Just wondering what people think about using drum grade books as part of learning to play the drums ? books like Rock school Drums or Trinity College - i have both of these books at grade 1 and as a beginner i use other forms of drum education along side them , i find that using the grade books are great for having something that is more or less playable for someone learning the drums, you also have short backing tracks to songs for playing along with, I noticed on grade 1 books some of the songs are more challenging than others,
drum grade books
- Thread starter dazzzer35
- Start date
Paul Blood
Junior Member
I really know nothing about them, but it sounds way better than what was available when I was starting out in the 70’s! I’d recommend that you also invest time in your overall hand and foot technique, listen to lots great music, go to concerts, play with great albums, and most importantly, play with lots of other musicians! Good luck.
Jonathan Curtis
Silver Member
I teach from the Trinity syllabus, and I think it’s great. Avoid Rock and Pop and Rockschool, they’re too watered down.
adamosmianski
Senior Member
Personally, I'm not a fan of this standardized approach to teaching, learning, and assessing. This was a big shock to me moving to the UK as I never saw anything like this growing up and teaching in the States.
It places the emphasis on ticking the boxes necessary to pass the exam but leaves (at least in my experience) a LOT of holes. I've had students come to me who are "Grade 8", but can't do or don't know things that I would expect to see from a student much younger and supposedly less able than them.
I know plenty of teachers who end up teaching the same tunes all day long. Every student learning the the same tunes, often with little regard to their own interests.
It almost seems more for the parents than the students. The parents can see what their money is going towards when the student ends up with a certificate declaring them Grade X. And this puts unnecessary pressure on the student. Countless parents want their child to "have their Grade X by month Y". So again, back to making sure all those boxes are ticked, while other important skills and skipped over in the interest of time.
It places the emphasis on ticking the boxes necessary to pass the exam but leaves (at least in my experience) a LOT of holes. I've had students come to me who are "Grade 8", but can't do or don't know things that I would expect to see from a student much younger and supposedly less able than them.
I know plenty of teachers who end up teaching the same tunes all day long. Every student learning the the same tunes, often with little regard to their own interests.
It almost seems more for the parents than the students. The parents can see what their money is going towards when the student ends up with a certificate declaring them Grade X. And this puts unnecessary pressure on the student. Countless parents want their child to "have their Grade X by month Y". So again, back to making sure all those boxes are ticked, while other important skills and skipped over in the interest of time.
Jonathan Curtis
Silver Member
I do understand your point here. I am somebody that teaches one syllabus exclusively (for those that want the grades), and I stand by it. Why shouldn't music and the arts have standardisation. These grades are internationally recognised qualifications carrying UCAS points, and are OFQUAL regulated.
The idea is to professionalise (professional) musicians in the same way as other trades. We would expect a plumber or electrician to have the relevant certification, why not a professional musician hired for a job? Now I understand that plumbers and electricians have a safety aspect to contend with, but i think the point about professionalisation stands.
Yes, many kids do it for the parents, but there's no harm in gaining recognition of a certain attainment. I, too, have students who posses grade x, but are not overall that good, but this is a cause for their continued motivation. A kid with a grade 6 working towards his grade 7 is highly motivated to practise and improve. It is my job as his teacher to make sure any gaps in his knowledge are filled in.
I think you are describing weaknesses in the educational system, and the concept of qualifications on the whole. ANY qualification can be reduced to a box ticking exercise if we're cynical enough. A degree, after all, is no guarantee of talent for any given candidate, but that shouldn't mean we throw out the whole concept of qualification and attainment.
Last edited:
Xstr8edgtnrdrmrX
Local Boob
I just use a core group of about 3 books, and then edit how I use them to the ability level that I need.
