Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Teaching at home vs. outside studio vs. traveling

Hello Everybody,
It's been ten years since I've taught privately in my home. (It was never a big studio -- I maxed out at about 9 or 10 students.)

I'm considering going back to teaching again in about two years when my kids are a little older and want to weigh out some options and think things through in the meantime.

There's tons I could ask, but for right now ...

I really disliked teaching in my home. It was a disruption for my family, my family's noise and general living sometimes disrupted the lessons, I felt like my privacy was being invaded, and I just prefer the idea of "going to work" and allowing my home to be my home.

So ... I'm wondering if I would be happier teaching in a studio or being a traveling teacher, neither of which I've ever done.

As far as teaching in a music store, I'm wondering if it's very difficult to get in?
Do you have to have advanced degrees and an amazing resume for them to even consider you?
Do you have to wait until a certain time of year for when they're hiring?
What would be the best way to get "in" there?
And are there are telltale signs of places that are better than others to work?

If you've taught at a store, what did you like or dislike, and in what ways was it different?

And what about that versus traveling? Any preference between the two? If you're a traveling teacher, what do you like about it?

Is there anyone else that prefers not to teach in their home?

Thanks!

You have a few choices:

1. Teach at home - you don't like it, so don't consider it

2. Teach at music studio - Pros: no need to find students. Cons: might be limited in what you are teaching, you have to abide to your boss' rules or policy.

3. Teach at student's home - Pros: no need to have a space or piano. Cons: maybe spending too much time in traveling

4. Rent a space in commercial place - Pros: be your own boss and no need to teach at home. Your business will look more professional. Cons: it is more costly than the first three choices.

5. Rent a room in a music studio - This is not the same as you teach for your boss. This means you rent a room, you pay rent and your landlord cannot interfere with what or who you are teaching.

I personally like number 4 and 5 better.

Well, I really like teaching in my home.

I also travel to a limited number of students per week, all for purely logistical reasons, and I'm hoping to phase that out eventually. The one thing I like about it is those particular students.

I looked into teaching at Local Music Store when I was just starting out. They were all too happy to have me, but even as a beginning teacher with few qualifications at the time and a fairly low private teaching rate, I found the store's rates unacceptably low and I didn't pursue teaching there. As far as I know stores don't care about teaching qualifications, but that's not necessarily a good thing.

You didn't mention community music schools. They do care about teaching qualifications but every school is different and many can be flexible enough to consider you based on the strength of your playing ability, musical work history or other demonstrations of your expertise that aren't degrees.

If you can command a rather high fee as a private teacher there's also the option of renting a space yourself to teach in and putting a good piano in there. But that's quite a bit of overhead.
(Indeed, teaching anywhere besides your home or the student's home means that one way or another someone else gets to take a sizable portion of the money paid by the family, which means they pay more and you get less.)

I think traveling to the students' homes to teach is the way to go. You can demand a much higher fee plus money for gas and expenses. If you live in an area with a high demand, then go for it.

I am no teacher, but one of the main reasons not to have a teacher at all, is the cost.

If you look hard enough, you can always find a teacher who's willing to teach for less. One of my family friends' daughter is taking lessons from a retired "teacher" whose rates I probably should not post for the public to see, but suffice it to say that my jaw hit the ground when I heard it.

But don't you agree that piano teachers have a right to make a living?

Of course they do!

Absolutely, piano teachers deserve to be paid well.

But I think the point of Johan's post is that if you set up your studio as a 'traveling' studio only, you will need to charge a premium for the travel time and gas. Therefore, wouldn't you reduce the available pool of students? I would not be able to afford my lengthy weekly lessons if my teacher needed to add on travel and gas each week.

But it's a trade off. I teach in "mixed" conditions... some people at home, some people at their home.
I have some parents paying all the expenses for my travel, with the agreement that I will reduce these expenses if they find me more students in their neighbor, because their kids schedule is so tight that they don't want to waste the 20 minutes to come and go to my studio and the fact that as parents they have their businesses to run.

There is PLENTY, at least in Houston, of people willing to pay premium dollars for the convenience and because "your" premium dollars is just pocket change for them.

Be honest, be upfront and don't bend too much, they won't respect you. They will kick and scream when you tell them the rate for travel but most of them do understand.

See, I was thinking it would be exactly the opposite. I think a lot of parents would flock to a teacher who made it more convenient for them like that. As a parent who knows a lot of parents, that's a big deal, especially when you have a couple other kids that you need to drag with you to lessons or who have their own activities you need to bring them to.

But I could be wrong.

What exactly is a "community music school"? I can't picture anything around here that sounds like that.

It does depend on the market.

In the area where I live, there are plenty of teachers who are "traveling" from house to house, charging a premium and being full of students because overall is a higher income area and kids are kept on tight, busy, schedules. I go to a family and I'm stuck in between the chess teacher and the calligraphy teacher... both teaching at home.

In a way It helps me because I can verify the status and kind of instruments owned by the family. I found out that the definition of "piano" seems to be wider than it really should be and status of maintenance is apparently random even with EXTREMELY expensive grand pianos.

To make this work for you financially, wouldn't you need to charge the same hourly rate for driving as you do for teaching time? That was my assumption in the post. If that is the case, my 1.5 hour lesson would now cost me the equivalent of a 2.5 hour lesson... totally out of financial reach on a weekly basis.

Maybe my assumption of an equal rate is incorrect... or you plan to fill your studio with the affluent. I think your planned travel rate and your target student population are questions for you to consider if you plan on traveling.

Well, no. I agree their work is worth paying for. I don't agree they are entitled to have anybody want to pay for it. Subtle distinction maybe, but when I hear the word "right" it seems like an entitlement issue.

Don't forget the Skype option. That should be on the table as well.

Examples, in New Hampshire, Maine, and Massachusetts, respectively:

Concord Community Music School

Portland Conservatory of Music

Winchester Community Music School

For adults is an option usually only if they have mobility issues, but for kids you are offering an extreme value even if you charge your time, plus the car expenses plus a "risk fee" just because you have to get out of your house and you need some buffer in case you can't get back to the studio on time.

In most of these cases both parents work and they have a nanny who picks them up at school... instead of paying for the nanny to bring the kids at the studio, drive most likely their minivan or suv, and get paid to do nothing, you go there while the nanny takes care of the house... even if you cost twice as much they offset the cost having the kid able to do more (no time wasted in traveling) and the nanny works instead of driving... the mileage and risk goes on your car instead of theirs, in case of an accident is your b-side and not their kids....

I also teach out of my studio, but now I'm mostly teaching in the students' homes. I'm on the verge of turning away students.

These parents do talk to each other, and the word gets out fast.

Maybe if you live in the middle of nowhere. If your closest city is 100 miles away, you might consider using Skype.

Furthermore, for the more serious/advanced students, I can't imagine using Skype unless it's one of those rare lessons with a master teacher 2,000 miles away.

I reread the OP.



So I think you're right, probably not an option for that person. Still, it's a valid mode of teaching that some teachers specialize in, I wouldn't sell it short too quickly. There are 7.3 billion people in the world, only a few live within driving distance, but a good bit more have internet.

OT:

Things will change quickly with Microsoft Hololens and other AR technologies. The perpetual struggling of teaching at home vs in home might finally become a non-issue.

Babies born today, might find it strange that you and your teacher needs to be physically in the same room to learn piano.

Just like a building without WiFi and a world without Internet is a foreign concept to both of my boys :-) and neither of them has seen camera films.

Update: Just saw Tim's post. The most senior person in this forum seems to be the most open minded with technologies. Amazing.