 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: DrewSorensenMusic
Date: 2012-01-04 22:10
Hi Everyone, and especially a kind hello to Mandy if she's reading this,
I confess, Mandy's thread on becoming a better player has opened up some questions of my own. Is it important for a Good Music Teacher to be a good Performer?
Arguments for why a Teacher should be a good Performer:
1. How can you teach something you can't do yourself? (A math teacher needs to know how to add before he/she can teach addition)
2. A working musician (past or present) knows more of the business of music, in case the student has aspirations to take their music to the next level. (I have no clue how to run a restaurant, because I've never worked in that field)
Arguments for why a Teacher DOES NOT need to be a good Performer:
1. The teacher can be knowledgable of great recordings for his/her students to hear good performers
2. A teacher can make up for lack of performance skill with abundant historic knowledge (I'm sure tons of music appreciators are lousy musicians, that's why they got into music appreciation)
I bring this up for my own good. I have decided not to take on private students until I feel I have grown into a professional musician. I do however refuse to teach grade school or the like, as I feel I've worked to hard to deal with the unfocused mind.
Anyway, I'm interested to hear everyone's opinion, anecdotes, or additional pros and cons.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed Palanker
Date: 2012-01-04 22:35
It's a matter of how good a performer one has to me. May I say, Leon Russianoff, one of our greatest teachers was not much of a performer. he could play but got nervous so he made a career as a teacher, a great teacher may I add. Yes, in most cases it is good to be a good performer but one doesn't have to be a great performer but many really great players do not make very good teachers.
ESP eddiesclarinet.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2012-01-04 22:40
I agree with Ed 100%. Said pretty much exactly what I was going to, and said it lot better than I would have.
Alexi
Retired, playing more sax than clarinet, but still playing clarinet and still loving it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: TJTG
Date: 2012-01-04 22:41
"I do however refuse to teach grade school or the like, as I feel I've worked to hard to deal with the unfocused mind."
If you don't have the skill set to teach young children, and believe their below you, you're already headed down the wrong path. You're never above teaching young students. Maybe what you mean is "young students forced to go to lessons who do not practice". Nobody enjoys those students.
Also, the best teachers I've had are humble.
-----------------------
As far as teaching.....
If you have horrible instincts on your own instrument, musical and/or technical, you will never be able to identify those sorts of problems in your students. No great conductors fell back onto conducting because they were iffy at their own instrument.
One exception to not being really proficient on your instrument, IMO, would be taking the time to actually learn other instruments. I mean going beyond your 1/2 semester course in trumpet at college.
I know someone who plays Clarinet, Trombone, Barry Sax, and a couple others proficiently. This a fine substitute to being a breathtaking clarinetist, especially for a middle-school director. Her instincts are there as well as a strong knowledge of her students instruments. She could teach high school students.
Book smarts will never make up for street smarts. Book smarts will never make up for having practiced and become a good musician.
I've seen far too many of my colleagues go through college whom are mediocre at clarinet. I had a classmate perform in studio and after said "that's the best performance I've ever had". He didn't hear what we heard, and it was chaos. He can talk endlessly about music theory, has good aural skills, and is a horrible musician. Book smarts do not make up for musicianship.
---------------------------
You've obviously hit a nerve with me. Sorry to be blunt, but 100's of students graduate college every year with music-teaching degrees. I'd say less than 10% is qualified to teach. Who wants a teacher who plays worse than them?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-01-04 22:46
Drew,
I don't truly know what you mean by a professional musician; some "professionals" I have met were suspect at best; even less so as educators.
As for teaching ability and any commensurate performing level: If one has doubts about what they are speaking of, or is worried that they may be challenged and thus have to explain "why" or "how", then they should not be speaking of said matters.
I have met famous 'clarinetists' that were awful teachers; conversely I have seen less-lauded 'technicians' that were wonderful in working with students- of all levels.
Aside from the obvious surface-level, "Yes, a good clarinet teacher should be able to function on the clarinet", I think it is a far more complex question than the few bullet-points you have stated.
*Usain Bolt's coach cannot run as quickly as Usain, yet is he less valuable as a coach?
*Shouldn't we as a teacher be fostering the continuance of our art-form, not the preservation of our lineage?
I have posted this before, but I think it speaks of matters as they need be addressed:
http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.pdf
-Jason
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Caroline Smale
Date: 2012-01-04 23:17
I suspect it depends largely on the level of teaching being practised.
To teach post graduate students and aspiring professionals then it's virtually a given that the teachers needs to be a "good" performer.
