Rubens Never, not here. We'll leave the disgusting elitism to the other forums!

I got bagged a few times at PW for siding with a few about how Synthesia can be a good way to round up more piano players, and get that foot into the door of piano paradise. And then they can even choose to have piano lessons etc after - if they like playing the piano.

I haven't used Synthesia myself though - but I did a 'simulation' in my mind - or foreseeing - based on what I saw of Synthesia, and figured that it could certainly get people used to some hand and finger independence. One way of starting up. It will be sort of like re-habilitation or learning how to crawl/walk etc at first, but the people should be able start playing a few things, and hand independence pretty quickly - even if they might not 'yet' understand chord-matching with melodies, or finger sequencing work etc. But that will be foot-in-door, and then piano/music etc lessons later - should do the trick.

And after watching various piano tutorials online - on finger sequencing etc - some people could definitely be playing some nice tunes that they like.

I think possibly ranjit was there in the same forum chat - one was Teachers Forum.

Importantly ... just like any group or population ... there is variation. And I know that not all teachers were the certain kind I saw at PW. There indeed are lots of fantastic and nice teachers out there.

    Synthesia - yes, I still support it as a place to start. Especially for more visual learners, it can get you seeing patterns quite quickly. In my mind, they function kind of similarly to lead sheets. You know the melody, maybe make note of a note here or there, then you observe the chord and chord pattern, etc. It gives you a blurry bird's eye view of the whole piece.

    An accomplished sight reader could absolutely do the same with sheet music after several years of training, but it's almost impossible to do that in your first few months.

      Found it!! After some 'discussion' in adult beginners forum, piano-lover-u.s. then decided to round up some 'help' in the pw teachers forum.

      And indeed ranjit and myself were posting about Synthesia there.

      LINK1

      And then the usual started ... the usual folks started to rub people the wrong way as Greener put it. And the offending post was obviously removed by a mod ... which does somewhat hide what particular people do get up to over there - not just in one forum section, but other sections too.

      And that first link is a spin-off from :

      LINK2

      (also - very 'interesting' read)

      ranjit Synthesia - yes, I still support it as a place to start.

      Yes true. Even if one user learns one of their fav tunes using piano with Synthesia, and likes the feeling of controlling the music in their own hands and fingers and brain/mind, then that is fantastic. And they can build from there ... take piano/music/listening lessons etc.

        I didn't condone the way they dissed some students there by calling some of them students 'transfer wrecks'. Derogatory stuff.

        And they even dared to conjure up a reason to justify their usage of that particular 'transfer wreck' derogatory term.

        LINK

        That particular bunch is ultra disappointing to see.

          Oh well, there is there and here is here. Here is where we'll be able to make a difference. Many of the newcomers who started posting there in the past year or so already have more posts in this forum in a few months.

          That said, I did read part of that thread you linked to and it was fascinating to see how some people have managed to beat the same drum for years on end apparently, without ever getting tired of it. I'm seeing the exact same arguments in that two year old thread that I saw when I was still active in there, which tells me that it's definitely better for me to spend my energy in this place, not there. Although I occasionally still reel from some of the strange attitudes in that place that defy all logic, I try to be as neutral as possible and just enjoy what we have here. It might be best to leave there to there and concentrate on making this a great place for all 🙂

          I want to emphasize that I'm really strictly speaking for myself here, not telling others what to do, where to post, where not to post, what to post, what not to post, etc.

            SouthPark I didn't condone the way they dissed some students there by calling some of them students 'transfer wrecks'. Derogatory stuff.

            I wonder if you read all 19 pages, and weeded through the chaff. I wrote in, followed by a teacher who corroborated. The gist is TRANSFER wreck --- meaning a student transferring from another teacher, where the manner of "teaching" created problems. The new teacher has to fix the problems that were created. For teachers to acknowledge that poor teaching exists is important. When I was in a violin forum at an earlier time, the blame was always on the student. "Follow your teacher." as though all teachers did the right thing. If you were having problems, well you didn't follow your teacher. The term "t.w." disabuses that notion. A student can be in trouble because they followed a teacher - because improper teaching exists.

            An example is given after my post of a transfer student with serious weaknesses: within a short time of proper teaching, those weaknesses disappear. Therefore there was nothing wrong with the student: it was what and how she had been taught. That's what the term means.

            Unfortunately the teacher who invented the term also destroyed its meaning when asked about it in that thread. I know the actual background. The reality that students can be handicapped by improper teaching is an important notion. That's what the term means.

            In a forum meant for teachers advising each other, this is a situation that teachers have to deal with. It also highlights the importance of knowing how to teach before launching into it - so as to not "create wrecks".

            What gets dissed are teachers who ruin students - not the students.

            The author of negativity in the synthesia thread and elsewhere is not a teacher; at least not in the sense of trained and experienced.

                Anyway, the question in the thread was actually whether there are any teachers here. The notion of getting feedback (I assumed, if there are teachers) kind of derailed it a bit.

