To give criticism and to be able to receive criticism has to do with the "why?" and how to wrap the package.

[imsevimse]

To give criticism and to be able to receive criticism has to do with the "why?" and how to wrap the package.

If you have been a teacher then you are trained (by experience) to give feedback. The good feedback is frank and constructive and focus on the needs of the receiver for him/her to evolve. Since we don't know eachother that well we need the message to be sent in an "envelope". If the envelope is beautiful and smells and looks nice the receiver knows our intentions are the best. If it is filthy and smelly we don't want to even open it to look inside. We need that nice envelope to establish good trust because no other possibility is for us to know eachother as the beeings and individuals we are. When some trust is established we know how to interpret the criticism from THAT sender.

I would like to know people better to improve communication and I think the envelopes is what is most valuable to be able to do that. Badly packaged messages is what to ignore because the sender has not bothered enough. His/her focus is bad and therefore the receiver should reject it as crap. This is what I do myself and I expect others do that too. This filters my list to only consist of messenges that are made in good intentions. Not messages that boosts my ego although those are nice, but messages that are frank and constructive.
Hope you understand this since English is not my native language. I understand my talk of the importance of a nice package for criticism may be ridiculous if you don't. (see that was another envelope)

A few examples of "why?"

I can see a few possible reasons to post here (focus is on the "why?" to post recordings in this list but it could be extended):
1. You want positive feedback to boost your ego
2. You want to sell records or think it will result in some economic outcome.
3. You truly want help because you long to be a better player both technically and musically.
4. You need to explain something about (your) technique or a special technique that can not be said in writing. It needs a video to explain and get the message through.
5. You want to show a special odd instrument for educational reasons.
6. You want to present yourself in music to everybody at the forum to let people know your skill-level, because you believe it could help in certain discussions where experience is important.
7. You want to inspire others because you have found out something about your playing that you want to discuss and share (and discuss) for educational reasons.
8. You want to share a concert you did just because that concert meant a lot to you

There are probably more reasons. Personally I'm not very interested in 1 and 2 in this list but all the others are fine with me.

No need to answer, but I'm very interested if anyone has thoughts about "reasons" (the why?) and "how to deliver and receive messages" (the criticism) because it is a subject that interest me.

We are born and raised in different cultures and all communication relays a lot upon what's in our backpack and our culture. To be able to express as an English "gentleman" or to speak english like a swedish "slob" is a difference. A Swede or other non english natives might need a more expensive envelope in that sense; we need to work more at our envelopes, but it has not all to do with language of course, because intentions are even more important.

/Tom

[timothy42b]

1. You want positive feedback to boost your ego

/Tom

Not to boost my ego.

I hope for positive feedback as evidence that I've made some improvement. That encourages me to keep working and is evidence that I can succeed at something.

[imsevimse]

1. You want positive feedback to boost your ego

/Tom

Not to boost my ego.

I hope for positive feedback as evidence that I've made some improvement. That encourages me to keep working and is evidence that I can succeed at something.

Interesting! It is kind of having a boost but could be for different reasons there. It could be the number 1.2 a subcategory "reason", since having a boost may be for different reasons, in this context for educational progress.

Personally I have no expectations what so ever except beeing treated fair. I think expectations lead to a lot of disappointments and that's why I often choose to leave that out of my life in general. To be treated fair is still to have pretty high expectations. My happiness is amongst other things very much dependant on me getting better as a trombonist, but it is less dependant on whether someone says I'm getting better at it or not, so I'm not expecting that. In case I'm getting better I hope to notice this myself. I have a recording device that should take care of that.

To record and listen is a help but it has it's limitations. The problem is I have trouble to listen objectively to my own playing even when it is recorded. I do hear lots of things I don't like but can not objectively sort out what's most urgent to fix. This is a dilemma. Wonder if more people here are dealing with this as a problem. The solution is I have to pretend it is someone else than me who is doing all the playing to hear objectively. Some things are then easier to pick up like if I don't keep the tempo or if I play a note out of tune or if I do bad/sloppy articulations, but other things are of more diverse nature and has to do with interpretation, that is more tough.

I know it sounds like I whish to be scizofren. Sure, It can be a big struggle to listen objectively, it often is.This is why? I need to post recordings to get criticism. Here you have the ability to listen and be truly objective towards any recording if you are willing to spend the time. Every voice counts.

More whys? and reasons?


