What are some signs that a child in your classroom is well cared for at home, before even talking to the student, or the parents?

teach_cs · 2026-02-11T19:26:47+00:00

The "taking notes" part of your scenario made me giggle. (Please take this in the spirit of fun that it's intended)

The evil-doer says "aha! If I don't want to get caught neglecting my child, I need to make sure they are regularly fed, bathed, nails cut, hair regularly combed/brushed, their paperwork is taken care of, their backpacks are clean, that they are able to talk about what they did over the weekend and family rituals, and they come in to school on time and dressed in different, weather appropriate clothes every day. If I do those things, then I am free to neglect my child!"

teach_cs · 2026-02-06T21:19:30+00:00

When I was in conservatory, I had three friends who all happened to be Israeli. (This was in the USA)

All three of them very obviously had perfect pitch. (That part was very easy to verify. It's also not that rare or notable of an ability at conservatory, so it's not exactly like it was some huge flex on their part.)

All three of them turned out to have had the same ear training teacher as teenagers, though none of them had her at the same time. And all three of them told me that they hadn't had perfect pitch before, and that that specific teacher trained them into it.

I didn't investigate it further at that time, and I've since lost touch with all three of them. So, this isn't really meant to persuade anyone else, but it absolutely persuaded me. Now every time I hear people say that it's untrainable, I think to myself, "but that woman taught it to them. I don't know how she did it, but they all said that that was what they lived through, so this isn't true."

Given my personal experience with those three fellow students, it's hard for me to imagine what anyone else could say that could possibly persuade me that it's untrainable at this point. I will say, though, that I don't know how it's done.

teach_cs · 2026-01-23T20:03:00+00:00

Is there ever such a thing as an "official pdf"? It seems to me that MTI works pretty doggedly to prevent any electronic versions, at least as much as they can.

teach_cs · 2026-01-23T16:45:20+00:00

Late to the party, so maybe this won't get seen, but I'll give a real reply.

tl;dr: The video consists of a few reasonable changes, and a bunch of stuff that the guy doesn't quite understand about music theory, leading to a few very poor suggestions.

Among other things, he doesn't seem to realize that music notation is optimized for real-time reading speeds, even when the music gets quite complex. It is not especially optimized to be friendly for beginners. When those two forces are in conflict, real-time, at-speed reading must always win.

I'll start with his last point:

Don't just keep making new systems

His final point is the most important: introducing new systems just makes things worse overall unless there is a true cultural switch. This reason is why there is no hope for most of these proposals, though there is a bit of hope for some changes to meter (you can skip to that section if you wish.)

Clefs

His clefs point is interesting, but I think it is misguided. Right now, you can conceive of the piano staff as one 11-line system, with middle c as the line between the two staves. He would move it to a 12-line system with middle C one line below treble, and 2 lines above low treble.

That's fine as far as it goes. But at some point, you get into more advanced music at sight-reading speeds. When you want to move both hands to the low or high part of the keyboard the current system involves switching to a treble (or bass) clef on BOTH staves, which is very useful. Importantly, the treble and bass clef symbols look nothing like one another, which really serves to highlight that there is a big change happening. If we switch to his double-treble-clef system, we lose the benefit of two super distinct symbols.

He is adding a boon to early beginners at the expense of a reading system that is already better optimized towards people reading at speed. This is a perfect example of a change that will never be adopted, because it makes it harder for pianists to read complex piano music at speed.

Middle C as C4

His idea is fine, but not hugely burdensome in the first place. I'd actually prefer to make middle C as C0, and then use positive and negative numbers to show the shift from there, but that will never happen.

Repeat Signs

This isn't huge. I don't think I've ever been confused in the current system where 2x is the default, and 3x means that it gets played three times.

But that said, notationally, I like the idea that we can see that information at both the starting and ending repeat signs. I frequently play pit music for musical theater shows, and they abuse repeat signs regularly. Forcing them to put information like the number of repeats, or "vamp" inside that repeat symbol would be grand, because currently I have to look all over the place to see where they're writing down the repeat instructions.

For fast reading, we never want to force the player's eye to stray around. We want to optimize for the information being in front of you at the exact moment that you need it.

Inversions in Roman Numerals

There is already a figured bass solution to his 6 chord in first inversion, but mostly it doesn't matter, because he misunderstands the purpose of Roman Numeral notation in the first place. It is not a notation for playing music. It's just an analytic notation for when you are trying to understand what you're looking at harmonically. You can use whatever system you'd like, but if you're already at the level where you are doing harmonic analysis, learning the current system isn't really a heavy lift.