                K.S. I read through that whole lot, and I condone the term 'transfer student' - which appeared at least sometimes in that thread. Eg. transfer student that needs significant work or a significant over-haul in particular areas. You could see that the person - AZNP --- even began to capitalise the T and the W --- which is a clear sign of you-know-what. The f.b. word (aka flame baiting). Him/her calling the students 'transfer w****s' is poor form. Disrespectful. At least a couple of folks there even said something that the term is inappropriate - or along those lines.

                keystring The author of negativity in the synthesia thread and elsewhere is not a teacher; at least not in the sense of trained and experienced.

                True! I think at least some others in that teachers thread are teachers. Benno reckons he himself is a teacher.

                I agree that -- if a particular teacher is teaching students very poorly - then that is bad. And if AZNp is such an experienced and/or good teacher, then he/she should just continue to teach the transfer students, as AZNp etc accepted the students - so should just get on with it, and teach professionally.

                  keystring I wonder if you read all 19 pages, and weeded through the chaff. I wrote in, followed by a teacher who corroborated. The gist is TRANSFER wreck --- meaning a student transferring from another teacher, where the manner of "teaching" created problems. The new teacher has to fix the problems that were created. For teachers to acknowledge that poor teaching exists is important.

                  I agree. The use of the term was a comment on the teaching, not on the student. If the teacher who coined the term was referring to the student, he never would have taken the students on.

                  keystring The author of negativity in the synthesia thread and elsewhere is not a teacher; at least not in the sense of trained and experienced.

                  I don't think formal pedagogical training is or should be required for someone to teach piano and, imo, is something that might be nice to have, but not required by any stretch. In the U.S., at least, the majority of teachers have had no formal pedagogical training and yet there are many fine teachers. For the not-so-fine teachers, I don't think pedagogical training would be of much consequence.

                        Stub For the not-so-fine teachers, I don't think pedagogical training would be of much consequence.

                        I don't agree. Teaching the piano involves a set of skills that can be learned - maybe not by all, but by most people.

                        *
                        ... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...

                        • Stub replied to this.

                            Stub I don't think formal pedagogical training is or should be required for someone to teach piano and, imo, is something that might be nice to have, but not required by any stretch.

                            I've encountered good teaching with no formal training, and also bad teaching with high credentials, so I agree. Stub, I was cautiously addressing a situation that was brought up here. What you responded to had two elements: training and experience.

                            Mention was made of (an) individual(s) who regularly criticize(s) students, always with the same critiques and I'd say assumptions. Experienced teachers are the least likely to do so because you need to assess where a student is at, looking at a lot of different things they're aware of. The title "teacher" carries authority in people's minds, so that they may doubt themselves. If a person say they "teach" - it can mean working with a handful of students in some capacity - that does not give the broad overview needed to assess people on-line. In fact, the experienced teacher is the least likely to do so.

                            The subtopic here seems to have been the idea of teachers giving feedback here (though I might have misunderstood Ranjit). I don't think that experienced teachers whose primary job is teaching would do something negative. I do suspect that they might refrain from assessing, because they know how much is involved.

                            hope this clears that up. I don't like the feeling of stepping into a hornet's nest. This site is it's own place and that is FANTASTIC.

                                keystring, my thoughts exactly! It's one thing to prefer a certain method or genre. It's an entirely different thing to broadly accuse anyone who dares to think a little differently that they don't know anything at all about anything.

                                  There are teachers of all sorts ... some are parents (or others) teaching kids, and those parents (or others) may be very good teachers ... without having received certificates etc. And those parents or others may be both very good piano players, that had lessons ... and also very good at teaching their skills to others. And there are the professional teachers ... with certificates etc.

                                  But ... of course, we have to support the 'professional' teachers as well. And we know there are all sorts. In any group or population ... you encounter various sorts.

                                  As for piano ... it is a musical instrument as we know. And it and music and learning and etc means different things to different people.

                                  As for teaching and learning ... there will be case by case situations. And it all takes time to find out what the situation is ... such as a student isn't putting in enough time or effort ... and why ... eg. other social/recreation/leisure activities, or a high workload at school, or not interested, or is one sort that doesn't learn at some average rate due to what reason there is, or due to another teacher not teaching 'correctly' (can be subjective) ... etc. Or a combination of mix of those conditions. There can be grey areas.

                                  Animisha Stub For the not-so-fine teachers, I don't think pedagogical training would be of much consequence.

                                  I don't agree. Teaching the piano involves a set of skills that can be learned - maybe not by all, but by most people.

                                  Yes, certainly some teaching skills can be learned, but (in my opinion) teaching is more of an art than a science. You can't teach the desire to teach, patience, wisdom, a mindset committed to doing what is best (and works best) for the student. Keystring mentions experience. Experience is wonderful and carries a lot of weight, but there are inexperienced teachers who have the teaching mindset and they are wonderful, too. You can also have bad teachers with a lot of experience, and they (sadly) are not likely to be open to being re-trained .

                                      It may be good to answer the original question, "Any teachers here?"