At the other end of the student spectrum I think that whilst a good degree of proficiency is useful there are other aspects to inspiring young players that are more important.
A modest performer/teacher who has had to work hard to reach their current standard probably knows far better how to teach at this level than a star performer who never seemed to encounter many problems.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: genekeyes ★2017
Date: 2012-01-05 01:49
You cannot teach a subject that you do no not know. If you are going to teach clarinet, you should have studied and learned the instrument and have an understanding of what it takes to play it. Being a professional performer is not a prerequisite to being a good teacher.......acquiring the requisite skills and knowledge is.
That being said.............there are also many fine players that are not good teachers...Being a good teacher requires many additional skills that are not necessarily critical to playing....but again. a working knowledge and understanding of your subject matter is always crucial to being a good teacher. Too much time is often spent on how to teach while ignoring what to teach.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C.Elizabeth07
Date: 2012-01-05 02:21
Comparing teachers and performers seems a bit silly to me. Sure both are working with the same medium (music/clarinet) but to teach and to perform are two different arts. There are certain people who are meant to teach, who may not be a "highly proficient" artist. But these people have an ability to relate to the students, to identify issues and offer a variety of solutions to help assist them, they have patience and above all they find a way to inspire and motivate their students.
Also when you look in terms of public school music education, you are not merely teaching 'clarinet". As a music teacher you are certified K-12 for MUSIC. Meaning as a clarinetist you may wind up teaching Band, or general music, or orchestra. My boyfriends mother is a elementary school/middle school music teacher, she is a French hornist. She teaches beginning orchestra and beginning band and middle school jazz band and general music.
As far as being a public school music educator it is actually much more beneficial to be proficient at all instruments. We need to keep in mind that teaching is not just limited to clarinet. Virtuostic playing will not help you explain to that 8 year old how to get a sound out of their oboe, or help you to explain the slide positions on a trombone, or how to bow properly on the cello.
I'm not saying its not important to be proficient on your own horn, just that teaching music is about more then just teaching clarinet....
And as far as the comment about not wanting to work with young kids because you have worked too hard to deal with kids who can't focus. Its your job. Its your job to get them interested enough to focus (Its possible) Its your job to inspire them so they want to practice (Its possible). Its your job to get them hooked on the music bug from a young age (Its possible). Young kids can be extremely rewarding to work with and you can learn a lot in terms of your own playing by working with them. Not to mention at some point YOU were that distracted unfocused child fumbling with a new instrument, we all were there at some point.
However, if you feel that you cannot inspire a young child to practice, to fall in love with their instrument and do not have the patience (because it does take quite a bit) then teaching may not be for you because no matter what level you teach we need to hook, motivate and inspire all our students. We need to always strive to present material at any level in a way that is interesting, meaningful and enjoyable.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: oca
Date: 2012-01-05 02:23
There is not a parallel in what the teacher is teaching. The arguments going for the notion that a teacher has to be a good performer are formed based on the assumption that technique is the subject to be taught; on the other hand, the arguments against that notion assume that history and general music knowledge is going to be taught.
I think that it doesn't matter whether a music teacher is a performer or not.
Example: A physics/biology professor would be as good if not better than Usain Bolt at coaching running.
Anyone knowledgeable in the field will be great.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Trevor M
Date: 2012-01-05 02:31
"I think that it doesn't matter whether a music teacher is a performer or not.
Example: A physics/biology professor would be as good if not better than Usain Bolt at coaching running."
You really believe this? I can understand saying that Olympic-level athletes will benefit from coaches who are versed in physiology and the mechanics of movement, but do you really think the high school track team is going to do better with the local biology professor than with a coach who competed at an international level and therefore understands the psychology, culture, and difficulties of it? It's like saying a physicist would be better as good at teaching clarinet as a skilled clarinetist because, you know, he might know more about acoustics.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2012-01-05 02:53
Often top performers forget about teaching a struggling student how to play something, because it is so natural for the pro to play difficult parts.
I kind of enjoyed studying with teachers that demanded doing the basics, such as getting the fingers working as fast as possible.
Then you have that great professional that will teach you how to play with feeling and how to win auditions. Of course I could go on with a lot of other examples, but I think this post kind of gets the message.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2012-01-05 03:07
This discussion reminds me of Doug Blevins--a man who has spent most of his life in a wheelchair due to cerebral palsy, and a man who has never kicked a field goal in his life. With this unlikely background, Blevins is one of the best kicking coaches out there!
