Boost your learning curve

by Elaine Wipf
Originally published in the February 2010 issue of the MMTA Newsletter

As our students are busy with exams, contests and festivals, we see their learning curve soar as they rise to the challenges presented.  They give their best effort to achieve these goals.  If we expect our students to bring a desire to learn and diligent effort to their musical endeavors, should we expect less of ourselves?  As teachers we must continue to learn and continue to grow.

While learning may include the pursuit of a higher degree, this certainly is not our only option.  Our learning curve can be developed in many ways.  Here are 10 ways to boost your learning curve in 2010.

• Teach a piece you have not taught before! – You will approach it with freshness, and you may discover a new pedagogical gem.

• Play through new music! – This may include playing through lesser performed works of standard composers, or playing works by recent or newly discovered and published composers.

• Learn and master a new piece! – What is that piece you have always wanted to play?  Now is the time to dig in and start practicing.  Working through the difficulties of a challenging piece gives fresh insight into your students’ struggles, and you may discover a new approach to a practicing dilemma.

• Listen! – There are a variety of opportunities to listen to music including, recordings, concerts, You Tube or iTunes.  Online opportunities can help you find recordings of lesser known works.  This is one learning activity that you can do while driving.  Have you heard all of the Chopin Mazurkas?  The Debussy Preludes?  Try listening to several different recordings of the same piece.  You will be amazed at what you learn!

• Read books! – There are many wonderful books about composers, musical style, keyboard literature, piano pedagogy, psychology of learning, and a wealth of other topics that will boost our learning curve. Make a list of books you want to read, then select one or two of them and start reading.

• Turn on the computer! – There are many e-journals available.  “Googling” a topic will produce a wealth of information. There are websites, and chat rooms that are specifically purposed to help music teachers.

• Attend the MMTA convention! – Clear the dates now (June 7-8) for the upcoming MMTA convention.  I am always inspired anew by the sessions, and the interchange of ideas with other music teachers. 

• Attend other pedagogy seminars, conferences and master classes! – There are a myriad of opportunities both close and far.  The costs of transporting and staying at a conference are decreased by finding other music teachers attending, and sharing the cost of gas and motel.

• Keep in contact with local groups of music teachers! – The MMTA local groups often provide continuing education opportunities in their meetings.  The contact of professional with professional always sharpens our skills.

• Go back to school! – This will guarantee challenge, learning and growth. You can opt for a degree program or audit the classes! Some pedagogy seminars offer the option of credit.

The opportunities are there.  Seize them!  How is your LEARNING CURVE?

Hands off teaching

By Kathie Younker
Originally published in the MMTA Newsletter, April 2012

I once had a student who, whenever I took over the piano at a lesson, acted a little annoyed. I couldn't figure out why, because everyone knows that demonstration is worth a thousand words, right? I was at the peak of my performing ability, and I had a lot of skills to impart. I knew how it should sound, I knew the historical framework of the music, and it was a time saver for her to listen to me and do what I did. I had gone to wonderful workshops and master classes where the master played and the student (sometimes after a few tries) duplicated the style, the touch and the expression, in fact every nuance, exactly as demonstrated by the master.

I didn't learn from my student that I should try a different approach, but it always weighed on me in my subsequent teaching. As I began to teach more and more advanced students, I realized that I had to make a choice: either I had to teach only those pieces I had under my fingers or I needed to be willing to teach pieces I couldn't play as well as my students could. I am a person who bores easily of teaching the same pieces all the time, so I chose the latter, and thereby made an amazing discovery. I discovered ways of teaching that transcended my technical skills. I became the orchestra conductor who doesn't need to grab the oboe and show the oboist how to play, but rather, respects the oboist enough to realize that he will figure out the means if he is inspired by an idea.

Therein lies the challenge: how does the teacher impart the knowledge without taking control of the piano? How does the teacher relinquish control of the piano and still earn his/her salary?
Imagery, gestures, stories, lyrics, and singing are all wonderful ways to get the students' creative juices flowing. Imagining what is going on in the piece (what story is it trying to tell, or what impression is it creating?) is a way to really get the student actively involved. Gesturing a phrase with the arms, or dancing the dance while the student plays, helps get the feeling of the forward motion as well as the rhythm and accent of the dance. Gesturing the type of touch in the air or on the keyboard gives them a strong visual idea of how the muscles and joints move to create a given sound. Writing some extra dynamics or even a breath mark can spark their expressive imagination.
Improvising lyrics and singing them while students play also helps them feel the drama or the humor, while at the same time gives them an understanding of where the piece has to breath. A little history lesson can help a lot to give them a sense of the style of the particular period or of a particular composer. The more I did this type of teaching, the more I discovered new ways to impart my ideas creatively, and the more descriptive and alive I became with my teaching.
I discovered that a 'hands-off' style of teaching validates both the student and the teacher:

