Simpedia

Shanta H., Minnesota

I have several students who are learning another instrument traditionally while they are taking piano from me.  I was in this same situation myself because I am a professional singer and I obviously had to learn my music by reading and playing it on the piano (very poorly in my case).

What I found, and what I tell students, is that it’s not a problem, as long as they can separate their instrumental music from their piano music.  It’s fine if they need to read their choir music or band music, just stay away from the piano music. It’s really no problem, and students will find that their instrumental or vocal reading skills will begin to improve even before they begin the reading programs.

I found my sight singing and vocal music learning took a leap when I began Accompaniment.  My rhythm reading took another enormous leap with reading Rhythm, and then my reading took another, further leap with Reading Notes. None of this in any way impaired my ability to read my vocal music, it HELPED.

With other instruments, let’s say the student plays a reed instrument.  The fingerings on nearly all reed instruments are the same, so if they learn to read intervallically, the way SM teaches it, they will be able to play any wind instrument no matter what clef they need to read. The same is true of a violinist who wants to learn viola. I joke with my parents that piano is a great “gateway drug” to get into music.

It can be hard to get students to “turn off” the thinking about each note on the staff, but they will reap the rewards if they can stick with it and if you follow the program.

Desiree K., Florida

You are not alone in your struggle.  I’m sure that every SM teacher has had students wanting to “put the cart before the horse,” and learn reading along with the beginning foundation program.  Once we really let the playing-based “Single Thought Process” method of teaching sink into our inner being, we can see how counter-productive that would be.

It sounds like your student thinks that the only goal is to learn to read music.  That is only ONE of the goals.  Although your student is eager and very capable, she doesn’t know what she doesn’t know.  When I started school as a child, I distinctly remember coming home from the first day of school disappointed that I didn’t learn to read, that day!  I didn’t know what I didn’t know.  I didn’t know that there was so much more to learn than just reading, such as math, history, etc.

I have had several students learning to read music at school or already capable of reading music take lessons from me.  I give them permission to play any and all music they want outside of Simply Music.  I explain to them that I do not want them to undo all the hard work they have done to get where they are.  However, everything that I teach will be learned the Simply Music way.

I let them know that we are going to approach piano in a more natural way.   Simply Music students learn to play the piano, but they also learn to compose, improvise, read, and write music.  Our students learn every chord in every key in the Accompaniment program.  It takes traditional students years to learn the same material!  They will be able to play any piano, anywhere, at anytime,  even though they don’t have their music with them.  They will no longer be page dependent.  That is huge!

It’s great that your student is keen to move on quickly.  SM is perfect for her!   I don’t know of any reading method that allows students to move as quickly as Simply Music does.  Until I was licensed to teach Reading Rhythm and Reading Notes, I was uncomfortable speaking about the Simply Music way of teaching reading.   I presumed that it would meet my students’ needs, but I didn’t really know how to describe the benefits.  Just the manner of teaching rhythm separate from reading notes, makes the process so much easier.  I truly believe that SM students learn to read music quicker and more thoroughly than traditional students. I believe the key is painting the big picture of how much more SM students learn than traditional students, while preparing to learn to read music.

Fiona H., Australia

Just speaking from an Australian context, I would encourage your student forward with music reading, I have had many ex-traditional readers, new beginners to SM (who progress quickly onto reading), and all shades in between and I have found that motivation is the key to success with reading.

Every method (including SM) had its own advantages and disadvantages when it comes to teaching reading. If a student comes to SM with a reading background or enthusiasm – it provides you a richer platform to reinforce her skills/fill in gaps or advance her further- let her read!!!  It is an important language and does take time to build. Who are we to say someone must not read to therefore be a successful SM student? You will enjoy the unique journey with this student.

If you have been given the gift of a motivated pianist, putting a glass ceiling on her and boxing her in NOT to read will be detrimental to her progress- what type of contemporary teacher would do this?

Am talking from my experience in the Australian context…. All the best!

Gordon Harvey, Australia

I’d like to get a little clearer about what you’re saying.  Are you saying that Olivia should help the student continue to develop her reading skills as well as progressing through the playing-based stage of SM?  Or are you simply saying that the student can continue with her existing reading-based pieces?  Actually, let me try to answer both in one go:

I see no reason not to let this obviously capable and motivated student continue with Ballade pour Adeline and any other pieces she’s learned outside SM (note, though, that Olivia’s post says she learned it by watching rather than reading – sounds just like Neil!).  Actually, Olivia doesn’t really say how well the student can read.  If her reading skills are very basic, her progress will not be set back by simply ignoring them in her SM lessons.  Olivia will simply have to make sure the student doesn’t try to learn her SM songs by reading.

If her reading skills are good, and she has learned songs by reading, there’s no reason to drop those, and Olivia can include them in her Playlist and help her improve her playing of them just like we do with SM pieces.  However, I strongly feel that teaching her any other songs reading-based would be counter-productive and unnecessary.  If she continues to show that she’s bright, just give her plenty of projects that will expand her playing-based skills – Arrangements, Accompaniments, composition projects, Elizabeth’s duets and so on.

Of course, she will probably also progress through the curriculum and reach our reading program faster than the average student.  If Olivia were to teach her reading projects using the reading method she learns at school, she would be slowing down her progress through SM, and probably wastefully duplicating her school experience.  The main point is that the student, however experienced or capable she may be, still needs to properly process the playing-based tools, not only to maximize her playing skills, but also to most effectively exploit those tools as she works through the SM reading process.  Arguably also she will pick up our reading approach more quickly if it waits until the developmentally appropriate time.  Although I agree that reading takes time to build, it takes less time when introduced at the best time.

I don’t see how delaying reading in order to get the best possible experience of SM, especially if the student is developing reading outside SM, isn’t the best path. I also don’t see the fact that she’s learning a different approach to reading as a hindrance to learning our approach when the time comes.  In my opinion, at least with pitch reading, a note name approach and an intervallic approach do not conflict, they can actually complement each other, but the intervallic approach at least should be learned in an unadulterated fashion.

So I say, have experienced readers suspend their reading while processing the initial stages of SM, let them keep their existing reading-sourced pieces, expect them to move quickly through the program and be ready for a fresh perspective on reading that enhances the reading skills they will have no doubt retained.  I haven’t ever encountered a student with prior reading experience whose reading skill wasn’t turbo-boosted by the addition of our approach so long as it was properly presented.

I don’t see how this approach boxes anyone in when they are learning so much other great stuff.  Even their reading skills are rarely set back, and then quickly catch back up.  I wouldn’t claim that “someone must not read to therefore be a successful SM student”.  After all, SM students absolutely learn to read, but what I can say is that following the process as it stands works.  Meanwhile, any other reading work that a student might do outside of SM is okay so long as it doesn’t distract them from what they are learning with you.