Question regarding Jazz Instructors

[Derekdaman]

I am a Jazz guitarist and I take lessons from a guy who got his masters in music and went to berklee. He is the first jazz instructor that I have had and recently I feel like he has not been presenting me with much new material at all. I would just bring in my jazz ensemble tunes and we would solo and discuss a little bit (he would give me some soloing/comping tips). Is this how a good jazz instructor teaches? Should I try some other teachers? My teacher is an amazing player and maybe it's me that is doing something wrong (?). We have been working on anthropology for the past 3 months.. only if I brought up we were working on it in a lesson. We have worked through some Berklee Press Guitar Method/sight reading books, but that's it. I feel like I'm not being presented with new challenges every week. Does anyone have any insight/advice?

[jazz oud]

This question doesn't have a simple answer.
It's impossible to really say without knowing more about you.

Jazz requires a lot of motivated work from the student. Many jazz teachers are not going to take a methodical step-by-step approach of telling you what to do and work on; they expect that you are checking out music on your own and coming in with questions.

This may not work well with beginners, who don't know enough to even ask the right questions. So someone might be a good teacher for advanced students but not for beginners.

How well are you meeting the challenges he's already presented? A lot of students want to keep moving on to new things without having properly dealt with the stuff that has already been presented. Maybe he keeps working on RC with you because you haven't made enough improvement (maybe not, I'm just speculating here because there isn't much to go on).
Maybe forcing you to stick with something long enough to really learn it is his way of teaching you that important lesson.

Maybe he's just not the right teacher for you. Maybe your expectation of "new challenges every week" is off the mark and you need to focus on mastering the things you are being shown. Maybe he is just a poor teacher. Getting a degree is an accomplishment but doesn't guarantee that one is a good player or a good teacher.

How much time are you spending on your own, transcribing from recordings, working on sight-reading, working on the concepts that he goes over in the lessons? How old are you? How long have you been playing guitar? When did you start jazz lessons with this guy? Where are you in a jazz ensemble?

[Derekdaman]

Originally Posted by jazz oud

This question doesn't have a simple answer.
It's impossible to really say without knowing more about you.

Jazz requires a lot of motivated work from the student. Many jazz teachers are not going to take a methodical step-by-step approach of telling you what to do and work on; they expect that you are checking out music on your own and coming in with questions.

This may not work well with beginners, who don't know enough to even ask the right questions. So someone might be a good teacher for advanced students but not for beginners.

How well are you meeting the challenges he's already presented? A lot of students want to keep moving on to new things without having properly dealt with the stuff that has already been presented. Maybe he keeps working on RC with you because you haven't made enough improvement (maybe not, I'm just speculating here because there isn't much to go on).
Maybe forcing you to stick with something long enough to really learn it is his way of teaching you that important lesson.

Maybe he's just not the right teacher for you. Maybe your expectation of "new challenges every week" is off the mark and you need to focus on mastering the things you are being shown. Maybe he is just a poor teacher. Getting a degree is an accomplishment but doesn't guarantee that one is a good player or a good teacher.

How much time are you spending on your own, transcribing from recordings, working on sight-reading, working on the concepts that he goes over in the lessons? How old are you? How long have you been playing guitar? When did you start jazz lessons with this guy? Where are you in a jazz ensemble?

Recently I have been rather sick so I have been spending much less time practicing. I sight read every day-we are starting Melodic Rhythms for guitar by Leavitt next week. I do not transcribe as much as I should.. I get very lazy with that. I do go over concepts from the lessons. I'm 16. I started last year. And I am in a high level jazz ensemble with all of the better students from my area. I am also in a lower level jazz ensemble/combo with my school - many of my classmates dont really care for jazz but show up to rehersal :P.

Any tips on maximizing the benefit from practice time?

[jazzman1945]

Originally Posted by jazz oud

Many jazz teachers are not going to take a methodical step-by-step approach of telling you what to do and work on; they expect that you are checking out music on your own and coming in with questions.

This is a surprise for me. You're talking about a professional American jazz educators?

