I hate asking for money.
May. 15th, 2006 10:06 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ewtIt's time to put my teaching rates up again this fall. I haven't had a payrise since Autumn 2004.
I currently charge £25/hour for teaching piano. Bear in mind that I travel to my students and I do not charge them extra for the travel time and so on. I am thinking of putting my rates up to £27 or £28 per hour. £28 would make for slightly easier arithmetic (most of my students have half-hour lessons), but I'm not sure if it's too much. On the other hand, I would expect to pay at least £30/hour for music lessons myself, or possibly quite a bit more.
The other thing is that many of my students need longer lessons. Even then we won't be able to do everything every week. I generally start students on 30 minutes a week, but once they start working toward exams and so on it really isn't enough time - not if I want to teach them thorough musicianship, rather than just how to be an exam monkey. As things currently stand I frequently teach longer than I'm paid for, and that's not cool on several levels. Of the ten (probably soon to be eleven) students I normally teach on a Sunday, easily four or five of them should be having 45-minute lessons instead of 30 minutes. Some teachers won't teach for less time than that at all. My during-the-week students are probably fine as they are; trumpet student usually gets an hour anyway, and my Thursday student in Kentish Town is too young to concentrate for 45 minutes.
I don't think there are any families I teach who genuinely couldn't afford both the increase in time and the higher rates, but I am worried about the objections. Whether people can afford something and whether they are willing to pay it are different, and I don't want it to seem like I'm grasping for money. I know when I spoke to one parent about adding a 15-minute theory lesson every other week she was against the idea on the grounds that when she was studying violin they just did that as part of the lesson... but I seriously doubt she had half-hour lessons (although she seems to think she did) and learned the violin well and had theory tuition on top of that.
I don't want to lose students because I'm putting my rates up.
So I guess I have to put the rates up, and suggest longer lessons for those students serious about taking exams and so on, and accept that some families won't want the longer lessons.
Do I put the rates up at the beginning of summer and then suggest the longer lessons in September when I'm re-scheduling? Or do I suggest the longer lessons for those students who continue through the summer, and put the rates up in the autumn? Either way some students will end up being asked for longer lessons and higher rates at the same time, because not everyone studies through the summer.
Really, once a student is at the point where they can sit and concentrate for 45 minutes instead of just a half hour, there is not usually a good educational reason to keep them on 30-minute lessons. This will vary from student to student, as all things do, but I'm thinking that it might be wise to adopt a policy along the lines of "I normally teach children for 45 minutes if they are over seven years of age and 60 minutes if they are over the age of 10" and see what happens.
Your thoughts?
I currently charge £25/hour for teaching piano. Bear in mind that I travel to my students and I do not charge them extra for the travel time and so on. I am thinking of putting my rates up to £27 or £28 per hour. £28 would make for slightly easier arithmetic (most of my students have half-hour lessons), but I'm not sure if it's too much. On the other hand, I would expect to pay at least £30/hour for music lessons myself, or possibly quite a bit more.
The other thing is that many of my students need longer lessons. Even then we won't be able to do everything every week. I generally start students on 30 minutes a week, but once they start working toward exams and so on it really isn't enough time - not if I want to teach them thorough musicianship, rather than just how to be an exam monkey. As things currently stand I frequently teach longer than I'm paid for, and that's not cool on several levels. Of the ten (probably soon to be eleven) students I normally teach on a Sunday, easily four or five of them should be having 45-minute lessons instead of 30 minutes. Some teachers won't teach for less time than that at all. My during-the-week students are probably fine as they are; trumpet student usually gets an hour anyway, and my Thursday student in Kentish Town is too young to concentrate for 45 minutes.
I don't think there are any families I teach who genuinely couldn't afford both the increase in time and the higher rates, but I am worried about the objections. Whether people can afford something and whether they are willing to pay it are different, and I don't want it to seem like I'm grasping for money. I know when I spoke to one parent about adding a 15-minute theory lesson every other week she was against the idea on the grounds that when she was studying violin they just did that as part of the lesson... but I seriously doubt she had half-hour lessons (although she seems to think she did) and learned the violin well and had theory tuition on top of that.
I don't want to lose students because I'm putting my rates up.
So I guess I have to put the rates up, and suggest longer lessons for those students serious about taking exams and so on, and accept that some families won't want the longer lessons.
Do I put the rates up at the beginning of summer and then suggest the longer lessons in September when I'm re-scheduling? Or do I suggest the longer lessons for those students who continue through the summer, and put the rates up in the autumn? Either way some students will end up being asked for longer lessons and higher rates at the same time, because not everyone studies through the summer.
Really, once a student is at the point where they can sit and concentrate for 45 minutes instead of just a half hour, there is not usually a good educational reason to keep them on 30-minute lessons. This will vary from student to student, as all things do, but I'm thinking that it might be wise to adopt a policy along the lines of "I normally teach children for 45 minutes if they are over seven years of age and 60 minutes if they are over the age of 10" and see what happens.
Your thoughts?
