Article about teaching

[rubbervsglue]

Considering that most of the guitarists who have written articles for IBM are experienced teachers, I think those of us that aspire to be teachers would get great insight if someone were to write an article about the art of teaching. Maybe explain the do's, the don'ts, teaching techniques, etc...

Any takers?

[forgottenking2]

That'd be very interesting. It's a daunting task though... it'd be easier if we did it in a FAQ kind of format... more like a forum, that way you can get lots of people's views, Eric is an excelent teacher but so is Guni and James has interesting points of view so I think everyone should be given a chance to participate. So just post one of your questions and I'm sure these guys will help. I'll do it if I can.

Regards,

[szulc]

I have always approached teaching from the point of view that helping the student reach an ephiphany is one of the best ways to get them to teach themselves.
No one can really teach you anything, all they can do is show you enough to make you interested enough to teach yourself and learn. The other thing is I resfused to teach them the "flavor of the month". My approach was always from the perspective of how do you learn to improvise and create your own style. Sure, there are fundamentals everyone (must) should learn (as well as state of the art techniques), but you need to begin immediately creating the opportunity for the student to improvise and gain a belief that they can. Their first reaction is alway "I don't know what to play", but you need to help them get over this early and get on with the business of listening and choosing what works for them and what doesn't. The other thing is, they don't realize that the fun part of practicing is improvising and learning to improvise. Getting them to make this important realization is the first step. Then you have to deal with the consequenses of this. They will want to spend all of their time "jamming" instead of working on theory and technique. My definition of "jamming" is mindless improv without regard for key or tonality. While this is useful it should only be a SMALL part of the improv time. The difficult thing to do is impose structure on the improv sessions. If you can do this successfully you can get them to make great strides in their learning, and being comfortable with the process of deciding what works and why. This should be balanced with learningtunes and how to improvise over them using the melody and chord changes as a basis. There is a great deal of good musical ideas packed into the many "Standards". You will find new ways of approaching things from this.

[Metal Dan]

I myself just started teaching so a quick reference list of do's and don't's would be useful. I have the fortune of being able to teach four complete beginners (my only students for now) at the moment so I don't have to go through the process of finding what they do and do not know. What I am doing is teaching them how to read right off the bat. I believe that no matter your style you should be able to sight read a little bit, but depending on your style this can become a major priority or not, but ALL guitarists should at least be able to figure out how to play a piece if standard notation is thrown in front of them... even if they have a more "hunt and peck" approach to it at first. I can sight read thanks to 2 years of classical lessons but I wouldn't say I am the quickest at it ;)
I've taken basic theory... 12 tones of the western music system, what sharps and flats are, enharmonic... super basic stuff. I have also given them a few exercises to work on the left and right hands and what the "proper" way is to fret, pick, sit, etc...
But I noticed that when I started playing, especially classical, I was having trouble building my repertoir (sp?) unless my teacher would sit a piece in front of me. I eventually got over that, but I don't want my students going through it either. What I did was for the first lesson I showed them 8 basic open chords and let them practice switching between them. I told them to go ahead... pick any two and practice switching... when you can do that pick two more... then try stringing some together... all the while using a metronome. For their first major assignment I have them creating me a chord progression of their very own of at least 3 chords and playing it for me at the next lesson. I have them creating right from the very first lesson... now teaching them the "where's and why's" behind the chord progression I am saving for a later lesson. For now I am emphasizing creativity.

So while I am giving them things to practice... I am letting them be creative and sort of design their own lessons in part.

I knew how frustrating it was to start out... not really being able to create and just plain having a hard time with every thing... and since you really couldn't play any songs it just made it worse... So I am having them write a "song" of their own almost. I think being able to throw a few chords together and actually MAKE music after the first lesson was a good move.

What do you guys think? How am I doing at this so far?

[LarryJ]

Its probably a good move, metal dan. I think the most important thing is having a vision, a lesson plan that you are gonna stick to. Remember, you can have them make up songs and stuff while sitting in front of you, but if their goal is to become a complete/competant guitarist (and yours it to teach them to become one) you should also make sure you're going in a specific direction. Just make sure you dont end up transcribing songs for them everyweek, and have some sort of a progression (even a loose one) planned out to keep them building on what they know.

