Posted by Jay Bertolet on January 01, 2002 at 17:18:30:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Education: Who Needs It? posted by David on January 01, 2002 at 13:45:03:
"There are two other situations that should be addressed. One is the "natural" player.
Sometimes, these guys are flat amazing. Also, they sometimes don't understand a thing
about why they play the way they do. Communication skills or not, I steer my students well
clear of these guys because they can be more frustrating than anything. I think a good
teacher has to understand the process (causes and effects) intimately before (s)he is
capable of teaching that skill really effectively. The last thing I want to say to a student is "why can't you just do this?"."
I believe I've already answered your question in a previous post, at least my opinion on the subject. As I alluded in that same previous post, I believe that a high level of experience is only a positive thing for a teacher. Having some personal experience in dealing with all the possible problems a player might face makes a teacher better qualified to help students through those same problems. That's why I think that retired professional players are a great choice as a primary teacher. I don't think 4 or 8 years of college could ever match the level of experience with problem solving that you'd get after 25+ years on the job. Of course, being accurate with diagnosing problems and being really observant in evaluating the students can go a long way too. Being a "natural" player with no real world experience dealing with diagnostic problems would put the prospective teacher well behind the 8-ball I would think. This is not the person I would send my students to first.
My opinion for what it's worth...