Is having 2 [piano] teachers a risk?

July 15, 2013 at 07:15 PM · Thessa - from what I understand about jazz, most of what you are learning is music theory and harmony as opposed to playing techniques. Therefore, you can almost certainly have different teachers for each, and I know jazz musicians who teach jazz violin even though they do not play violin. I do not know to what extent your child can learn the theory involved or whether he is advanced enough on piano to really appreciate it. Perhaps some of the jazz musicians on the site can advise you, but I think there are significant questions for you.

July 15, 2013 at 10:35 PM · From the viewpoint of his autism, its a nice thing for him to be able to learn in more than one context and with more than one person, so it might be a good thing regardless of what he learns or how much he learns. Make sure to discuss with the school based teacher (as I am sure you would do).

If he understands well enough that Teacher 1 does this work, and Teacher 2 does that work, you might find that he doesn't confuse the two lessons, but his ability to generalise the information will be interesting.

My experience with kids on the spectrum who have special abilities in music [only a couple of kids] has been that they seem to 'stim' on the music, for want of a better term. It can sound great to the listener initially, but they don't do it for the same reason as a neurotypical student so the learning and playing is much less predictable - they won't necessarily play for 'pleasure' in the sense that the family / teacher takes for granted. And it can be repetitive, without an interest in variety or get stuck at a piece that is preferred without a motivation to move on. Their knowledge, while encyclopaedic, was specific to their interest and not necessarily directed towards helping them learn the next skill. so that needs good management by a teacher, or patience and humour.

July 16, 2013 at 12:53 AM · Just to point out that something is improvisation it doesn't necessarily mean it's jazz. I heard the most amazing cadenza to the Haydn 'cello concerto from Leonard Elschenbroich (It showed off musicianship far more than brilliance of technique), and was almost speechless when in answer to my question he told me that he'd been improvising it (because this was the custom at the time). Church organists, of whom there are fewer than there used to be, regularly improvise (incidentally, talking about organists, and talking about autism, you might like to (re)-read "God's Smuggler" by Brother Andrew, particularly the bits in the early part of the book about his brother Bas). I suspect that if your son is at all fitted to improvisation, he won't need to be taught it, in whatever style.

He may be the opposite of autistic when it comes to music, in which case he may well not be confused by two teachers.

July 16, 2013 at 09:42 PM · Thessa

When it comes to making decisions, I've always found it helpful to divide them into two classes. First, there are decisions that are risky because they are hard to reverse. And second, there are decisions that are low risk because they are easy to reverse.

I suspect that this decision is in the low-risk class. If you and your son and your son's teacher all feel there might be benefits, why not give it a go on a trial basis, with a clear "division of labour" between the two teachers? If it doesn't seem to be working out, it would be easy to stop the improv lessons, and it's hard to see how much harm would be done. If it does work out it might be a valuable developmental opportunity for your son.

Only you know your son well enough to make the final decision, but from this distance it looks like an opportunity with a sigificant potential upside, and a modest potential downside.

July 16, 2013 at 10:26 PM · A second regular teacher should be either an assistant to the first, with exactly the same methods (but with a different personality?), or teach quite different music.

A summer workshop is another matter: it is stimulating to meet someone with a completely different approach; often we pick up ideas which our "main" teacher has been suggesting for the preceding year!

July 17, 2013 at 01:38 AM · I have not had much experience with taking lessons from two different teachers. However, there was a short time in there where my teacher had her sister fill in for her once in a while. During that time, I think I learned more than before. The two teachers had slightly different opinions on how a violin ought to be played. However, it was helpful to get ideas from two different people, and I was able to apply the best of both.

I certainly wasn't overloaded, but then again, my fill-in teacher was not secondary. Do you have to sign your son up for lessons right away, or could you experiment with a couple lessons and see how he does?

July 21, 2013 at 07:48 PM · Thank you all so much for your support. You are right, Geoff. I have now learnt there is a clear division of labour. His school music teacher we understand will not teach the instrument proper but basic music theory in an easy and fun way which will help him enjoy [more] his instrument.

July 22, 2013 at 03:52 PM · Thessa,

I had 2 music teachers for several years. One was a classically trained violinist, and we worked the common techniques and exercises. I switched classical teachers at one point and learned emphasis on some new things. Change can be good. During this entire period, I had a series of improvisation teachers for jazz violin. They were trumpet, piano, bass, even drum professionals. Improvisation builds off basic violin technique, like shifting and staying in tune, but improvisation skills are entirely different. There are many, but they have to do with chords, rhythms, and pattern use - all in real time decision making.

From my experience, I see no issues and lots of benefits in having 2 teachers focused on 2 different sets of skills.

July 26, 2013 at 01:44 PM · Just read your encouragement, thanks, Mike.

July 28, 2013 at 11:00 PM · Hi Helen,

I don't go to his Suzuki lessons but my husband does and our son (he is ten) has started lessons recently and yet I get the impression he has a lot of fun with her just learning by ear to play simple pieces like Lightly Row and Go tell Aunt Rhody. The teacher told my husband he is a fast learner on these easy pieces even though he has to use both hands when playing. There is so far no theory and may well not be - in his first few years? Recently, he has started scales and he loves varying them [he calls varying things "mucking about"] and he does the same with his pieces so they don't sound the same on another day. It's strange - he is "autistic" in many other ways and especially in relation to academic work in his special school and with the gadgets he love but not in music? I guess music is not work to him; it is enjoyable light therapy for now maybe until when the hard bits like theory and sight reading enter in later years. Having said that as he plays for pure enjoyment, it does not matter if he later finds theory/sight reading too difficult? He can quit and just play for the love of playing by ear alone.

T.

July 29, 2013 at 08:57 AM · That sounds like a great start to me, Thessa. Long may he play.