Easiest and most difficult concepts to teach?

[m1469]

I realize that everybody is different and have different strengths both mentally and physically, but I wonder if in teaching you find recurring patterns between a larger population of your student-body in what are generally more difficult and/or easy concepts to teach?  

[ajspiano]

I havent personally noticed anything, but I think that's because my students have always been far too varied in age and in what exactly I'm teaching them for me to draw comparisons between them that would hold any weight. Too many variables.

I did have a chat a few weeks ago with a woman who teaches a lot of young children, primarily beginners in the 4-8 kind of age group, very well qualified lady (AmusA, LmusA, Bmus, Mmus) ..She talked about how a lot of children experience difficulties when first attempting to play together in regard to the different coordination challenges presented by similar motion vs contrary motion. And, the reading challenges presented by reading on 2 lines and coordinating reading 2 different lines with 2 different hands. She mentioned that she'd had some students who struggled for a long time with piano, only to go on and excel on a single note instrument with ease.

[quantum]

The concept of balance is a recurring pattern I have found.  More specifically: achieving balance when applying a concept or technique.  I'm sure you've all experienced the situation where you ask a student to do something, and they end up overdoing it. 

Especially with newly introduced concept I find that students are unaware of the bounds of which to apply that concept. 

[pianoplayjl]

Definitely the most difficult has to be rhythm IMO.

[faa2010]

Definitely the most difficult has to be rhythm IMO.

I agree with pianoplayj, as well as working with the metronome and putting colour to the piece.

[pianoplayjl]

I agree with pianoplayj, as well as working with the metronome and putting colour to the piece.

I disagree with the latter part of your statement. It is up to the student to create colour into the piece of music by using their imagination and at the same time making the music musical so that it is in line with the laws of music. Metronomes are a nightmare. Here I am in 8th grade and still struggling to follow the metronome. IMO the metronome only makes matters worse for anyone who doesn't know how to use and follow the metronome.

JL

[m1469]

Thanks for the posts here.  Yes, obviously we could agree or disagree about what are considered objectively difficult or easy concepts to teach (and some people are branching into that being from the perspective of the learner), but I am specifically wondering about whether a teacher experiences particular subjects throughout a large % of their actual student-body.  So, I'm wondering what is the actual experience people have, not just philosophically what one considers to be the most difficult or easiest.

For me, part of what brought this subject up is that I find myself having the most difficult time "teaching" very basic posture and technically related subjects - so that it all develops -over time- in a way which forms a kind of complete package of working parts.  Part of that is very psychological for me, in that when I see something which needs correcting, I think about the many steps I myself have consciously gone through to gain in the ability to be truly more efficient (and there's always more that can be accomplished, too).  It's been really quite a process with several ideas involved and a particular vigilance that many could label as obsessiveness.  And, sometimes it seems that's the only road to it, and I wonder who in the world would be actually willing to walk down that same road?  But, maybe the precise form my own road has taken is more unique to me than it seems and not everybody would have to walk down the exact road to reach helpful, efficient and needed forms of knowledge and skill.  I don't know.  

I think that I'm brinking on seeing the need to change a facet of my teaching style.

[quantum]

Part of that is very psychological for me, in that when I see something which needs correcting, I think about the many steps I myself have consciously gone through to gain in the ability to be truly more efficient (and there's always more that can be accomplished, too).

You are not the only one who has experienced this.  I think that teachers can be very eager to bestow their vast body of knowledge to a student - to pass on all what he/she has learned.  The teacher has the luxury of stepping back and placing specific concepts in the big picture.  However, a student most likely does not yet have a sense of that big picture: not all the bricks have been laid in order to see the house. 

A teacher can see the points for improvement a student can take, and all the inter-related concepts the student needs to learn in order to achieve progress.  However, to the student each one of these small concepts is a leap in understanding and growth.  Of course the teacher would like the student to amass all this knowledge in order to move forward.  The important point IMO is that this does not all have to happen at once.  The journey of learning is key in the formation of the big picture.   

[m1469]

You are not the only one who has experienced this.  I think that teachers can be very eager to bestow their vast body of knowledge to a student - to pass on all what he/she has learned.  The teacher has the luxury of stepping back and placing specific concepts in the big picture.  However, a student most likely does not yet have a sense of that big picture: not all the bricks have been laid in order to see the house.  

