My Teacher asked if I wanted to do RCM Level 1 or Level 2

Pallas

I started lessons about 3 months ago. I arrived having finished Alfred All-In-One Level 1 on my own. We did a few of the extra pieces at the end of the book, but as soon as we started doing pieces from Classics to Moderns, I was hooked. All along, I've offered to do whatever curriculum my teacher wanted to try, but so far she has said it doesn't matter what book we use. I like having structure, but decided to follow her lead.

After my first recital though, she no longer wanted to use Introduction to Classics to Moderns, and instead chose two Level 2 pieces for me to work on: Schumann's Melody and Petzold Minuet in G with all the ornaments. Suddenly, she asked me if I wanted to do RCM levels, and if so, I could pick between doing Level 1 and Level 2. She said L2 would be very difficult, but ... and left it there. Whenever I ask her what she recommends, she just says, "It's totally up to you."

My instinct is to use the syllabus if she wants to, but not do exams (because, why elect the stress) and start at Level 1 instead of hurling myself into Level 2. But I do have an impulse to accept my teacher's challenge and do Level 2. Sigh. I think this might be a silly impulse. There is still a lot to learn from Level 1 (I checked), and it's not a race. But I worry there's something I'm missing. What if it's not in fact a great big deal to start at Level 2, and she's pushing me because she thinks I can do it even though it would be hard. I mean, she wouldn't set me up to fail. She's a good teacher.

I'm really happy to be taking lessons at all. I'm so happy to be finally working on bucket list pieces. One of my friends says, hey, why not just knock out Level 1 first, "real quick"?

I think it's fine either way, but I could use some advice. Please remember: I love hard work, but I'm also very mindful of walking before I can run. AND YET. One of my teacher's favorite sayings is "Learning piano isn't like building a bridge, you don't have to do everything in strict order." ARG. I have considered just showing up with both sets of books and whacking the ball back into her court! 🤣 The books are expensive, but I can afford them and I don't care. HALP.

keff

Pallas If you wish to skip level 1, then my advice would be to make yourself fully comfortable with the technical requires of level 1, if you are not already in that position. In some respects I regret not doing the ABRSM grades when I was with my last teacher because it provides a very systematic way of learning. Most likely I would not have taken the exams but even so just studying the pieces and technical requirements of each grade would probably have helped my playing.
I also believe that pursuing piano levels or grades at the exclusion of everything else needs to be avoided.

Ithaca

Pallas One of my friends says, hey, why not just knock out Level 1 first, "real quick"?

Pallas I have considered just showing up with both sets of books and whacking the ball back into her court!

Pallas One of my teacher's favorite sayings is "Learning piano isn't like building a bridge, you don't have to do everything in strict order."

I like the idea of buying both sets of Level 1 and Level 2 books, so you and your teacher can freely choose between the pieces. Practically speaking, if your teacher really knows what she’s doing, then it may not matter where you start, b/c she’ll know what technique you’ll need to learn for any particular piece, and how to get you there. Psychologically speaking, though, I’m guessing that nominally starting at Level 1 with the option to make forays into Level 2 will be the most pleasant and least 2nd-guessing/angst-inducing way to go.

FWIW, my teacher stopped lesson books after the John Thompson 1st grade book - she would just show up with a pile of sheet music when she felt it was time - but when I start with a teacher again, I’m going to ask to begin with the most basic beginner books. Literally the ones for 5-year-olds. Because if I can play it properly, it will take me very little time to review it with my teacher - I can just play through all the pieces, and she’ll be able to see if I’m missing something or not, very clearly, since the pieces are so simple. So a bit like what your friend suggests.

BartK

Pallas Learning piano isn't like building a bridge, you don't have to do everything in strict order.

This shows that your teacher is experienced and knows what she's doing. Learning is not linear. You don't just master level 1 concepts, then level 2, etc. There is a lot of reinforcement necessary to learn anything and the same concepts are revisited many times throughout the levels. Your teacher knows this and she is not going to let you miss out any vital concept. If you struggle with something she can look for pieces to work on that thing. But at the same time, you make progress by being challenged slightly beyond your comfort zone and I think this is why she suggested level 2.

Sgisela

Pallas
This video came up a while ago for me on YouTube and I think has an interesting perspective for you:

She talks about skipping grades starting around 9:30, but the first half of the video has some good context about ‘beginner grades,’ ‘intermediate grades,’ and ‘advanced grades’ that I think is useful to hear as context. She also talks about how learning is non-linear (as @BartK mentioned earlier).