Getting back to Drew's original question, it depends if you're talking about teaching private students or teaching music in a school setting.
As far as private students are concerned, a teacher should teach the levels he/she feels comfortable teaching. That's it. I've done some performing here and there, but I don't think of myself as a performer. I enjoy teaching beginners, and I've come up with a lot of techniques for getting beginners off to a great start. I also teach advanced students. If I had a student, though, who was capable of tossing off something like the Nielsen concerto, I think I'd send him/her to a pro who is capable of playing on that level.
School music teaching is a completely different matter. I spent many years teaching music, and I've also spent a little time here and there in other kinds of classrooms. Having said this, I don't think there is anything quite as difficult as being a school music teacher. Music teachers today are often expected to be able to teach everything from elementary school general music to high school jazz band. It's not easy! In no other subject area are teachers expected to have such a vast range of knowledge.
As a school music teacher, few people really care how well you play. The ability to write good lesson plans, run a good rehearsal, and keep track of grades and attendance is more important to parents and administrators. Knowledge of various styles, basic fingerings on all instruments, conducting skills, etc. are much more important than the ability to play a Rose etude.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DrewSorensenMusic
Date: 2012-01-05 03:16
Hi Everyone, and especially my inspriation: Mandy *Wink*
When I first saw Mandy's thread, I was first a little upset at (and please forgive me Mandy) someone that, let's just say, has a lot of work ahead of her. I've read all the posts from her thread. I've read a lot of the posts here. I thought it might spark a good bit of debate, although I am still surprised how passionate people are on the subject. I am still interested in others' opinions if they haven't expressed them already, or have more to give, but I think I've come to a conclusion that I've known all along.
In regards to my own profession, I am not ready to become a teacher. One of the main reasons is I travel a lot, and I'd feel like I'd have to give that up to be with my kids. I feel like if I became a teacher I'd be better suited for an instrumentalist that is already focused. Not that I couldn't inspire the love of music in young people, I just feel I have a lot to give to those that wish to take their music to the next level than to get them playing mary had a little lamb. (I know there's a million side notes, and probably 7 people will quote that and tell me I'm wrong, but let's just say I'm happy with the way I play, and feel I could share that). I still have a lot of exploration in a performance career, and I think I'll continue to live a meager life while enjoying it until I can't stand it any longer.
As for someone else that would like to teach music. I think it's ok no matter what level you are at to teach music. I think someone that is proficient at the clarinet would have important skills, but so would someone that studies equally as hard at being a teacher. Maybe, if the teacher is still working to become a better player, it might be best to stick to the beginning stages of child development. I'm not really sure if the Usain Bolt's coach is not a runner argument really holds water here. I'm pretty sure Usain Bolt's coach probably has a PHD in physiotherapy or some other incredibly useful field to Usain, and I just have a hunch that a clarinet professor should play the clarinet well. But even if someone decided to do that, I wouldn't say no right off the bat. I'd give them a shot, see how their students performed, and hope for good results. I really don't know what it takes to become a teacher, because I'm not a teacher.
Mandy, I wish you the best in your choice. I think you have the passion, drive, and charm to be successful.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2012-01-05 03:48
Regardless, teaching (and running) a school band program OR teaching general music to K-4 is not the same as private teaching clarinet.
I took the latter road instead of the Music Ed road because I realized that I would not possibly be able to run a band program and also give _each and every_ student 110% of what he or she needed. That's why I'm really happy with my private studio. It's relatively low-pressure. My goal is to get each student to be the best they can be (and want to be).
I don't have to worry about having enough oboes or too many saxophones. I don't have to force kids to play instruments they don't want to play for the sake of having a balanced band.
I know I'm not at a college level for teaching. I'd be fine for non-performance majors. I also know I've got some incredibly talented high school kids who could be performance majors if they want to do so.
I have bachelor's and master's in performance. I know how to get a kid to play technically well, for the most part, if they want to put in the required time to build the muscle memory/skill. I do know I don't have the ability to take them to a really extraordinary level. I have one kid now who's really reaching the edge of what I can do technically, but he's so busy musically, and doesn't want to exclusively play classical clarinet that it works out ok...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MandyCarlsson
Date: 2012-01-05 03:52
I am still so confused. Can someone please explain why my etude is so upsetting? You do realize that I am essentially a beginner and 34 is not ancient! *laughing to myself* Let's assume for a moment that I live to be 85 (the average age the folks in my family live until) and that I work until I am 70. Now, I will not graduate until I am probably 38. Let's also assume that it takes me another 4 years of intensive study to become (hopefully) above proficient on my clarinet. Everyone with me? I still have 32 years ahead of me of carreer life until I plan on retirement. 32 years is a long time! Also, keep in mind that I want to teach kids, I am able to relate very well to middle schoolers.