A teacher can see the points for improvement a student can take, and all the inter-related concepts the student needs to learn in order to achieve progress.  However, to the student each one of these small concepts is a leap in understanding and growth.  Of course the teacher would like the student to amass all this knowledge in order to move forward.  The important point IMO is that this does not all have to happen at once.  The journey of learning is key in the formation of the big picture.

Well, yes.  For me, also, at this point, sometimes each step in teaching is a bit of a leap of faith, like taking apart an engine a little bit.  I have this sense of "If I take this apart, am I going to be able to put it all back together" and that can be ... something to deliberate over.  It's also a particular area about my teachers that I deeply, deeply admire (and continue to grow in admiration and appreciation for), because from my standpoint, they both took a very huge, life-sized leap of faith on me (and seem to continue to do so) to the extent that it's not even describable.  But, maybe to them it didn't/doesn't feel quite the same as that, I don't know.

Part of all of that is that the teacher isn't the only person in the equation.  My wondering if taking something apart is a good idea or not also has very much to do with my perception of the student.  And, in myself, yes, my teachers have taken what seems like a huge leap of faith on me, but I also have been somewhat married to the commitment myself and my own experiences thus far as well as my own intuition (and perhaps some stubbornness) have played a role, as well.  Don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly aware there's no ultimate ceiling, I'm just reflecting on my path for the sake of my students.

So, it's like I do this summation of my perception of my students as people and what they are demonstrating as pianists in my studio, and then I tend to also compare them to my own self/path to try to understand what it really takes, and in many cases the equation is not encouraging for me as a teacher.  And, I find myself sometimes not knowing how to deal with that summation.  I think though that I am doing something falsely.

For the first time in my teaching I am actually starting to build a certain program upon which certain materials that I've never required before, like some Czerny, are now required for very specific purposes.  Part of that is in realizing the need to build more of a pianistic offense vs. only being on the defense, meaning getting to problems before they occur instead of putting myself in the position of needing to take the engine apart before putting it together.  It still requires a bit of a recipe, though, between teacher and student and materials, in order to be "the perfect storm" ... at least it seems.    

[nyiregyhazi]

I disagree with the latter part of your statement. It is up to the student to create colour into the piece of music by using their imagination and at the same time making the music musical so that it is in line with the laws of music.

And how are they going to know how to do that- unless you teach them what makes music musical? Students don't magically know these things or stumble across them by random applications of imagination. They need to be taught principles of what makes for a musical line.

[pianoplayjl]

And how are they going to know how to do that- unless you teach them what makes music musical? Students don't magically know these things or stumble across them by random applications of imagination. They need to be taught principles of what makes for a musical line.

Exactly! thx for that point!

[nyiregyhazi]

Exactly! thx for that point!

Actually, did I misunderstand you before? I had the impression that you meant it's down to the student to put colour in- rather than for the teacher to teach them how to do so? Perhaps that wasn't what you meant, though?

[49410enrique]

i am still taking lessons so this isn't from someone 'teaching' but for me the hardest to 'learn' thus prob the most difficult to teach was (and 'is' in regards to contuing to improve on it) discipline.  this is very instrinsic in nature and very much motivation driven so it's hard to get such a broad concept across in lessons, how exactly do you teach a student the importance of delayed gratification, persistence, the ability to tell yourself again, again again when practicing and when planing to practice, these are beefy fairly abstract concepts, if i had a student i wouldn't even know where to begin!

[49410enrique]

. IMO the metronome only makes matters worse for anyone who doesn't know how to use and follow the metronome.

JL

u r wise beyond your years young jl, this is a very profound and true statement

[slane]

I did have a chat a few weeks ago with a woman who teaches a lot of young children, primarily beginners in the 4-8 kind of age group, very well qualified lady (AmusA, LmusA, Bmus, Mmus) ..She talked about how a lot of children experience difficulties when first attempting to play together in regard to the different coordination challenges presented by similar motion vs contrary motion. And, the reading challenges presented by reading on 2 lines and coordinating reading 2 different lines with 2 different hands. She mentioned that she'd had some students who struggled for a long time with piano, only to go on and excel on a single note instrument with ease.