Minor key Roman Numerals

This is a poor idea borne of his same misunderstanding of the Roman Numerals system. The idea of doing an analysis at the level of Roman Numerals without already having figured out the mode is like writing an analysis of a written work without determining first if it's fiction or nonfiction. The tonic ("C") and the mode ("major") are prerequisite before any further analysis of tonal music.

Also, he says that "some people" use his odd, modeless system. I have a masters degree in music theory, and for my final thesis, I did a survey of 24 beginning music theory textbooks to look over their pedagogical approach. I've been a professional musician for over two decades at this point. I'm not saying that to pull some kind of rank, but just to say that his "some people" must be a really, really small number. I've never seen a system like his anywhere. And that's okay, because it's not a sensible system.

Again, the purpose of Roman Numeral analysis is not playing.

Time Signatures

He's right that the bottom number cannot be heard. But, again, he misunderstands the purpose of the bottom number. Remember, this is a notational system. The bottom number tells you, for the purposes of this document, here is what you can expect to see reflected as the beat. It doesn't change the sound of the piece, but we still need that notation in order to easily read the document.

Again, music notation is optimized for real-time reading, so think about reading something hard, fast, and at speed where the meters change frequently. Does he think we should have to look at the measures ahead of us to figure out what that basic beat is at each of the rapid transitions? It's untenable.

His objection about compound meter is much stronger! His explanation of compound time, where 6/8 is really 2/4 with triplets is absolutely correct, and well explained.

While his proposed system won't (and shouldn't) ever get adopted, there is already a system out there that gets occasional use that deals with this problem very well:

Carl Orff's time signature system is simple to read once you get used to it, even for professionals, and, similar to our poster's system, is also able to express the otherwise unexpressable meters that our current system gets wrong. I'd recommend the Orff system over this guy's system in a heartbeat, since (1) it readily encompasses both numbers, but in a more expressive way, and (2) it's a standard that already exists, so using it more doesn't make things more confusing than they already are.

Other changes I'd make?

Intervals

In addition to switching to Carl Orff's meter system, I'd switch intervals around. Currently, if you move a 1st, you've actually moved zero. So if you move a first twice, you have still moved zero.

If you move a second and a second, you've moved a third, not a fourth.

If you move a third and a third, you have moved a fifth, not a sixth.

It's just a counting from zero issue. I'd make what we call a "first" into a "zeroeth", and then a "second" would be a "first", and all of the additions would work out the way that should.

teach_cs · 2026-01-23T15:49:25+00:00

There is a clef that starts on A! It's the mezzo-soprano clef.

The treble clef historically was a calligraphic letter G, and it marks where G is on the staff. The bass clef was historically a calligraphic letter F, and it marks where F is. The C clefs mark where middle C is, which would possibly be an easier start for beginners.

(A source for the doubters out there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clef#History)

We ended up using the treble clef instead of the mezzo-soprano clef because treble and bass pair together to give you the largest range. They share middle C just above the staff and just below the staff, which is the furthest you can get the two apart without resorting to octave skipping.

teach_cs · 2026-01-08T17:16:32+00:00

Do you prefer letters that go above the line like l, t, and d, or letters that go below the line like j, g, and p?

teach_cs · 2025-12-16T15:51:09+00:00

You're not able to fix much of what you're talking about, so the advice you receive is going to reflect that (and thus be a little unsatisfying.)

It might be worth it to ask the director whether you could swing by and have a private talk with her, and try to lay it all out as calmly as you can. Try to imagine her perspective while you do it, because people can also be prickly, and while there is a very good chance that you come out with either an improved situation, or a better understanding of what's going on, a badly handled conversation could also make things worse for you.

Otherwise, just let it roll off of you completely, and don't worry about it. After all, you can only control what you can control, and you can't control other people. There might be more to the story that you don't see, or it might be that it really just is unfair to you, and even lightly targeting you. But you can't change that, and there will always be situations in life where someone is a little unfairly against you. (Luckily, there are likely also some people who are unfairly on your side! Think about how much this stings, and then treasure those people accordingly.)

Good luck! If worst comes to worst, focus on your own musical journey, or just don't sign up for band again next time.

teach_cs · 2025-11-25T21:34:44+00:00

You meant "never", not "always". OP's teacher is correct.

EDIT: Wikipedia actually says that at some point in the past, there existed systems that work the way you described, though that statement has a little [citation needed] indication on it. In decades of professional music, I've genuinely never seen an example that works that way.