[kingfisher]

I agree with jazz oud that the question is complex. Maybe the real question is whether you think his teaching style suits your learning style.

I just started jazz piano lessons in late August. My teacher assigns me 2 or 3 songs for the week and then when I come back with play them together. Usually this leads to one or maybe two ideas/concepts that he will teach me. I will then try to integrate them into my playing for the following weeks.

I am a highly motivated student, and I do a lot of practicing and learning and listening on my own. Maybe my teacher has adapted this way of teaching to suit my style, or maybe he uses it for everybody; I have no way of knowing. It works for me, because I have freedom to come up with ideas of my own as well as learning from him. When I have my own ideas he always provides me with positive feedback as a way to encourage me to continue to learn on my own.

If you have a good relationship with you teacher, you should talk to him/her about it. If you want more challenges, say so. If you feel that his/her current style of teaching is suboptimal for you, request that he/she adapt a slightly different style for you.

[jazz oud]

Originally Posted by jazzman1945

This is a surprise for me. You're talking about a professional American jazz educators?

I'm surprised that you are surprised.

I'm not sure what constitutes a "professional jazz educator". There are a handful who have a very detailed and comprehensive pedagogical approach, but this is not the majority, even among those who teach at colleges and universities.

Most people who teach do so to supplement performing income; they are performers first, educators second or third. They did not study pedagogy, so they tend to teach the same way they learned: identify gaps in the students' knowledge and attempt to help them fill those gaps. It is a piecemeal approach, not a methodical one.

From the original question, I also don't think we're talking about a "professional jazz educator", whatever that means, but someone who has a degree and performs as well as teaches privately.

[jazz oud]

Originally Posted by Derekdaman

Recently I have been rather sick so I have been spending much less time practicing. I sight read every day-we are starting Melodic Rhythms for guitar by Leavitt next week. I do not transcribe as much as I should.. I get very lazy with that. I do go over concepts from the lessons. I'm 16. I started last year. And I am in a high level jazz ensemble with all of the better students from my area. I am also in a lower level jazz ensemble/combo with my school - many of my classmates dont really care for jazz but show up to rehersal :P.

Any tips on maximizing the benefit from practice time?

Sight-reading every day, that's great. Melodic Rhythms is a great book to work with.
16 is pretty young, especially if you've just started working on jazz a year ago. It's great that you are in those ensembles. It is invaluable experience, especially if you have a good conductor.

I think you should talk to your teacher about your concerns. Any decent teacher should be happy to get constructive feedback as long as it is thoughtful and really geared toward getting the most out of your lessons.

If your teacher graduated rather recently, he may still be figuring out how to best help you. You can tell him that you feel like the pace of the lessons has been a little slow or repetitive and you'd like more challenges.

He might tell you that you need to nail the stuff he's already given you first. But there are some things that he should be able to help you work on regardless of what else you're doing:

comping, chord forms, voice leading, rootless voicings
solo guitar
improvising concepts (motivic playing, space/pacing, contrast of texture/density, working with the melody, forward motion, targeting, etc)
learning tunes
singing stuff (bass lines, guide tones, etc.)
guitar technique (left hand efficiency, right hand picking, right hand fingers)

It may be that he is not the right teacher for you at this point in your development, maybe you need someone more structured. But at least discuss your concerns with him and see how that goes.

As for maximizing your practice time: work slowly on one very specific thing, trying to get a noticeable improvement in one practice session. If you don't improve slightly within 30 minutes of practicing something, then either you are practicing it too fast, without enough focus, or your goal is too broad.

Small goals thoroughly dealt with can quickly add up to big progress.
Also, remember that early on, half of your practice is really about figuring out how to practice in the way that is most effective for you.

[jazzman1945]

Originally Posted by jazz oud

I'm surprised that you are surprised.

Your reply was even more surprising. Apparently, I have no idea about the categories of jazz teachers and educators in America. My experience is based on meetings with David Liebman, Herb Pomeroy, Shelly Berg, who created some of the jazz experience of teaching in America in general, in addition to Berklee.