My daughter is having trouble with this, although at this stage its very few of her pieces that require two hands together. Did the lady have any hints as to how to help? Or is it just practice practice practice?

[mcdiddy1]

Easiest-how to produce sound on the piano. Unlike other instruments like woodwinds, brass, and strings, where you have to do certain movements and changes to the body in order to produce a sound any piano student can learn to play a piece in about ten minutes.

Hardest-Imagination and forming and interpretation. Most of the students I have taught tend to view piano as a keyboard where you must play a piece in one way and one way only. They tend not to experiment with sound and different ways. To them it is either right or wrong because of how we have been condition to think is that the teacher is always right and your input does not matter.  I think what good musicians from great musicians is the drive to look deeper, work harder, to create music that speaks with a unique voice and emotion and it is difficult to teach a student to do that in and unartificial manner

[doreen]

Rhythm

[jpahmad]

So far for me it's been that moment when your beginning students first coordinate both hands at the same time.  They may play HS separate well, accurately, counting, everything, but when we begin HT they get thrown off by it and it takes some major surgery to build it up.  I usually have to chop up the measure and then build it up slowly.  I'm pretty sure this is because HT is a completely different sensation.  Some kids just get really frustrated and they usually say something like "can I just play the right hand"?  I say "no." 

The good news is that once they break though that HT barrier, and get the feel for it, everything they do after that (HT) comes much easier.

jp

[lostinidlewonder]

I find the easiest for students to learn is naming notes on the piano and score however the most difficult concept to teach how to do this effectively with pieces. Sight Reading hands down is the toughest concept to teach and master. I have a number of high level students who read inefficiently and the drugery to bring them up near to their playing level often leaves a bad taste in most of their mouths. It is difficult to get students to practice their pieces with discipline, but to get them to practice sight reading (which is more mentally strenuous than playing from muscular memory) is even harder.

I find the majority of music students these days are taught how to play pieces rather than how to learn. It is a common issue with almost all musical examinations in this world, the rate in which a student learn is never examined. I can't tell you how many high level students I have taught who cannot sight read at a high level but can play at a high level.

Self discipline is also a very difficult concept to teach, that is studying when you do not want to and ensuring you work every day. It is an uphill battle to make improvements in a students discipline because often it has nothing to do with music but the very way they live their whole life.

[jpahmad]

"I have a number of high level students who read inefficiently and the drugery to bring them up near to their playing level often leaves a bad taste in most of their mouths"


What specifically do you have them do in class or at home to practice sightreading?




jp

[lostinidlewonder]

"I have a number of high level students who read inefficiently and the drugery to bring them up near to their playing level often leaves a bad taste in most of their mouths"

What specifically do you have them do in class or at home to practice sightreading?

It is a difficult question to answer specifically since each student is different but I'll try to get to the "tip the iceberg" so to say. I feel repertoire study is what most advanced students need rather than drilling exercises to be able to readily play scales, chords, arpeggios in various key signatures, however I find that there are some of my advanced students who indeed need help being able to deal with the basic building blocks! Of course many of my advanced students can sight read easier grade but the point I was trying to present is that the difference between their playing abilty and sight reading skill is often too imbalanced.
 
For my advanced students I like to train them with many different compositions depending upon which style of piano music suits them best however I have found that J.S Bach is a common tool I use and especially the WTC fugues to help them with their sight reading. I wont go into the details of how we learn to read the music more effectively because I will end up writing a book but i find that from learning to read Bach's part writing effectively this has far reaching effect in how they read other works and especially develops a good sense of fingering. Some of the easier to sight read preludes and fugues in Book 2 that I have found that my advanced students generally work with include: 5f,6f, 7pf, 9f,12p,20p,21f,22f. I do not ask for speed but ask the students to strive for even timing and good fingering even if that means slowing the tempo right down.

I am very interested in conscious observations that we make in the score, patterns which help us read more of the score at once without having to read every single detail. Part writing is wonderful to use because most students cannot help but consider every note that is played (since often we have many melodies coming together to create a mass of sound). So if the student masters sight reading part writing they have good coordination and mental awareness to be able to read other works and their layers (which often are not so note weaving as part writing). There are of course many other Bach pieces other than the WTC. I usually provide my students with a large collection of easier graded Bach pieces that are not too rhythmic or full of ornamentation.

