Guitar teacher--how to choose?

These guys want you to learn to read music so they can stretch out the learning curve, hence more money for them.

In my experience teaching piano (for hire) and working with students on academics in school settings (as a volunteer), there is nothing more excruciating than working with a student who is not making forward progress.

Even if you're sitting there getting paid the same whether the student makes progress or not, it is disheartening and depressing if the student isn't moving ahead. Spending time with students who make rapid progress (and therefore are usually more enthusiastic about the lessons) is way more fun than sitting there going slo-mo and repeating the same stuff over and over.

Of course, if you're a person who takes no pride or satisfaction in a job well done, and just plain puts in the time required to get the paycheck, then this may not apply to you.

Margaret

I'm going to disagree with King on a studen'ts ability to teach themselves. . . .

If you truly have a groundbreaking insight, there are no teachers that can assist you. Case in point: Andres Segovia. . . . But a guitarist like that may come along once in a generation or so.

I'm not saying it as an absolute. The average student on any instrument is not going to change the way every person to come after them approaches the instrument.

And the average student is, well, average.
I know a few decent guitarists (even some decent readers) who taught themselves. There are plenty of books, videos, etc., so I don't think it's impossible to be reasonably good without a teacher.

I think it's possible to be reasonably good without a teacher. I also think it's highly probable that without a good teacher there will be major gaps in one's musical knowledge and technical ability that will hinder a person from achieving their potential.

Of course, the flip side to that is I also believe a bad teacher will do more to harm a student than not having a teacher at all . . .

look at their cd collection

I'm driving home from teaching today, and I'm thinking about that comment - that guys like me are trying to stretch out the learning curve. Here's a sample of what I had today:

Student #1: New student, I'm guessing late 40s. Just bought her first guitar.

We cover fretboard navigation, chord diagrams, a couple basic chords, streamlining chord changes, a two-chord song, and a couple of strum patterns. She asks about reading music. I tell her that I recommend it, but she's in that small minority where it doesn't matter: she has no aspirations to play with others, reach a high level of competance, or move beyond simple chord-based folk music.

She says she'll learn later if she wants to.... I say no, not 1 in 100 learns later, and I explain why.

At the end of the day, she's left a message on my cell phone that we need to talk. I call her back.

She tells me that with what I taught her this afternoon, she can buy a chord book and learn everything she wants to play. So she wondered why she needed a teacher at all... and then it hit her: she needs a teacher to show her the things she doesn't know - like how to read music. And after her progress today, she knows I can help her do that, and quickly. She wants to start on note reading next Monday.

Teachers don't succeed by stretching the learning curve - they do it by stretching horizons.

Student #2: She's 10. After the lesson, her mother tells me she needs to switch her lessons to Tuesday. I have no openings; if she needs Tuesday, I'll recommend another teacher.

The girl (who has been quiet and well behaved all the time I've known her) throws a fit - "I will NOT take another teacher".

(This, of course, makes my day :) )

Teachers don't succeed by stretching out the learning curve - they do it by getting students excited about music. That makes students bond with a teacher who can make music exciting.

Student #3: He's 14. Practices 5 hours a day, has already done a guest soloist gig with an out-of-state college jazz band. Great chops, phenomenal ear.

Today's lesson, on the use of whole tone scales against dominants and altered dominants, took me almost 2 hours to prepare.

Teachers don't succeed by stretching out the learning curve - they do it by giving the student value, no matter how much effort is required on their part. I have three very advanced students, and I put in 6-8 hours a week of prep time to give them their money's worth (which works out to slightly more than mimimum wage that I'm getting for those students - lucky for me they're not the average!)

Stretching out the learning curve is probably the fastest way to lose students. That's only common sense. People are smart enough to know if they're being ripped off.

Here's what I'd look for in a teacher:

1. A level of competance in what you want to learn. This may not even be a guitar skill - my improvisation teacher was a bass player, but he was a great improvisor and teacher.

2. Excellent communication skills that match your learning style. Not everyone learns best from the same method; if you're a visual learner, you want someone who demonstrates; if you're an intellectual learner, you'll be better off with someone who charts out the scales, etc.

3. A history of success teaching others in your shoes. You may not want to be what my mother graciously called "the first waffle out of the iron".

If a teacher has those three things, and I'm comfortable with them, I'd give them a shot for a few weeks. The problem with selecting a teacher on the basis of saying "here's what I want to know, and here's how I want you to teach it" (note reading/tab/ear/mystic runes/whatever) is that as a seeker of learning, you don't know what it is you don't know - a teacher is your guide through that wilderness of uncertainty. Be open, be willing, be guided, and assess your progress regularly.

Awesome post, NoteBoat!

Margaret

So, I want to start taking guitar lessons. I`ve called a bunch of music shops, schools and private teachers in my area but the problem is that they would all seem to be as good as the other! What`s the best way to go about choosing?

There`s this private teacher I`m quite interested in--Berklee college diploma, his own studio, his own orchestra, reasonable price and seems like quite a cool guy. He says that he`d even be willing to record some of my work if I want for a demo cd or whatever. And he`s willing to give me a first lesson-evaluation. The thing is, I`d have to travel to the city center every week. That`s extra fees, I guess.

And then, there`s a few places closer to where I live that could also be good for me. They`re `music schools` but they`re also shops at the same time so I`m not sure how good that is. And I`d still have to get there somehow so unless I can get a ride from someone, I`ll have the transport fees to pay anyway.

And then, there`s a college not so far that`s supposed to have quite a good music department. I haven`t tried calling there cause it`s all French and I`d rather take lessons in English but maybe it would be worth a try too.

But the thing is, with all those options, how am I supposed to make a choice?! They would all seem to be able to provide the same stuff at almost the same price so do I just pick one and try it out? And if it doesn`t work, I switch? I don`t want to end up switching from one teacher to another every month or so! Any suggestions? Advice?

First off, talk to the teacher and see if he's attuned to your goals or his own. The first lesson may be a crap shoot, but if the teacher is to rigid in his lessons he may not be right for you. Find a teacher who enjoys your taste in music.

Eric

I don't know what a teacher's perspective is maybe Noteboat can share but I'm not sure I want a teacher that just enjoys my taste in music.

I think to some extend they need to have their own methodology and teaching plan, obviously it would be nice if they can include the songs you like in their plans but to me they should call the shots which at times may mean playing songs/exercises that you don't like or find enjoyable.

Yes you are paying for the lessons but that doesn't necesarily mean you should call all the shots, the reason there are teachers in the first place is that they have much more knowledge than you and that they can guide you down the correct paths.

I think it's a two-way street - teachers and students should both broaden each other's horizons.

It's a buyer's market, so teachers don't pick their students. I have plenty of students whose tastes I don't share (I'm not a huge fan of A.J. & Ally, for example). Stuff that I like to listen to in my off hours may really turn off students.

At a first lesson, I always ask what music they like, who their favorite bands are, what their favorite songs are. And I'll search out some tunes and see what they're about. I've come across some pretty cool music that way that I wouldn't have heard otherwise. That's how I first came across bands like Anberlin or Streetlight Manifesto... and lots of students are shocked that I know the music outside my generation.

I'll present music a student hasn't heard before, but only if it makes a connection. If a student is crazy about Led Zeppelin, I'll expose them to Howlin' Wolf's "Killing Floor", and maybe use that to introduce other early blues and how the techniques are used in rock. If they're into Los Lobos, maybe a quick trip through the Rascals' "Good Loving" to show how the same chord progression works in a different style than "La Bamba".

I might play short clips of virtuoso applications of the same technique in another style. Say a song they're working on uses harmonics, maybe a Yes or Heart tune. I'll pop on a few seconds of Tommy Emmanuel. Maybe they're interested, maybe they're not.

I'm not about to throw Ornette Coleman at the Joni Mitchell fans, or vice versa. But I've seen other teachers who teach the same songs to every student under the logic of "they learn the techniques; what they do with them after that is up to them...", and I don't think that works long term for most students. The students who share their tastes can very well, but from what I've seen students with polar opposite musical directions often get shorted.

In my view, a teacher should do two things: first, give the student the tools to do what they want to do. The tools are the same - Stanley Jordan doesn't tap any differently than Eddie Van Halen. But second, the teacher needs to do it in a way that's exciting, or at least interesting.... that gets them the 'oomph' needed to put it into practice.

There's one downside to my approach though, and I should point it out - because I teach many different styles, I'm not a specialist. For example, I teach both classical and plectrum guitar. Just maintaining basic chops on both takes me a couple hours a day... so once a student reaches a high intermediate level, I'm not the right teacher. At that point I recommend someone else.

If you're well on your way as a guitarist, you want a virtuoso specialist who does nothing other than your style. The very advanced students I have are either pusuing the two areas I excell at teaching (advanced theory and sight reading in real time), or they're really good at one thing, and want to add techniques from another style - one of my students is a chord melody player and arranger looking to add classical guitar techniques to his approach.

NoteBoat says:
The problem with selecting a teacher on the basis of saying "here's what I want to know, and here's how I want you to teach it" (note reading/tab/ear/mystic runes/whatever) is that as a seeker of learning, you don't know what it is you don't know - a teacher is your guide through that wilderness of uncertainty. Be open, be willing, be guided, and assess your progress regularly.

Excellent point!

Denny

Note,

As usual great reply, obviously you've been doing this awhile and have thought this through. everything makes sense, I didn't mean to imply that I would want a teacher that forced me to learn songs etc that I hated I just look at the teacher as the one who should be directing the learning once we have established what the goals are.

Note,

As usual great reply, obviously you've been doing this awhile and have thought this through. everything makes sense, I didn't mean to imply that I would want a teacher that forced me to learn songs etc that I hated I just look at the teacher as the one who should be directing the learning once we have established what the goals are.

I didn't really mean that a teacher should teach only in your favorite genre, but that by teaching you what you like and what you want to learn you'll be more inclined to stick with it (beginners). Of course for someone who already plays the criteria for a teacher would be more focused.

Eric