I can make the first page of exercises in Stone Stick Control apply to any ability level; I tend to write an individual curriculum for each student based off of everything I have ever encountered.
and I don't give out grades except for at my schools, where I have to follow certain standards ....but don't get me started on that pile of horsecrap!!! I just to do that to keep the admins, and the parents happy. I always tell the kids that any public performance is their grade. I have never, in my life, in any subject, believed that grades are a way to assess knowledge. To me, it is application of knowledge that is the bellwether.
and I know that this is a bit off topic, but @Jonathan Curtis sort of mentioned standardizing assessment, and that just got me going on a point that hjas been touchy with me for years
I can make the first page of exercises in Stone Stick Control apply to any ability level; I tend to write an individual curriculum for each student based off of everything I have ever encountered.
and I don't give out grades except for at my schools, where I have to follow certain standards ....but don't get me started on that pile of horsecrap!!! I just to do that to keep the admins, and the parents happy. I always tell the kids that any public performance is their grade. I have never, in my life, in any subject, believed that grades are a way to assess knowledge. To me, it is application of knowledge that is the bellwether.
and I know that this is a bit off topic, but @Jonathan Curtis sort of mentioned standardizing assessment, and that just got me going on a point that hjas been touchy with me for years
Jonathan Curtis
Silver Member
Go easy on me…
Don't you run the risk of training musicians who all sound like clones of each other?
It sounds like a standardized curriculum might be wise for someone who wants to become a working musician, but not so great for someone who wants to be a creative musician.
Where I live, there's an eight-grade curriculum for piano. There seems to be a consensus that if somebody wants to do original music, they should get their grade five, and then go off on their own. So the standard curriculum is a great starting point, but ceases to be relevant to most people at the more advanced levels where they need more personalized lessons.
Last edited:
jeffwj
Platinum Member
I’m in the US. I can sort of see the reason for having graded curriculum. I have had students come to me from other teachers. Some come in for their first lesson with a few papers with hieroglyphics from other teachers with S’s, K’s, HH,s, etc. When I put an actual piece of music in front of them, they cannot play it. It is no fault of their own. Their previous “teachers” most likely could not read music themselves. I guess a graded curriculum would weed out the people who are just not qualified to teach.
That being said, people come to me because of my results. While I follow a self-created curriculum consisting of books (not graded books) that have been chosen, tried ,and tested by me, I also asses the student’s needs and adjust the curriculum accordingly. I supplement with my own material, created in Finale and presented in a professional fashion.
Dom Famularo used the analogy of a doctor’s prescription. He assesses the student and “prescribes” material based on that individual. I guess I think about my main curriculum as being the RDA (standard vitamins and minerals) and the extra material being the material individually chosen based on the individual student’s needs.
I have filing cabinets full of books that I do not use. I purchase many method books to be sure that the books that I do use are (in my opinion) the most effective. Even if the US adopted a graded curriculum, I would most likely opt out and still use the exact same curriculum as I use now.
Hope this helps,
Jeff
.
Last edited:
Jonathan Curtis
Silver Member
No, not at all. It simply ensures a strong grasp of the basics. We must be careful not to generalise or oversimplify here. To say that I teach a graded curriculum doesn’t mean that that is the entirety of what we cover in the lessons, or that the student is solely there to learn how to pass an exam.
The syllabus presents a balanced starting point. The top grade, grade 8, is the equivalent of a level 3 qualification, an A-level, which 16 year olds complete. Obviously a pre-professional level, but a solid base.
Students following this curriculum are guaranteed a good exposure to lots of things, from theory and rudiments, to reading and musical styles, including improvisation. I use these all as starting points to explore further concepts.
I also rarely work through graded material with older drummers or those that come to me for specific things. The vast majority of my graded work is with young beginners, because it provides them with the fundamentals and a sense of achievement.
Creative musicians need a strong grasp of the fundamentals, which the graded path can provide. It’s not the only way, and I make it clear when I offer it that it is just one path, and not for everybody.
Standardisation of the fundamentals is not the same thing as pulling all the individuality out of the musician, or the creativity out of the lessons. It is just a starting point.
I would also respectfully suggest that my American friends commenting on it in a negative manner are doing so without actually understanding what the syllabus is, what it contains, and how it works, and are instead making false assumptions about the process and contents of the syllabus. I think if you saw what was involved and how it worked you might be more impressed than you might think.