• It shows respect for the student's creative ability and recognizes the student as a partner in the learning process.
• It helps you the teacher (or the adjudicator) be a little more open to the student's interpretation of the music, since if you aren't spending your teaching time drilling the student to learn your interpretation, you will be spending more time listening.
• It gives you the teacher a guilt-free-but-effective alternative teaching style when needed, for example, if you are ill or incapacitated physically, if the piece the student is learning is not under your fingers, or if you have a student who prefers to keep control of the piano.
• It gives students confidence and a feeling of independence as a musician, which goes a long way in making them confident performers. There's nothing more confidence building than the feeling that they can play a piece better than their teacher.

I want to be part of that!

by Judy Payne
Originally published in the MMTA Newsletter, December 2012

Gravitation – a movement or force toward something or someone.

I joined MMTA via WSMTA [West Suburban Music Teachers Association] as a chance to commune with other music teachers in the western suburbs. To be frank, I did not expect the level of professionalism that I witnessed by these dedicated musicians and teachers. I was simply blown away by the chops these women displayed as they explored and played at the annual Composers Forum meeting in May. I wanted to be part of that.

The next year I attended the National Convention in Austin, Texas. The seminars were wonderful, the mood inviting, and the inspiration to become more deeply involved in professional development solidified. I began attending the state convention. I wanted to be part of that.
During the first years of MMTA membership, I began to enroll many of my students in the State Piano Contest, believing that it was the premier offering of the MMTA, enhanced by memories of playing in the 10 Piano Concert at Northrop in the late 1960s! As a music theory major in college, it was natural to begin to familiarize myself with the MMTA Theory Program and to begin using its materials with my students. I wanted to be part of that.

However, initially, I did not explore the Comprehensive Piano Examination Curriculum. It appeared somehow too, je ne sais quoi… However, in the spirit of a convert, I have wholly embraced the gravitation to what I now believe is the strongest element of the offerings of the MMTA. So how did I experience this change, or more importantly, how can I suggest ways to facilitate the gravitation in other members?

Well, my first transfer student showed me the way. He had already passed the first two levels and was eager to continue in the work. I put the pieces of the puzzle together, what literature he had played, what piano skills he had acquired and where he was with theory. I opened my Piano Examination binder and read and highlighted what I needed to do to advance him to the next level. What had seemed rather unfocused became quite clear once I simply started using the materials.

The next year, I chose approximate levels for each of my students, using the summer to choose literature and to prepare the overall lesson plan for each student for the next year. With this work done, the academic year really became focused into attainable goals. The program incorporates literature, keyboard skills, and sightreading. I could devote my energies as a teacher to developing and relaying a deeper understanding of musical principles and musicality. What a joy! I wanted to be part of that.

Now, a proviso from a convert. Although I use the materials to develop an individualized course of study for each student, I do not require that every student actually take the examination. If this is anathema for you, stop reading. I do believe the core of learning is the most important element, and highly specific requirements should be weighed for each individual student. I have a couple of upper level students that just do not have the time or drive to complete Theory Level IV as a prerequisite for their Piano Examinations. I have a few students who find the differences in the keyboard skills of Theory versus those of Piano Exams confounding. I have some who absolutely find it impossible to schedule year end exams on the same dates as AP and ACT/SAT testing. Are any of these issues insurmountable? No. But, again, my own belief is in the curriculum itself, not in its testing. However, I have some students who absolutely relish the examination experience and the results. Some want the certificate and what it represents, some want the points and ribbons. But what I want is to be the best teacher possible and to give each of my students a well designed and purposeful music education. I want to be a part of that!

More Scale Fingering Help

by Sharon Kaplan
originally published January 2013 in the MMTA Newsletter

At the MMTA Visioning Session last August, there was a request that MMTA provide a book that has all the piano syllabus technical skills spelled out, with fingerings. And wouldn’t you know, we found someone, Elise Rieke, who is working on that and is willing to share it with us!! But working everything out and getting it all on paper takes time. Until then, here are some references that some of our committee members have found helpful.

THE FJH CLASSIC SCALE BOOKS by McArthur/McLean

FJH CLASSIC FIRST SCALE BOOK for Prep - level 2

* Major and parallel minor pentascales

* Cross-hand arpeggios
* Tonic chords (blocked and broken)
* Cadences (I-V-I, I-V(7)-I)
* Major and minor One-octave scales
* Three-note tonic chord inversions
* Cadence I IV V V7 I
* Instructional pages explaining all of the concepts covered in this book
* Quick Guide to Scale Fingering
* Practice guides
* Progress charts.

