I'm not foregoing practicing by being on the forum ... I'm sitting in a car for hours.    

[keyboardclass]

I'm watching TV...  Well, you know what they say: The Tao that's profound is not the real Tao (anyway).

[m1469]

I'm watching TV...  Well, you know what they say: The Tao that's profound is not the real Tao (anyway).

Hey, now that's serious profundity .  Pretty soon me read a book ... Crime and Punishment or Beethoven Sonatas?  It's a tossup.  Don't worry though, I barely know the books nor the author nor the ideas exist.  After I'm done reading, I will believe I made it all up myself.

[m1469]

I shouldn't have been so lazy.  It's from Lao Tzu's Tao Teh Ching.  Here's one translation:
A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves.

Yeah, I'm back (and I'm still in the car).  I thought about this a couple of hours ago but didn't say it then.  See, the way my mind works, I'm always trying to get to the most fundamental element to work from, and so, in the off chance that this quote is supposed to be about a Universal Intelligence (or what some might call God), I still disagree that we are "supposed" to end up feeling as though we did it all ourselves, though that does indeed seem to be how things work in this place called earth.  Personally, I believe that if there is a Universal Intelligence, it's meant to be known as such. 

[lostinidlewonder]

What interested me the most when I took lessons and will interest me again was what lies within the instrument and behind music.  It was more like being handed paint brushes, colors, types of brush strokes in terms of the instrument: what can this instrument do and what can I do with it. In terms of music, I would like to know different kinds of music, even music that I might think right now that I hate, and really learn about them.  Theory, history, genre to get the sense and be able to bring more out.  None of these are specific pieces.  But I think that by being exposed to so many things and getting the insights from an experienced teacher, that in itself forms tastes.  I could not form my long term goals in terms of pieces or type of music at this point.  Can you relate to that?

I cannot personally relate to this because I have a very particular musical taste and I am constantly working towards completing a never ending list of pieces. However I do find it in students of my own who do not really have a specific taste in music and like to learn a broad range of pieces and simply learn the craft of piano playing and study. I think it is ok but even with these students I try to encourage their opinion on which piece to learn even if that means playing a few pieces and then asking them to order it in terms of their liking. Some really truly and honestly cannot work out which piece they like more than another which to me is very amazing but it happens! I have always known if I like a piece and if I could imagine I would play it myself, I am really fussy and actually find the great majority of piano solo pieces quite boring which shocks a lot of people when I mention that. If I had to estimate I would say only 10% of pieces composed interest me so much so that I would want to play it, still this provides us with a lifetime of work nonetheless, I find it important to determine what you like because we do not have enough years in our life to complete and master everything that has ever been composed for piano. By determining what pieces inspire us to learn we can discover technique at piano, improve at it naturally without forcing the issue but instead learning what pieces encourage us and forever looking forward to the next piece.




m1469 is asking about an example of where we can make a student believe that they learn things themselves.

First of all the teacher must of course transmit the knowledge to the student to begin with, you don't just sit there silently and meditate and the student reads your thoughts and hey presto they learn something. I don't think anyone is a magical guru like that! But you plant the seeds of knowledge in your student, not by telling them the answer but by edging them towards it this is like attacking a problem from side on.

For example if you teach someone who never uses deodorant and smells terrible every time they come to your piano lesson do you say "Hey you smell bad use some deodorant!" That is direct, why not put some deodorant on a table next to them before they come use some on yourself when they enter and then mention how expensive and high quality this deodorant is and how lovely the smell is and how it can smell different on other people, I wonder how it would react with your skin lets try! In piano you do the same, if they use a wrong finger or expression or whatever, you don't simply correct them you hold back giving them the answer and ask them to consider it themselves. It is like teaching them to fish not giving them the fish as fleetfingers mentioned.

Simply getting a student to focus their attention in particular areas will cause them often to solve their own problems. As you know in piano we can look at so many things at once it is hard to work out what exactly we should focus in on, the good teacher will tackle problems side on most of the time so that the student can learn for themselves, learn to focus on particular areas a little closer without being told directly to do so.

Of course there are instances where you simply tell the student the answer but only in situations where you believe your student is familiar with the error themselves. For errors which are in the realms of "they do not know that they do not know" we must approach the solution not by giving them the answer directly, more often than not they will forget how they achieved the answer and you must remind them more than you need to. I become more of a question generator than an answer provider when tackling issues side on and trying to make the student realize that they know the answer themselves they merely need to focus in on a particular issue. The teacher needs to close off the students mind to things that are distracting them from a solution focus their attention to what is required. By focusing them they will solve things from themselves and they will remember their solution more naturally.

[m1469]

I do understand the idea of attacking something from the side, and very often my own teaching style includes this very much, as well, because I want them to think about arriving at a result and the thinking process is indeed important to their growth and development.  But, my first goal with my own students is to make sure they feel very safe in this process with me.   It can actually be an extremely vulnerable-feeling experience for some individuals to reveal their thoughts to another, and to not only reveal their thoughts but even the ways in which they think.  Part of that safety includes me not just putting them out on an island alone, I want them to feel like they have a guide because there can be some pretty funny turns and I don't want those turns to stop an individual from trying.  While it's important for an individual to develop that skill of thinking through a challenge, some individuals absolutely must have that sense of guidance during that process for awhile.  Sure, it's great for an individual to feel like they can arrive at an answer, but for some it's a much bigger deal to share that with somebody.  As seems to happen for me, I am just realizing as I type this that this is very true for me.  It's true for a couple of students of mine, too.  I think there are several reasons for this.  

No matter what, I will remember those individuals who sat there or stood there or whatever while I exposed my thoughts to them and they listened and guided and thought about it.  How many people truly listen to others?   How many people really think about what that person said and how they think and such?  And, do that with progressive intentions besides?   I am a person who takes things to heart and that all means something to me.  To not feel invisible is both scary and relieving all at the same time.  So, if the goal of a leader is to be barely known to me, I'm sorry, either that's not going to happen because of who I am, or you're not reaching me.  I have a strong desire to thank the idividuals who have seriously put time in with me, and it's hurtful actually to rob me of feeling like "you" cared, just because some philosophy says that a good leader is supposed to make me think I did it all by myself.  See, I really thought I felt you caring about me and now you are telling me I only imagined that and now I don't trust myself.  

If all I've got is reading between the lines, then there's going to be a problem because in my mind there will always be too many possibilities.  There has to be some kind of common ground between us, some kind of transparency, some kind of truce or understanding that we are here because we both love this and learning about it is fun in general, and fun to do together.  Don't rob me of that, please, as aside from music and piano being something precious and beautiful, learning and sharing intelligence is just as precious and beautiful to me.

I can't help it, there are people who have changed my life since the first day we spoke and/or I heard them play.  It's something so beautiful to me to learn with somebody I can be myself with and who I trust.  I would never want to take that away from anybody who felt that way.                  

[keyboardclass]

Sorry, the above posts are too long for me to read.  I don't know whose talking 'universal intelligence', 'universal dumbness' is probably closer the mark!

[lostinidlewonder]

.... my first goal with my own students is to make sure they feel very safe in this process with me.   It can actually be an extremely vulnerable-feeling experience for some individuals to reveal their thoughts to another, and to not only reveal their thoughts but even the ways in which they think.  

I think this is very true and I find this insecurity more obvious with youngsters but also adults need to have a safe environment to learn in and feel like they can make mistakes without being put down. Some even have a negative approach in how they view their own method which makes their efforts less than optimal. A teacher needs to give the student confidence and create a safe environment for them to reveal and discuss their ability.

Part of that safety includes me not just putting them out on an island alone, I want them to feel like they have a guide because there can be some pretty funny turns and I don't want those turns to stop an individual from trying.

I generally find that you can make them feel like they are on their own as you edge them towards the answer by questioning them, and the questions tend them towards the correct focus which will improve whatever you are focusing in on. Sometimes you may ask a question and they do not know which direction to go, why not give them some options and let them choose. I just dislike guidance which is spoon feeding the student, although it has its application especially for the beginner but not too much of this should be used.

I tend to believe that if a student has to learn by me telling them directly more often than not it will not sink into their minds and they will not practice alone at home as easily. However if we approach the problem and I have asked many questions about it and they have answered it somewhat acceptably then they will naturally understand what we are on about because they can relate it to their own answers to specific focus questions. Sometimes we have to edit our students answers which might not be totally correct and as we know in piano the subtle difference between right and wrong can be a very thin margin. We often need to reveal the small difference to the student and encourage them to rethink their answers while considering what is right and wrong and how close the difference actually is.

No matter what, I will remember those individuals who sat there or stood there or whatever while I exposed my thoughts to them and they listened and guided and thought about it.  How many people truly listen to others?  

I find this a lot with teenage students of mine, sometimes the lights will be on but no body is at home. This is why if I am relaying answers to the student and they are not totally awake then it is in one ear out the other. So by questioning the student you require that you have the lights on and people at home! If they are not at home then you will realize it through the answers they give. It is quite amusing sometimes because I have taught students who merely stare into oblivion and do not realize that I have even asked them a question! They all of a sudden wake up when I stop talking and wait for their response. And then even you can hear a response but it is half hearted or without real thought. You need to get the student to demonstrate, take away talking and focus in on physical results. An answer to a piano lesson question should not only be words but words with direction at the keyboard, this combination is a full answer. Too many teachers leave things in terms of words which simply will be forgotten and not practiced when the student is alone even if you write it into their journals, paste it on their foreheads etc. And merely teaching the action without words leave the student with insecurity as the muscular memory may be misconstrued without conscious thought keeping it in line.

I have a strong desire to thank the idividuals who have seriously put time in with me, and it's hurtful actually to rob me of feeling like "you" cared, just because some philosophy says that a good leader is supposed to make me think I did it all by myself.  See, I really thought I felt you caring about me and now you are telling me I only imagined that and now I don't trust myself.  

I tend to believe that I care a lot more for my students by attacking problems through questioning the student. If I merely give them the answer and ram jam it to them it is almost arrogant of me as a teacher, I disregard the students own time required to answer the question and merely tell them the answer and expect them to follow. If they do not follow I break the answer up until they can swallow it. I use to teach like this and still do for early beginners who learn simply a lot faster by accepting things and not thinking too much, they can think later on. And my students appreciate lessons more when I get them to solve their problems, we can have fun and laugh about incorrect answers and see why they are not right, and we can get interested as we analyze and study the correct path. Always being on the right path sometimes is simply not helpful for a student, they have to make mistakes in lessons and the teacher needs to see how they made their mistake and how they deal with it. A lesson where you only talk about what is right and proper is too complicated and often students will have their lights on but not be at home!

Sorry, the above posts are too long for me to read.  I don't know whose talking 'universal intelligence', 'universal dumbness' is probably closer the mark!

If they are too long to read then it is true that "YOU DONT KNOW"

[m1469]

Lostinidlewonder, thank you for your response.  I don't understand why, but once again I can't quite relate.  I mean, I DO relate in many ways, but it's all in the ways that I teach my own students most of the time (and ways in which I have literally raised the kids I've nannied).  But, even though there are elements in these descriptions which may crossover with my own study with my own teachers, there is something very much missing which can't be actually put into words, but also seems not even to be hinted at here.  Music is magical and it can be present in a room even while nothing is being said or played or even while there is talk about something else almost entirely. 

To make a musical connection with somebody, that somehow trumps almost everything else.  And, to build a lesson from that musical connection I think seems to almost naturally include many of the ways of transferring information at the right times.  Yes, there's obviously still thinking going on and work being done and maybe one way of doing something could be better than another.   But, what I am talking about is two people who love the instrument and who love music and who love learning and growing, and who have already been nurturing this and developing this and otherwise living this for nearly their entire lives.  When it's built on that, something's very different.  What I think I have realized the most clearly is that, perhaps what I am feeling and thinking and experiencing goes beyond the scope of the capabilities of this thread.  And, not just because there's a difference between reading about something vs. experiencing it in person (though that is true).         

[keyboardclass]

If they are too long to read then it is true that "YOU DONT KNOW"

Generally I find those who type the most, know the least - there's a saying there somewhere.  I don't know where anyone finds the time to digest all that rambling.

[lostinidlewonder]

.... Music is magical and it can be present in a room even while nothing is being said or played or even while there is talk about something else almost entirely.  

I guess we all can experience music in a different way, but I don't see how this experience aids in teaching (the talking about something else entirely however has application).

To make a musical connection with somebody, that somehow trumps almost everything else.  And, to build a lesson from that musical connection I think seems to almost naturally include many of the ways of transferring information at the right times.  Yes, there's obviously still thinking going on and work being done and maybe one way of doing something could be better than another.   But, what I am talking about is two people who love the instrument and who love music and who love learning and growing, and who have already been nurturing this and developing this and otherwise living this for nearly their entire lives.  When it's built on that, something's very different.  What I think I have realized the most clearly is that, perhaps what I am feeling and thinking and experiencing goes beyond the scope of the capabilities of this thread.  And, not just because there's a difference between reading about something vs. experiencing it in person (though that is true).        

I have a student who loves piano and really romanticizes the idea of playing the piano (reads about the lives of composers and always discusses stories with me). However he needs to focus on the actual hard work that needs to go into achieving quality playing and constant improvement. It is nice to think about music and enjoy it but there is the other side of it which is simply hard work and discipline this is what teachers need to work with but of course we must ensure that the student actually loves the instrument or has at least some kind of personal interest in learning it. I like to think hard work before enjoyment, but all lessons should focus on the love for music but we work hard because we love it so much.