I'm not sure what constitutes a "professional jazz educator". There are a handful who have a very detailed and comprehensive pedagogical approach, but this is not the majority, even among those who teach at colleges and universities.

Of course the teacher is the one who knows how to play at first, but is also exploring methods of teaching - it takes it to a professional level of the teacher, in any case, it must raise the IMO.
If I'm in the last 15 years longer busy jazz pedagogy than concert activity, then I'm probably a professional educator and on the level, and by vocation. Did you have it going wrong? After all, professional jazz education in the United States has a history of 67 years, as my age!

They did not study pedagogy, so they tend to teach the same way they learned: identify gaps in the students' knowledge and attempt to help them fill those gaps. It is a piecemeal approach, not a methodical one.

Do You think it should be so ?

[jazz oud]

Originally Posted by jazzman1945

Your reply was even more surprising. Apparently, I have no idea about the categories of jazz teachers and educators in America. My experience is based on meetings with David Liebman, Herb Pomeroy, Shelly Berg, who created some of the jazz experience of teaching in America in general, in addition to Berklee.

There are over 500 colleges in the US that have a jazz program. If there are 7 instructors (based on typical instrumentation), that's 3,500 jazz instructors. Many schools of course have more instructors, but there is also some overlap, so let's call that even. There are easily double that number of instructors working privately or in high schools. So we can assume at a minimum 10,000 people in the U.S. teaching jazz. The people you mentioned are not representative of the average instructor. There are other great teachers as well, J.B. Dyas, Hal Galper, Hal Crook, Mick Goodrick, etc. But this is a big country with a lot of jazz musicians.

I wouldn't remotely consider myself a "professional educator"; nonetheless, I taught in a college for a period of time, as well as teaching privately (which I continue to do). There is a great deal of institutional inertia in the way that college music programs are set up, which makes it difficult to design more effective curricula (as it would require changes on multiple level including administrative levels), and to some extent the 4-year model of college is not a good fit for jazz study, IMO.

Of course the teacher is the one who knows how to play at first, but is also exploring methods of teaching - it takes it to a professional level of the teacher, in any case, it must raise the IMO.
If I'm in the last 15 years longer busy jazz pedagogy than concert activity, then I'm probably a professional educator and on the level, and by vocation. Did you have it going wrong? After all, professional jazz education in the United States has a history of 67 years, as my age!

I don't understand the question.

Do You think it should be so ?

It doesn't really matter what I think, since I am not going to change anything, but here goes: Jazz is a process of self-discovery in many ways, and I think study probably needs to be largely self-directed in order to be effective. Beyond standard instrument/theory pedagogy (intervals, keys, scales, harmony), a teacher can guide a student, point them in particular directions, and explain certain things so the student doesn't waste time on things that are already well-defined. But I don't think it is possible or desirable to have a jazz program of "first do this, then do that, now do the other thing".
Learning to play and interpret classical music is relatively straightforward to teach, in comparison (though of course still extremely challenging to rise to a high level).
I do think that jazz education is getting better than it used to be. The "second generation" teachers have learned from the weaknesses of the first.


But 67 years is practically nothing, we are just discovering how jazz is learned, IMO.

[edrowland]

Many jazz teachers are not going to take a methodical step-by-step approach of telling you what to do and work on; they expect that you are checking out music on your own and coming in with questions.

Originally Posted by jazzman1945

This is a surprise for me. You're talking about a professional American jazz educators?

The best teaching relationship I ever had was with a teacher who worked very much like that. The relationship was very much bidirectional: on the one had, I'd be bringing in concepts and material I was working on; and on the other hand, there was a constant thread of concepts and material that he was feeding me. My learning was largely self-directed, with guidance and assistance coming from my teacher. It was a hugely productive period in my learning.

And the worst teaching relationship I ever had was with a teacher who force fed methodical step-by-step stuff, whether I needed it or not. God that was dull. And thoroughly unproductive.

I have always believed that real learning doesn't happen until you take responsibility for your own learning process.