One of my students like Scriabin very much and we came up with this list of pieces for his sight reading and it has been a wonderful journey and certainly has helped him learn Scriabins more complicated works faster. The sight reading works included Prelude+Etudes: Op 11 no 2,3,4,9,10,15,17,22, Op 13no3, Op 15 no 1,4, Op 16 no 1,3,4, Op 17 no 3,4, op 22 no 1,2, op 27 no2, op 31 no 1,4, op 35 no2, Op 37 no 1, op 48 no 2.

I also encourage my more advanced students to be able to read more contemporary style pieces fluently by sight, popular music in movies, shows etc (1920s onwards). I often get them to read a lot of works in this style (and since I am an avid cocktail style pianist next to my trained classical style I enjoy teaching the creative process of improvisation to them through the sight reading as well). One book I like to use is Readers Digest Treasury of best Loved Songs which has a number of gems.

The problem with sight reading study is that you need to do a large number of works and keep cycling through them. It requires consistiency to work properly. The magic of sight reading however is that you never lose the skill like you may forget how to play a piece by muscular memory. Once you acquire the skill to read effectively you do not really lose it (at least I have noticed in myself and my students that we do not lose any skill with no practice but of course you don't become any more efficient!).

I find many of my advanced students have a huge list of pieces that want to work on and have little interest improving their ability to read works which is not exactly on their list! They are not interested if they can sight read easier graded pieces from start to finish at a high standard. But I cannot push them to be able to sight read works at their playing level immediately, it is impossible to do so effectively. Most of them just do not want to go through the stepwise process which takes many years to get their reading skill level closer to their playing skill level, most students I find are repertoire orientated not so much interested in the rate in which they learn on their own, they tend to use me in lessons to help them in that area!!! But I do not want to have to decipher the music for them and show them the way, I'd rather teach them to fish for themselves, I certainly would like to expect it from advanced students. I guess many of them took 10+ years to get to play at the high level that they do, they feel defeated if they then have to go back and study pieces which seem too easy for them to play by muscuar memory (but challenge their reading ability).

I was a terrible sight reader in my teens but played at a high level, what got me into sight reading however was being able to play music immediately without hours and hours of practice. It empowered me and excited me but I had to be modest and start at a lower grade which made me feel stupid of course (and very angry when I couldn't read something many levels below my technical capability IMMEDIATELY!). Now I can explore most works immediately without having to search for recordings, it certainly empowers you.

Any ideas how to improve advanced students sight reading or how to encourage students to study reading would be greatly appreciated.

[jpahmad]

O.K. , I have a good way of looking at it.  I'll start in chronoligial order:

I feel repertoire study is what most advanced students need rather than drilling exercises to be able to readily play scales, chords, arpeggios in various key signatures, however I find that there are some of my advanced students who indeed need help being able to deal with the basic building blocks! Of course many of my advanced students can sight read easier grade but the point I was trying to present is that the difference between their playing abilty and sight reading skill is often too imbalanced.
 

Well, I agree with the repertoire study.  Kill two birds with one stone, actually, more like five or six.  I think though it's pretty industry standard for students to sight read on a lower level than their repertoire level.  I mean, I've met very few people, maybe one or two, who could sight read something like a four part fugue or  maybe a Liszt sonata, at tempo, with dynamics, while talking about the composer's personal life at the same time.  I think both these individuals were college professors, with a "Dr." in front of their name.  Well, unless, are you one of these people?

 
I do not ask for speed but ask the students to strive for even timing and good fingering even if that means slowing the tempo right down

Now, if you slow the tempo down to a crawling speed, or even a walking speed, is that still sight reading?  Because, in that case I can sight read the Rach 3.

But I cannot push them to be able to sight read works at their playing level immediately, it is impossible to do so effectively. Most of them just do not want to go through the stepwise process which takes many years to get their reading skill level closer to their playing skill level, most students I find are repertoire orientated not so much interested in the rate in which they learn on their own, they tend to use me in lessons to help them in that area!!

