Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries.
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above.
You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Polischuk, Derek Kealii, author.
Title: Transformational piano teaching : mentoring students from all walks of life / Derek Kealii Polischuk.
Description: New York, NY : Oxford University Press, 2019. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018016528| ISBN 9780190664657 (hardcover : alk. paper) | ISBN 9780190664664 (pbk. : alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Piano—Instruction and study. | Mentoring. | Music—Instruction and study—Psychological aspects.
Classification: LCC MT220.P79 2019 | DDC 786.2/193071—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018016528 1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2
Paperback printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America
Hardback printed by Bridgeport National Bindery, Inc., United States of America
To Karin, Veronica, and Miles, for their love, support, and understanding of Daddy’s long hours at work
TRANSFORMATIONAL PIANO TEACHING
The Piano Teacher as a Mentor
An Introduction
I am sometimes overwhelmed by the responsibility I carry for the students in my piano studio. Without the daily perspective gained from also being a parent, I don’t know if I would regularly be able to deal with the particular responsibility that this profession demands. Piano teachers are not only instructors of music but also counselors, family mediators, performance coaches, temporary parents, life coaches, and more. Because our lessons usually are taught to individuals, these roles are multiplied. This responsibility is a great blessing and the kind of mentorship that I crave in my work.
As a young pianist I studied with Krysztof Brzuza from ages eight to seventeen and with Daniel Pollack from ages seventeen to twenty-six. Both were brilliant musicians and music teachers, but their teaching resonated because they were extraordinary mentors and even father figures. My lessons in high school with Mr. Brzuza were meandering three-hour marathons spent practicing technical rudiments, rehearsing concerto movements, talking about my friends, talking about his children, talking about a life in music, talking about a life outside of music, and so on. I remember driving
home at 10 p.m. not only energized about the pieces that I was preparing but inspired about life in general. There was a gentleness in his approach that allowed me to be myself. I was never ashamed of my interpretations, my opinions, or my questions. After I played something, the response, delivered in a thick Polish accent, was always, “Derek, yes. Thank you. That was v-e-e-e-r-r-y go-o-o-d, b-uu-u-t . . . ” On paper this looks like the beginning of a stinging criticism, but in person it was a gentle beginning to a helpful critique. A feeling that Krzysztof was genuinely interested in my overall development as a young man blanketed all of this. I was not merely another student he retained to supplement his income; I was, at least in my mind, his pianistic pride and joy.
My first lesson with Daniel Pollack was frightening and exhilarating. I had known Mr. Pollack from his gorgeous recordings and his fascinating interviews in the PBS documentary about the 1990 Tchaikovsky Competition, for which he was a jury member. I was wracked with nervousness as I approached Ramo Hall at the University of Southern California for the first time as a seventeen-year- old. My first lesson began with a bang, or, rather, a strike of a match, as Mr. Pollack smoked the first of what seemed like twenty- five cigarettes during just the first movement of the Mozart Sonata K. 333. As I clumsily brought the music to a halt, he said, “Go- o- o- d, good” (in a villain’s voice from a Star Wars film). “You play well . . . has anyone ever taught you to use your wrist? . . . We need to work on this. Now. Tell me about yourself. . . . What dorm will you be staying in? Will you be going to Trojan football games? Are you Hawaiian or something?” He asked question after question. A great educator asks questions and listens. While Daniel Pollack may be famous among his students for his long and beautiful rants about any and all subjects, his sincere inquiries were what reached me. He wanted to know me
as a person. This famous pianist, teacher, and connoisseur of all things Russia and piano wanted to know if I would be going to football games.
Historically, the greatest teachers of the instrument were more than instructors, they were transformative figures. Rosina Lhevinne, one of the twentieth century’s most influential professors of piano and a faculty member at the Juilliard School starting in 1924, would hear students at her modest apartment in Manhattan’s Upper West Side. She was frequently heard to say, “Technique is never a goal in itself. Anyone can have technique, what is important is to be yourself. And one must listen with the heart.”1
The life of a young person, especially a teenager, is full of turmoil, doubt, self-deprecation, foolish imitation, constant evaluation of self-worth, great interpersonal triumphs, and debilitating failures. The educational life of a young person may be occupied by impersonal standardized testing, doubts and fears about future success, competition among peers, a feeling of having failed to live up to the standards set by parents or older siblings, and at best, great realizations about one’s place in the world through the development of the rational mind. The private music teacher can play a critical stabilizing and edifying role in what can be a very chaotic youth. This book examines the role of mentor, a role that a successful music teacher must inhabit in order to sustain a career as an effective educator. Because each student is a distinct individual, many types of students are discussed, from high-achieving students to recreational students to those with special needs. In addition, I examine the concept of family support as an indispensable tool for sustaining a student’s motivation between lessons. Finally, I discuss a teacher’s own motivation and recommend a cycle of positivity and achievement as a way to keep his or her work fresh and exciting. I hope you find this work thought-provoking, enriching, and challenging, but
most of all, I hope it reminds you of the reasons why you first came to love your profession.
note
1. Esther Brown, “Rosina Lhevinne: Still Listening with the Heart.” People. Accessed March 14, 2017. http://people.com/archive/rosina-lhevinne-stilllistening-with-the-heart-vol-2-no-2/.
Teaching Gifted Students
The concept of gifted education has undergone major changes over the course of the past thirty years. New theories about the nature of intelligence have forced our society’s concept of giftedness to change and gain greater focus and effectiveness. Legitimate charges of discrimination have forced proponents of the gifted movement to ardently defend and adapt their programs. All of these discussions have led educators to examine the methods used with gifted students in an effort to open them up to a wider cross-section of pupils. It is difficult to determine whether the concept of giftedness and gifted education is at all relevant in the contemporary educational climate, in which equity and excellence for all students are understandably emphasized. The music teacher must recognize the obvious but sometimes forgotten fact that although some students may learn more quickly or may more easily grapple with challenging content, those students are not more important than others who may not be formally labeled as gifted. Students in a piano studio are simply individuals deserving of varied and thoroughly informed teaching strategies. The effective piano teacher will understand that it is critical to obtain strategies for differentiating instruction on the basis of the unique needs of the student. Therefore, the ability to teach
gifted students is simply part of a toolkit of resources for meeting all of your students’ unique learning needs.
W hat is giftedness ?
Traditionally, giftedness has been associated with a high IQ. It has been assumed that gifted students were born with unusually high intelligence and could be easily identified by their above-average school grades and success in all school subjects. Although much of this is still true and important for teachers to understand and accept, the definition of giftedness is starting to become more robust thanks to new research in cognitive science and developmental psychology. It has become clearer that there are many unique ways of being gifted, rather than a laundry list of qualities that one must posses in order to be labeled as such. Many strategies for teaching gifted students are based on a traditional definition of intelligence: the cognitive capacity that a person is born with. Recent research has begun to call this definition into question, most notably the work of intelligence theorists Robert Sternberg and Howard Gardner. Robert Sternberg has developed the triarchic theory of intelligence, which suggests that there are actually three distinct and measurable dimensions of intelligence.1 In the triarchic theory, compotential intelligence consists of mental mechanisms for processing information, experiential intelligence involves the way an individual deals with new tasks or situations, and contextual intelligence involves the ability to adapt to, select, and shape one’s environment.
Music teachers who do not formally know Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences are certainly familiar with the spirit of its concepts from their years of working with a varied group of students: There are multiple ways of being “smart.” Gardner has
identified eight different types of intelligence: logical-mathematical, linguistic, visual-spatial, body-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic.2 The impact of Gardner’s theory becomes clear when one compares his many categories to the traditional IQ test, which measures logical-mathematical and linguistic intelligence only. Music teachers must consider the application of Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences when working with students who are likely to fall into any of these categories of intelligence.
David Perkins has synthesized the research on theories of intelligence, grouping types of intelligence into three main strands.3 Perkins describes neural intelligence as being rooted in biology and as basically a reflection of neural efficiency: Some brains are simply more physically capable of advanced thought than are others. Neural intelligence reflects the most traditional view of intelligence, similar to the IQ examination. Perkins defines experiential intelligence as “know-how,” or the way an individual develops knowledge of specific situations and patterns. Reflective intelligence, for Perkins, is a knowledge of judgment strategies, or more specifically, knowing how to think and how to persist in a train of thought. Perkins suggests that all three strands of thinking combine to create overall intelligent behavior.
Joseph S. Renzulli, the director of the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, has developed a “three-ring” description of giftedness. In this definition, giftedness consists of aboveaverage ability, above-average creativity, and above-average task commitment and motivation.4 Renzulli points out that a select group of students will demonstrate these behaviors at almost all times and across activities and that other students will demonstrate them in specific activities or particular areas of interest. He goes on to suggest that the most effective approach to educating gifted students is
for educators to carefully choose content, teaching, and educational opportunities according to a specific gifted student’s learning needs. Rapid development in recent research shows that intelligence is multidimensional and that it can be learned. Similarly, giftedness can also be developed in a student when the curricula provided are appropriate to the student’s needs.
The identification of gifted students is a far more complex endeavor than simply singling out students who receive high scores on IQ exams, or, in the case of the music studio, the students who consistently win competitions. When educators limit their identification methods to traditional measures, there are bound to be unidentified students whose needs will not be acknowledged and addressed. One of the most glaring problems that educators face in identifying gifted students is that Native American, Hispanic, and African American students are underrepresented in gifted programs while white and Asian students are overrepresented.5 Until teachers, administrators, and parents acknowledge that students from all cultures, languages, and backgrounds can be high-ability learners, the identification of gifted students will continue to be incomplete. It is also important to remember that high-ability students may not fit the traditional picture of a good student. In order for observation to be effective in the identification of gifted students, teachers must become aware of any and all biases, assumptions, and stereotypes they may have about who can and who cannot be gifted.
gifted students in the P iano studio
An effective music teacher understands the power in appropriately matching the level of a challenge to a student’s ability. Neurological research indicates that the best learning takes place
when a student’s interests and abilities are matched to the right level of challenge.6 This can present difficulties for gifted students, for whom the content and repertoire typically appropriate at a given age level are not challenging enough. Further neurological research explains why this is the case: When a curriculum is not challenging enough for a student, the brain does not release enough of the chemicals associated with learning, including dopamine, noradrenalin, serotonin.7
Evidence-based research about high-ability students’ experiences in public school classrooms indicates that, typically, they are not being challenged at a high enough level and, as a result, their learning needs are not being met. A national study found that, at the elementary level, an average of 35 percent to 50 percent of the regular curriculum could be eliminated for gifted students.8 The implications of this research for the private music teacher are interesting. It is important that we correctly identify gifted students in our studios and provide these students with repertoire, studies, musical tasks, and a learning pace that are well matched to their ability level. Should this not occur, we run the risk that our gifted students will lose interest in their studies or drop the study of music altogether. The concept of music aptitude and the measuring of this characteristic can be a helpful way to approach giftedness in the piano student. The extensive research of Edwin E. Gordon provides much of the basis for the field of music aptitude.
Edwin E. Gordon is known for his excellent books The Psychology of Music Teaching, Learning Sequences in Music, The Nature, Description, Measurement and Evaluation of Music Aptitudes, and A Music Learning Theory for Newborn and Young Children. Gordon is also the author of seven standardized music tests, including The Musical Aptitude Profile and The Iowa Tests of Music Literacy. Gordon argues that music aptitude is a product of both
innate potential and early environmental experiences.9 Gordon’s writings argue that people are born with different degrees of music aptitude and that understanding these levels can help a music teacher provide appropriate and effective instruction during early childhood and beyond. Much of Gordon’s concept of music aptitude stems from his research into the concept of audiation, that is, hearing and understanding music we have heard in our minds.10 He advocates developing the skill of audiation in young people in much the same way as we learn to use language, in that training in audiation requires the sequential development of four music vocabularies: listening, performing, reading, and writing. When students have successfully acquired these skills, they are ready to be taught the theory of music. Gordon stresses the importance of guiding students at the earliest possible age to develop a musiclistening vocabulary as a foundation for more formal music education. He argues that by the time children enter school at the age of five or six, the most important time for them to develop their music-listening vocabularies has passed. Gordon also argues that the majority of children who enter school lack the readiness to profit fully from formal music instruction. Because of the difficulties presented in such situations, Gordon recommends music aptitude testing in order to better reach students, regardless of the level of their musical potential. Information and music aptitude testing protocols are available from the Gordon Institute for Music Learning and GIA Publications.11 Piano teachers who wish to accurately assess the music aptitude of students whom they believe exhibit giftedness in music may benefit from becoming familiar with the work of Edwin E. Gordon and may consider utilizing the testing protocols that this researcher developed in order to better tailor musical instruction to the musical aptitude of each student in their studios.
The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented has conducted significant and enlightening research about the instruction that gifted students receive in the typical classroom. In the center’s Classroom Practices Survey, researchers gathered data from a sample of seven thousand educators and found that teachers reported making only minor modifications, if any, for the gifted students in their classrooms. Teachers who did make adjustments usually did so by simply assigning more advanced reading materials, providing enrichment worksheets, or asking students to complete extra homework. In the center’s Classroom Practices Observation Study, researchers found that in 84 percent of classroom activities, gifted students received instruction that was not distinct in any way.12 A number of factors in a public school education might explain why teachers are finding it difficult to meet the needs of gifted learners. The basic organizing principle of schools is that students who are the same age will have the same level of ability. In addition, very few teachers have received training in how to differentiate instruction for students of various aptitudes. Fortunately, as the concept of diversity gains traction in public education, teachers are beginning to receive more frequent and more effective training in the teaching of students of all abilities and backgrounds. Despite these improvements, the tradition of a multipurpose educational delivery in which all students receive the same instruction continues to be pervasive in most schools. Applied music instruction suffers from similar restraints, in that music testing often is determined by the number of years of study or “levels” reached. Those who organize festivals or competitions and run music studios would do a great service to all music students by considering the learning differences of every student, including those who might be identified as gifted. A possible tool for addressing this issue is ability grouping .
a B ilit Y grou P ing
This practice is a divisive issue in public education. Ability grouping is different from tracking, which is the practice of sorting students into different classes on the basis of their grades, perceived abilities, and test scores. Ability grouping does not sort students into multiple classes but, rather, groups students within a single classroom. It may be compared, albeit imperfectly, with a piano teacher’s assigning duet partners within his or her studio on the basis of their perceived giftedness by pairing gifted students with other gifted students, and so on.
Those who criticize gifted education and, specifically, tracking, claim that varied grouping is necessary in order to ensure equal opportunities for all students. Students who remain in low- level tracks are disadvantaged when it comes to developing higherlevel skills and studying enriched educational content. Critics are also correct in pointing out that minority students and those from lower socioeconomic strata are overrepresented in special education and remedial classes. 13 While proponents of gifted education do not typically support tracking, they do occasionally support the concept of homogenous grouping at least some of the time as a way to meet the needs of gifted students. Supporters of homogenous grouping worry that the slower pace of a mixed group of learners will cause a gifted student to miss important opportunities to pursue advanced work. Research has shown that ability grouping has almost no effect on student achievement across all levels of learning ability. Research shows that the instructional strategies that teachers use with groups might have a greater effect on achievement than does placement. 14 In a study of schools that had been “detracked,” researchers found
that heterogeneous classes were the most effective when teachers used differentiated instruction, in which individualized, varied expectations, at a high level for all students, were supported by complicated assignments across the board. 15 The possibilities for private piano teachers and the flexibility of the model of private instruction are a rich ground for meeting the needs of all students, particularly gifted ones. Research has shown that problemsolving and inquiry tasks are most effective when delivered in a heterogeneous group and that material review and large- concept discussion are most appropriately addressed in a homogeneous grouping. 16 This could naturally describe the difference between the private lesson and the group or studio class.
WRITING EXERCISE: Reflect
in writing on how you would sensitively create homogeneous groups in a piano studio. What characteristics would you look for in students? What activities would you assign to these homogenous groups?
strategies for W or K ing W ith gifted students
In their review of research concerning teaching gifted students in a detracked classroom, Johnsen and Ryser17 describe five areas for differentiating instruction, as follows:
1. Modifying content
2. Allowing for student preferences in instructional areas