Generally I find those who type the most, know the least - there's a saying there somewhere.  I don't know where anyone finds the time to digest all that rambling.

You don't have the time to read it so how do you know it is rambling? Don't feel intimidated that some people can talk about music and express themselves with more words, it doesn't mean that you are a lesser person. However you do look stupid critiquing merely length of posts without even considering the content.

[keyboardclass]

Let's not forget - empty barrels make the most noise.

[pianowolfi]

Perhaps this is supposed to be profound, but I personally don't find it to be so at this point in my life.  Some of the music world's greatest leaders (not even mentioning other areas of existence) have a palpable presence even very long after their physical presence ceases to be known.   

This is true.

[pianowolfi]

Sorry, the above posts are too long for me to read.  I don't know whose talking 'universal intelligence', 'universal dumbness' is probably closer the mark!

"Too long for me to read?"

Some of my students tell me in all seriousness that a piece of 2 pages is "long".

They aren't even the worse learners. No.

But everything that is beyond one page simply overwhelms their imagination...

[keypeg]

I have found the Horowitz quote - sorry that the URL is so long.  It is on p. 127 but starts on the previous page.   There is a paragraph (middle of p. 126)  in which Horowitz discusses teaching and students amidst a longer talk on a number of subjects.

Addendum: To really understand what he says you have to go to the beginning.  Horowitz starts by talking about how he relates to and interprets music, and why he is against recordings.  That outlook would also be there when he teaches so what he writes can't make sense until you have that part too, I think.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=_hFIZD5bnVgC&pg=PA127&lpg=PA127&dq="I+think+that+a+large+part+of+the+problem+in+this+country+is+that+people+are+taught+how+to+be+taught+by+so

[asianpianoer]

I have a student who loves piano and really romanticizes the idea of playing the piano (reads about the lives of composers and always discusses stories with me). However he needs to focus on the actual hard work that needs to go into achieving quality playing and constant improvement. It is nice to think about music and enjoy it but there is the other side of it which is simply hard work and discipline this is what teachers need to work with but of course we must ensure that the student actually loves the instrument or has at least some kind of personal interest in learning it. I like to think hard work before enjoyment, but all lessons should focus on the love for music but we work hard because we love it so much.

haha my teacher is almost he opposite of that.I want to get down right into playing.... not that i'mnot interested in lives and stores etc. But... he can talk. once in a 1hr and 40min lesson I only actually played for 8 minutes and the rest was talking. maybe 20mins on my piece and the rest on pianos and other background knowledge

[fleetfingers]

I have found the Horowitz quote - sorry that the URL is so long.  It is on p. 127 but starts on the previous page.   There is a paragraph (middle of p. 126)  in which Horowitz discusses teaching and students amidst a longer talk on a number of subjects.

Addendum: To really understand what he says you have to go to the beginning.  Horowitz starts by talking about how he relates to and interprets music, and why he is against recordings.  That outlook would also be there when he teaches so what he writes can't make sense until you have that part too, I think.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=_hFIZD5bnVgC&pg=PA127&lpg=PA127&dq="I+think+that+a+large+part+of+the+problem+in+this+country+is+that+people+are+taught+how+to+be+taught+by+so

Thanks for finding the source of the quote and sharing it with us! It does have more meaning when read within its context.

[keyboardclass]

Thanks keypeg.  How nice to read the thoughts of a great man.  Now that could never be too long!

p.s. tinyurl.com is good for shortening urls.

[birba]

haha my teacher is almost he opposite of that.I want to get down right into playing.... not that i'mnot interested in lives and stores etc. But... he can talk. once in a 1hr and 40min lesson I only actually played for 8 minutes and the rest was talking. maybe 20mins on my piece and the rest on pianos and other background knowledge

That reminds me of the time I went to Agosti's for a lesson, and he spent the entire time talking about and analyzing Verdi's Othello.  Grrrrr.........!!!

[asianpianoer]

what's agosti's

[pianist1976]

what's agosti's

Please!!!!! Not what but who! 

https://www.google.com/search?hl=enf&q=guido+Agosti

[keyboardclass]

You mean not a spaghetti house?

[birba]

 

[pianist1976]

You mean not a spaghetti house?

I never heard that brand. I use to buy Buitoni 

[birba]

And here I thought she -he was talking about a place you go to eat spaghetti.  Like  Pancake house.   

[pianist1976]

Yeah, Mr. Pankake. That great piano teacher