On Jul 17, 2008, at 10:25 AM, David Tayler wrote: > The "next step" (aka "the next level") is now becoming an interesting > pedagogical device. Teachers find that it is a good way to encourage > people, as opposed to to an approach based on "square one" or > "fundamentals." > A lot of teachers are using it; a lot are discussing it. Teachers use > it as a way of safely critiquing other teacher's work indirectly a > well. > The idea of square one is frumpy, old fashioned and unattractive.
I don't think the "next step" is necessary the next level. I've got plenty to do still on the level I'm on now! Anyhow, I didn't get that phrase "next step" from any teacher. I just always think of it that way in relation to my own playing. I'm not much of a lesson taker, or a seminar goer: generally I prefer to work intuitively by myself, until I think it might be beneficial to ask one of the "heavy hitters" for advice. As for the fundamentals: I go back to them all the time. I begin each practice session at "square one." with warm-up exercises that are generally at the square one level. > The question it raises is whether the method effectively avoids > addressing the core skills, jury is out on that one. Well, how many lutenists live near enough a good lute teacher to take regular lessons? Not many, right? Many, perhaps most, have to be content with whatever they can get at the various seminar workshop weeks. I imagine the lessons offered at the seminars are on various skill levels, but even so it's only for a few days at a time. Very few luters take lessons once a week on a regular basis. Mostly we have to pick up what we can, wherever we can find it, and what we get may or may not include solid grounding in the basics. That's nobody's fault in particular: it's just the way it is. David R [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
