Richard Anderson currently serves as Associate Professor of Piano at Brigham Young University. A graduate of Arizona State University, Northwestern University and the University of Colordao, he is the author of Ensemble, a textbook for musicians wishing to gain piano skills, and is co-author with Reid Nebley of Simple Steps to Playing the Piano, and the PlayRight Piano Method for Beginning Pianists. Dr. Anderson has also authored articles for Clavier magazine. His group piano text Beginning Piano Techniques, which includes MIDI disks and web support, will be published in January of 2007.
Richard Anderson
School of Music
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
801.422.3258
richard_anderson@byu.edu
While it's difficult to pinpoint when and where group piano began in the United States, it may be that it began almost the same time as the piano was becoming the accepted keyboard for instruction. In 1815, Johann Bernhard Logier (1780-1846) started teaching group piano lessons in Ireland. He quickly gained international fame, and in 1818 at least two teachers traveled from the eastern United States to take his pedagogy course.1 Prior to the Civil War, classes in piano were taught at schools for females in the South. In the 1880's, Calvin Bernard Cady, who taught at the University of Michigan and Columbia Teachers College in New York, may have been the first to establish and publish a teaching philosophy in class piano, indicating three areas of musicianship that should be attained: "understanding musical ideas, developing the ability to express these ideas verbally, and providing ample time in the lesson for the experience to manifest these ideas at the keyboard."2
By the beginning of the 20th century, piano sales were increasing rapidly and by 1913, class piano was seen as a way to combat the cost of private lessons and provide instruction for more people. Two of the leaders for incorporating class piano both in and out of the public schools were Thaddeus P. Giddings and Hazel Gertrude Kinscella of Minneapolis. In 1915, they introduced the "novel, original and in many ways revolutionary" concept of teaching piano in classes.3
In Giddings and Kinscella's program, class sizes averaged sixteen students who paid twenty-five cents a class to use the latest materials. The instructor received a salary of two dollars per lesson. Classes grew quickly and within two years, a manual was created entitled Giddings' Public School Class Method for Piano. This manual became a primary reference for piano class instruction.4 Within ten years, programs would be reported in fourteen other cities.
Growth continued into the 1920s and a group within the Music Supervisors National Conference, which represented music instruction in the public schools, added keyboard specialists to their membership. Out of this group would come a thirty one-page manual entitled Guide for Conducting Piano Classes in the Public Schools.5 Numerous school districts were introducing class piano programs. Paper keyboards were the primary tools, but various other instruments began to appear. The Starr Silent Portable Keyboard was first marketed in 1925, followed by the desktop sized Wessell, Nickel and Gross School Class Piano, an instrument whose sound was made by reeds. Also new in the 1920s were records for students to listen to and play along with.
The piano class movement had a high level of growth from 1926 to 1930, when 873 cities reporting class piano instruction programs in their school districts. It is not known how many programs were being run outside of the schools. The demands for trained teachers soon exceeded the supply.6 After 1930, the movement declined over the next two decades with a decrease of 659 school programs by 1948. Only 221 school districts reported having programs in that year. 7 Undoubtedly, the Depression, World War II, the beginning of the Korean War, and the increasing number of private methods and private teachers played some part in this decline. The emphasis appeared to be shifting from public school programs to incorporating class piano as part of the private lesson.
During the 1950s and into the 1960s, class piano began to grow again as a viable option or tool for teaching. Silent keyboards had been the most common tool up to this time, but companies such as Wurlitzer Inc. began introducing electronic keyboards specifically designed for class piano instruction. While Baldwin, Rhodes and others also introduced electronic pianos, Wurlitzer seemed to be at the forefront in marketing and development introducing its first electric piano in 1954. It was given the model number 112, was a heavy (nearly one hundred pounds) wood-framed instrument, had a shortened keyboard, and its tones were produced by reeds. By 1956, Wurlitzer was advertising a lab concept that included keyboards with headphones and a “Multi Piano Monitor” that allowed the instructor to listen to each student.8
The 1950s and 1960s saw major growth in publications, presentations and pedagogical materials to match the new technology. This growth is seen in the creation of organizations for promoting and teaching group pedagogy, and three major periodicals, Piano Quarterly, American Music Teacher and Clavier, who published a variety of articles on group instruction. For example, at the 1955 MTNA national convention, Dorothy Bishop, who would supervise the group piano section of Clavier magazine, spoke on incorporating group teaching into the high school.9 By 1965, Guy Duckworth, the supervisor of Northwestern University's preparatory department, had published a four-volume series for group instruction.
