Guitar Teaching Needs a Curriculum.

What should a child be able to do after a year of learning the guitar?  I'd say that's a difficult question to answer because they might have learned six songs or twenty six. They might be preparing for a Grade 1 exam. They might know a handful of chords, a few scales and some riffs. Another child, after exactly the same amount of tuition, might be playing completely different music.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with that. In fact, it's one of the great strengths of the guitar. One student might want to play classical guitar. Another might love rock. Another wants to strum songs and sing. Someone else becomes fascinated by blues, jazz, fingerstyle or song writing.

We already have examination syllabuses, method books, graded repertoire and broader music curricula. They all have their place, but there's another question underneath them: What are the individual skills somebody actually has to acquire in order to become a guitarist?

Take strumming for example - we tend to talk about it as though it were one ability, but strumming isn't one skill, it's a collection of skills.

I've identified eight separate component skills, each of which can be observed, taught and practised independently.

That changes the conversation because when a parent asks how their child is progressing, instead of saying, "He's getting better at strumming", I can say:

"He has eight component skills to develop. Two are already secure. We're working on another one now, and there are several we haven't reached yet."

Now progress is visible.

Standardise the Learning, Not the Music

Imagine four students - one is learning a classical piece, one is learning an Ed Sheeran song, one is playing blues and another is playing rock with friends.

Their lessons might look completely different but underneath the repertoire, many of the same abilities are developing. They have to coordinate two hands, control movement, understand pulse and subdivision, synchronize movements with musical time, control unwanted string noise and maintain accuracy as tempo increases. Eventually they also need to refine tone, dynamics, articulation and expression - and develop a musical ear for pitch recognition and interval awareness.

The music may vary, but the core learning often remains the same. A valuable guitar curriculum shouldn't dictate:

• This is the music every student must play.

Instead, it should emphasize:

• These are the skills necessary for mastering the instrument.

This approach allows teachers to select their repertoire while empowering students to cultivate their own musical identities.

Are We Teaching the Piece or Teaching Guitar?

When I introduce a new piece to a student, what am I really teaching? Am I focused on the piece itself or using it as a tool to teach guitar? This distinction is crucial, because a piece offers numerous learning opportunities: chord changes, rhythm, picking techniques, position shifts, articulation, coordination, dynamics, and tone production.

If the goal is merely to finish the piece, teaching might become something like:

• "Let's get through this section, then we'll move on."

However, if the piece serves as a means to develop skills, I start asking different questions:

• What skills does this passage require?

• What abilities does the student already have?

• What skills are they missing?

• Can they apply the new skill elsewhere?

For me, that's true learning.

Mapping Guitar Playing

This is why I’ve created Skill Maps to complement my Four Stages of Practice. Skill Maps break down complex abilities, like strumming, scale playing or chord changes, into their component skills.

The Four Stages add another layer: Mechanics, Timing, Tempo, and Refinement.

This allows me to ask two key questions:

• What skill is the student focusing on?

• What stage of learning are they at?

If issues arise, I can further investigate what is hindering progress. This is where teaching becomes diagnostic.

Simply saying, "Practice more," is not a diagnosis.

A Curriculum Without a Uniform

Imagine several guitar teachers at the same school - one specializes in classical guitar, another in acoustic, and yet another in electric. I wouldn't want to force them to use the same repertoire or teaching methods.

However, they could share a common understanding of the skills being developed.

A parent might ask:

• What has my child learned this term?

A head of music could inquire:

• How are our guitar students progressing?

The answers could go beyond completed pieces and grades, providing tangible evidence of learning without excessive paperwork - a map.

Being a skilled guitarist doesn’t automatically make someone a good teacher. Teaching requires diagnostic skills:

• Why can't this student transition between these two chords smoothly?

• Why does this passage slow down when played faster?

• Why can the student hit the notes but not keep the rhythm?

• What specific movement is causing the issue?

These are essential teaching skills, and I believe they can be taught. Therefore, a guitar curriculum could also serve as a framework for training guitar teachers, addressing not just what to teach but what to look for.

The Repertoire Should Remain Free

I don’t want every guitarist learning the same music; quite the opposite. Let classical guitarists play Sor, while others explore Hendrix or learn their favourite song. Some may prepare for Grade 4, while others follow their unique paths. Yet, beneath this freedom, we must clarify what we are actually teaching.

Let’s identify the skills, understand their development, and pinpoint the reasons when something isn’t working. Maybe the guiding principle I’ve sought throughout my thirty-plus years of teaching is: Standardize the learning, not the music.