[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference mr1pst::music

Title:MUSIC V4
Notice:New Noters please read Note 1.*, Mod = someone else
Moderator:KDX200::COOPER
Created:Wed Oct 09 1991
Last Modified:Tue Mar 12 1996
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:762
Total number of notes:18706

665.0. "Approaches to Teaching Piano?" by LARVAE::BRIGGS_R () Thu Aug 25 1994 09:49

    
    I'm looking for views with regard to methods of teaching children the
    piano. Here in the UK I've come across two fundamentally opposed
    approaches:
    
    
    Approach 1 - Up until the age of 13/14 (or UK Grade 4/5) teach the child 
    practical only. Do practical exams and participate in music festivals
    to promote confidence and give something to aim for. This is based on
    the premise that kids get turned off by theory.
    
    The obvious advantage to this is that kids are less likely to be
    discouraged by getting involved in 'boring theory' and that they
    cultivate confidence by doing practical exams and performing in front
    of people.
    
    The disadvantages are that they don't acquire enough theory to be able
    to pick up relatively simple pieces and 'teach themselves'. They always
    need teacher to explain the key, timing etc. The related disadvantage
    is they only look at exam pieces or music festival pieces meaning
    probably not more than 6 pieces in a year. Therefore less exposure to
    wide ranges of music.
    
    
    Approach 2 - Do practical and theory 'side by side' from day 1.
    De-emphasise exams and public performance (but still do them) and allow
    child to alternate set pieces with what they want to do (e.g. suitable
    chart hits).
    
    Our 12 year old daughter has undegone approach 1 and, although she is
    an old hand at public performance and exams (UK grade 4) she STILL
    cannot pick up a simple piece of music and teach herself to play it,
    even something she'd love to play. In the course of trying to rectify
    the situation and maintain her interest we've considered an alternate
    teacher. That's when these two approaches seemed to become prevalent.
    
    Anyone any views?
    
    Richard
    Basingstoke UK.
    
    PS: Could find no piano conference, 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
665.1 now, what were you asking? 16924::STEWARTan E-ticket ride at Neuro-DisneyThu Aug 25 1994 15:0916
    
    Well, there doesn't seem to be much of a contest between those two
    approaches, does there?  You can either become a skilled robot, or a
    musician.
    
    My early training was from the school of robotics, but fortunately my
    instructor was an enlightened dude and started introducing theory when
    I was ready.  Unfortunately, my axe was the trumpet, and orthodontics
    switched my direction from music to engineering.
    
    If you go with a robot teacher, be sure to provide plenty of
    opportunity for the kid to explore in non-directed areas.  Show him or
    her how they can throw in a 3rd to make the harmony more dense/obvious. 
    Load up Band-in-a-Box and teach 'em a minor pentatonic scale.  Make it
    fun!
    
665.2Musical IntuitionSMURF::LONGOMark Longo, UNIX(r) Software GroupThu Aug 25 1994 16:0232
	We can learn-by-doing, and children are better at this than most 
adults.  Notice how quickly they learn to communicate through the spoken 
word, a very complex system of symbols, and they do this passably well 
before anyone gives them grammar lessons.

	As adults, we've largely abandoned conscious intuitive learning 
processes in favor analytical approaches.  Analysis achieves understanding by 
intellectually decomposing a system into it's component parts, then 
understanding the role of each part in a greater whole.  This works well 
in most cases, but young minds don't yet have the analytical skills to 
effectively use this form of learning.

	So if we can't rely entirely on analysis based training, what are the
alternatives?  Obviously, kids can't play entirely by intuition (at least 
*most* of them can't).  We use analysis to "translate" the melody we want to
play or learn into actions on a keyboard, fretboard, etc.  But deep analysis
is not needed in many cases and so neither is deep knowlege.  Your daughter
may already have the skills she needs to learn the pieces she has trouble
with, but may not be using a learning process that best advantages her own
musiocal intuition.

	Perhaps what your daughter needs is not more knowledge explaining 
the relationships of notes and theory of musical construction.  If she wants 
to be able to better "teach herself", maybe it would be wiser to examine 
the *process* she uses to teach herself a piece.  It may be that the she 
already has enough knowledge and that she could be shown how to more 
effectively apply the knowledge and musical intuition she already has.


	The best of luck to you both,
	Mark
665.3Plan "b"MSBCS::STEINHARDTFri Aug 26 1994 18:249
    This is a no-brainer to me, go with approach #2.  One of my twin
    daughters (age 9) has been playing for three years, and taking lessons
    with a wonderful teacher who allows her to integrate theory and personal 
    interest material.  We never have to remind her to practice, and she
    loves to play, improvise, and both read sheet music and learn by ear.
    
    Cheers,
    Ken