Well, I think you have a lot of great ideas to offer your students.  But, you answered your own question.  You said it, you can't push them to go home and read music like they're casually reading a book, and this is what is neccessary for developing the ability to read music fluently.  They have to want to do it.  They have to just want to sit down at the piano and read different things.  They're not going to do it if they don't find it enjoyable.  I for one, love to just sit at my piano, open up my books and read anything.  I'll read orchestral scores too, whatever, it is relaxing and enjoyable to me.

But herein lies the classic chicken or the egg riddle.  How do they find it enjoyable if they can't do it well.  And how will they put forth the effort to do it well if they don't find it enjoyable?

I was a terrible sight reader in my teens but played at a high level, what got me into sight reading however was being able to play music immediately without hours and hours of practice. It empowered me and excited me but I had to be modest and start at a lower grade which made me feel stupid of course (and very angry when I couldn't read something many levels below my technical capability IMMEDIATELY!). Now I can explore most works immediately without having to search for recordings, it certainly empowers you.

I had the same experience.  I could play at a much higher level than I could sight read.  But, I felt insufficient and I new that I wanted to have the ability to comprehend and reproduce the written score rapidly.  That was an intriguing skill to me and I wanted to have it.  So I busted my $ss reading for hours on end until I had made some improvement.  Your right, I had to start with really basic stuff, but surprisingly, I started to enjoy doing it, even the easy stuff, once I saw that I was developing.

So, to help you out, I think that students need to have a taste of what it feels like to be successful in sight-reading.  I think that once you hook them, somehow, it will pick up momentum on its own.; They will then go home and start reading random music, and maybe kind of enjoy it.   But as teachers, we got to get them to that point through trickery I think.  Here are some ideas:

I like to use Czerny Op. 599 for sight reading only.  This is because there are repetitive rhythmic patterns and repetitive harmonic patterns.  Plus alberti bass and broken chord figures for the left hand, stuff that's easy to digest.   So, by using this material, I eliminate many of the variables that would be present in a regular piece of music.  It is also very easy to see groups of notes.
When my students begin learning a new piece, I force them to read from the score.  I don't want them to memorize it.  I want them to develop a relationship between what they see on the page and where their hands are moving.  How do I force them?  Well, I tell them as they play for me I'm going to stop them at any moment and have them point to which note on the score they just played.  They may memorize it anyway, like finger memory, but that's fine.  As long as they are making some kind of association between what the hands are doing and what they're looking at.  This hopefully builds a sense of dependency on the score.  That's good...for now.
I tell them that they won't get really good at it for a long time.  This relaxes them and makes them feel better about their progress.  That's the truth though, as you said above, people need to have a lot of experience with a lot of repertoire before they develop into good sight readers, and that just takes time.  Other than that, I suppose I just hope the kid will like piano enough to do what I did and am still doing:  Play a lot of stuff and read just for the fun of it.  What else can you do?  You know the saying, "you can bring a horse to water...."

Thank you for sharing your ideas with me though,

jp

[lostinidlewonder]

An interesting/educational reply jpahmad!

I think though it's pretty industry standard for students to sight read on a lower level than their repertoire level.  I mean, I've met very few people, maybe one or two, who could sight read something like a four part fugue or  maybe a Liszt sonata, at tempo, with dynamics, while talking about the composer's personal life at the same time.  I think both these individuals were college professors, with a "Dr." in front of their name.  Well, unless, are you one of these people?

You are right that it is pretty standard for students to read lower than their playing level, we never really strike up an equilibruim but we can aim to limit the distance between them. I certainly can play repertoire much more difficult than my reading level, I play many pieces which are just impossible to sight read immediately at tempo (however I continue to improve my reading skills, it will be a never ending journey just like repertoire study). Even easier pieces which are written with rapid tempo are sometimes impossible to sight read immediately at tempo but feel this is not important. I do not find that being able to sight read challenging works for yourself immediately at tempo is an important skill. This is becaue of the nature of sight reading and learning music, instead of merely muscular memorizing bars/phrases at a time, we merely sight read through the entire piece over and over again and eventually it predominantly becomes mastered. It is like how Rolf Harris drew the Queen, start with a rough idea and hone in onto the final product. That is how I see sight reading and how I feel most of my students like to deal with it also.