/Tom

[Wilktone]

No need to answer, but I'm very interested if anyone has thoughts about "reasons" (the why?) and "how to deliver and receive messages" (the criticism) because it is a subject that interest me.

From a pedagogical standpoint, delivering criticism is usually more effective if it can be phrased in a positive manner. I don't mean just being constructive, but by offering instructions on what to do, rather than what not to do. For example, you don't tell a student, "Don't slouch in your chair." Instead you say, "Sit up straight."

I don't recall the exact details, but I read an article a while back about a well respected basketball coach who's coaching was analyzed in detail. One of the takeaways I got from it was his pattern of making corrections. He would first describe or show his players what he wanted them to do, then tell them what they were doing wrong, and follow up by going back to what he wanted them to do. The authors of the paper felt that this was one of the keys to his team's success.

[Kbiggs]

From a pedagogical standpoint, delivering criticism is usually more effective if it can be phrased in a positive manner. I don't mean just being constructive, but by offering instructions on what to do, rather than what not to do. For example, you don't tell a student, "Don't slouch in your chair." Instead you say, "Sit up straight."

I don't recall the exact details, but I read an article a while back about a well respected basketball coach who's coaching was analyzed in detail. One of the takeaways I got from it was his pattern of making corrections. He would first describe or show his players what he wanted them to do, then tell them what they were doing wrong, and follow up by going back to what he wanted them to do. The authors of the paper felt that this was one of the keys to his team's success.

This is a fundamental technique in counseling psychology: rephrasing a statement in a positive way to help the client clarify their thoughts and strive for a goal.

Regarding Tom’s use of the word “envelope,” one famous psychiatrist (Adler I believe) called this a “shit sandwich”: providing feedback with something positive, followed by a reflection of something negative, concluding with something positive.

In music, it might sound something like, “The staccato in bars 10 through 12 was excellent—separated, but not too dry. Bars 13 through 20 were not legato, almost like you allowed the staccato to spill over into your legato playing. At bar 21, when you started playing forte, you played a true legato.” Or something like that…

[robcat2075]

I like ego-boosting feedback!

I think most of us do and the ones who say they don't need it are trying to fool us.

Ego-boosting feedback is a reason to keep going when you have doubts about the merit of the pursuit.

Trombone playing (or any other art) isn't going to make money for most of us so there has to be some other inducement besides "because it's there" or an internal striving for improvement.

[imsevimse]

No need to answer, but I'm very interested if anyone has thoughts about "reasons" (the why?) and "how to deliver and receive messages" (the criticism) because it is a subject that interest me.

From a pedagogical standpoint, delivering criticism is usually more effective if it can be phrased in a positive manner. I don't mean just being constructive, but by offering instructions on what to do, rather than what not to do. For example, you don't tell a student, "Don't slouch in your chair." Instead you say, "Sit up straight."

I don't recall the exact details, but I read an article a while back about a well respected basketball coach who's coaching was analyzed in detail. One of the takeaways I got from it was his pattern of making corrections. He would first describe or show his players what he wanted them to do, then tell them what they were doing wrong, and follow up by going back to what he wanted them to do. The authors of the paper felt that this was one of the keys to his team's success.

Good post! As a teacher I had as a goal to avoid the words "not", "don't" and "never" . Did not know this was science, it was something I discovered.
It was not easy to teach like that and I failed a lot and it does not mean those words are completely banned because some students need exactly THAT to evolve. The teacher need to handle those words with care and to know when to use them. That is if he/she wants to be the best and most effective teacher he/she possibly can be. The teacher should not be a policeman.

/Tom

[imsevimse]

From a pedagogical standpoint, delivering criticism is usually more effective if it can be phrased in a positive manner. I don't mean just being constructive, but by offering instructions on what to do, rather than what not to do. For example, you don't tell a student, "Don't slouch in your chair." Instead you say, "Sit up straight."

I don't recall the exact details, but I read an article a while back about a well respected basketball coach who's coaching was analyzed in detail. One of the takeaways I got from it was his pattern of making corrections. He would first describe or show his players what he wanted them to do, then tell them what they were doing wrong, and follow up by going back to what he wanted them to do. The authors of the paper felt that this was one of the keys to his team's success.

This is a fundamental technique in counseling psychology: rephrasing a statement in a positive way to help the client clarify their thoughts and strive for a goal.

Regarding Tom’s use of the word “envelope,” one famous psychiatrist (Adler I believe) called this a “shit sandwich”: providing feedback with something positive, followed by a reflection of something negative, concluding with something positive.

