Ok this is a weird one. They only just started playing recently but they're learning Debussy and Satie? O
Ok this is a weird one. They only just started playing recently but they're learning Debussy and Satie?
My questions are as follows:1) How would you guys go about teaching these pieces?2) What is the best way to correct a students hand positioning?3) When should I begin teaching a student how to read sheet music? (please note: both of the students use YouTube MIDI videos to learn pieces)4) How should I go about choosing pieces for my students?Anything helpful would be much appreciated.Thanks for reading!
A bright student may play a LEVEL 1 pieces after two to three years of learning with method books.
Then they are not a bright student, IMO. A bright student would probably be closer to about a grade 6 level or higher after three years. I don't really understand why teachers keep insisting it takes astronomically long to learn piano. I find something like bernhard's time frame on this forum to be far more suitable.
A bright student would probably be closer to about a grade 6 level or higher after three years.
A gifted student would be someone who can get to Grade 1 in a year.
I'd say a prodigy would be able to get to Grade 6 in 2-3 years but pass with A+ or A grades... starting from nothing, because if they can get to Grade 6 in 3 years, in another 3 they could be doing Associate or Licentiate.
Well a bright or talented student could get even further with less time but let's not consider extremes. Start teaching the average population and you will see the average student would never get to grade 6!
For the less talented there needs to be a mixture of deep interest in learning piano, disciplined practice, following teachers instructions and persistence for people to get to the upper grade levels. This is easy to maintain in the short run but try it for years on end
For the less talented there needs to be a mixture of deep interest in learning piano, disciplined practice, following teachers instructions and persistence for people to get to the upper grade levels.
Just on the one point on following teachers' instructions. This assumes a good teacher giving appropriate instructions. And here, if the instructions are poor (which happens too often), the disciplined and obedient student will be the worse for wear. And the talented student might be thrown off course when instructions don't match what the music is telling him or her.
Do you remember the bernhard thread where he taught a woman with arthritis in her 50s Schubert Impromptu op 142 no 5 from scratch in six months? I feel like the average student could get very far very quickly if they just applied themselves a few hours a day.
But can't you simply supplant more effective practice strategies? I find average students go down so many dead alleyways that I can't help but feel they could be doing much better if only they practiced correctly. The average person can read language, play a sport competently. Why not piano?
If it takes years of persistent practice, I wouldn't be able to learn piano at all, lol.
I keep saying that if I was grade 1 after a year of playing I would have quit. But I forced myself to play more difficult, more interesting material which is why I continued. So I feel there has to be a better way.
And I did it starting at 17, surely a young child's brain would be far more malleable?
I feel like if it's a grind which takes that long, surely the student is doing something wrong? Because I have seen many people who could get to say Fantaisie Impromptu in 3 years.
To me it feels like it just requires concentrated technical and musical work.
Not the average student, but a gifted student (in the top 1%) -- I think they should be able to reach a grade 8 level in 3 years with good instruction. A prodigy could get much further imo.
I'm sure you mostly practice daily more than 30 minutes at a time. The average student though missed days can even go entire weeks without any practice at all.
Yes but what I mean is that I see tangible improvement with every practice session, and that is why I feel the motivation to put in the time. If it was largely the same week after week, I would not be as inclined to practice regularly.
I can't stand the feeling of endless effort seemingly going into a black hole. So I forced myself to quickly get to a level where my practice was efficient enough to observe rapid (at least what it seems to me) progress. And I tried to think out of the box and look for "shortcuts", as much as piano teachers tend to hate that term.
So that's what I mean -- if after two years of persistent effort I was at a grade 2 level, I would personally not want to continue. I am not a very disciplined person who sets up schedules and grinds for years. I need instant gratification lol -- you know the times when I attempted to play pieces like HR2 just so I could feel they were within reach. I just feel that being so tenacious is unnecessary -- if that was the case I would have quit long ago -- and that progress in itself would be the reward if people realized how to do it.
So I feel, if only people realized how quickly effective practice can improve your playing, a lot of the motivation might come automatically.
With sporadic practice one doesn't see the results of their input, so maybe that's why piano students feel like it's a slow grind for years and years. It has not been my experience at all, assuming you put in at least a couple hours a day of solid effort. I personally feel like a lot of the difference can be attributed to amount of effort and quality of practice rather than talent.
I tried it out with a student, and it did work: in four weeks, he understood the principles of weight and how to effortlessly get strength and control, his left hand was getting much better as I explained how to use mirror practice and how to observe and mimic hand movements, and so on. And this was with fairly little practice, less than 30 minutes a day (he was a busy person but very interested). So I feel it can work, and it's just that I see so few teachers actually teaching along those lines that it makes me wonder.
My advice- pupils are basically responsible for their own progress.
It depends on what you mean by this. If you are a crap teacher who teaches poorly its not the student's fault if they don't progress following your crappy instructions.Also I do not think small children should be held responsible for that, because they are small children. Show them things, inspire them, and let them enjoy themselves (if they like piano) while you guide them, and let them do something else than piano if they don't. I think it's the adult's responsibility to supervise and guide that, not the child's.
Also, if you are really good yourself, you will inspire your students to try hard! Then, you can spend half the time performing for your students.