Transition from teacher-centred teaching to learner-centred style?

[doran.dragic]

Hello everyone,

I've been mostly teaching beginner students and I'm somewhat new to teaching. Recently my ex teacher who's teaching at college level attended one of my lessons and thought that my teaching method was somewhat rigid and teacher centred. In my defense I was working with a student who's very new to the instrument (but a musician and proficient at piano and theory), somewhat shy and I guess that a presence of a third person made this a bit worse.

What I would normally would do with my beginner students is shortly explain the concept I'm teaching, give a short demo and invite the student to do it. I try to use backing tracks or accompany students when they try out this concept but also not too much because at this point a lot of basic mistakes still happen and I try to be aware of those and correct them. The atmosphere is relaxed and I'm positively reinforcing stuff that's good also not being negative about what's not. I'm also open for questions and music that students want to learn.

Has anyone had this issue or had a teacher that did this and you didn't like it? Or any tips in general from people with more experience.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

It sounds like your teacher was pointing out your lack of focus, not on the GOAL of what you're teaching (i.e. skill set), but on how the specific individual processes information. You need to develop the eye and ear for where each specific individual is having issues either comprehending or executing the exercises and approaches you are trying to get them to learn. Think of it like this; there's a place that has a fire, food, shelter, etc. inside a big circular wall. If you're teaching everyone to get inside by bashing a hole in the wall, well not everyone can wield a sledgehammer efficiently, not everyone is strong enough to handle a sledge with enough power to get through, not everyone wants to destroy a perfectly good functional wall. Your JOB as a teacher is to figure out how to get them inside, NOT how to bash through a wall. Does that make sense? It's a clumsy analogy, but I hope it gets the point across.
I would encourage you to talk to your teacher about your specific time with them, with this idea in mind. Most folks who teach tend to model their approach on THEIR teacher's style, so I'm a little surprised that he had this insight and it isn't coming out in your teaching style.

All to say, you shouldn't be teaching a single way to do things, you should be teaching a skill set and finding the best way to convey that to the unique person that's in the same room with you.

 

[Malcolm35]

One on one teaching:

Find out what the student wants, then take the student there, explaining all the steps is not necessary if all he wants to do is play covers using chord charts (fakechord) etc. Show him how to do that first.

Let him have a success playing a three chord wonder, then build from there. Give him a song for next week, and introduce him to chord tones...

My old instructor would give me a new song to work on and a dirt simple bit of theory that pertained to that song each week. I got the satisfaction of playing a song and the theory burger was given in small bites. Just enough to satisfy my hunger, but, not so much it made me sick.

Happy trails.

 

[Ed Fuqua]

I'm not sure I agree Malcolm. I guess it depends on the student but I, for one, just can't get with the "I want to learn how to play this song" kind of teaching. But again, my model for teaching is based on my studies with Joe Solomon, and he pretty much taught ALL of his students (beginners to pros) the fundamentals of playing music on your instrument (he had students other than bassists). I teach you how to play a song, you know how to play that song. I teach you the fundamentals of playing music on your instrument, you can play any freaking song you want.

 

[Mark White]

I was working with a student who's very new to the instrument (but a musician and proficient at piano and theory), somewhat shy

As someone who has resembled this remark in the past, if you'd have sat and said "But what are your goals? What do you want to learn?" I probably would have struggled to give you an answer you could work with to provide a customised lesson plan. Though I have no experience of teaching, I do have experience of learning and someone else taking me through baby steps until I have enough knowledge to understand where I really want to go next is something that is often helpful to me.

For an observer to say "you took the wrong approach with that student and you should do this" is perhaps very different from an observer saying "why did you take that particular approach at that time with that student". One assumes you had nothing in your usual methods of approach to provide a better lesson for that student. The other allows you to show you were using the approach you thought was best at the time for good reasons.

In how you describe what happened, your ex-teacher almost seems to have done the very thing they are telling you not to do...

 

[BrotherMister]

Sorry for the long post ahead!

There is a skill to teaching that I'd say the majority of musicians teaching haven't thought about. As Ed pointed out, people tend to teach how they were taught. There are people teaching music just because they play their instrument well, even more are teaching who can't even do that. As a result, a lot of misinformation gets spread. However, in the hands of a good teacher that lineages is magic. You have to know concepts inside out then explain them countless ways. What works for a student sat in front of you might not for the next one. Your preferences and how you learned doesn't translate into how someone else might, be flexible in your approach to that.

Personally I see teaching as of passing on information and turning that into someones knowledge. How major scales are constructed is information. You can tell that to someone and they might get it. All you've done in relay information. For a lot of teachers, the job is done. Information does not equal knowledge though, they are two different things. Exemplifying information helps it become knowledge. I'm flexible in my approach to relaying the information less flexible in what skill and knowledge I teach. Feedback and discussions with people allow me to evolve the method, but the same knowledge is being developed with everyone who studies with me.

Your methods are yours and yours alone. Me telling you what I do and how I do it won't help you develop your thing. The following questions are always worth constantly thinking about and you'll develop a method that is yours which puts the learner first.

What I would normally would do with my beginner students is shortly explain the concept I'm teaching, give a short demo and invite the student to do it

Am I operating as an authority am I a partner in learning? Am I acting as an authority or a facilitator? Is this approach directly involving the learner? How can I get the them more involved in the process? Would they benefit from problem solving? What approach would lead to more learning with an understanding rather than just the memorisation of information? Is this encouraging the learner to explore? Can I get the learner to demonstrate their understanding of the concept intellectually, physically and aurally?

a lot of basic mistakes still happen and I try to be aware of those and correct them

Is it beneficial for me to be the first to point out the mistakes and correct them? Would a learner benefit from self-assessment first and allow them the opportunity to identify mistakes and come to understanding of why they were made? Am I encouraging self direction and self reflection? Am I honest about my mistakes and encouraging life long learning? Would they benefit from repetition in order to distinguish the difference between a slip up and a gap in their knowledge? When is the right time to step in and to what extent are you impacting the learning process by doing this? Is this a good opportunity to give them something new to think about and explore?

The atmosphere is relaxed and I'm positively reinforcing stuff that's good also not being negative about what's not.

Am I engaged with the learner? Do I have any stories that are relevant to what is being taught? When is the right time to take the foot off the gas and give the learning some breathing space and time to relax? Do I have anything humorous or relatable that promotes a working relationship between us? Are these criticisms merited and how can I ensure they are constructive? Am I being honest with this person?

I'm also open for questions and music that students want to learn

What does this person want to learn and how does it fit into my curriculum? Are we able to brainstorm together to formulate an approach? Is my content relevant? Do they feel ready to move on with this? Am I encouraging discussion with the learner? Does the learner have expectations from me and do they know the expectations I have of them? If I set this person work would they benefit from me doing the same thing and then the two of us having a discussion at how we arrived at our respective conclusions and differences?

The singular question I always ask myself is: How can I make my lessons better?

This is all stuff I think about. It's why I always encourage lessons with a good teacher and not video sites as a primary source. Those resources don't tell you when someone doesn't understand, and is unable to test the knowledge. The biggest issue musicians have when it comes to teaching is the lack of focus on teaching. Ask anybody who interviews musicians for a teaching job and the single issue that stops most people getting jobs is that they talk too much about what they do and not about teaching.

 

[doran.dragic]

Thanks everyone! This is terrific input and it's really making me think hard about what and how I am willing to achieve.