Would I have offended less people if I was 18 and planning on majoring in Music Education?
I'm not being snarky, just pointing out that there is a startling amount of elite thinking and, frankly, I am confused. Please, before my head explodes, enlighten me. I openly admitted I was below standard, essentially approaching the board with my tail between my legs from the get go.
Drew, I have enjoyed this post. Thank you for your thoughts.
Mandy
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: oca
Date: 2012-01-05 04:00
"do you really think the high school track team is going to do better with the local biology professor than with a coach who competed at an international level and therefore understands the psychology, culture, and difficulties of it? It's like saying a physicist would be better as good at teaching clarinet as a skilled clarinetist because, you know, he might know more about acoustics."
Actually a coach who understands "psychology, culture, and difficulties" represents the same person in my analogy, someone who is educated in the field. However, you brought in the good of both worlds: an educated person and a good performer ("a coach who competed at an international level"). Now you have a coach that is someone who understands the field and someone who who is an expert performer.
The prompt in the original post asked for one or the other.
:D
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: C.Elizabeth07
Date: 2012-01-05 04:09
You are absolutely right and there is nothing UPSETTING about your playing The fact is, is that you put yourself out there for critique, are asking question and doing EXACTLY what you need to be doing to learn and improve. You are learning and that is never EVER EVER a waste of time or something to be upset over.
Reading your whole story and listening to you play, I think its great. Sure, you have work you need to do, but so does everyone. That's the beautiful thing about music. We are constantly learning and growing and searching for more, searching for our limit, for the best we can be. Girl, I've got to be like your biggest cheer leader right now and I think you should continue to update with videos of your progress, I'd personally love to hear it.
Unfortunately the "elitist attitude" and "ego" come with the music business. Being humble is not a bad thing, frankly, I think it makes it easier to work with people. When I've organized chamber groups and other small performing groups I would rather have someone who is maybe not THE BEST but is proficient, competent and easy to work with, especially in collaborative groups. I don't feel like spending the rehearsal watching the clash of the egos.
I myself have always tried extremely hard to keep my ego in check, especially after meeting people who could talk the talk but couldn't walk the walk. I never wanted to think more highly of myself then I should (which is probably why my self-confidence is in the toilet...but thats a whole other issue).
Keep it going, I think this and you are fantastic and I'm looking forward to hearing how you progress!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-01-05 04:24
Mandy,
I can speak for no-one else but I found nothing about your etude "upsetting" in the least. I can hear what needs improved, as you can I am sure, but you really need to quit punishing yourself over those things. Your ability as a clarinet player does not define you as a person; you don't need to come here feeling "ashamed."
Furthermore I respect what you are doing, and even more so why you are doing it .....and I'm 33, so surely You cannot be old!!!
I had to leave my orchestral/conservatory job for health reasons 3 years ago (in a foreign country); even had to stop playing for a little over a year.
Now I find myself back in my hometown, where I haven't lived for 14 years, with no contacts to draw on- and a bad economy to boot. So, though our trajectories are different, I would say we are both in a similar "mental" state with what seems like an uphill climb in front of us (but not brick-wall.) When you feel like someone is pushing you down, push back.
and from my desk, if any sense of elitism was felt, I assure I did not intend it.
-Jason
Post Edited (2012-01-05 04:28)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Trevor M
Date: 2012-01-05 05:42
"However, you brought in the good of both worlds: an educated person and a good performer ("a coach who competed at an international level"). Now you have a coach that is someone who understands the field and someone who who is an expert performer."
You said: "A physics/biology professor would be AS GOOD IF NOT BETTER THAN USAIN BOLT at coaching running."
That is crazy. When I said "a coach who competed at an international level and therefore understands the psychology, culture, and difficulties", I meant Mr. Bolt, specifically. He'd make a better coach. You don't reach that level without a practical understanding of how to win track meets.
I think that goes for music, too– a teacher ought to be very proficient on the instrument. I know a guy who teaches 'all the woodwinds' and the horrible sounds emerging from *both* oboes for his one oboe student are heartbreaking. I want to tell the kid that he's wasting his money and his time, and to find a new teacher.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that teaching is arguably better for the technique of the teacher than the student. It forces you to really think about what you're doing and why, and whether it's sound technique or just something you do because you can get away with it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-01-05 06:45
Trevor M wrote in part:
>It forces you to really think about what you're doing
> and why, and whether it's sound technique or just something you
> do because you can get away with it.
Precisely. Thank you
I wrote earlier.
Quote:
If one has doubts about what they are speaking of, or is worried that they may be challenged and thus have to explain "why" or "how", then they should not be speaking of said matters.
That would seem to be so obvious that it need not be stated, but I think many would not pass this litmus test.
I have seen very "prestigious" institutions of learning with instructors that would fail miserably.
-Jason
Post Edited (2012-01-05 06:47)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Cory
Date: 2012-01-05 12:32
Clarinetguy
About school music teaching - you said it like it is!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Lelia Loban ★2017
Date: 2012-01-05 12:50
Maybe we can also make a distinction between playing and performing. My piano teacher, Arthur Eisler, was a brilliant pianist, and I'm convinced his extremely high level of playing skill contributed greatly to his teaching ability. However, he wasn't really a brilliant *performer*, because he suffered from terrible stage fright. He never had a career as a touring virtuoso even though I think he had all the chops to compete with the best. Unfortunately, he tended to infect his students with his performance anxiety, whch he experienced on our behalf as well as his own, and in that one respect, his lack of *performance* skill did have a negative impact on his teaching.
A useful distinction has also emerged here between teachers of beginners and teachers at the most advanced levels. Those jobs require different skills. How many excellent grammar school band teachers play all instruments equally well? And why would they need to? A good teacher for young kids needs a working knowledge of how all the instruments operate and the basics of playing them, enough to demonstrate how to do things -- combined with the empathy and ability to relate to those kids and persuade them to love their music and practice it and *listen*.
Lelia
http://www.scoreexchange.com/profiles/Lelia_Loban
To hear the audio, click on the "Scorch Plug-In" box above the score.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jon Shurlock
Date: 2012-01-05 14:58
If I wanted to become a professional musician I wouldn't look for a great clarinettist, but I would look for a someone who has taught great clarinettists
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: oca
Date: 2012-01-05 15:20
Trevor, you refer to Usain Bolt as a good teacher because he is a "good performer" thus he is also "knowledgeable in the field".
The question is would you rather have a "good performer" as a teacher or someone "knowledgeable in the field".
Of course someone that is of international status AND knowledgeable would be the best kind of teacher.
I'm arguing that a person knowledgeable in the field is an equal if not better teacher than a performer in the field.
Usain Bolt is the brawn; his coach is the brain.
Would you rather have "brawn" as the main characteristic of your teacher or "brain"?
As for the teacher who taught oboe, I doubt that he is knowledgeable in oboe.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Nessie1
Date: 2012-01-05 16:27
A couple of things that strike me about this are -
I can think of several people who, though they were of course pretty great players, made their greatest mark as teachers of those who went on to perform at the most prominent level - I'm thinking of people like William Pleeth who taught just about any great British cellist for many years, Maria Curcio and Fanny Waterman for piano, Dorothy DeLaye for violin...
Secondly, great teachers are not necessarily the ones who see you to Carnegie Hall/the Royal Festival Hall or whereever - they are the ones who inspire you to carry on enjoying your music at whatever level that may be.
Thirdly, a good teacher is one who knows when that rare pupil comes along (may be only once or twice in their career) who needs more than they can offer and does the right thing by pointing them in the direction of the kind of teaching that will help them develop to their full potential. When that happens, if that pupil does eventually go on to reach dizzy heights, they will not have forgotten that first teacher.
Vanessa.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Buster
Date: 2012-01-05 19:08
As for all this fighting surrounding Usain Bolt, I am sorry I used it as an example.
I was referring to his coach, Glen Mills; not to Mr. Bolt's potential as a coach himself. I should have more explicitly stated this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glen_Mills
Though the discussions surrounding a physics/biology professor being a superior coach are interesting, they diverge from the point I wished to make.
=======
I do see I should have more clearly defined the performer/professional terms. I chose to stick with "professional" for simplicity's sake; and to avoid any arguments over semantics.
I see many musicians whom are "professionals" in the sense that they make money performing; however they assume that fact solely elevates them to be "experts" and thus they chose to teach as well. Some of these "professionals" are suspect as performers, and worse as teachers. And what's more, some of these professional performers/teachers even have "Name Recognition."
Thus, I wrote the sentence which summarizes it for me, and is the "standard" which I hold myself to:
>>If one has doubts about what they are speaking of, or is worried that they may be challenged and thus have to explain "why" or "how", then they should not be speaking of said matters. >>
The link I posted to Feynman's speech was not meant to be elitist, nor demeaning. He simply speaks of matters much more clearly and eloquently than I can. What he speaks of is the state where our world should be; unfortunately not where it often resides.
I do think this standard should hold true for a "professional", or the "public school" teacher of our children.
-And the answer to the genesis of this thread is a far more complex one than we can fully address in this forum. But Lelia's post particularly rings true for me.
-Jason
Post Edited (2012-01-05 19:09)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2012-01-06 01:49
If you really want to find out who is a great teacher, ask who TAUGHT someone who you consider to be a great performer. Because they are the product of that persons tutelage.
Alexi
Retired, playing more sax than clarinet, but still playing clarinet and still loving it!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clariniano
Date: 2012-01-06 04:29
I think one way of attracting students, at least for me, seems to be having people hear and see you. That's how I've attracted a number of students recently, most from the church my husband is music director at, which I usually play about once a month, though occasionally twice, especially at Christmas or if the originally hired soloist can't seem to be contacted. (it's happened about 3 or 4 times in the past couple of years). So being about to perform well is definitely an asset in teaching. And my husband seems to be able to keep students progressing to advanced levels within 4-5 years starting as beginners, because he can REALLY play. And all of the teachers I have had on both clarinet and piano have been fine performers, and really inspire me to play better. Plus often at concerts I hold for students my husband and I play something impressive, but not really virtuostic, and the kids and parents are impressed. People from the Kumon math program in the basement of the church sometimes come in to listen to us practice or even a lesson, and we've signed up 5 students that way.
Though I generally produce great players from clarinet students (4 kids I have taught have gone on to music in university, though one on a different instrument than I taught him (I taught him clarinet, he's in a Jazz performance program on guitar, in his final year), though I got in touch with him several months ago, when I accidently found his ad on craigslist and I was looking for a guitar teacher referral for a couple people who asked me if I knew good guitar teachers), I have also had fine results with piano students, particularly in recent years, especially with this Level 6 Piano RCM student I teach, who is probably going to be my first 90%+ piano exam mark beyond elementary piano. I am by no means a professional piano player, and get very few piano playing enagagements; even some of my friends don't know that I can play the piano to an early advanced level!), but I have a good ear for what sounds good, I study with good teachers, and have a collection of recordings and youtube videos that I show or have students listen to.
But my experience is that many fine performers happen to be good to excellent teachers as well. In fact, one of my students in university as a Performance major, told me while he was studying with me that his previous teacher (before me) really sucked at performing and teaching, after he saw me play a concert several years ago we asked him to turn pages for my husband.
Meri
Please check out my website at: http://donmillsmusicstudio.weebly.com and my blog at: http://clariniano.wordpress.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MarlboroughMan
Date: 2012-01-06 12:33
My favorite line from this thread:
Jason's "Shouldn't we as a teacher be fostering the continuance of our art-form, not the preservation of our lineage?"
This is Marlborough Country.
Eric
******************************
The Jazz Clarinet
http://thejazzclarinet.blogspot.com/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: annev
Date: 2012-01-06 20:53
Earlier in this thread, Mandy, you asked if it made any difference that you are 34, rather then 18, and pursuing a Music Education degree. I think it takes a lot of courage to do what you are doing and wanted to share this story with you.
I have a friend who picked up a musical instrument for the first time when she was in her 40s. It was something she was always interested in but never had the opportunity to do. She found a private teacher and also audited music classes at her son's high school. After four years, the high school music teacher found a spot for her with the university wind ensemble. From there she was able to get into the music program and she graduated with a Bachelor's in Music Education. She currently does some free-lance performance (mostly small ensemble work) and teaches instrumental music part-time to grades 5 to 8. I've heard her play and she is a lovely musician. I also sat in some of her grade 7 and 8 classes and she is a great teacher. She likes and understands kids, she knows what it's like to start at the beginning, she has energy and enthusiasm for what she does and the kids pick it up. She has a heart for teaching that I think comes, in part, from her own experience of never having had the chance to learn music when she was young. She loves what she does, and it shows.
Switching careers is hard. There is often this expectation that because we're adults we "should" be good at XYZ. In reality, we all start somewhere and we're all learning, no matter where we are on the curve. You have lots of time to learn the skills you need to be a really good teacher. In addition, you'll be bringing your maturity, life experience, passion and transferrable skills to the job. It's a potent mix with lots to offer!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