In music, it might sound something like, “The staccato in bars 10 through 12 was excellent—separated, but not too dry. Bars 13 through 20 were not legato, almost like you allowed the staccato to spill over into your legato playing. At bar 21, when you started playing forte, you played a true legato.” Or something like that…

I do not belive in some "shit sandwich". It can be as Rob said in the other thread; To put in my words "something the student can see through" and then it becomes ridiculous. The criticism must be fair and constructive. Trust is what I would call it. The "envelope" is all about trust. At this forum we don't know eachother so trust is something we must work at (if we want it)
(1) In the long run. This means ALL our posts here tell everybody who we are.
(2) In the short run. The very post that consists of the essence - the criticism - it sure needs a nice envelope because not everybody knows us from all our previous posts.

(To me) All posts need to express good intentions. To be frank; If it does not its worth crap to ME and probably the same to you. If you like people and have good intentions and are not a narcissist most of this comes natural, but ... a problem can be the language.

If anyone ever have been offended by anything I have posted I apologise.

/Tom

[robcat2075]

I'm not entirely against the sandwich, I understand why it was invented.

Some people in the work place are one disappointment from going postal. Managers have to be careful with them.

My fatigue with it was at how often it was used for trivial matters.

Maybe they thought I was about to go postal?

[harrisonreed]

The sandwich is dumb. Start with what happened, go over sustains, and then identify improves. Do it for anything important enough to warrant that sort of after-action review. It has to be meaningful. "You did great" is not a sustain. "Your method of IDing trouble areas and delegating out tasks based on that to your team was really what got us through this. We need more of that" is a sustain.

When giving praise as a method to improve morale, don't give "attaboys" -- instead identify exactly what went right and why, because sometimes people don't know why something went well. You get more of that good thing and can spur winning streaks.

[Wilktone]

I've always heard it called a "compliment sandwich." Yes, I know the compliments are the bread, but I think it's again about emphasizing the positive. To be clear, the coach's method I mentioned above (I went to look for the article and couldn't find it again, so I can't tell you more about it) aren't a compliment sandwich, it's just a way of providing instructions where you surround the description of what's going wrong with what you want to be doing.

What makes it dumb, as Harrison puts it, is when the compliments are insincere. They should be genuine compliments about something done well.

[afugate]

I don't recall the exact details, but I read an article a while back about a well respected basketball coach who's coaching was analyzed in detail. One of the takeaways I got from it was his pattern of making corrections. He would first describe or show his players what he wanted them to do, then tell them what they were doing wrong, and follow up by going back to what he wanted them to do. The authors of the paper felt that this was one of the keys to his team's success.

Undoubtedly it was about legendary UCLA coach John Wooden. His philosophy was to tell them what to do and spend zero time on what not to do. I've read a couple of great articles about Coach Wooden. For example, he had a very specific way he wanted players to do a bounce pass. If he saw someone do it wrong he would stop practice immediately and then teach them how he wanted it done. "No. Like this."

I try to remember this when I'm working with students.

--Andy in OKC.

[Wilktone]

Undoubtedly it was about legendary UCLA coach John Wooden. His philosophy was to tell them what to do and spend zero time on what not to do. I've read a couple of great articles about Coach Wooden. For example, he had a very specific way he wanted players to do a bounce pass. If he saw someone do it wrong he would stop practice immediately and then teach them how he wanted it done. "No. Like this."

I think you're right, but there's so much that's been written about John Wooden that I'm having trouble finding the original paper I read to confirm my memory. I will have to dig deeper into it, though, because just scanning through some of the articles and book descriptions there looks like there's a lot of good material in there that can transfer over to teaching music.

[afugate]

I think the article I read was based on this original publication, titled "What A Coach Can Teach A Teacher." It was a 1974-1975 study of John Wooden's approach to coaching.

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _a_teacher

One of the key takeaways was how little time was spent on negative instruction. Another key observation was how little time he spent on praise or scold.

--Andy in OKC

[MikeSweetsLord]

Interesting thread. Thanks everyone. I know it's an old topic now, but I need to get my three posts in before I'm identified as a human non-bot well-intentioned trombonist. I definitely see the sense of the last comment on the coach's limited use of scolds and praises. That was how I tried to work as a teacher of beginning instrumentalists. Spend time on the work (with guidance) and when are scolds or praises are most needed they will have some resonance and meaning due to their scarcity - much like your favorite recording!