However, since they are just starting, thats a good idea to get them interested in the music. Good luck

[SkinnyDevil]

Good thread.

As a teacher, I'd like to add that teachers often make one crucial mistake: They assume the student wants to be a musician. In my experience, MOST students could care less about theory or reading or exercises or the proper way to do anything at all. Most of them just want to be able to strum a few of their favorite songs at a picnic or aroud the campfire or in their homes.

I wish I had figured that out on my own, but I actually read that in an interview with a jazz teacher (can't remember his name, but he wrote that HUGE book on chords - says the guitar is a "hedonistic' instrument & that teachers hurt themselves by not remembering that). It was like a lightbulb coming on (hahaha!).

Anyway, my students drastically improved when I dropped stuff like reading and understanding what they were doing (hahaha!!!), believe it or not. What I found was that they are then able to focus on PLAYING the guitar (playing songs, not exercises) and many of them at that point became interested in stuff like reading & theory & exercises & whatnot. Maybe not "many" - most still just wanna strum some chords. But those who begin to excel begin to open up to abstract (rather than just concrete) information.

Just my 2 cents......

[Metal Dan]

Now you've confused me Dave, :D .

I don't think it's a wise thing to just avoid it. Maybe at least touch on stuff like reading and teach them the basics and let them decide how far to take it... to me it's sorta like being a physics teacher and only showing the students some formulas and not others. Maybe that's a bad analogy since this is music and not a science... but I think you get my point.

So what do you suggest I do? I am certainly showing them how to slap chords together and play MUSIC... but at the same time I am showing them the "where's and why's" of it all in nice bite sized chunks.

Here's my paradox though. I teach all four beginners in a group lesson every Sunday night for about an hour or so. What do you suggest I do for this kind of "class" situation. They are all at the same place with their knowledge and ability since they all just started. I know eventually as they get the basics under their fingers it will branch off into private lessons... but what should I do to keep things moving along and make sure they are ALL enjoying the experience. Should I maybe 'dissolve' the class and teach each one privately so the lessons are more custom tailored to the individual? They seem to respond well to being in a group.

I guess I should drop the group thing then? With me I just believe Satch's immortal words that "Diversification is paramount... the more you know the better" and I feel like it's a waste if you aren't going to learn as much as you can...

But that is the key to being a good teacher then. Really listening and teaching them what they want to learn and not what I think they should...

I think I answered my own question :confused:

[chris]

Maybe that's a bad analogy since this is music and not a science...

Get him Szulc ;)

[Metal Dan]

It was just my own opinion. I see no point in being lax when it comes to music.

[SkinnyDevil]

I'll try this again. IBM keeps making my computer crash - I wonder what that's all about?

Anyway......

First off, don't drop group. I teach in both group and individual settings, and I find that group typically shows more rapid learning of basic skills. The biggerthe group, the better (generally). My active student roster fluctuates between 45-75 active students at any given time (not counting my transient students [workshops & clinics], on-line students, and readers of my on-line materials) and most of them are in group setting (approx 70%). I break them into 2 age groups (about 8-12 and 13-adult...youngest kid is 6, oldest is 74) and into 4 levels (gtr-1, 2, 3, 4). Sessions are 8 weeks, then they usually move to the next level. By GTR-3 they are experimenting with the pentatonic scale improving solos over a 12-bar blues progression, and have 10-20 songs under their belts. Not bad for 16-24 weeks, huh?

Peer support (and pressure) seem to accellerate the learning up to a certain point.

I don't think skipping "knowledge" base to focus on "skill" base is lax, but I understand those who disagree. I just feel that if they get immediate enjoyment from it, they'll stick with it and be more open to abstracts. That feeling has been correct in most cases.

I like your physics analogy, so think of it like this: College student knows nothing of physics (must be a psych major, huh? - hahaha!), so he decides to sign up for a conceptual physics course. Most classes of this type are to introduce one to physics CONCEPTS (from archaic Greco-Roman to Newtonian to Relatavistic to Quantum), but do so without he math. It is understood that a small percentage will get totally turned on by the concepts and seek deeper knowledge...but most will simply be mentally stimulated, find a general enjoyment of the data, and become more "well-rounded".

Similarly, my students learn lots of songs, develop specific physical skills, fine-tune their ears, and have a LOT of fun with a skill they'll possess the rest of their lives. A few, however, will go on to seek a deeper knowledge (and skill). In my years as a teacher, I've prepped kids for music schools, seen several go on to be guitar teachers, 2 moved into classical music, and one is a band director for a high school. Many have found great enjoyment playing in bands before moving on to more "adult" employment (hahaha!!!). Several of my current students are very active on local music scenes.

I've never had anyone come to me and say I didn't teach them enough. It's always sort of been my belief that I can only teach what they are ready to learn. In essence, I don't really teach them anything at all...I just give them access to knowledge and skill, and point the way. Ultimately, they do the real work and always find exactly what they seek.

At any rate, it's what works for me. Probably not for everyone, though. I've seen those (including now of my former students who is now a guitar teacher) who have completely different apporaches who have similar success. Perhaps it's a zen thing (as my studio boss used to say). That is, we are most successful when we teach in a manner natural to us. So, if your way is working for you, keep at it!

I hope some of this helps, though.

[Metal Dan]

You're my role model in a way Dave, lol. Your probably the only teacher I have had this discussion with.

I like your idea of having group sessions that run like you are taking college courses.

Thanks for all the advice. If you've got anymore to share I'd love to hear it! Help a newbie out ;)

[Metal Dan]

By the way, I was wondering what is a good rate for me to charge?? I plan to eventually ditch my day job and teach (I can also do repairs and setups on the side) but I have to do it one step at a time. I'm not sure what a brand new teacher such as myself should charge for individual lessons and the group sessions...

[LarryJ]

The average for classes around here (Connecticut) for 30min-1hr is about 15 dollars. Give or take 5 dollars I guess. I wouldn't quit the day job just yet :)

Group costs should be lower than individual lesson cost, because students are not getting the same one-on-one attention.

[Black_the_Sky]

In the Chicagoland area the rates are slighly higher. I've taken lessons from two different people plus checked out rates around the area. The cheapest I found was $18 per half hour but I've paid up to $25 for a half hour and currently am paying $20 right now.

[rubbervsglue]

Very interesting stuff guys... Thanks a lot for the ideas!

[Metal Dan]

I checked around in my area and it ranges from like $16 a half an hour all the way up to around $30 and even more for an hour (around 55$).

[SkinnyDevil]

Rates are a very personal thing. I have a friend in a nearby city where rates are about what they are where I live. He teaches classical and is a firm believer in "snob appeal", so chargers about 2.5 times what I charge. I, on the other hand, remember when I could not afford lessons and wanted them very badly, so I tend to keep my rates as low as possible. We both charge less for group classes.

My private rates are $56/month. I do not charge by the lesson or by the hour. I find I have much more stability if I charge a flat monthly rate, and students tend to make getting to lessons a priority. I tell 'em it's ike the cable bill - they don;t care how much you watch TV, but you still have to pay the bill. No added charge on months with 5 weeks, but also no discount when holidays roll around.

My group rates very depending on location, but they run approximately 75% of the individual rate.

Clinic & workshop rates are another issue, but I keep them reasonable.

You also need to factor in your costs, of course. Studio rent, materials, etc. My rent on indy lessons at music stores is significantly less than my rent where group classes are held. Cuts heavily into my pay, but the establishment handles sign-ups & promo, so it's a fair trade.

[SkinnyDevil]

You might want to sign up with Music Staff (http://www.musicstaff.com). I've only gotten 2 referrals from them, but they have a LOT of information to help you get a teaching biz off the ground. Keeps you from re-inventing the wheel (hahaha!!!).

[Metal Dan]

Thanks for the advice! Lessons run a little more here. I was paying a flat rate of 100$ a month. $56 might be TOO low... but then again, I am new to this and can't justify charging much more than that :p

But I like the contract thing. All teachers I know of are doing that now.