Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Advancement too quickly?

PianoMan778,

Do you have any videos that you would be willing to post? A video is worth a thousand words here.

Mozart K545 after three years isn't crazy, if the kid has the coordination and the work ethic. Sudden large leaps beyond that piece could be.

I have known kids who really intensely wanted to work on piece X, no matter the level of difficulty. With the active assistance of the parent, the kid then succeeds in pressuring the teacher into allowing it. Sometimes this outcome sets the student back substantially, because the child winds up butchering the work. It's worse if the parent then profusely praises the bad work and allows the child to further ratchet up the difficulty of the next piece.

If the parents are being induced to chase things that don't have anything to do with musicianship then they are pressuring teachers to do things that go in the wrong direction. The same for education. Parents being persuaded toward things that are in the wrong direction, and then pressuring teachers to do things that are contrary to teaching, and pressuring their kids to the wrong direction - I don't see this as leading to much good. How many problems are being cited in these fora?

The key word here is "induced". If parents are getting wrong information but they are not arrogant or just dimwitted - or both - they can be guided towards correct information.

If they get guided, yes. For my part I have been pushing communication and putting out the idea of "goals" for several years, and there is a reason why I ended up going this direction. It is not an easy situation for our societies.

If 'teacher' is substituted for 'parent' in the last paragraph, the above quote is reasonably close to the OP's concern as to how his nine-year-old is being taught. (Not saying there is profuse praise or butchering going on.)

Andromaque said:


I think this is key--his teacher thinks the student can play those pieces, and maybe he can, but to do it the student needs to devote a lot more of his life to practice than he is currently. The parent probably knows best whether or not that can or should happen.

Regardless, best of luck (and practice, practice, practice) to your child, PianoMan778!

I did speak to my son's teacher today, and my main concern with her was having him learn the Italian Concerto at the expense of everything else. She said he shouldn't practice it more than 15 or 20 mins of his hour of daily practice. I mentioned that this will mean it will probably take him a year or two to learn it, and she said that was OK.

She feels it's important to get children at a young age (whom she feels can handle it) to take on pieces that they will play for the rest of their life, because "there's something special about their young minds that makes it get absorbed better". That's not her quote, just my interpretation of what she was trying to say.

So I guess the question is, is it beneficial to work on a piece slowly that may currently be beyond your ability to play (at full speed), as long as you take your time and make it only one part of your daily practice schedule?

My guess is that it will kill any joy he would ever have with that piece, and maybe even with the piano in general. That would be very sad.

I agree. I think this is a TERRIBLE idea. New teacher time.

Keystring raises an important issue: goals. I wonder if we teachers could list those goals and validate the authentic ones. For me, there are definitely good and bad goals.

To the OP: Playing the Italian Concerto for this boy is unwise. Sorry, I don't have to hear him to know this. In the Royal Conservatory, this piece is listed for the final Performer's Exam.

If your boy was at reading class, you would never expect him to take Hamlet now, which is taught in Grade 12 in my neck of the woods. That's because there has to be a natural/logical progression in the order in which you read literature. Sure, he might appreciate Hamlet more in twenty years time if it's part of the air he breathes now. But he also might appreciate Willy Wonka and his Chocolate Factory more in twenty years if it's introduced now.

There are literally hundreds of pieces which present interesting challenges and which can and should be incorporated into an interesting curriculum for your son. I wouldn't necessarily drop your teacher, but rather ask her to teach him all sorts of pieces which can be learned in under eight weeks.

I think an hour is a good length of practice time per day. But you may need a second lesson each week if your son absorbs these shorter pieces so quickly.

Thanks I wonder - would that be a good starter for a new thread?

I currently have a 1st grade boy who reads at the 11tg/12th grade level, comprehends it, and thinks at that level. Should his teachers hold him back and have him read 3rd and 4th grade material so he doesn't miss out on his childhood? Or should they go the Dougie Howser route?

Is he 6 or 7? How is his handwriting?

I would guess the upper side of 6 at this point. I have no idea about his handwriting, but his piano is going twice the speed of any student I've ever had.

Make that Doogie Howser.

There was a reason behind my question. A student who is very bright will be ahead in many places, and as you pointed out, it would be silly to hold him back just because of his age. But it can be assumed that he is ahead everywhere. If he has the eye hand coordination of a six year old he may need to progress in the writing department at that level even if he is six years ahead in the reading department, as an example. But to hold him back in his reading material, as you pointed out that would be silly.

He has absolutely no difficulties with hand/eye coordination. Very fast fingers, and accurate!

When I was young my English relatives gave me a set of books called "Journey through Bookland". There were 10 volumes. Volume one started out with nursery rhymes. By volume two there were Aesop fables, and so on. But there was no "lock" on which volume to explore, and you could use an index to search for other, related material. Myths lead me to mythology, on all levels, and there were the Charles Lamb "Tales From Shakespeare".

So while I was still quite young I became a voracious reader, and that habit tranferred to music. I didn't read Shakespeare's plays while young, but I was listening all sorts of advanced music while I was still in elementary school and had a hunger for many pieces of music that are usually not taught until students are much older. I do not think that exploring such advanced piano music hurt me. I did it on my own, and I never mastered any of it (stayed with it long enough) to do much more than shoot my sightreading ability through the roof.

I think there is room for intelligent young kids to explore areas in which they are VERY advanced without being totally cut off from kids their own age in other areas. I say take your young Doogie make the moon the limit. Encourage him to explore ANY music he is ready for, and so long as he masters each thing he plays on SOME level, meaning that whatever level you get to on a piece leaves it open to pick it back up, periodically, and take it to a higher level, you are on 100% solid ground and your young student will absolutely thrive on what you give him!

It's not holding somebody back to introduce them to the depth and breadth of a subject. A lot of people think that prodigies should be directed towards vertical success, ie. increasingly complex music that "shows off" such things as fantastic technique. But what about increasing your grasp of music's secrets? What about enjoying the sheer volume of artistic pieces from around the world. Have you exhausted Janina Garscia's works, Joan Last's, and Rocherolle's? Has your student compared and contrasted the many minuets of Bach with those of other composers, perhaps writing a minuet of his own, or studying what is known about how to dance a minuet?

If I had such a six year old boy as John's around, I still wouldn't introduce him to Hamlet. Some things require maturity to understand, such as why Hamlet's uncle wants to kill his brother and marry his wife.

About Doogie Howser: I never saw the show, but I don't think 16 year olds should be doctors. Again, why not do research until you are older? Or is there an expiry date on this boy that I don't know about?

My mother used to wonder why people would teach their kids golf. She thought you should save some things for kids to look forward to. This is probably an old idea now.

John, would you think a fourteen year old with superior driving skills should drive in the city?

I know many 32 year olds who shouldn't drive - period! And yes, I know some who could and should be allowed to do so.

I do think I understand Candywoman's reference to "vertical success" which I might call "superficial zipping through the grades" or "collecting advanced pieces to hang on your trophy wall" - is that the kind of thing you are thinking about, CW? Simply having read this forum for several years, I believe that John teaches in depth and not just vertically.

When I asked about handwriting, I was thinking of physical development, because small muscle control takes time to grow and all aspects of a child's development has to be taken into account so I hope that this child's teachers and parents are watching for this too - probably they are. Anyone who is gifted still needs to grow in a well-rounded manner in all areas, especially when young. But that should be at his actual level, not the stereotype of his age. In fact, that should go for everyone.

I have often wondered whether young people might not have a lot more on the ball than we give them credit for, and whether our society is in fact infantilizing our youth (is that a word?).