Motivation: The Method and the Art

As a general rule, I require of my students discipline, repetitive practice, and just to hunker down and "get the job done." This works well for the self-motivated kids, but......

Some kids are self-motivated, some aren't. (Goodness, aren't adults like that, too? Why are we surprised when we see kids being like this?) And some days, even the self-motivated ones get burned out.  I have started to learn that it's my job as the teacher at this point to motivate them again, or even to kindle that flame for the first time. As Socrates said, "Education is the kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel." 

The fact is, teaching would be easy if all kids were born self-motivated. But I have to remember that it is not realistic to expect all kids to be delivered in cookie-cutter shapes.  They are all different, and we know this.  Isn't it my job to expand their minds, get them to explore the boundaries of their interests (and if I do my job well, those boundaries won't exist!), and to give them the tools to becoming who they want to be, deep down inside?

But how do you motivate someone? We've seen it done - coaches have this ability, as well as teachers, parents, wives....the list goes on.  

Rule #1: You have to be motivated yourself. As a piano teacher, if they see me love playing Bach, they might start to ask themselves, "She loves it; could I?"

Rule #2: There's no formula - it involves some personality reading, some talking things through, and getting them to think outside the box of their own heads. Essentially, teach them to be objective.  (What's that? Be objective? Isn't that a National Standard? Or rather, an age-old principle of higher thought....).  

I was discussing with a particular student yesterday about subjects like math, where it's hard to see the "real-life" application past fractions and simple math.  I'll be honest and tell you that when I was a math student, I never received a good answer to that question I'm sure every math teacher dreads hearing: "When will I actually use this, like in real life?" Similarly, my students have asked me, "What's the point of me playing [insert classical composer] if I know I'm not going to become a professional pianist?"  My student yesterday was talking about math, in particular, and it struck me to ask her a few questions about the point of learning in general:

I ask, "Do you think learning math makes you more dumb?"  She offers a faint reply, "No."

"Even if you're never really good at it, do you think it benefits you in any way?" 

She shrugs and says, "Yes, it makes me smarter, I guess..."

"Won't being smarter and more well-rounded make you better at anything you do in life?" 

She finally looks up at me, eyes wide, and says,"Yes!"

And I think she really got it. It was definitely one of those "moments." And with music, it's

the same -- learning Bach will not only develop your brain, but it will also make you better understand today's music, make you a better listener of music, and overall a more interesting person and better citizen and contribution to the human race! (Ok, I got dramatic there, but it really is true!).  We need to communicate to kids that all  learning is beneficial, and you can't pick and choose what is valuable to learn. It's all valuable, you may just have to look a little harder sometimes to find it. And here's a secret: the things that you have to work for are sometimes the very things you end up loving the most. 

A similar way of thinking is the comment I've heard all too often: "You can't expect kids to work as hard for piano, because it's not like they are getting a grade for it or anything." So we want our kids to only work for excellence when they are getting a grade for it? Great message to send to them -- only 

work if you are rewarded by someone else. And even worse, we are telling them that learning is only enjoyable when there is an outside reward -- whatever happened to the excitement of learning? The pure joy that comes when you do conquer a difficult measure you've been toiling over for days?  Call me an idealist, but I'm not wavering on this one. 

Teaching the whole child through music lessons.

As a music education student, I often heard phrases like, "Strive to reach every student," "Educate the whole child," and, "'Diversity in the classroom' is not a bad thing."  However, I've noticed that in the realm of private lessons (piano for me, but applies to any instrument), we assume that because it's a one-on-one situation, the student is automatically being "reached."  I would argue that even though the private lesson is a more personal setting than the classroom, the danger of losing the attention of the student is just as great. 

One area of this topic that I find to be an issue is how to teach what we might call "serious" students vs., for lack of a better word, "temporary" students.  Let's face it, probably only about 10% of our private students will continue to pursue music past high school.  It's tempting as a teacher to get more frustrated with the students that aren't in it for the long haul, but really, is it realistic to expect this out of all of our students?  Of course not.  The real struggle is in this: how to avoid lowering the standards for those students who will not grow up to pursue music. 

I have already established that it is unrealistic for me to expect all of my students to want to be professional pianists/music instructors.  However, now we must ask ourselves: what is reasonable to expect out of them?  One thing is certain: time spent in private lessons should result in meaningful progress.  Most people would like to be able to at least enjoy playing the piano for the rest of their life.  Reading music, learning how to improvise, and getting to at least an intermediate level of playing would be requirements satisfy this desire.  Inconsistent practice would lead away from this goal, would it not?  I would argue that it's just as important to push the "temporary" student to practice just as much as the "serious" one, as long as they are taking lessons, reminding them that in order to make meaningful progress, practice must take place.  Using this logic, if a student and his/her parents feel that they've gotten all they can out of piano lessons, then I will not hold it against them if they choose to move on.  Until they stop, though, I won't stop pushing and demanding progress through practice -- for their sake!  Nobody enjoys something they aren't making progress with. 

The point I'm trying to make is this: if we, as music educators of K-12 students, only teach the students who will end up being professional musicians one day, we will be losing the battle against eradicating music from schools and everyday life in general.  That tells the world that music is not a subject everyone needs, but just a specialized art meant for only the "musically inclined" (one of those damaging phrases that makes people think music can't be learned).   Isn't our goal to develop better minds by musically educating people?  Here's what Science Daily says about music and the research that's been done on kids who've been musically trained: "[The findings] show that not only do the brains of musically-trained children respond to music in a different way to those of the untrained children, but also that the training improves their memory as well." (2006)  It also has been shown to improve other things such as language development, motor and sensory skills, and a myriad of other things. (Univ. of Concordia, 2013)

That proves that musical training is worth it just because of the overall benefits it has on the brain.  If some of those brains go on to teach or make music for a living, wonderful!  However, the world still needs better music appreciators, supporters, listeners, and people who just make music for fun.  And according to the above research, the world will get smarter people if they are musical people.  It is a part of educating the whole person; music is something bigger than just music.  It's not an end in itself.  For me, it's about getting kids to blossom into their amazing, God-given potential as diverse, well-rounded, sophisticated people.  I happen to specialize in music, so that's how I'll contribute to the process.  

Now, for the serious students, there are teachers out there that are meant to be teachers of those kinds of kids.  And that's wonderful -- they need that kind of attention and focus if they want to succeed in music as a living later in life.  I think that as teachers, we need to decide what kinds of teachers we'll be.  As parents, it's important to ask yourself when choosing a teacher, "What is this teacher's philosophy, and will it match what we would like to get out of taking piano?"  I have decided that I want to be the kind of teacher that can reach everyone; I strive to be good enough to challenge the serious student and creative enough to challenge the less serious one. 

I remember in college we also had to write our "Philosophy of Education."  I think it was about 2 pages long...I think that by the end of my life, my Philosophy of Education will be volumes long!  I hope I never stop challenging myself to keep re-molding that philosophy...I would think all teachers of any kind would feel the same as me.  Have a great night!