[WilliamLang]

There's always a third path (and 4th, 5th 6th, etc.) that can be worked with. In my case, as a teacher I try to engender a sense of trust in the relationship to my students. That they know our goal together is to get them to be at first, closer to industry standard, with regards to the craft of playing, and second, to grow as artists and curious people existing in the world.

If you want you can neatly box these thoughts into the scolds and praises paradigm, but to me it exists outside those parameters in a person-first type approach, where the trust is an umbrella for the working relationship to include scolds, praises, and what-have-you.

[atopper333]

I’ve never taught music, but I’ve taught a lot of other things…which in application aren’t all that different.

I believe there are generational concerns when teaching and the ‘envelope’ or ‘package’ must be constructed differently given the disposition of the receiver. Furthermore, it depends on the learning style of the receiver…are they auditory, visual or kinesthetic. This will also affect how the message is received.

The learner has to be open to criticism and the teacher must understand that the ‘why’ is much more important than the ‘how’ as defining the ‘why’ provides a much more expanded understanding of a concept. If you are teaching why, then the student has a better understanding of the end goal which allows them to be more open with accepting criticism.

The last part of the equation for me is that the instructor must be fluent in all of the learning styles as they are the one trying to impart knowledge, understanding, or proficiency. The instructor must adapt to the students learning style to achieve maximum success and to improve efficiency.

Positive feedback is important as it provides encouragement to adjust one’s actions. The focus must always be on the ability to provide constructive criticism which allows the student to learn and improve…

Sometimes a direct statement and an honest appraisal even if very blunt, is the best approach.

Just my opinions on the subject…if learned so much from teachers who have a completely different teaching approach than myself. Like most things in life, there are different combinations of instruction methods as there is a different methods of learning, this is just what has worked for me.

[Ozzlefinch]

It's been a long while since I've dealt with pedagogy in teaching. I train adults, so the vast majority of my experience comes from andragogical approaches to learning. So take everything I say from the point of view of an adult learner.

Feedback and correction is useless if learning goals have not been firmly established from the start. To paraphrase Lewis Carol: "If you don't know where you are going, then any road will get you there". It is of paramount importance to define the learning objectives in conjunction with the wants of the student at the very beginning of the learning process. The fastest way to turn off the learning process is to force them into a pre-planned course of instruction. The proper approach is to guide the student into developing a learning program that will meet their needs and give them the tools to be successful. I encounter this all the time when a student "just wants to play along with the songs on the radio" and doesn't want to learn the fundamentals of theory because "it's a waste of time". Forcing theory will cause them to never come back to class, but sliding theory in through the back door by choosing a song they want to play and then applying the theory to certain parts in a way that it doesn't feel like learning to them. They have to see for themselves that what you are teaching them will have immediate and real-world results. The teaching has to be done in a way in which they think they are helping themselves rather than you being the expert handing down knowledge like a king giving out favors. It's less being a "teacher" and more like being a "guide" through the learning process.

Adults aren't empty slates. They will turn off if you scold them or treat them like children. Adults come to the class with life experiences. Any new information you give to them will automatically be filtered and correlated to something they are familiar with. Allow the student to self evaluate, and if they need correction, ask them using specific and leading questions as to what THEY would do differently, or how THEY perceive the mistake they just made and what they would do differently next time. General feedback will be compared to the progress towards the established learning outcomes- the student will already know whether or not they are meeting their own goals. Then involve the student into any corrections. An example would be a student with bad posture. Instead of telling them to sit up straight, ask them to try sitting up straight and "see if that feels better when you play". Then ask them again next week if, when they were practicing, they felt better doing it properly. It's a bit like training a cat- you have to make think that the proper behaviors were their idea, then they will accept it.

This is a very deep rabbit hole indeed. One method absolutely does NOT fit all situations. If you want to be teacher, then you have to learn many methods. It's not about giving them knowledge, it's about creating behaviors.

Always keep the destination in mind....how you get there is your choice.

[bwilliams]

The sandwich is dumb. Start with what happened, go over sustains, and then identify improves. Do it for anything important enough to warrant that sort of after-action review. It has to be meaningful. "You did great" is not a sustain. "Your method of IDing trouble areas and delegating out tasks based on that to your team was really what got us through this. We need more of that" is a sustain.

When giving praise as a method to improve morale, don't give "attaboys" -- instead identify exactly what went right and why, because sometimes people don't know why something went well. You get more of that good thing and can spur winning streaks.

Ah yes! AAR. I know it well! Training Support Battalion days!!