Robert Pace also developed materials and began offering a three-week workshop on class piano instruction at Teachers College, Columbia University. The National Piano Foundation, the educational arm of Piano Manufacturers Association International was founded in 1962 and retained Dr. Pace as its Educational Director of NPF for the purpose of implementing group teaching seminars throughout the United States.10
While American Music Teacher and Piano Quarterly published a limited number of articles on group instruction in the 60s and 70s, Clavier had the largest representation. Between 1960 and 1980, Piano Quarterly only published three articles on group instruction. However, it did devote a whole issue in 1978 to group instruction covering all areas, private through college. Clavier had the largest representation, publishing 34 articles in this same time period.
The vast majority of articles during this time emphasized incorporating group instruction into the private setting, a representation that failed to recognize the progress being made in public school and college programs. In Clavier, for example, only four articles dealt with public school programs. Tommie Pardue authored an article entitled "Class Piano Instruction in Your School,"11 John Roberts authored an article on the class piano program in the Denver public schools,12 Edward Adelson published an article entitled "Group Piano in the Public School Music Class,"13 and Doris Dolence asked the question, "Where are the Electronic Labs in the Public Schools?"14
And only two articles published in Clavier dealt specifically with the college program. In a 1962 article, J. George Hummel asked the question, "Will Colleges Meet the Challenge of Group Teaching,"15 encouraging colleges to create group pedagogy courses for teaching children. William Richards wrote an article dealing with finding success with the piano proficiency exam.16 One article in Piano Quarterly, by Helene Robinson, detailed the creation of two electronic labs and the piano proficiency at Arizona State University in 1975.17
As more electronic labs began to appear in public schools and in private studios, the amount of pedagogical materials markedly increased. In 1971, E. L. Lancaster presented two articles featuring a comprehensive list of materials for piano classes. Featured in the list were texts for adults and college classes, repertoire collections, as well as materials for sight reading, accompanying, ensemble playing, popular and jazz music, audiovisuals and reference books. These articles were later up-dated in another article in 1980.
It appears the 1970s was the decade that group piano pedagogy and the group piano program began to grow into its own recognized specialty with a supporting industry of instruments and specialists. After Robert Pace's resignation from the National Piano Foundation in 1977, Martha Hilley and Marguerite Miller coordinated more NPF group teaching training sessions through the World of Piano seminars. Presentations in other regional and national conferences increased and in 1972, the Music Teachers National Association national convention added a division solely dedicated to group piano with the first sessions being chaired by James Lyke. Through these and subsequent conferences, nationally recognized specialists, such as E. L. Lancaster, Francis Larimer, Larry Rast, Martha Hilley, and Fred Kern, among many important others, began to emerge and have a major influence on the development of group pedagogy.
During the 1980s, group instruction continued to blossom. In 1981, the first National Group Piano Symposium was held and group piano training sessions continued to be featured at the MTNA national convention. Tommie Pardue and Linda Garcia were establishing model labs in public schools in their respective cities. The college program was becoming an integral part of the music curriculum. Pedagogues, such as E. L. Lancaster and Martha Hilley, developed model pedagogy programs and labs for the training of the group piano teacher.
The number of texts and pedagogical materials being published increased at a steady rate as group piano coordinators created comprehensive textbooks to meet the unique proficiency requirements of their individual music programs. James Lyke had been among the first to author a comprehensive adult text that presented a thorough representation of basic keyboarding skills. Others soon followed. Supplementary materials flourished as group piano coordinators and other teachers and instructors more clearly defined their needs in skill areas such as sight reading, harmonization, improvisation, score reading and transposition, etc.
The most important development in the late 70s and early 80s was the digitation of instruments and technology. The digital electronic keyboard was a vast improvement over the older instruments. In 1981, Dave Smith proposed a MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital Interface) standard in a paper presented to the Audio Engineering Society and the MIDI Specification 1.0 was first published in 1983. This would dramatically influence the direction of group pedagogy and continues to be an integral part of the developments of all aspects of group piano instruction. It not only changed the instruments and technology available, but MIDI made it possible to draw on new and effective teaching tools and techniques. MIDI became standardized in the music industry in 1991 allowing for the interfacing of hardware from different companies.
While the keyboards became digitized and offered more sounds as well as recording and playback options, the 1980s and 1990s offered more external units such as the Roland MT-200 that could be interfaced with the keyboards. These units contained a large number of synthesized and sampled sounds making possible recording, sequencing and quantizing on multiple tracks. Along with the industry, teachers could compose and orchestrate accompaniments for the exercises and pieces a student would be learning. These orchestrations could be played at variable speeds with no change in the quality of sound, an incalculable improvement over tape players.