Now, if you slow the tempo down to a crawling speed, or even a walking speed, is that still sight reading?  Because, in that case I can sight read the Rach 3.

Oddly enough with Bach I find his music doesn't lose cohesion if you slow the tempo right down (of course you cannot slow it so far that the notes lose context to the phrase). This is why i find Bach is so wonderful to develop reading skills with. You cannot really slow down this much with other composers like Rachmaninov more complicated works for example since things like his use of syncopation require a certain tempo to be fully appreciated. I find with works closer to my level I can sight read much of the works satisfactory but of course there are parts which require closer attention and you cannot just sight over them since too many details are missed/not appreciated. But good sight reading skills pick out these trouble parts quickly and you can systematically work on them faster.

You said it, you can't push them to go home and read music like they're casually reading a book, and this is what is neccessary for developing the ability to read music fluently.  They have to want to do it.  They have to just want to sit down at the piano and read different things.  They're not going to do it if they don't find it enjoyable.  I for one, love to just sit at my piano, open up my books and read anything.  I'll read orchestral scores too, whatever, it is relaxing and enjoyable to me.

It is difficult to get the students into enjoying reading music and I think you have hit on a good exercise to encourage it. Listening to music and following it with the score is an invaluable exercise, we do not necessarily need to practice sight reading at the keyboard but we can merely read a score and listen to a recording, that is a great way to get into it I feel.

I had the same experience.  I could play at a much higher level than I could sight read.  But, I felt insufficient and I new that I wanted to have the ability to comprehend and reproduce the written score rapidly.  That was an intriguing skill to me and I wanted to have it.  So I busted my $ss reading for hours on end until I had made some improvement.  Your right, I had to start with really basic stuff, but surprisingly, I started to enjoy doing it, even the easy stuff, once I saw that I was developing.

This is the same attitude that some of my advanced students have and it makes studying sight reading less burdensome. But some do not have this attitude however your next statement is interesting:

So, to help you out, I think that students need to have a taste of what it feels like to be successful in sight-reading.  I think that once you hook them, somehow, it will pick up momentum on its own.; They will then go home and start reading random music, and maybe kind of enjoy it.   

You are right that students like to see results and how easy things can be for them. I encourage my advanced students to be able to find what works are dead easy for them to sight read and esure that they try to impove upon that level. Many of them however like to only work with these easier pieces because they do not like being faced with difficulties and move on. That is the thing about sight reading, it is not a perfect art and some muscular memorizers just can't deal with that. They like to have everything controlled and correct, it goes against their nature to keep moving on. But with multiple reading attempts of the same piece we become more accurate, this is something that I try to instill in all my students. You do not have to read perfectly, just predominatly correct with good fingers.

My advanced students often know many pieces and have studied many pieces in the past. This of course helps them with their sight reading skills. The more pieces you know the easier it becomes to read the routine in other pieces. I feel that sight reading study requires that you read many times more than the pieces you have learned in the past to accelerate your experience base many folds further. The more music you experience the better your reading becomes but it is too slow to memorize pieces to develop your reading skills for advanced students imo.

I like to use Czerny Op. 599 for sight reading only.  This is because there are repetitive rhythmic patterns and repetitive harmonic patterns.

I agree, Czerny is good to drill the basic building blocks of music and the more intricate fingerings you may find with them. Czerny generally is quite boring for most students to memorize so to use it as sight reading can be quite a good way to use him. Also Czerny tends to use repeated patterns in his works (like Bach) which once you pick up on it it has a macroscopic effect on your efficiency to read the entire piece and I find this is an extremely important issue in sight reading.

Plus alberti bass and broken chord figures for the left hand, stuff that's easy to digest.   So, by using this material, I eliminate many of the variables that would be present in a regular piece of music.  It is also very easy to see groups of notes.

I find coming back to these basic tools are very important even for advanced students even those who might have a lot of experience base with it. Although basic tools in reading generally I teach to more beginner/intermediate students, many of my advanced students do not have problems reading these tools but the extensions that can be build upon these simple tools can stump their reading, thus going back to the basics aligns their reading.

When my students begin learning a new piece, I force them to read from the score.  I don't want them to memorize it.  I want them to develop a relationship between what they see on the page and where their hands are moving.  How do I force them?  Well, I tell them as they play for me I'm going to stop them at any moment and have them point to which note on the score they just played.  They may memorize it anyway, like finger memory, but that's fine.  As long as they are making some kind of association between what the hands are doing and what they're looking at.  This hopefully builds a sense of dependency on the score.  That's good...for now.

I like to do this as well with my students, some of them are cheeky and merely count the beats and move from bar to bar So I will sometimes play at a random place and see if they can work out where I am playing. I find it more beneficial for the teacher to play and the student follow the score rather than getting a recording and reading with it but both are invaluable of course (the latter is forced when the student is outisde of the lesson).

I tell them that they won't get really good at it for a long time.  This relaxes them and makes them feel better about their progress.  That's the truth though, as you said above, people need to have a lot of experience with a lot of repertoire before they develop into good sight readers, and that just takes time.  Other than that, I suppose I just hope the kid will like piano enough to do what I did and am still doing:  Play a lot of stuff and read just for the fun of it.  What else can you do?  You know the saying, "you can bring a horse to water...."

Yeah there is no secret to make students want to study. If there was I think there would be a lot more high achievers in this world! It is this discipline that I have stuggled to instil in my students, how do I get them to work constantly. I look at my situation I love to play the piano it is my life, it feeds my soul. But not all my students are so emotionally attached to their music. It is just a shame that sometimes you come across advanced students who play so well but they learning rate has much to be desired. It is even more of a shame when you find they don't want to subject themselves to studying a horde of easier pieces to improve their reading.

I can remember clearly one advanced student (who was studying music at univeristy) whos eyes almost fell out of her head when arrived to the lesson and dumped a file of 200+ sheets on the table for her and said this is what she should cycle through completely each week Ok it is intimidating to see so much music if you are predominantly a memorizer, but why not try it, she was so afraid she managed only a small % of the works the first week. But she wanted to become a professional musician and wanted to improve her sight reading, she was just not aware that sight reading requires exposure to a lot of music not just a small amount or relying on your memorised repertoire. This can leave them insecure becaue they feel like they can't control everything they play, it is a good stuation to contend with however. I found I had to reassure her every lesson and encouage her, eventually she managed to cycle through them all every week and at the end of the year she felt like she needed new material which was awesome. But a number of advanced students I have encouraged to make marathon reading attempt just shun it and never make it a focal point in their musical study, they prefer to just learn memorized repertoire. It is slow however but I can understand them. As a teen I wanted to learn pieces that excited me and studying sight reading was the most boring thing I could ever do. However I came to a point where the level of the pieces I was studying was so filled with information that learning it at an efficient rate became harder and harder. Improving sight reading skills acted as a catalyst to my efficiency and I learned that it was the bottle neck of my progress (like ram in a computer!). It would be lovely to be able to transfer this appreciation into my students, it is possible but it takes a lot fo time and effort and some simply refuse because it takes them away from playing music with complete  mastery and control.

[jpahmad]

It is difficult to get the students into enjoying reading music and I think you have hit on a good exercise to encourage it. Listening to music and following it with the score is an invaluable exercise, we do not necessarily need to practice sight reading at the keyboard but we can merely read a score and listen to a recording, that is a great way to get into it I feel.

    Having the students follow the score away from the piano.  This is a good idea, I didn't think of that before.  I'm assuming that it would beneficial for the young, beginning students.  I think it would be a great way to promote, or increase, continuity in actually playing.  This is probably because, when following the score with their eyes while listening to a performance, THEY CAN'T STOP.  I think I will try this.  How exactly do you do it?   Do you have them point to the notes as they listen, or, point to phrases, measures?

Oddly enough with Bach I find his music doesn't lose cohesion if you slow the tempo right down (of course you cannot slow it so far that the notes lose context to the phrase). This is why i find Bach is so wonderful to develop reading skills with.

You're right, Bach doesn't lose cohesion when you slow it down, because of its weaving contrapuntal melodies in particular.  I didn't think of that.  It can make your eyes go crossed though, especially when your looking at three or four parts.  But the inventions are great.  Also, the themes re-occurring in different registers of the keyboard is very useful for students. 