I didn’t do RCM exams; when I lived in the US, I did the Guild Auditions. But my impression is that while these grades exist to be discrete milestones, learning is very much on a continuum. Level 1 and Level 2 are both beginner levels, and it may not be that much more work for you to get to a place where you’re comfortably able to pass Level 2, in which case there’s no reason to hold yourself back.

What I suspect is happening is that your teacher sees that you are motivated and work hard and that Grade2 is a reasonable goal for you. But the teacher also sees that you like structure and order, and if you want to go level by level, that’s reasonable, too.

Stub

Thumbs up that your teacher thinks you are capable of L2, but I'd do Level 1 first. You mention that there's still a lot to be learned from Level 1, so why jump to Level 2? If nothing else, the L1 pieces will help solidify what you've already learned. Challenge and hard work are good in their place, but maybe this isn't the place for it.

Pallas

Stub I was thinking it would maybe be easier to focus on fundamental technique stuff if I'm not also consistently struggling with new stuff. I still have tension in lots of situations, I'm still not consistently ergonomic with all thumb crossings. I'm trying to find that sweet spot with not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, but not letting appropriately imperfect become sloppy habits that lead to pain. Thank you for lending your opinion. It helped me investigate some additional reasons I might do Level 1 first.

lilypad

I've been using the RCM books to keep my sanity while I finish up the Piano Adventures series. The RCM books aren't method books, but more of a graded repertoire series so I don't think you'd miss out on anything pedagogy-wise by starting at level 2. It would be more like missing out on maybe some nice pieces from level 1. YouTube has playlists that have all the repertoire and etudes from the various RCM levels (I can't remember if level 1 has an etude book). If there are pieces from that level you'd really like to play, I'd go ahead and just the book(s) to play those specific pieces as side projects while you focus on level 2.

I have fond memories of some fun pieces I played from even their Prep A or B books for PW's Beginner Pieces recital several years ago. One of the pieces even had a glissando in it!

Pallas

lilypad The RCM books aren't method books, but more of a graded repertoire series so I don't think you'd miss out on anything pedagogy-wise by starting at level 2.

I bought Level 1 etudes and repertoire. About half the pieces look pretty challenging. I might be off base, but I think there's a syllabus of technique, and theory that goes with each level, in separate resources. So I can see how it's not a method book, but it's leveled somehow such that I see I'm missing some skills introduced in Level 1. I think my teacher agrees with you that those skills can be learned while studying Level 2, but it would up the difficulty level. So that's what I'm pondering.

Thank you very much for weighing in! I really appreciate having the help examining the options so I can make an informed decision.

JB_PT

If it were me I'd get both sets of books. You said there's a lot to learn in L1 still, so that wouldn't be a waste. You can tiptoe into the L2 books and if it seems like too much, you can just set them aside until later. Or maybe focus on L1 pieces but include one piece from L2 at a time. That would give you a good challenge and some satisfaction if you end up doing better than you anticipated; alternatively, if the L2 pieces do feel like too much, at least you know and you aren't wondering if you should have just 'gone for it.'

Pallas

JB_PT This sounds like a reasonable best-of-both worlds option. On the way out of my lesson, I said, "I could get both? Why not both?" And she made that, "Up to you," gesture that I've grown to know and love/hate. She's very skilled at making me decide for myself. 😜

RFox

If you're working with a teacher you're not going to miss out on anything. The reason the basics are the basics is because they crop up in every piece we play. I'd go with L2 and use the L1 book on your own at home in a more casual time-frame.

Doing L1 with your teacher might not offer enough weight to work with for either of you.

Pallas

RFox Doing L1 with your teacher might not offer enough weight to work with for either of you.

Thanks for weighing in. I really appreciate it. If I arrive with both levels, she can decide what to assign and I can follow her lead. The worst that can happen is I have a nice complete set of books, some of which are used a bit more than others.

Pallas

keff I also believe that pursuing piano levels or grades at the exclusion of everything else needs to be avoided.

I've been concerned about this myself. I don't want to spend a year laboring on two pieces I don't care about just to get a certificate that says I'm a certain level. I just want to be able to read music, play with good technique and expression at whatever level I'm at, and maintain a sense of growth over time for my own enjoyment, and hopefully other people too.

Pallas

keff If you wish to skip level 1, then my advice would be to make yourself fully comfortable with the technical requires of level 1, if you are not already in that position.

I just looked up the technical requirements for the first time. I found the charts online. Her system doesn't map exactly to the charts. She has gone faster in some areas, and saved other areas for later. Very interesting. Thanks for the suggestion.