It may depend what you're trying to do. If it's the craft of museum music you're pursuing, method might work. If it's quest for original voice, there is no method.

My only exposure to Dave Liebman's teaching is "A Chromatic Approach to Jazz Harmony and Melody". I can't imagine anyone could work through it linearly. Well... Once through perhaps, to get the flavor of it, but certainly not the full meaning of it. And yet I go back to it again and again as a source of constant inspiration. It's not a method so much as it is a path to creative exploration. It must be unteachable -- although I've talked to a number of musicians who have studied it as part of a masters program. But it is the kind of book that rewards you for the very significant effort required to engage with the material that's in it. Not something you could possibly do for marks.

[jazzman1945]

Originally Posted by edrowland

The best teaching relationship I ever had was with a teacher who worked very much like that. The relationship was very much bidirectional: on the one had, I'd be bringing in concepts and material I was working on; and on the other hand, there was a constant thread of concepts and material that he was feeding me. My learning was largely self-directed, with guidance and assistance coming from my teacher. It was a hugely productive period in my learning.

And the worst teaching relationship I ever had was with a teacher who force fed methodical step-by-step stuff, whether I needed it or not. God that was dull. And thoroughly unproductive.

I have always believed that real learning doesn't happen until you take responsibility for your own learning process.

It may depend what you're trying to do. If it's the craft of museum music you're pursuing, method might work. If it's quest for original voice, there is no method.

My only exposure to Dave Liebman's teaching is "A Chromatic Approach to Jazz Harmony and Melody". I can't imagine anyone could work through it linearly. Well... Once through perhaps, to get the flavor of it, but certainly not the full meaning of it. And yet I go back to it again and again as a source of constant inspiration. It's not a method so much as it is a path to creative exploration. It must be unteachable -- although I've talked to a number of musicians who have studied it as part of a masters program. But it is the kind of book that rewards you for the very significant effort required to engage with the material that's in it. Not something you could possibly do for marks.

Professional teacher knows when to give the student a very detailed directions, and when the most general. In this case, the "boring" is no .criterion, but "it helps" or "it isn't helps".

Just yesterday, I was sitting with a student on wonderful K. Jarrett's version of Golden Earings, analyzing I would say super detail the structure of his improvisation - even in the books it is not accepted. Nothing to say about boredom: student's eyes just were his eyes just sparkled - he first drew attention to the musical elements that have eluded him.

[Jakeweiser]

Just because someone gives lessons doesn't make him a good teacher

Just because someone has a degree doesn't mean he can play

Just because someone is a great player doesn't mean they're a great teacher.

Some people are amazing teachers and middle of the road players.

Finding a good teacher is trial and error. This music has a certain level of 'do it yourself' but at the same time there are ways to approach things systematically in terms of harmony for example or just learning to play your instrument.

Sitting there talking about standards is not teaching, that's just hanging out and talking the music. Good teachers assess problems and come up with options for how the student can solve them with practice.

[guitarjazz]

Never taken lessons but have played professionally for a number of decades. I have enjoyed hearing audio of lessons by Pass, Breau, Raney and others. I'm not looking for a relationship but rather insight.

[alez]

Originally Posted by edrowland

I have always believed that real learning doesn't happen until you take responsibility for your own learning process.

I'm pretty positive about this one too.

[engelbach]

Originally Posted by edrowland

I have always believed that real learning doesn't happen until you take responsibility for your own learning process.

I believe that some people just naturally do that, whereas others benefit from being taught how to learn.

Motivation has to come entirely from the student, but it's not necessarily inherent. Sometimes it needs to have something to kick it off — perhaps a teacher, perhaps an event in one's life, like hearing the music and wanting to be a part of it.

We always had a piano around the house, and I learned the treble clef early on. But I was never motivated to learn how to actually play until a friend showed me how to interpret chord symbols to create harmony. That motivated me, at 15, to a lifelong career, mostly self-taught.

My advice to Derekdaman is to find other tunes that he likes and bring them to the lesson. He'll find out soon enough if he's ready to move on to other things or should continue to proceed more slowly.