One more question.  Do you write in accidentals for your students when they miss a sharp or flat?  I mean, before students really develop key-feel for all the various keys, do you provide "training wheels" for them by writing in the accidentals, or do you just verbally remind them that "that's b-flat", or "that's f-sharp"?


I'm just thinking, and I do provide "training wheels", but if I didn't do that, and just reminded them verbally a few times about a flat, or sharp, then they might develop key feel quicker. 

[lostinidlewonder]

    Having the students follow the score away from the piano.  This is a good idea, I didn't think of that before.  I'm assuming that it would beneficial for the young, beginning students.  I think it would be a great way to promote, or increase, continuity in actually playing.  This is probably because, when following the score with their eyes while listening to a performance, THEY CAN'T STOP.  I think I will try this.  How exactly do you do it?   Do you have them point to the notes as they listen, or, point to phrases, measures?

For the beginner students I often record a number of easy pieces and give it to them to listen to and follow the score with. I encourage them to follow the strong first beats of the bars so they know when they move to the next bar (even without being able to follow all the notes). I then encourage them to follow the beats within the bars as they become more confident. This is mostly a self exploring exercise but I will often count beats with young beginners and follow the score with them to get them used to the evenness of our counting and how we can follow music with this timing.

My advanced students often I will give them quite complicated music to listen to and follow the score. It is also wonderful to follow orchestral scores since it forces you to see multi bars at the same time, much more so than you would ever experience on a piano. Of course it is difficult to follow everything at the same time but at least they could follow one instrument per listen, or a couple, or maybe jump around to the places which take their listening attention.

Bach doesn't lose cohesion when you slow it down, because of its weaving contrapuntal melodies in particular.  

This is a good way of putting it.

One more question.  Do you write in accidentals for your students when they miss a sharp or flat?  I mean, before students really develop key-feel for all the various keys, do you provide "training wheels" for them by writing in the accidentals, or do you just verbally remind them that "that's b-flat", or "that's f-sharp"?

For beginners often I will highlight the shape that is produced from the black and white notes, then if they miss a black note I do not focus on that single black note and put an accidental there for them to remember it by, but instead I will highlight the shape that a group of notes created that contains that black note. For instance if they had to play a C minor C Eb G I would highlight an upright triangle shape created by these three notes, so they can not help but sense that a black note should be in between the two white notes. Observing shape helps us all read more efficiently.

The key signature however should never have to be reminded, if it does that means the student is neglecting an understanding of the contour to the piano each key signature creates which is an elementary sight reading understanding. As an aside, I often get my students to play C major scales with the key signature of their piece applied, then I get them to play scales on there, intervals, random patterns all over the keyboard with both hands etc. This gets their hands orientated to the general shape that the key signature provides. This creative approach is usually difficult for beginners but it is instructive for them to be able to improvise on certain key signatures or even scale forms for that matter. I have even experienced some advanced players who are classically trained who find it difficult to play randomly on a key signature form if they are not told exactly what to do but then beginner/intermediate jazz trained students (or students who play by ear) tend do it in a flash

[jpahmad]

Thank you lostinidlewonder,  Just one last question,

For beginners often I will highlight the shape that is produced from the black and white notes, then if they miss a black note I do not focus on that single black note and put an accidental there for them to remember it by, but instead I will highlight the shape that a group of notes created that contains that black note. For instance if they had to play a C minor C Eb G I would highlight an upright triangle shape created by these three notes, so they can not help but sense that a black note should be in between the two white notes. Observing shape helps us all read more efficiently.

What exactly are you highlighting?  Are you actually drawing, say, a triangle, above the part of the measure with a c minor chord?  It sounds really interesting what you suggested, could you just explain it one more time.  I'm having a hard time visualizing what you are describing.  I'm eager to try this.



jp

[lostinidlewonder]

What exactly are you highlighting?  Are you actually drawing, say, a triangle, above the part of the measure with a c minor chord?  It sounds really interesting what you suggested, could you just explain it one more time.  I'm having a hard time visualizing what you are describing.  I'm eager to try this.

Here is a link that might help:
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=31747.0

Although the example in this link is more advanced you may notice the application of course to easier pieces.