                                      I'm on the fence, and in-between. I do have a teaching degree for school, with learning disabilities & 2nd language learning in there. (I'm not the only language teacher here). I've taught in the classroom and also one-on-one; looked into alternative systems such as Waldorf, visiting classes, The one-on-one later on often was troubleshooting. The first time I ever had music lessons, it was as an adult on a new instrument, and a bunch of things went wrong. At the end of that, I got a piano, which I had played self-taught as a child. Because of the first experience, I went deeply into teaching-learning for music - so as to not fall into a hole as a student a 2nd time. Some of this was public dialog and a lot was private, including with a number of teachers and over a longish time. In my studies with my main teacher, pedagogy, teaching ideas, have been an element for quite a few years now.

                                      I am still a student, and still learning. I've explored problems and solutions with fellow students, including passing on things that I've learned in all of this. Some of this may be considered "teaching". And also for me - learning. As far as that is concerned, I see fellow-students in the fora sharing experience and guiding all the time - maybe there's a gray and blurry line. A couple of teachers have urged me to start teaching for real, like officially. So, dunno.

                                      The things that interest me especially has to do with the process of learning, approaches. This does mesh with my teacher training, plus what I learned from actual music teachers. In "school teaching" we learned to create teaching units, set out aims, objectives, means of getting there, assessing. That's geared to teaching a group, and a tad cumbersome for individuals doing music - but some of it applies. In learning to play the piano we are aiming to learn to play a given piece: we are also learning to acquire skills; both things intersecting. There's a whole gamut of stuff attached to all that. How does a teacher bring these things across, in what order - what activities does a student do at home so as to acquire these things, organizing their time how, etc.? This interests me greatly because of that first experience. There's a thread here about a scientific approach (dunno the exact title atm), and it has some of those elements.

                                      I cannot call myself a piano teacher or music teacher, though.

                                      Stub Yes, certainly some teaching skills can be learned, but (in my opinion) teaching is more of an art than a science. You can't teach the desire to teach, patience, wisdom, a mindset committed to doing what is best (and works best) for the student.

                                      It is indeed both an art and a science. Yes, there is patience, commitment etc. - but how do you do the actual teaching? What kinds of things do you teach first, and how do you set about doing so? Have you an idea of how the student should practise these things at home - have you thought of transmitting this how to the student, and if young, the parents? Are you even aware that there are skills, and which ones, or will you simply teach simple music followed with more complicated music, and hope that skills will magically appear through the act of trying to sound good, like the teacher? These are questions we might ask ourselves.

                                      The other end of the stick is the teacher who learned a rigid pedagogy - things must be done in this order and manner, and they "work" because that's how it's always been done - and those students who don't learn must lack talent, or are lazy - never examining the methodology and its soundness. This goes to what you wrote "and works best for the student".

                                          Stub but (in my opinion) teaching is more of an art than a science.

                                          You could say the same of playing the piano! 😉 Yet, here we are, some for whom playing the piano comes naturally, and others who must work hard to make it sound good. I am in the latter category.

                                          So, if playing the piano can be taught, teaching to play the piano can be taught. 😎

                                          PS Keystring says it better than I do.

                                          *
                                          ... feeling like the pianist on the Titanic ...

                                          • Stub replied to this.

                                              keystring It is indeed both an art and a science. Yes, there is patience, commitment etc. - but how do you do the actual teaching? What kinds of things do you teach first, and how do you set about doing so? Have you an idea of how the student should practise these things at home - have you thought of transmitting this how to the student, and if young, the parents? Are you even aware that there are skills, and which ones, or will you simply teach simple music followed with more complicated music, and hope that skills will magically appear through the act of trying to sound good, like the teacher? These are questions we might ask ourselves.

                                              The other end of the stick is the teacher who learned a rigid pedagogy - things must be done in this order and manner, and they "work" because that's how it's always been done - and those students who don't learn must lack talent, or are lazy - never examining the methodology and its soundness. This goes to what you wrote "and works best for the student".

                                              In many of the Commonwealth countries (so I understand), the question of what to teach and when has been formalized for the teacher by the ABRSM or RCM grade system. Beneath the grade syllybi lie many decisions about how to teach, but the outline is there. In the U.S. and many other countries where the grade system is not well-established, the teacher is on his or her own. This is probably where/why teachers get locked into teaching in a certain way, often the way they were taught. Potentially, non-grade teachers have more leeway to individualize lessons to suit the student, and more experienced and established teachers probably do, but I can see how the extra work might lead some to stick with a method that they know works for most of their students. Though many teachers are dedicated to teaching and want their students to succeed, it is a business.

                                              As for "lazy" or "lack talent," it does happen and can apply to both students and teachers. (P.S. "Talent" is a whole different topic and one I hesitate to even mention.)

                                                  Animisha You could say the same of playing the piano! 😉 Yet, here we are, some for whom playing the piano comes naturally, and others who must work hard to make it sound good. I am in the latter category.

                                                  So, if playing the piano can be taught, teaching to play the piano can be taught. 😎

                                                  I'm with you in the latter category. 😀
                                                  I'm not sure about the equivalence of teaching how to play the piano and teaching about teaching how to play the piano. To paraphrase what you wrote above, for some teachers teaching comes naturally, for others they must work hard to teach adequately and even then it's not enough. Better than any formal pedagogy is (imo) observing "good" teachers working with students, and having had good teachers yourself, with the understanding that "good" can mean different things to different people.