Eventually, these units became a part of the instrument itself. Students and teachers could now compose, orchestrate, sequence, record and save music to a computer disk. Prepared disks could be used to enhance instruction and practice. MIDI allowed for interface with computers and a myriad of instructional software programs became available. Students could now receive instruction outside of the classroom in the different skill areas, have programmed practice sessions, and prepare materials for evaluation.
Conferences in the 1980s, 90s and beyond regularly included in the technological aspect of the pedagogy. After the year 2000, conferences continued in a variety of settings. For example, the National Piano Foundation and MTNA began co-sponsoring regional group teacher training sessions that were held in Indianapolis, IN (2001), Dallas, TX (2002) and Orlando, FL (2003). "Due to the success of these regional conferences, NPF and MTNA began co-sponsoring group teaching sessions at the national conferences (Kansas City, KS in 2004, Seattle, WA in 2005, and Austin, TX in 2006). Thirteen group piano sessions were presented at the recent MTNA convention, with special sessions presented by Dr. Robert Pace, Dr. Guy Duckworth and Carolyn Shaak."18
As we approach two hundred years of group piano in the United States, one has to wonder what marvelous developments lay in the future and what challenges will be faced. Undoubtedly, group piano will continue to grow as an influential component of the piano industry, especially if it is able to recognize, perfect, and fill its niche in the changing milieu of piano instruction. By doing so, it will impact both student and teacher and garner continued support of the music industry. Joan Reist, emeritus faculty member of the University of Nebraska and former president of the Music Teacher's National Association, is another group pedagogue and advocate who has had an incalculable influence on group piano throughout her career. She has indicated that the success of group piano will continue at all levels because of several reasons:
"The dropout rate where group lessons exist is considerably lower than other (settings). Group teaching, and the attendant peer teaching and cooperative learning, is fundamentally and educationally sound. Senior citizen programs, pre-school programs, and after-school programs can flourish in a group setting, and will, I believe, encourage the support of the music industry. Teaching of keyboard skills at the college level is most efficiently and effectively accomplished in a group setting."19
For greater success at the college level, she correctly points out:
"that there needs to be a better connection and understanding between applied, history, and especially theory faculty, so that the keyboard skills curriculum reflects the philosophy of the music department -- and is practical and makes sense to the students who are required to enroll."20
Coordinators and teachers at the college and university level need to be aggressive and to exert all efforts to inform, educate and involve their colleagues regarding the academic importance of group pedagogy and the valuable role it plays in the departments and schools of music.
Group piano pedagogy needs to establish itself as a central part of the pedagogy curriculum and be less of an addendum, especially within the piano teaching profession. As Dr. Reist points out:
"There is a specific skill required of group teachers -- you don't just gather a bunch of students together and hope for the best. So, college pedagogy curricula must address group techniques and strategies, the basics of developing a group studio, and the various ways of adopting group teaching to a studio setting. Perhaps the most important aspect is that there must be support of group teaching by the entire profession -- not lip service, but rather acknowledgement that students learn, enjoy, flourish, and develop a love for music in a positive group environment. Every conference session of music teacher associations needs to address the power and positive energy that group lessons can provide."21
Undoubtedly, the future of group piano instruction will be assuredly brighter and more exciting if current teachers will aggressively promote group piano pedagogy and educate their colleagues as to its value. Amongst the believers, there is no doubt as to the valid and important role group piano has in the piano teaching profession and the contribution it is making to the music profession in general. But we still have work to do in verifying its validity outside of our own circles.
At the community level, group piano instruction can solve a number of issues facing instructors, students and parents. Economically, group instruction can be cheaper for parents and at the same time much more lucrative for the teacher than what the private lesson would be. Dr. Tim Shafer, Group Piano Coordinator at Penn State University and co-author of Class Piano for Adult Beginners, has indicated that economically, group piano's
"growth as an educational tool is largely dependent on business-savvy independent teachers who weigh the risk of the initial cost of a group piano purchase with the long-term financial benefits. Piano teachers who see the financial viability of (group lessons) will be successful in convincing potential students and/or their parents of the economic benefits of early level study in groups. This is a win-win financial situation for teacher and student. Depending on the number of pianos purchased, the teacher can easily be collecting $100.00 or more per hour of contact time, and students reap the benefit of the reduced cost of group lessons over and above private lessons."22
Social issues will continue to present a number of challenges and obstacles for the teacher and student. One big issue is time. Today's society is confronting students with more and more choices for how they will spend their time. Too many of these choices fall into the "instant gratification" category, a category made up of an assortment of fleeting past times that sit totally contrary to the learning of any valuable skill.
Since it seems likely that this problem will increase rather than diminish, piano teachers will have to adapt. More so than in the past, they may have to accept a secondary role as they compete for their student's time and interest. The average child or adult is not likely to practice for multiple hours a day or even a week. And yet, these students should not be cast off as potential pianists and musicians. At the least, an appreciation for and skill of piano playing, even minimally gained, will likely be passed on to and increased in the next generation.