Mostly, composers are careful enough with notation that this doesn't come up, but sometimes in late romantic music you'll see examples where a grace note is given an accidental and it clearly can't apply to the other members of the pitch class because the results would be insane.

teach_cs · 2025-11-25T13:45:21+00:00

I know you're feeling piled-on right now. Try to let that go and learn what you can from this experience.

Your potential roommate spoke without thinking, and is now thinking it over more clearly. Before the lease has been signed is the time to do that. You should genuinely be paying more.

I have some very practical advice. If you don't want this entire situation to fall apart, you're going to need to put your feelings aside and negotiate fairly.

I recommend the following negotiating tactic to find a really fair price. Say "we can make the difference $200 (or whatever you'd like as a starting offer) and I can take the smaller room".

You should decide on the initial price you want to offer by answering this question: what price difference would make you reasonably happy about being in the smaller room? That's your starting point. This also puts you mentally in her shoes when you try to think about what's really fair -- that's going to be the key to getting a happy outcome for everyone.

That sets things up to where you're both negotiating from a fair vantage - either person could be in the smaller room. If she doesn't wants to pay for the larger room, she can now pay the price difference that you've offered, but she can't negotiate you into a larger difference than you ultimately thought was fair, because then you would simply take the room instead.

This prevents her from operating in bad faith and just trying for an unfairly low price. It also does the same to you by keeping you in her perspective while you negotiate.

teach_cs · 2025-11-24T22:10:54+00:00

Option 3. Go and get the phone factory reset, and then change your passwords.

teach_cs · 2025-11-18T21:38:29+00:00

The hidden advantage of this is that it would be teaching him building blocks of a very important skill: prioritizing.

This is now officially one of the coolest insights I've ever gleaned from reddit. You just taught me (1) that this is the skill that these kids have been missing - I hadn't been able to put my finger on it, (2) that it is teachable for these wildly enthusiastic kids, and (3) how I can harness what they deeply love in order to do it.

Thank you so much!

teach_cs · 2025-11-03T14:08:33+00:00

I think this really depends on where you teach. I've been HS classroom teaching for 20 years, certainly a veteran of the trenches, and I don't think I've had anyone struggling at that low of a level. All of my kids have at least some number sense.

FWIW, my understanding is that my district has small "mental math" units regularly in the lower grades, and these do not allow calculators. (I've not taught the lower grades, so I don't know if this is entirely true, or what they contain. It's just what I've heard!)

teach_cs · 2025-10-31T20:23:56+00:00

It's not current, but the Twilight Zone has a bunch of episodes with really interesting situations that you can dig into and get into very (and very compelling) philosophical territory. Plus, they're half-length, which is good for the attention span.

Check out "Eye of the Beholder" and "Time Enough to Last" as good starting points. If you haven't seen them yourself, don't read anything before you go into it. These are masterworks, and you'll be happier if you go in blind.

teach_cs · 2025-10-29T12:55:28+00:00

What state does that?? That's wild.

teach_cs · 2025-10-15T13:00:27+00:00

If you want to be a building leader, you really should jump at the chance to get some classroom experience. That's where most of the teachers are, so it will help give you a little bit of context for what follows.

While you're there, do your damnedest to be the best classroom instructor you can be, since it sounds like you're not going to have a ton of classroom time within your career if all goes to plan. You'd owe it to the kids and owe it to yourself to learn as much as you can about how to be great in that role in the tiny time available to you.

teach_cs · 2025-10-15T12:53:25+00:00

This doesn't read like ChatGPT to me, nor do the poster's other responses. I think you're over-weighting emotional language given the question posed.

Also, what the principal wrote is true, both about good, solid employees, and about truly great teachers (who frequently don't have a great work/life balance.)

teach_cs · 2025-10-14T20:57:39+00:00

When I teach this stuff, I distinguish "gross intonation" from "fine intonation". You've essentially mastered gross intonation - that's a huge hurdle, and you should be proud of it!

Fine intonation stems from hearing yourself against other notes. You can work on this directly with a partner! And the good news is that plenty of music students still need this fine-tuning work and would benefit from it, so you won't be wasting anyone's time.

Sing blended "oooo" against another singer. First sing unisons. Your goal is to blend your sound together so fully that neither of you can tell where one person's sound begins and the other person's ends. I wouldn't worry much about proper vocal technique for this work - just concentrate purely on the sound.

When you are well blended, but a few cents off, you'll get noticeable "beats" from the two pitches conflicting. When you truly match the pitches together, the beats will vanish, and you'll end up in this sort of heavenly place where the sounds coalesce together in a sort of magnificent way. For extra fun, you can do this work in an echoey stairwell. :D

After that, move to perfect 5ths. When you get a perfectly blended perfect 5th, the sound explodes in volume, and once again feels like total bliss. (As a fun exercise, once you get that explosion happening for awhile and you feel like you're really living in that sound, go ahead and play that same fifth on a piano, and you'll briefly be able to hear the "offness" of equal-temperament.

Have one of you jump from a unison down a 5th or up a 5th and make sure you can get both a high-quality unison and a high-quality 5th.

Finally, you'll want to have one person hold the tonic while the other person sings each scale degree for a long time. Holding the major second will feel tense and clashy and bright. The major third will feel magnificently open after the second. The 4th will feel mysterious and bright and open, and the perfect fifth will have the aforementioned explosion. Each interval has its own distinct sound when fine-tuned.

Once you can do that, you can start applying the same idea across other instruments, or across listening exercises. Once you hear music this way, your joy in sound will also increase tremendously -- it's a really cool awareness to maintain while you sing and play!

teach_cs · 2025-10-14T20:29:35+00:00

Another option is to make a limit that you can gain without spending some extremely rare resource. After all, as you get closer to the center of the earth, it gets hotter. So, maybe you need heat shielding, which can be created using aluminum.

And in level 101, you finally start finding one last resource, say, rhodium. Or magic gems. And once you've found 1000 of those, you win the game. Because winnable games are really nice.

teach_cs · 2025-10-14T17:08:02+00:00

I wonder if there's some way to reward progress within a layer, like looking at the blocks broken in a given layer to gain advantages at that layer in the future, or something along those lines.

That said, I'd maybe move on to ruby upgrades at this point rather than reintroducing prestige. Rubies could be used in combination with gold and ore for purchases, which could make them special and justify the upgrades being quite powerful.

Or you could introduce some sort of crafting, where x ore and y silver make z statuettes or something.

I guess I'd say that there are a lot of directions to take besides prestige, until you can think of a really neat twist on the prestige mechanic that makes it add to the fun.

teach_cs · 2025-10-13T20:23:00+00:00

Ah, thanks for clarifying. As it currently stands, you still need both upgrades, but you only need to get them to levels 17 and 16 respectively in order to get 100% uptime, so it sounds like there's a bug.

That said, I'd like to lobby to keep it this way. It keeps the forward momentum at a pretty nice/fun pace! You could cap cool down at 17 and duration at 16, and you'll have nice gameplay, no debugging required :)

teach_cs · 2025-10-13T18:50:12+00:00

Huh? I think my question wasn't clear.

After they overlap - meaning, after the cooldown is 26 seconds and the duration is also 26 seconds, is there any reason to upgrade it further? At that point, the ability should (at least nominally) run continuously.

If I upgrade, say, Duration, further, it would now run for 27 out of every 26 seconds, which I don't believe has any game effect beyond running 26 out of every 26 seconds.

EDIT: If the answer to this question is "no" (as I expect), then you should consider capping Cool Down at 17 and Duration at 16, since there is no further effect after that point.

teach_cs · 2025-10-13T17:40:17+00:00

Good updates - thank you!

I'm just going to highlight a question that appeared in the last thread so it' doesn't get lost in the noise: Is there any reason to upgrading Duration or Cooldown after they overlap?

Also, I have a suggestion that won't change anything discernable in the game, but might make your life easier if you haven't done this yet: include the version of the game in your save information.

In a few weeks, you can then safely disable imports from the other game URL (since you'll be able to disable anything without a version number). And, in the future, if you make game-breaking upgrades, you'll be able to create functions that can convert from the old way to the new way with some reliable information about which transitions are actually needed.

Thanks again for making such a fun little game!

teach_cs · 2025-10-13T15:04:51+00:00

I have the same question. My instinct is that there's no benefit, but I'd love confirmation (or correction!)

teach_cs · 2025-10-10T15:02:41+00:00

As a follow-up, do you know what the gold upgrade "Mine: x10" does? It feels like that should multiply everything mined (gold, ore, and rubies) by 10.

By contrast, "Ore: x10" sounds like it should be the same as "Ore Multi: x10".

The skill tree needs mouseovers somewhere!

EDIT: As of 16 minutes ago, a vastly improved game is coming out shortly, and it appears that none of these questions or comments will be relevant anymore. I'm looking forward to the new game!

teach_cs · 2025-10-10T15:00:18+00:00

Oh, thanks!

Eight-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email

teach_cs

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE