Author: kdk ★2017
Date: 2016-01-31 05:31
gwie wrote:
> What he was particularly effective at
> doing was matching up the learning of music using the violin
> with some early stages of child cognitive development, to the
> point that he was teaching children music at an age where
> traditional educators previously felt that it was unrealistic.
>
> they aren't taught what the
> logical connections between sound and notation are at the
> appropriate stage of cognitive development,
> I welcome anyone to come visit my youth orchestra's Suzuki program, >...music literacy is part of the process, and it
> is introduced at a developmentally appropriate time.
>
> Depending on a student's age, they have to learn some things by
> rote at the beginning. A four year old learns to speak their
> primary language by imitating their parents. In no way does it
> imply that someone becomes an adult artist by blindly copying
> everything they hear without introspection, criticism, and
> self-evaluation.
>
> I think the difficult thing here is that discussion about the
> Suzuki Method has been a very polarizing topic
I think the difficult thing here is that we started talking about a mature student studying with an advanced teacher and it got muddled up with Suzuki, which isn't meant for that age group or level of development. The OP's well-intended point had almost nothing to do with any of this, which has in a way hijacked the original thread, so I'll leave it here. I have no argument with anything you've written above - my original point was only that it was, I thought, non-sequitur to bring Suzuki's approach or his "method" into the discussion. Suzuki is another, and in this thread, somewhat peripheral subtopic of learning to listen as a way to self-monitor one's playing, which is ultimately the whole point of a performer's training.
Karl
|
|
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