FJH CLASSIC SCALE BOOK for Level 3 - 6

* Explains concept for Major Scales

* Explains concept for Minor Scales
* One-octave major and minor scales in parallel motion in quarter notes
* Two-octave major and natural, harmonic and melodic minor scales in in parallel motion in eighths notes
* Contrary motion major and harmonic minor scales
* Triads and inversions ,block and broken
* Diminished 7th 4-note chord block
* Diminished 7th arpeggios
* Key note arpeggios.
* Cadence I IV V V7 I and inversions
* Chromatic Scale.

THE BROWN SCALE BOOK: Scales, Chords and Arpeggios for Piano Level 7- 11

This no-nonsense compendium is just the ticket as a reference source for scales and arpeggios. Every key is covered with major and minor (harmonic and melodic) scales, arpeggios, and chords. There's also a useful repertoire of practice ideas, contrary motion, third, sixths,...

THE COMPLETE BOOK OF SCALES, CHORDS, ARPEGGIOS & CADENCES

Scale, chord, arpeggio and cadence studies in all major and minor keys presented in a convenient two-page format. Includes an in-depth 12 page explanation that leads to complete understanding of the fundamentals of major and minor scales, chords, arpeggios and cadences plus a clear explanation of scale degrees and a two-page guide to fingering the scales and arpeggios. In addition, several enrichment options are provided with exercises such as harmonizing scales, accelerating scales expanding scales and much more!

Scales: Easy as 1 - 2 - 3

by Kathie Younker

Scales have suddenly become easier for me to teach because I have come across an easy way to get the fingering across to my students. Since I had learned my scales from a book and never had a teacher who taught me “tricks,” I always dreaded teaching the scales with the more unusual fingerings, until now. Now I group them into four simple fingering groups. While there is the occasional exception (for example, F major and minor in the right hand are exceptions to the 123, 1234 fingering pattern), if I teach the exception along with the rule, all goes well.

Fully half of the keys belong to Group 1 (below), while all three of the other groups are somehow related to the easiest fingering pattern, the “black key rule”, which is also explained below. A student can learn all of the major, natural minor and harmonic minor scales while only needing to learn one exception to the fingering rules (F) and one scale that appears in two different fingering groups (g# minor). The two exceptions in the melodic scales that occur in group 4 (below) are then easily applied, because the basic patterns are already learned.

GROUP 1: Left hand: 54321,321; Right hand: 123,1234.

There is ONE exception: F (Major and minor) R.H. uses 1234,123.

Keys:
Major: C,D,E,F,G,A
minor: c,d,e,f,g,a

GROUP 2: ‘Black key rule’: fingers 2 and 3 (3 and 2) go on the paired black keys, and fingers 234 (432) go on the three black keys. The thumb then goes on the appropriate white key between the black keys.

Even if a particular key doesn’t contain all of the black keys (for example, b minor), this fingering can be applied.

Keys:
Major: B, F#(Gb), C#(Db)
minor: b, bb, eb
g# natural

GROUP 3: Right hand uses the ‘black key rule;’ Left hand uses 321,4321

Keys:

Major: Bb, Eb, Ab
minor: g# harmonic, g# melodic
(G# melodic minor going down uses the ‘black key rule’ as in GROUP 2 above.)

GROUP 4: Left hand uses ‘black key rule;’ Right hand.: 34,123,12

Keys:

minor: c# and f#
Exceptions: R.H. c# and f# melodic minor going up use the ‘black key rule’ (but going down they go back to GROUP 4 fingering.)

Memorization

by Sharon Kaplan
Originally published in the MMTA Newsletter, November 2009

Kids are so overbooked these days.  If it's not a lot more homework with higher scholastic expectations, it's time consuming sports or other extra-curricular activities that take up more time than in any of the almost 50 years that I have been teaching.  So it was imperative that the Piano Exam Development Committee consider these changes in students' lives when we worked on the program.

What we haven't talked about yet was our very long deliberations concerning memory.  Several people have asked that not all pieces need to be memorized.  We very seriously considered that proposal, but were hung up on two issues: 1) students that did memorize all the pieces deserved to be given credit for their accomplishment and 2) the logistics of laying out the exam in a way that wouldn't cause confusion at the site and possible mistakes by judges. 

Our solution, after much research, was to change the number of points allotted to memorization.  We found that this rewarded the student who did the extra work necessary to memorize all the pieces, while not significantly altering the score of the student who had not memorized all the pieces.  It also gave us the opportunity to realign the percentage of points in other areas, rewarding musicianship to a greater extent.  We charted the exams using 3 points for memory, 4 points for memory and 5 points for memory, and this combination brought things closely into alignment with the original concept of the exams in 1970.

2002 Syllabus

Level	Skills	Studies	Repertoire	Memory	Questions	Sightplaying
Prep	-	-	-	-	-	-
1 & 2	20%	10%	50%	7.9%	-	13.2%
3 – 6	17%	8%	50%	12.5%	4.5%	7.6%
7 – 9	20.5%		55%	14%	3.5%	7%
10 - 11	17%		57%	17%	3%	6%

 

2010 Syllabus

Level	Skills	Studies	Repertoire	Memory	Questions	Sightplaying
Prep	26.3%	-	52.6%	7.9%	-	13.2%
1 & 2	20.2%	-	60.6%	9.1%	-	10.1%
3 – 6	19.7%	-	60.6%	9.9%	3%	7.6%
7 – 9	21.9%	-	58.4%	8.8%	3.6%	7.3%
10	20.4%	-	61.2%	8.2%	3.4%	6.8%
11	17.6%	-	64.7%	8.8%	2.9%	5.9%

This excited us.  What about you?

The first 40 years

by Ruth Anderson

Originally published in the May/June 2009 MMTA Newsletter

At this time next spring the new Syllabus package will be available for distribution to members. Committee members have written many articles describing the content and features. Inasmuch as I am a serious pack-rat, pretend to engage in historical research, and have been involved as a teacher and judge since the program’s inception, I would like to share some history.

Paul Freed, Professor of Piano at the University and former MMTA president, initiated the syllabus program as a guide to students and teachers providing a comprehensive program of technical skills, sightplaying, theory and performance from various historical periods. Paul was familiar with the Canadian examination system, and in the 1960’s he and Shirley Rediger, MMTA president, spent time in Canada studying their system. Made possible by grants from the Bush and Bremer Foundations, the first Syllabus was published in 1970 and capably administered by Ethel Hascall.

Colleges and universities throughout the state were contacted for their endorsement, and their facilities used for testing sites. Paul personally traveled to many sites to train prospective judges.

A theory testing program was already in place and these exams were incorporated into the comprehensive program. A performance-only certificate was available for those bypassing the theory exams beginning with the 1978 syllabus. All syllabi had 11 levels – until 2010, which will add a preparatory level. All award extra points for repertoire memorized. Special books of studies, Adventures in Time and Space, were compiled and published for levels 1 – 6.

A brief overview of the first four syllabi invites interesting comparisons.

1970 -- Critiques were to be written in third person and directed to the Board of Examiners. This policy was gradually abandoned. The total of each level was 100 points, with categories of Pass, Excellence, and Distinction. Essays were required in levels 5 – 10, questions in levels 1 – 4 and 11. Pentachords were played in parallel motion with 2-note slur patterns. Only one substitution was allowed, from the current contest list only, and a written request was necessary. Pentachords in various patterns were included through level 4, and for each level specific parallel major and minor keys were required for technical skills.

In upper levels, scales included detached, in thirds and sixths, and contrary major and minor. Repertoire lists were much shorter than in the current syllabus.

1978 -- Students were required to list 3 choices of testing centers on their application and assignments were made after all registrations were in. Written requests for the one allowed substitution were required, but additional substitutions were permitted at upper levels. The top scoring category, 80 – 100, was divided into Distinction and High Distinction. Various touches were required in pentachords, and Lydian and Phrygian pentachords were added in level 4. Required keys for technical skills were no longer limited to the same keys for all skills. Repertoire lists were expanded. The most challenging addition was major scales in double thirds for levels 7 and higher, and harmonic scales in contrary motion at level 10.

1981 -- Scoring was expanded to 120, then 130 points at upper levels. Essays were discontinued, replaced by oral questions at all levels. A glossary of skills was included. Pentachords in contrary motion were introduced.

Chord and arpeggio sequences in upper levels were introduced, and scales in double thirds were discontinued. An Addendum was published in 1982, and substitutions from the contest lists of the previous four years were permitted.
 

1989 -- Scoring was expanded to 100 – 165 points. The Studies lists were expanded to include other publications, and some of the previous selections in Adventures were placed at different levels. Contrary scales were dropped from upper levels, and scales in octaves were added. Repertoire lists were constantly expanded, particularly for the contemporary period.

These Syllabi have been constantly under review, and adapted to serve the changing needs of teachers and students, always without compromising the integrity of the program. Minnesota is the first state in the nation with a comprehensive program of this magnitude, and is still the only state, except for Illinois, with a comparable program. It is especially invaluable for inexperienced teachers as a teaching tool and reference, even if students do not participate in the program. After earning my music degrees in the '50’s I went out into the world with a decent knowledge of music literature, but clueless as to what and how to teach elementary and intermediate students. Yet some of my students learned in spite of their teacher. The syllabus program has been the linchpin of my teaching since 1970.
 

If I were to say the 2010 will be the best Syllabus yet, my prejudice would be obvious.