Pallas

Ithaca when I start with a teacher again, I’m going to ask to begin with the most basic beginner books.

I really like structure because it helps me build confidence. My guess is that she'll pick a few pieces from Level 1, get us both confident, then bread-crumb me to Level 2.

I think your plan sounds really wise and appropriate, and I'm looking forward to hearing about it.

Sgisela

Ithaca FWIW, my teacher stopped lesson books after the John Thompson 1st grade book - she would just show up with a pile of sheet music when she felt it was time - but when I start with a teacher again, I’m going to ask to begin with the most basic beginner books. Literally the ones for 5-year-olds. Because if I can play it properly, it will take me very little time to review it with my teacher - I can just play through all the pieces, and she’ll be able to see if I’m missing something or not, very clearly, since the pieces are so simple. So a bit like what your friend suggests.

I also graduated from lesson books pretty early and was then assigned a mix of exercises and pieces. Early on, I believe my teacher had me get Early Classics to Moderns, and a lot of the pieces from my early years were from that book. My impression (and what’s been said on this thread) is that the RCM books are basically collections of etudes/exercises and pieces that are considered to be appropriate for a particular grade (and can be used to prepare for the exams). So it’s probably pretty similar to what my teachers did, just collected in one place so you only need a couple books instead of lots of books/random sheets.

Anyways, having both the Grade 1 and 2 books will give @Pallas and teacher more flexibility.

ranjit

Ithaca One of my teacher's favorite sayings is "Learning piano isn't like building a bridge, you don't have to do everything in strict order."

I find that learning piano is like one of those video game skill trees. You can level up different skills in any order you like, but can't unlock legendary skills in any domain without maxing out the corresponding tree. Lol

keystring

I had to look into the RCM question a whole while back because of my first experience. As someone said, it is not a method book so "it" doesn't instruction - the teacher needs to. I was doing RCM when I started violin as a new instrument as an adult. There is a technique book and repertoire book, and the two go hand in hand. Say you're playing C, G, F and D major scales and their relative minors in "technique", your repertoire would also be in those keys: "technique X" in technique will show up in repertoire. How to do these things should be shaped by the teacher. ..... If you're going for exams, then theory comes in at around grade 4 or 5, and that would be a third layer.

What I did at the end after everything had gone awry was to buy the syllabus book itself which showed which skills and such were aimed for at each grade level. I also found out that the syllabus book suggested a whole bunch of pieces for any grade level, and the RCM repertoire book only had some of them. For repertoire I think they tried to have several for Classical era, several for Romantic era etc. I think this would be the same across all instruments.

Years after I stopped all this, and there was a lot more information on the Internet, I saw real teaching of some of the things I had done RCM-wise. You don't just play an etude, and if it sounds ok, then you've "done" it. There is a point to that etude, a thing you should be learning and aiming toward, and ways of getting there. A lot of this had been missed. In that sense, the fact of a teacher being there isn't enough: the teacher also needs to be doing the teaching because there are no pointers like there might be in a method book.

Pallas

keystring As someone said, it is not a method book so "it" doesn't instruction - the teacher needs to.

For sure! I would never use the Celebration Series as a self-study. Level 1 in RCM isn't Level 1 in the method books I've read. If I had opened the Level 1 repertoire book on my first day of piano, I would have quit on the spot. There are two whole levels in RCM before Level 1.

Player1

I'd recommend Level 1.

The RCM1 repertoire will be challenging but not overly so. The main difference between RCM1 and RCM2 will be that, after starting at level 1, you will have a solid understanding of the theory required before you advance to Level 2. An understanding which you may not have right now.

If you have the repertoire book already, all you'll need is to get the companion theory book and you'll be set.

Pallas

BartK Your teacher knows this and she is not going to let you miss out any vital concept. If you struggle with something she can look for pieces to work on that thing. But at the same time, you make progress

Yes. She wouldn't have suggested it if she felt it was beyond me, or that we wouldn't be able to address any opportunities for improvement along the way.

Pallas

Sgisela What I suspect is happening is that your teacher sees that you are motivated and work hard and that Grade2 is a reasonable goal for you. But the teacher also sees that you like structure and order, and if you want to go level by level, that’s reasonable, too.

That's what I think too. Also, in the latest Bulletproof Musician newsletter, Noa Kageyama cites a study that shows that students do better when they have a choice, which makes sense to me. Thank you for the video. I'm going to watch it.