Group piano, as Dr. Shafer points out, has valid potential in light of these social issues.
"Social influences are brought to bear by the culture and the children themselves. A child's piano lesson is one of the few (if not the only!) activities of his week for which he is expected to invest multiple hours in order to prepare in the days prior (to a lesson). No other activity (gymnastics, ballet, soccer, etc.) requires the solitude and preparation for the meeting time with the instructor. Group piano can remedy both of these social aspects."23
As group piano adapts to the changing social climate and mores, the impact of the Internet and related technologies is of prime importance for group pedagogy. Technology will more and more become an integral component of piano instruction and group piano is a perfect fit for its integration. Electronic keyboards, CD's, keyboard disk players, computers, MP3 players, the web, iPods, and other such electronic paraphernalia will have a growing role in assisting teachers in their instruction.
When asked how she feels technology is influencing group piano, Dr. Carolynn Lindeman, Professor of Music Emeritus of San Francisco State University and author of the group piano text, PianoLab, said,
"Technology has made a big difference in how group piano instruction is delivered and has to be one of the most significant influences for the future. With the quality of electronic pianos getting better and better, even those who were resistant to the notion of electronic over acoustic, are seeing the advantage. And all the technical options make teaching so much easier and music making more interesting! With the internet possibilities, students will be able to download additional exercises, music, worksheets, etc. and be offered links to learn more about their keyboard composers, the piano as an instrument, etc. Hopefully, this will allow the piano instructor to spend maximum class time on piano instruction and allow students to work on out-of-class web activities to practice and expand those skills introduced in class. The technological possibilities have certainly made me stretch my thinking and become more creative in what I can do as a teacher to make piano instruction better and more interesting to students. Obviously, our goal is to turn our students on and make them want to continue to play the piano after they have walked out our classroom door."24
And finally, there is the great unknown. Undoubtedly, there will be developments we cannot conceive of at this time any more than group piano teachers in the 1950's could have conceived of the wide reaching power and influence of the Internet. However, because these dedicated group pedagogues moved forward, developing all they could within their means using the tools that were present, they have always been in a position to incorporate each new development.
One thing is certain, with a rapidly changing society, and the continuing growth and development of technology, materials, and pedagogical techniques, group piano makes it possible for an ever increasing number of students to learn to play and comprehend piano music more thoroughly, quickly and with greater enjoyment. The teaching experience continues to become more fulfilling and effective than at any other previous time. And as more and more students reap the benefits of group piano instruction, its influence will be broadly felt in all levels of society and of the profession. It will continue to be a profession that does not limit its challenges, but challenges its limits.
References
1. W. Richards, "How Group Teaching Started," Clavier Vol. 5, No. 1 (1965): 39.
2. Ibid. p. 40
3. S. Monsour, "Piano Classes Are Not New," Clavier Vol. 2, No. 5 (1963): 32.
4. Richards, op. cit., p. 40.
5. Monsour, op. cit., p. 34.
6. Richards, op. cit., p. 41.
7. Monsour, op. cit., p. 35.
8. Advertisement, "American Music Teacher:, (Jan-Feb): 7.
9. D. Bishop, "Group Teaching for the High School Student", Presentation, Music Teachers national Association national Convention, St. Louis, MO, 1955.
10. B. Dillon, email to author, 13 June, 2006.
11. T. Pardue, "Class Piano Instruction in Your School", Clavier Vol. 1, No. 2 (1962): 46.
12. J. Roberts, "Class Piano in the Schools", Clavier Vol. 1, No. 2 (1962): 46.
13. E. Edelson, "Group Piano in the Public School Music Class:, Clavier Vol. 16, No. 6 (1977): 43.
14. D. Dolence, "Where Are the Electronic Labs in the Public Schools", Clavier Vol. 19, No. 1 (1980): 23.
15. J. Hummel, "Will Colleges Meet the Challenge?", Clavier Vol. 1, No. 3 (1962): 10-12.
16. W. Richards, "Success With the Piano Proficiency Exam", Clavier Vol. 16, No. 6 (1977): 31-34.
17. H. Robinson, "Piano Classes at Arizona State University", Piano Quarterly Vol. 33 (1975): 23.
18. B. Dillon, op. cit.
19. J. Reist, email to author, 1 June, 2006.
20. Ibid., p. 9.
21. Reist, op. cit., p. 9.
22. T. Shafer, amail to author, 23 may, 2006.
23. Ibid., p. 10.
24. C. Lindeman, email to author, 31 may, 2006.
| TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|---|