The traditional Suzuki method, devised by its pioneer advocate, Shinichi Suzuki, applied originally to violin instruction. Students as young as 2 or 3 learned to play their instruments in the way language was acquired, through imitation. (I recalled black and white film footage showing hundreds of Japanese children lined up in rows with baby-size violins, bowed in unison. It looked like a public holiday celebration.)
The music, a CD package of folk and classical offerings, featured “Twinkle, Twinkle” as a primer favorite that gave impetus to volumes of published Suzuki albums. They were hot-sellers nearly overnight!
David Cerone, a violin teacher at the Oberlin Conservatory during my undergraduate years, was the official player-soloist on all Suzuki recordings, making his effort a lucrative one.
The philosophy of Suzuki instruction embraced an early immersion in instrument study without exposure to note-reading. The latter would be shelved for a future time. It mimicked the sequence of language-learning with a delayed development of writing skills.
Part and parcel of the Suzuki construct was aural absorption of recordings to the point of saturation. The child would listen to pieces he was playing and basically “copy” the melody, tempo, phrasing, nuance etc.
During private or sometimes group lessons, the teacher was the leader with her copycat student as a full-blown follower. And mom or dad’s required presence at lessons was a mandatory prelude to a pulverizing process that took place during the week. (A parent chewed up bits and pieces of music to regurgitate and feed the child.)
Peers, teachers, parents, and an assortment of relatives, provided a solid support system for the “method," which could take on village proportion.
***
Ironically, the Suzuki Violin method one day was magically transferred to the piano, with its original precepts remaining.
Some Suzuki piano teachers, however, integrated traditional methods into their approach, while others were more strictly orthodox. (Religious wars in the making?)
From my personal experience, piano student transfers who had been immersed in a pure Suzuki learning environment from age 4 or 5, turned out to have poor note-reading skills when I interviewed them at age 9, 10 or 11.
One 12-year old admitted that her “Suzuki” piano training made her resistant to reading music. (She definitely displayed a lag.)
I did, however, notice her physical comfort with the piano. She had a nice hand position, supple wrist, graceful, relaxed arms and could be easily prompted through any technical routines (a tribute to her teacher’s technical skill and agility in the modeling process).
****
Disadvantages of Suzuki instruction:
1) note-reading was far too delayed.
Because a child relied on copying the teacher or parent during his formative years of study, there was no particular motivation to read music.
The Suzuki-saturated students had considerable difficulty psyching themselves up to the cognitive challenge of staff note recognition–a Freudian predictor of notation avoidance pathology–N.A.P.
COPYING
2) While it was valuable to have a good pianistic model for the physical side of playing, I’m not sure making a child ingest one particular way of interpreting a piece, or standardizing it made sense.
3) Having students churn out the same pieces at recitals fostered comparisons of performance between students.
I once attended a Suzuki recital in four parts that lasted for three cumbersome hours. Pieces like,”Twinkle, Twinkle” were played relentlessly with little relief, though by and large, the Suzuki miniatures were delightful.
4) Enlisting parents to be surrogate teachers during the week could be a living nightmare for some children!
How many moms or dads would have enough emotional distance to mentor their own kids? Too many had little patience and made unrealistic demands on their children to play perfectly.
***
On the positive side:
The idea of mirroring back a good physical relationship to the piano in the earliest years of study was sound, but traditional mentors could provide the same, while integrating elements of note-reading into the lesson.
Depending on a child’s age and readiness, a teacher could expose children to parcels of notation in digestible form, as I had done with Rina when she started lessons with me at age 4.
My approach to a child this young would be creative and innovative — borrowing materials from varied sources where it applied. For example, I used Irina Gorin’s Tales of a Musical Journey as my springboard, but on my own, I developed simple duets based upon transcribed versions of Saint-Saens' Carnival of the Animals.
I didn’t adhere to any deadlines, preferring to take cues from the child. Any other instructional modality, whether it be PURELY Suzuki-based, or a strict instructional path with little room for variation, didn’t seem to work.
Why, then, I asked myself, were piano teachers so dependent on organized teaching materials instead of tailor-making a learning journey to suit each child’s needs?
Food for thought.
***
LINK:
Suzuki Association of the Americas
If my child can speak at 2mths and read before 10mths, has been listening to music before he was born, I don't see why he cannot be learning to play music by immersion. Before he even started having formal lessons, he was already playing by ear on the piano. It is all just a natural progression of the nurture he gets from his environment. Just like no child would refuse to speak in his mother tongue and not be fluent in it. Learning to read music scores is just like how a child learns language too. The child can speak long before he/she can read. Some children are early readers, some don't read until they are 7 or 8 or even 10 or 12yrs old! So likewise with music. Some children are late readers. Do children learn to read before they speak their mother tongue?
Hi Shirley Kirsten, Sammi Cheng commented on your blog post, The Suzuki Piano Method: pros and cons: "I am a parent, and after 4 kids, I am convinced after extensive reading and experience of the "mother-tongue" method. I doubt an adult like the one who posted above, can actually learn piano the true Suzuki mother tongue method, simply bc he/she would also not be able to learn to speak a language the same way due to age. If my child can speak at 2mths and read before 10mths, has been listening to music before he was born, I don't see why he cannot be learning to play music by immersion. Before he even started having formal lessons, he was already playing by ear on the piano. It is all just a natural progression of the nurture he gets from his environment. Just like no child would refuse to speak in his mother tongue and not be fluent in it. Learning to read music scores is just like how a child learns language too. The child can speak long before he/she can read. Some children are early readers, some don't read until they are 7 or 8 or even 10 or 12yrs old! So likewise with music. Some children are late readers. Do children learn to read before they speak their mother tongue?"
http://elcerrito.patch.com/blog_posts/should-a-piano-student-be-a-carbon-copy-of-the-teacher
With how he has developed, I don't see how he could be "copying" his teacher? Only 10 or 20% of his performance is based on training from his teacher, as far as I see it. He could read notes shortly after starting suzuki violin lessons. Even if a suzuki student learns mostly by ear, he certainly does not do so mindlessly, I'd think. Aural is also my elder son's very strong point - good for him too bc he finds Aural Dictation in school easy. He also does improvising and composing for the small groups he leads and performs with.
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/450485/Suzuki%20method%20of%20piano%20instruc.html
"Anyway, once I switched to a traditional style of teaching I discovered a whole new world of information. My Suzuki lessons never taught me how to count out music, never taught me how to read music, never allowed me to "interpret" music, never showed me how to hold my hands, rarely discussed fingering, rarely discussed any pieces other than the Suzuki pieces, and so forth. Everything was learned by listening to the piece I was learning, and then trying to play what I heard. "In short, I am VERY glad that I switched to more traditional lessons. While I probably play *fewer* pieces now than I would be playing if I had stayed in the Suzuki system, in my opinion I'm playing the pieces better, and have a much broader appreciation of piano music. "Perhaps my Suzuki experience is not typical, but IMO you should be looking to change teaching methods. Otherwise, your daughter may end up being able to *only* play the Suzuki pieces."
Please open your mind and try to help young musicians, as opposed to merely slagging off a particular method without any grounding.
http://www.youtube.com/arioso7 I believe there are two examples embedded in the blog just published at El Cerrito Patch. But as mentioned so many more as well as the published paper at MTAC.org with more embedded you tubes of my working with a 4 year old, Rina. If you look at my blog list at Patch, there are several. My piano blog offers tutorials and embedded you tubes of my teaching as well. http://arioso7.wordpress.com Publications in the California Music Teacher Magazine, Clavier, and Piano Quarterly. Over 40 years, actually teaching.
Once again I congratulate your son on his achievement.
Show. The $64,000 question.. Jack Barry host. And as it turned out, they gave answers to the contestants and Charles Van Doren was one of the cheaters.
Of my 530 you tube subscribers MANY are from Asian countries.
> restrictive method of YEARS of playing by COPYING the teacher- These aren't "purists" in any sense of the word. These are incompetent teachers who don't know what the heck they're doing, and seem to have missed the entire concept of what the Suzuki Method is about. The general concept is that playing by ear is learned first, mimicking the process by we learn our first language. As soon as the child developmentally starts recognizing symbols (aka the Alphabet), note reading is introduced. There is no avoidance of note reading, rhythmic training, and all the other things that allow musicians to learn on their own as well as collaborate/communicate. I am not a Suzuki teacher, but my wife (who grew up in Nagoya, Japan) and many colleagues are...and I am continually amazed at the numbers of people who continue to propagate the lie that there is this "purist" Suzuki Method that insists on rote memorization and copying to the exclusion of everything else. That's just bad teaching, period, and those teachers would be awful regardless of the method involved.
http://arioso7.wordpress.com/2013/05/16/an-interview-with-rada-bukhman-pianist-teacher-author-about-the-russian-school-of-piano-playing/