Why we fail in learning? The secret rule of success.
I cannot stress my words enough when speaking about the gradualness that is necessary to go from simple to complex. Many years ago, while still studying in the conservatory, I stumbled upon an interesting hypothesis in observation of the proportion of the mind’s acceptance of new material. I can’t remember the name of the author but his words have been engraved into my memory: for one part of new material, there should be a minimum of three parts of what’s already been learned. In other words, there can’t be more than 25% of new information.
When working with my students, I’ve always tried to keep to this formula, and it’s never let me down. I tried to organize all that is new and unfamiliar so that the base of knowledge was always about three times more.
Often, I’ve asked myself this question: why must there be exactly one fourth of new stuff, and not a third or half? Here is what I’ve decided. At which moment does a person start to understand a new language without a dictionary? When he learns a minimum of three-fourths of the words. Here is a good example.
Let’s take the sentence “Mike is going to ______.” Where is Mike going? To guess without an identifying word is impossible. The known information comprises two-thirds, and the unknown, one-third. But if we read “Mike is going to ______ to learn,” then it isn’t at all hard to guess that he is going to school, an institute, or some type of lesson. There are three-fourths of known information, and only one-fourth of the unknown.
This exact formula is used on alphabet blocks, too. The child is familiar with the image of the Apple, the word “Apple,” and the symbol of a letter. All that is unknown is one-fourth, the name of the letter. It is easily guessed with the help of the givens, which he already understands.
New information is easily perceived when it has a minimum of three sources of support. It is possible that this is one of the main laws of human perception. At the foundation of any reasonable education is a progression from simple to complex. But how complex can the new information be in relation to the simple? How steep can the ascent be in order for the person to develop without any overloading and trauma? My experience says that the “incline” should be limited to one-fourth of unfamiliar information.
Once, I discovered several of my company’s competitors on the internet. They’ve also created a computer game that teaches the student to play the piano. The authors did think of flipping the music staff, but tried to tie it to the keys with graphics: they colored the notes and keys with the same hue. All that the beginner had to do was match the keys to the notes of that color. As I explained earlier, this dependence on color isn’t the best guide for the student’s perception, but worse, the process breaks off entirely as the student progresses. “They learn intuitively to hit the right note at the right time. Gradually, as their skill level advances, so does the game. Before you know it, it isn't just a video game anymore; it's reading music.” As for how exactly one can cross from the blind copying of different colors to really reading the music text, the creator doesn’t have the slightest idea.
Unfortunately, the majority of methodological programs that have decent ideas for beginners stop short of developing their skills gradually, from simple to complex. Teachers only vaguely imagine what gradualness is, and how to build a staircase that the student won’t stumble down, scrambling along the missing steps without a handrail to hold on to.
What I’ve worked out for the grand staff is a unique example of gradual development in education.
The very first introduction to a vertical staff doesn’t leave the beginner with any questions. On the page of sheet music or on the computer screen, he sees exactly what is on the piano keys in front of him: those same exact five green and five brown lines, and the same notes with pictures of contrasting colors. All that’s left for him to do is to check the keys, and copy what he sees.
This is the First, Elementary Presentation of the Grand Staff:
Of course, it incites the majority of our reprimands – allegations of charlatanic activities being the slightest of them. The main argument of the accusations against us has been that we teach the beginner to “mindlessly follow the pictures.” In the opinion of my colleagues, the student will get comfortable with a certain skill, and will stick with it without any desire to challenge himself further. If this was the only representation that was used, their accusations would have been fair. But after this one, five more steps remain! The grand staff is transformed into its normal form, absolutely abstract, over time. But the first introduction should show the child in a straight-forward way how the notes and keys work together. You see, at first, the main challenge of learning piano should be solved – that of a quick development of coordination.
Each person that has studied music knows how unbelievably hard it is at first to “tear the eyes away” from the sheet music to the keys. One can even fall into the extreme: throw the notes out and focus exclusively on coordination, playing by ear. But then, we don’t develop the main skill of a musician: “multiplicative vision.” When you were learning to drive, no one took down any of the mirrors! Because of this, the single best solution is to lighten the burden involved in reading the text as much as possible. This is exactly what the first presentation of the grand staff does. In essence, it is a limited simplification for reading. Not leaving any unknowns, it allows the beginner to focus on the hands, fingers and keys.
Naturally, at the rate of the development of the skills of play, the notation becomes more complex. But without fail, it does this under the 1:3 rule of a gradual increase.
Accordingly, in the Second Presentation of the music staff, we took away the pictures with the names of the notes.
Now, the beginner must rely exclusively on color and his knowledge of the music alphabet. This presentation fixes the student’s attention on the lines and spaces between them; now, this is the only reference point for the reading of the notes. The marks with the symbols of the notes comprise just about a fourth of the information presented. The other supporting elements – the colored difference between the Treble and Bass Clefs and notes on the lines and spaces, and the synchronized movement of the keys with the notes – remain unchanged. In the Third Presentation, we’ve shifted the music staff back to a horizontal form.
Now, the beginner must make a certain exertion: he must mentally rotate the image 90 degrees. But the image is already familiar and doing this isn’t too hard. The symbols have been added again to the notes; otherwise, the jump would have been too steep. To have to seek out the necessary notes and add the new rotation would be twice the load for the student’s concentration! This is why the symbols with the portrayals of the note names are returned to their former place – so that they can become a visual support for the rotation of the music staff.
The symbols are again taken away in the Fourth Presentation.
Only the formerly familiar reference points are left: colors and widened lines. This is already almost the regular music staff. All that remains is the color: the differences between the Treble and Bass Clefs, and notes on the lines and between them.
The Fifth and Sixth Presentations are already black and white. Their only difference is the complexity of information. Thus, in the Fifth Presentation, the notes are enlarged, and the rhythmic indicators are gently “unloaded.”
The final point of the “ascent” is a representation in the traditional form. When the student can easily sight read from the Sixth Presentation, he will have no trouble with “non-computerized” books of sheet music.
Progressing from one presentation to the next, the beginner perfects his coordinational skills without any breaks or falls. And his coordination helps to continuously better his understanding and reading of the text. A simultaneous strengthening of the students’ skills is a good indicator of the effectiveness of the educational process. Developing coordination, hearing, the voice, and reading altogether quickly helps the student achieve a high level of proficiency.
Judging this type of education by its results, we can consider it to be the most humane and productive out of all of the existing programs in practice. The most important quality of this process is its gradualness and friendliness to the perception. A definite balance between the development of the vision and tactical coordination is very important. All of this is helped along by the continuous stimulation of the voice, hearing, and music memory.
2-year-old toddler is practicing 'Jingle Bells' with Gentle piano module of Hiner's method. Her skills to focus, find correct music note, shift eye-sight to the corresponding piano key is already built. In the footage you will clearly see her both hands coordination and fingers' management (fingering) in process of development. The girl also is capable to sing the music notes with solfeggio. Her ability to carry tune in the initial stage.
The described methods can be applied everywhere. Our gradual formula doesn’t incite any hardships, nor conflicts. Reading notes becomes a fascinating activity for toddlers that are barely three years old. Our world doesn’t have any shortage of affordable keyed instruments, and I don’t see any problem in every person, regardless of his starting abilities, learning to sing accurately and sight read notes.
The only barrier to universal music literacy is the conservatism and personal ambitions of educators. It is too hard for them to part with their principles, even if these principles lead to suffering and poor results.
Sincerely yours,
Hellene Hiner