From a personal perspective, it doesn’t matter to me either way. If the grading body collapsed tomorrow, it wouldn’t affect my lessons, it would just mean I could no longer offer that particular path. I have a grade 8 that I got over a decade ago. It’s nice to have, but it doesn’t define me as a musician.
Last edited:
Paul Blood
Junior Member
Interesting topic, and obviously Europeans and Americans have quite different opinions. In the United States, even in our K through12 schools, the curriculum is not standardized. It can differ state to state, even district to district within the same state. Americans seem to embrace individualism, states rights, without too much federal control. Regarding music instruction, I can see pros and cons of both systems, but needless to say both continents continue producing great musical artists. I think someone who is destined for greatness will find it in spite of the system that was used to initially teach them.
Last edited:
Jonathan Curtis
Silver Member
Paul Blood
Junior Member
My daughter went through a graded system of sorts ( Suzuki) for violin. She maybe did 4 or 5 levels out of 10. At that point her teachers thought she was ready for more advanced pieces that were chosen carefully to highlight her strengths and build her weaknesses. She did audition for the Royal Academy of Music in London, was accepted, but she ended up at a University here in the States.
Last edited:
Xstr8edgtnrdrmrX
Local Boob
oh no, you will not be the subject of my wrath!! I give that to my administrators at school...
not when creativity is part of the curriculum.
in order to be creative, you have to have some kind of tool. And the tools are usually pretty standard across the board...Picasso used paintbrushes just like the guy painting houses. House painting is not usually considered "creative" (and some of us don't think Picasso is either...
), so, for me, the path to creativity has to start with some kind of standard to go off ofin music, our fundamental tools are rhythm, melody, harmony etc...and the understanding of those has to be standardized for people to understand, especially if they are going to be expanded on
I learned to be creative by listening to a bunch "standard" music elements....and then, after being exposed to many different things, I was able to expand into creativity. I personally think that "creativity" still has to have some kind of focus to make it stick.
Random notes, and rhythms, being randomly mixed together is NOT creativity, at least to me. I know that many others have no boundaries to what creativity is, but for me, creativity still has an idea that is grounded in something fundamental;, and that is what makes it creative - the expansion of the fundamentals. Randomness for randomness sake is not creativity to me. Probably why I don't like Picasso, Frank Zappa, John Cage, Frank Ghery, etc...
Matched Gripper
Active Member
Totally unfamiliar with grade books. Do they focus on the drum set as an instrument, all of the percussion instruments, something else? Thx!
Xstr8edgtnrdrmrX
Local Boob
you can find them for any instrument
Matched Gripper
Active Member
Ok then! If I may ask, what is the syllabus, what does it contain, how does it work, and what are the requirements of a grade 8? Thx!
Last edited:
JimmyM
Diamond Member
That is a fallacy. I hear so many musicians say things like, “I didn’t want to learn music in school because I didn’t want my creativity stifled,” and then they proceed to writing music that uses pentatonics and blues scales while claiming to be great musical explorers because they throw in an occasional 9th chord or diminished chord.
Nothing wrong with music like that…some of it I really enjoy. But it’s not anything too original because it’s all been done before, and all the creative person does is put their own spin on it. Music lessons and theory doesn’t exist to put up and coming musicians in little boxes from which there is no escape. All it does is explain what is going on in music already. It’s up to you to come up with a way to make it unique to yourself.
That makes sense.
The North American experience with standardized curriculum has been rather negative. On this side of the pond, it has tended to mean every student studying the same stuff, and teachers being evaluated by how well their students perform on standardized tests. In the states, a lot of the attitude goes back the the "No Child Left Behind" policy of George H. Bush. In Canada we've also had bad experience with it.
Last edited:
True enough, but the issue isn't "music school", but "standardized curriculum". I don't think anybody's saying that musical education is bad, it's just a question of how standardized it should be.
Last edited: