Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Bad Teachers

Did I say I was?

No.

But anyway, since I can drive a car, I think I should find a driving instructor forum and start ranting on there about how inadequate the driving examination system is

You do that. Meanwhile, I am going to listen to Beethoven's wonderful 6th Symphony, conducted by Leonard Bernstein.

I agree with you that this should be the way they run it. I am totally into producing well-rounded musician with holistic approach!!

In CM test there are two parts:
Theory/ Ear Training in one day and
Performance(repertoire)/ Technique (scales)/ Sight-reading in another day

According to my understanding that if a student fail theory (passing mark is 70%) and pass the performance part, they would considered fail and have to retake the same level next year again.

However, if a student fail Sight-reading but get very high rank for repertoire and technique, depends on the evaluator, he would still pass the performance part of the test.

As a result, we have tons of kids who knows how to "copy" performances from recordings, but when you ask them to improvise, listen, and sight-read, they are all clueless. As contrary to examiners' belief, those three areas are more important than the prepared pieces.

Of course it will have a negative impact on the examination system, because if the examination is so difficult to pass, why would people pay to take it? Catering to the mass is the ultimate failure of ABRSM and Trinity examination body. The system is been accepted by all major exam boards doesn't mean it is good and balanced, sometimes it simply because there's no alternative which doesn't affect the profitability of the current system.

Defend it in any way you like, please. And please stop this BS "you are not a teacher in the system." Tell you what, I TOOK the ABRSM exams (both grades and diplomas), and I am ACTIVELY teaching students who's preparing for both grades and diploma exams. Seeing how their repertoire list for diploma remain virtually unchanged for the last decade is already an indication that it's not an examination system, it's a money grab system.

I stand by my assertion that to criticise something, a little experience and involvement in it is prerequisite to a sensible discussion.

Anyway - it is not such a good idea to insist upon a minimum standard of achievement across multiple sections of a *single* examination.

What you, Alan, and ezpiano and polyphonist are suggesting, is the equivalent to making it compulsory that all sections within the theory exam be passed.

Total score 75%? Sorry, but because you scored 3 out of 10 in the intervals question, you fail the exam. Your theory knowledge isn't balanced enough, you see.

Or, how about within each section of the exam itself? Aural skills should be just as balanced, right? So, yes you may have scored 12/18, but because you achieved this by getting all the listening and analysis bits perfect, unfortunately, you sang like one of those "crazy" American Idol auditions, so we have to fail you on that section, and consequently, I'm sorry to say, the whole exam.

I also dont think there's anything wrong with an examination system which caters to the masses. That's not to say I think it's perfect as it is, but the fact is it needs to serve many purposes, not least of which is encouragement.

The tone I'm picking up from those who complain about everything being "too easy" is one that, to me, smacks of wanting to belong to a more exclusive club.

I should also add that, if you wanted to place more importance on skills such as listening and sight-reading, wouldn't the intelligent solution simply be to rebalance the marks awarded to each section? If fewer marks were allocated to the performance elements, then this would make passing on pieces alone much harder.

Finally someone gets it.

But the title of this thread is Bad Teachers.

If we really have tons of kids who play well but lack other skills, is that evidence for bad teachers? Or just teachers doing a good job of meeting current goals?

Given that almost none of those kids will go on to become working musicians, are those additional skills so important the system needs to be revised?

Yes. At least for incompetent teachers. Usually the problem is that the teacher can barely sightread themselves, so they are uncomfortable teaching it to the student.

I think it can imply bad teaching, but not necessarily. I'd hate for people to assume that since I have some students who choose not to practice that they reflect on me as a teacher and pianist.

Personally, if I know a student needs to learn something, I have to make sure I know it first before I can teach it! Ignoring the fact they need it is not an option. In the past, this has meant I need to learn more about playing jazz from lead sheets or jazz improv, for example. I'm not a "pro" at these things, but enough to help a student get started, and then send them on to someone who is more advanced if the student wants to go further in this direction.

It doesn't really matter whether those kids will go for music major or not, you simply cannot deny that these musicianship skills are essential for life long appreciation and enjoyment of making music as their hobby.

Don't you love the ability that you can simply pull some music books from the shelf at your spare time and start sight read some cute little pieces? Don't you love the ability that you can improvise and use music to express your own story?

Talking about teachers, there are, at least in Hong Kong, a large number of them specialized in getting kids passing grade exams, without teaching them anything else. Imagine a kid learned nothing besides the required piece for exam, scales and arpeggios, do you seriously think they will grow to appreciate and enjoy music? These are bad teachers, but they are promoted by a flawed music grade exam system, and further encouraged by the competing nature of Asian style kids upbringing.

I am sure your tone will change when your kids gets these kind of teachers.

Your analysis is fine and dandy provided the ABRSM and Trinity revised their scoring system in the pass decade, which, unfortunately did not happen. What they have done is just rotating grade 1-8 repertoire pieces once in a while. Hence, it's a money grab system.

Perhaps this is a bit OT, but exams are a means to an end, and not the end in itself. A teacher who can't see this will find something else to grab onto. However, there are many good teachers out there who use these things as a goal for students, yes, but not the primary focus of their teaching.

The same argument could be said for method books. Bad teachers use good method books in a bad way, "passing" students on to the next without ensuring the student has learned the skills necessary to play the music within them. It's not the fault of the method books.

I'd like to get back to the original topic, which imho is an extremely important one.

First item is the question when a transfer student comes in with difficulties: Is it due to the previous teacher? Might it not be due the student or family - not wanting to practice or listen, parents undermining progress, maybe a learning disability that hasn't been found? I think that is legitimate, and you can't always tell, especially right away. I think that AZNpiano is talking about the times when you can tell.

We've had stories of third year transfer students where every note has a finger number penciled in by the teacher, and the student can't read. Or what if a transfer student comes in clueless and lost, and is soon wowed by "how much she is learning" and makes tremendous progress and continues to do so. Things of that nature.

I believe strongly that musical ability is built on fundamental skills and knowledge, the kind which is transmitted in the first years. If any of those skills are missing, problems will crop up in weird areas and you may not know why. Take your transfer student with wonky timing. Is there weak understanding of note values, what counting means, understanding of pulse or meter, reading skills, or technique that makes movements jerky? You're at grade 7 but the problem may lie in something that the student didn't get at a preliminary level.

Would it make sense for transfer students to be given a review of the fundamentals, in the way the new teacher teaches them, to make sure there are no hidden holes?

I am in a transfer situation myself, and in addition as a teacher I have done remediation and troubleshooting with students outside the area of music. It almost always seems to come down to the core things.

That said, in reflection of AZNpiano's sentiment, if a person does not yet know enough, maybe they should hold off teaching - especially beginners who are getting the foundations - until they do. It's the student who suffers. Polyphonist expressed in his post that teachers would not want to teach students who began this way: that is not fair to the student. It's better if that situation is avoided in the first place.

I can't agree more. If a teacher wants to teach to the exam, he/she can always do so no matter how the exams change. If a teacher understands what a student should really learn, he/she should teach the student accordingly and the student will have a solid foundation and consequently will score well in exams if he/she chooses to participate. Exams are meant to help students achieve a well-rounded education. If teachers/parents choose to view exams as hoops to let the students jump through, it's their own fault.

"...At least for incompetent teachers. Usually the problem is that the teacher can barely sightread themselves, so they are uncomfortable teaching it to the student..."

How funny--- this is exactly what my brother (the high school band director) said about the teacher who 'didn't approve' of teaching students to play scales.

To the word.

Third year? How about any NUMBER of years of supposed teaching where reading was never covered and finger numbers becamse a lethal crutch?

That seldom happens until a faulty foundation is fixed, and that can take a long time, if it can even be done...

Yes, but it is not so simple, and there is no magic book or set of skills that can be checked in order unless you take each student back to zero, and many or even most transfers will get discouraged and quit before you can get the job done.

I can't agree more with you too childparadise!

Exams is a tool and depend on the teacher how to use it. Good teacher will use it in a nice and balance way. Bad teacher (just like the one in original post by ANZ) would use it badly. That is why when it comes to piano education, selecting a good teacher is more important than taking exams. Unfortunately a lot of parents being misinformed, they just want their children to pass the exams at whatever cost, even if it means the education is not well-round to a point of "malnutrition". Imagine a diet with only meat with no vege and fruit at all, it is only lead to self-destruction.