Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Great suggestion! I love the Grossi because they’re great and really short so I know my students will do them every day because they are short enough that they won’t get bored or overwhelmed.
Great suggestion! I love the Grossi because they’re great and really short so I know my students will do them every day because they are short enough that they won’t get bored or overwhelmed.
The main thing with teaching notes identification is that sometimes the student is good at identifiying the notes individually (like on cards) but all jumbled in to a piece they have a hard time.
The real, true solution for this is practice. In other words, time. They have to take time to try to read little songs at the harp each day, because this way they will get faster at figuring out the notes until they internally memorize it. I think one challenge is that this not terribly fun so most people don’t practice doing that each day.
I try giving the students really small, easy songs where the notes are next to each other and then where they have sensible spaces. Sometimes that helps too. Like the Songs for Sonja books. They may be too easy in some eyes but if you’re getting someone to read, they are great.
The main thing with teaching notes identification is that sometimes the student is good at identifiying the notes individually (like on cards) but all jumbled in to a piece they have a hard time.
The real, true solution for this is practice. In other words, time. They have to take time to try to read little songs at the harp each day, because this way they will get faster at figuring out the notes until they internally memorize it. I think one challenge is that this not terribly fun so most people don’t practice doing that each day.
I try giving the students really small, easy songs where the notes are next to each other and then where they have sensible spaces. Sometimes that helps too. Like the Songs for Sonja books. They may be too easy in some eyes but if you’re getting someone to read, they are great.
It’s too bad about the performance situation at your school. I did not have this problem at my schools but the music ed thing was a huge problem, in fact it was kind of a joke. We would occassionally meet music ed people who were really gifted. For the most part, though, it was kind of a joke that they could play at all.
I believe that you have to be very good at your instrument to teach, although being good doesn’t equate to being a good teacher. A lot of people, good or bad at the instrument, just teach to hear themselves talk. But a good teacher is a good performer who knows how to explain concepts clearly and effectively so they become the basis for a growing student.
One problem with harp performance degrees is that they don’t usually have a pedagogy class and often when they do it’s simply a trashy, catch-all class that covers everything that hasn’t been covered somehwere else. So you learn about harp maintenance and string tying one week, editing music another, composing another, teaching maybe but not much and certainly not much practical experience, and sometimes gigging and maybe even a statement on ethics (like it’s a small world, be careful … etc.). A lot of majors don’t have the literature or pedagogy classes that other instruments do and it puts these students at a loss, and that puts the entire instrument at a loss .
The biggest problem with harp, though, is that people think it’s rare so they are very trusting when they meet someone who “teaches” the harp even if that person has no business even owning a harp. So there are totally unqualified people teaching, semi-qualified people teaching, and qualified people teaching, but maybe like another post said, this occurs in all genres.
It’s too bad about the performance situation at your school. I did not have this problem at my schools but the music ed thing was a huge problem, in fact it was kind of a joke. We would occassionally meet music ed people who were really gifted. For the most part, though, it was kind of a joke that they could play at all.
I believe that you have to be very good at your instrument to teach, although being good doesn’t equate to being a good teacher. A lot of people, good or bad at the instrument, just teach to hear themselves talk. But a good teacher is a good performer who knows how to explain concepts clearly and effectively so they become the basis for a growing student.
One problem with harp performance degrees is that they don’t usually have a pedagogy class and often when they do it’s simply a trashy, catch-all class that covers everything that hasn’t been covered somehwere else. So you learn about harp maintenance and string tying one week, editing music another, composing another, teaching maybe but not much and certainly not much practical experience, and sometimes gigging and maybe even a statement on ethics (like it’s a small world, be careful … etc.). A lot of majors don’t have the literature or pedagogy classes that other instruments do and it puts these students at a loss, and that puts the entire instrument at a loss .
The biggest problem with harp, though, is that people think it’s rare so they are very trusting when they meet someone who “teaches” the harp even if that person has no business even owning a harp. So there are totally unqualified people teaching, semi-qualified people teaching, and qualified people teaching, but maybe like another post said, this occurs in all genres.
The problem is not that all music ed programs or majors are bad but that a lot of schools including the ones I went to encouraged people who failed performance auditions to come anyway as a music ed. and then re-audition the next year. While those of us who passed the auditions were subjected to very strict standards of playing, the music-ed.er’s learned a lot about pedagogy and didn’t have many standarads for their playing (no juries, few performance requirements). For instance we had to give two full, memorized recitals in our undergrad. Those people who were music ed majors only had to give a half-hour, non-memorized recital. This disparity in standards is really a problem.
It is standard in the US for anyone studying at a University that the teacher now has at least a Master’s in Performance.
One thing about the post comparing the Ginastera and Twinkle Twinkle. There is a reason that 4th graders don’t teach 3rd grade. It’s not because they haven’t learned the material or that they can’t teach it back. It’s because they don’t yet understand exactly where the material fits in to later material; they can’t teach it as a foundation.
You study long and hard, mastering your instrument so that when you teach you understand the path your students are going to take because you are much farther along on it. It’s like becoming a monk. You don’t go to a monastery and learn from a monk one year ahead of you or two years ahead of you. You learn from a master who understands the path you’re on. Also, sometimes when you learn a piece you know it but you don’t know it as well as you do years later. That’s just human progress. So always we will have that in our performing and teaching but it is an even bigger reason to hold off on teaching until you really are quite far from the beginning level.
Mr.S is right, too. When I first started teaching I had to do a lot of observation of my teacher’s lessons. It was really helpful. Talking to and watching other harpists is also helpful.
The problem is not that all music ed programs or majors are bad but that a lot of schools including the ones I went to encouraged people who failed performance auditions to come anyway as a music ed. and then re-audition the next year. While those of us who passed the auditions were subjected to very strict standards of playing, the music-ed.er’s learned a lot about pedagogy and didn’t have many standarads for their playing (no juries, few performance requirements). For instance we had to give two full, memorized recitals in our undergrad. Those people who were music ed majors only had to give a half-hour, non-memorized recital. This disparity in standards is really a problem.
It is standard in the US for anyone studying at a University that the teacher now has at least a Master’s in Performance.
One thing about the post comparing the Ginastera and Twinkle Twinkle. There is a reason that 4th graders don’t teach 3rd grade. It’s not because they haven’t learned the material or that they can’t teach it back. It’s because they don’t yet understand exactly where the material fits in to later material; they can’t teach it as a foundation.
You study long and hard, mastering your instrument so that when you teach you understand the path your students are going to take because you are much farther along on it. It’s like becoming a monk. You don’t go to a monastery and learn from a monk one year ahead of you or two years ahead of you. You learn from a master who understands the path you’re on. Also, sometimes when you learn a piece you know it but you don’t know it as well as you do years later. That’s just human progress. So always we will have that in our performing and teaching but it is an even bigger reason to hold off on teaching until you really are quite far from the beginning level.
Mr.S is right, too. When I first started teaching I had to do a lot of observation of my teacher’s lessons. It was really helpful. Talking to and watching other harpists is also helpful.
I think set exams and qualificatiosn woudl be great but the problem is always who would be in charge of judging those tings? Even just posting on these forums you can see that while most people are fair, some post angrily and sarcastically without even understanding the post they respond to … so what would happen if they were the judge?
Remember the article in the Harp Column about the American Guild of ORganists having an ethical code of conduct? A lot of other fields have that requirement when you join their “society” or guild. Yet the AHS doesn’t. So I wonder if other instruments do have certifications that are fairly judged, outside of Suzuki and Yamaha training.
I think set exams and qualificatiosn woudl be great but the problem is always who would be in charge of judging those tings? Even just posting on these forums you can see that while most people are fair, some post angrily and sarcastically without even understanding the post they respond to … so what would happen if they were the judge?
Remember the article in the Harp Column about the American Guild of ORganists having an ethical code of conduct? A lot of other fields have that requirement when you join their “society” or guild. Yet the AHS doesn’t. So I wonder if other instruments do have certifications that are fairly judged, outside of Suzuki and Yamaha training.
There are a lot of people teaching the harp. If you want to know how many years it takes to be a good teacher, look at some of the bios for famous teachers.
There are a lot of people teaching the harp. If you want to know how many years it takes to be a good teacher, look at some of the bios for famous teachers.
Some harpists bring carpets with them for this purpose. Just like when you record you always bring a carpet to put under you, the bench and the harp so that you can play in shoes without making any noise.
