I found this week's readings to be fascinating on many levels. In the eCoursepack, there were articles discussing the importance of functioning as a band director not only for the duration of the school year, but also during the summer months. I know that this is true. Just being here at Case Western Reserve University, I have learned that there is plenty to do in any band program, regardless what time of the year it is. Just this week, I took one of my days off and visited a local high school band with Dr. Ciepluch. I observed him working with four different bands, all at various skill levels. What I loved most about this trip was the opportunity to discuss one-on-one educational matters with the teachers. They were nice enough to talk about the realities of their band program during their planning periods. After reading the articles for this week, I was interested how the band directors keep the "flow" going since the actual time they get to meet with their students is limited. Because of time restraints and special school scheduling, these directors only really are able to meet with there students for about a half hour every day. This is surprising to me! Sometimes it takes 20 minutes just to get the band warmed-up and sounding good. What I learned most from the experience is that because of the limited time, you are forced to "pick your battles" and try to focus on one thing at a time. If you don't do this, you realize very quickly that there is no time left and little has been accomplished.
Regarding summer work, I know that a teacher's job is never finished. An instrumental music teacher's job goes on for the entire year. There is always repertoire to be planned. Once the music is planned, you have to get it out of the library, make copies, and store the music for the year. Conversely, this may be a good time to reorganize oneself, and put away all the music from the previous year. Band directors need to do all this while preparing for the upcoming season, especially if they are preparing for marching band. There are drills to be written. There is music to be arranged. There are planning meetings with the school board. This is a time to plan for years in advance. When might the band be taking a trip? How will the band director allocate funds for next year? Are all the instruments in adequate condition? Of course not, so is the band director in contact with the local music stores? Recruitment is always an issue 12 months out of the year. Is the band director planning any special activities? Have they talked with their school administration about special ideas? There is so much to do at every point in the year, sometimes I wonder how it all gets done!
In reading Chapter 6 of Instrumental Music Education, I like the learning philosophies presented by the authors. The philosophy that seemed to resound the most with me was "Constructivism and Discovery Learning." In this philosophy, humans use their prior knowledge and experience to teach themselves, regardless of how they are taught, formulating questions and answering them via experimentation. This philosophy makes the most sense to me, probably because it best describes the way in which my brain works. For example, I have taken many classes on rhythm, music theory, saxophone, and ear-training. All of these classes have been taught differently by an extremely diverse group of educators. All of them had their own teaching philosophies, and they all introduced materials in their own way. My brain was like a sponge that soaked in the information. However, I learned at my own pace, and things tended to "click" for me at different times for no other apparent reason than maybe my brain was "ready" to understand the particular concept. This is why as a future music educator I know that I will be able to bring my strengths into the classroom and be able to help people. But I know I won't be able to reach everyone everyday at every time. So I will use the techniques I have learned in Instrumental Methods to guide my teaching, but I will be pretty moderate in how I present or teach certain ideas. For example, I'm not going to base my entire program on one element, like audiation. I will introduce this as a concept, but will let the students figure out if it works for them or not. Nor will I advocate one kind of counting over the other (unless of course I'm mandated to do so). I will be the wellspring of ideas, but the students will learn by themselves, as I learned and continue to learn by myself.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Friday, February 18, 2011
2/18/11 - Reflections
Reviewing instrumental method books was an exciting activity, and I particularly enjoyed reviewing the series, Do It! Teach In Band. I found this series to be highly unusual, but beneficial for the teacher who wants to teach music by ear. The possibilities for composition, improvisation, and learning about intonation and balance are endless. The resources that accompany this series are vast and user-friendly. I enjoyed the opportunity of sharing this series with the class. If I had to do it all over again though, I think I would have spent less time talking, and more time playing with the CD. Although I hope a lot of what I had to say was important and valid, I should have spent more time delving into the actual supplementary materials, which is really what makes this method book series shine. In hindsight, I also think that I was far too critical of this series' shortcomings. Rather than make a list of what I disliked most about the series, I should have spent my time promoting what the series does well. I also didn't manage my time very well; I had planned some group activities and I barely had enough time to show the class some audio examples.
I also enjoyed hearing my colleagues present their method book to the class. Although I can appreciate all of them for what they are trying to accomplish, I certainly have my favorites. The Jump Right In series is perhaps beneficial for an entire music program that advocates Gordon Learning Theory, but I would never use it by itself. It is too complicated, and young students need to play. I think students would easily become frustrated with this series and want to give up their instrument for all the wrong reasons. My personal favorite is Standard of Excellence, which developed out of the book I learned from, Best In Class. I think it has the perfect balance of various learning theories, and it presents it to the students in an attractive way. I remember highly valuing the book when I was learning how to play the saxophone. It seemed perfect; it taught rhythm well, and introduced concepts at a gradual pace. I neither felt frustrated or bored as I was learning the fundamentals and rudiments of music and the saxophone. If I find myself in front of a beginning orchestra one day, I think Artistry For Strings is an excellent book for my beginning string players. It has excellent visual diagrams and taught the students at a moderate pace.
Switching topics, I highly enjoyed participating in classroom observations this week. I don't think I was surprised in anything I saw, except for the genius of Mr. B. H. I wish I had him as a band director when I was in 5th grade! That school district doesn't know how lucky they are to have such an all-star at the helm. What impressed me more is that he had his own "method" developed for the percussion. When I went to do an observation last semester of his 7th and 8th grade bands, he had his own "method" developed for them as well! He really should publish some of his materials as they really seem to be effective. There were other teachers that I observed that seemed to be less successful at dealing with the temperament of 5th graders. I know that this is because of age and experience. This worries me a little bit, as I love teaching music, but I don't intend to be a "baby-sitter" to children that can't behave. But I also understand that this comes with teaching younger students because of their short attention span. I also understand that certain students will have special needs, and certain schools will have a large population of students with special needs. It is just disappointing when you have to spend more time disciplining children instead of teaching them music.
I also enjoyed hearing my colleagues present their method book to the class. Although I can appreciate all of them for what they are trying to accomplish, I certainly have my favorites. The Jump Right In series is perhaps beneficial for an entire music program that advocates Gordon Learning Theory, but I would never use it by itself. It is too complicated, and young students need to play. I think students would easily become frustrated with this series and want to give up their instrument for all the wrong reasons. My personal favorite is Standard of Excellence, which developed out of the book I learned from, Best In Class. I think it has the perfect balance of various learning theories, and it presents it to the students in an attractive way. I remember highly valuing the book when I was learning how to play the saxophone. It seemed perfect; it taught rhythm well, and introduced concepts at a gradual pace. I neither felt frustrated or bored as I was learning the fundamentals and rudiments of music and the saxophone. If I find myself in front of a beginning orchestra one day, I think Artistry For Strings is an excellent book for my beginning string players. It has excellent visual diagrams and taught the students at a moderate pace.
Switching topics, I highly enjoyed participating in classroom observations this week. I don't think I was surprised in anything I saw, except for the genius of Mr. B. H. I wish I had him as a band director when I was in 5th grade! That school district doesn't know how lucky they are to have such an all-star at the helm. What impressed me more is that he had his own "method" developed for the percussion. When I went to do an observation last semester of his 7th and 8th grade bands, he had his own "method" developed for them as well! He really should publish some of his materials as they really seem to be effective. There were other teachers that I observed that seemed to be less successful at dealing with the temperament of 5th graders. I know that this is because of age and experience. This worries me a little bit, as I love teaching music, but I don't intend to be a "baby-sitter" to children that can't behave. But I also understand that this comes with teaching younger students because of their short attention span. I also understand that certain students will have special needs, and certain schools will have a large population of students with special needs. It is just disappointing when you have to spend more time disciplining children instead of teaching them music.
Friday, February 11, 2011
2/11/11 - Reflections
Like rhythm patterns, melodic patterns are a good way to introduce children to the rudiments and fundamentals needed to achieve success in instrumental music. They are an important aspect of music learning and cognition, and students will benefit from these types of exercises in all their musical experiences. I hope I don't start to sound like a broken record when I say that, again, these exercises are best carried out at the general music level. Sure, I can understand the theory behind wanting to include them in the instrumental music curriculum, but I'm not sure that this will ever practically become the norm. There is so little time for kids to come in, wet their reeds, blow some notes, and prepare to warm up for band. And with the budget cuts schools are enduring from the current economic situation, I don't think that the arts are going to get more time and consideration. I think trying to implement these sort of activities in the instrumental music classroom will have the opposite effect when time is already so precious a commodity.
Right now even in 5th grade band, students are being removed from their classroom at different times in the day to come to the band room. There, they have seconds to open their case, prepare their instrument, and begin to play. The teacher has an agenda that they must push in order for the students to get through all the material that is required of them to move on to the next lesson. They must be individually assessed, graded, and introduced to a new concept, sometimes all within a twenty-minute span. When is there time to practice audiation? I believe that students get to practice audiation and rhythm most successfully in the actual band setting, when they are rehearsing and performing repertoire. Sometimes we try to isolate musical elements too much, and it ends up taking away a greater part of the whole experience. I think that the students will learn all they need to learn about audiation and rhythm during their regular experiences in band. These will also be the most meaningful experiences for them, as they are playing real music with real emotion attached to it. They feel part of a greater whole, and I believe kids pick up melody, harmony, rhythm just as easily by osmosis. I know that I did.
I do love technology like Smartmusic that Dr. Bauer showed us in class this week. What a wonderful opportunity for teachers and students alike to have access to tools that will help them become better musicians. I love the fact that the students can practice with it at home for a small fee. They can access the pieces that they are working on for Solo & Ensemble, and play along with the computer. This is fantastic technology that has a great future, and we would not be doing ourselves or our students credit if we did not invest in this great technology. Ultimately, I believe programs like Smartmusic are best used at home or in the school's general music lab. This technology is wonderful, but most of it requires one on one use by the students. For this, you really need to invest in time outside of the instrumental music classroom.
Right now even in 5th grade band, students are being removed from their classroom at different times in the day to come to the band room. There, they have seconds to open their case, prepare their instrument, and begin to play. The teacher has an agenda that they must push in order for the students to get through all the material that is required of them to move on to the next lesson. They must be individually assessed, graded, and introduced to a new concept, sometimes all within a twenty-minute span. When is there time to practice audiation? I believe that students get to practice audiation and rhythm most successfully in the actual band setting, when they are rehearsing and performing repertoire. Sometimes we try to isolate musical elements too much, and it ends up taking away a greater part of the whole experience. I think that the students will learn all they need to learn about audiation and rhythm during their regular experiences in band. These will also be the most meaningful experiences for them, as they are playing real music with real emotion attached to it. They feel part of a greater whole, and I believe kids pick up melody, harmony, rhythm just as easily by osmosis. I know that I did.
I do love technology like Smartmusic that Dr. Bauer showed us in class this week. What a wonderful opportunity for teachers and students alike to have access to tools that will help them become better musicians. I love the fact that the students can practice with it at home for a small fee. They can access the pieces that they are working on for Solo & Ensemble, and play along with the computer. This is fantastic technology that has a great future, and we would not be doing ourselves or our students credit if we did not invest in this great technology. Ultimately, I believe programs like Smartmusic are best used at home or in the school's general music lab. This technology is wonderful, but most of it requires one on one use by the students. For this, you really need to invest in time outside of the instrumental music classroom.
2/4/11 - Reflections
In the readings this week, Feldman and Contzius discussed the importance of rhythm and movement. They mentioned Dalcroze as being a strong proponent of learning the fundamentals of ear training and rhythm before learning a musical instrument. While I agree with Dalcroze in that students need to learn the rudiments of ear training and rhythm before they play a musical instrument, I don't think that focusing extensively on ear training and rhythmic exercises in the instrumental music classroom is very time effective or productive. I believe that ear training and rhythm cognition begins at birth and keeps developing throughout the course of one's life span. It should be taught in general music from the moment a child enters into preschool. Hopefully, children will take many years of general music before they ever begin a musical instrument. But this is obviously not always the case. I think children are exposed to rhythm and melody enough in their everyday lives. I don't think that the instrumental music teacher should do much with it in the classroom. It takes valuable time away that is already compromised with other student activities. And I'm not sure that students are getting a lot out of the activities anyway.
A perfect example of this occurred during our class session when Dr. Bauer played You Can Call Me Al. Although this activity was fun and exciting, I'm not sure I understood what the ultimate goal of it was. We all took turns improvising rhythmic patterns using various parts of our body as percussion instruments, while the rest of the class tried to copy the rhythmic patterns in a call and response sort of "game." It was fun and I think a lot of people enjoyed the activity. But how is an activity like this going to fit into my curriculum for high school band? There is scarcely enough time in the day to focus on intonation and playing together as a group. There is even less time to get through as much repertoire as teachers would like to get through. Although the exercise with rhythm is interesting, I'm not even sure that there is enough time in the activity for it to give any sort of lasting effect. To me, it takes unnecessary time away from more important issues like can we get from letter "A" to letter "B" without completely falling apart? Time is money, and unfortunately when I get into a real teaching situation I have a feeling time will be even less than I think it will be now.
This is not to say that I don't see the educational implications in doing exercises like the ones we did in class. I think over a period of time, students could learn a lot from these types of activities, and have a greater sense of rhythm, pulse, and meter. But what I take issue with is the time and place. Like I said before, something like this is fantastic for general music. It is fun, it makes the students think for themselves, it introduces elements of improvisation, and it is a nice distraction from the rest of the day. Students will be able to learn a lot from this process, and I hope general music teachers across the world are putting it into their overall curriculum. I just don't think we have time to do it in band. Besides, the kids want to play music. They want to get their instrument out and play. Anything preventing this from happening will just make them more frustrated and anxious.
A perfect example of this occurred during our class session when Dr. Bauer played You Can Call Me Al. Although this activity was fun and exciting, I'm not sure I understood what the ultimate goal of it was. We all took turns improvising rhythmic patterns using various parts of our body as percussion instruments, while the rest of the class tried to copy the rhythmic patterns in a call and response sort of "game." It was fun and I think a lot of people enjoyed the activity. But how is an activity like this going to fit into my curriculum for high school band? There is scarcely enough time in the day to focus on intonation and playing together as a group. There is even less time to get through as much repertoire as teachers would like to get through. Although the exercise with rhythm is interesting, I'm not even sure that there is enough time in the activity for it to give any sort of lasting effect. To me, it takes unnecessary time away from more important issues like can we get from letter "A" to letter "B" without completely falling apart? Time is money, and unfortunately when I get into a real teaching situation I have a feeling time will be even less than I think it will be now.
This is not to say that I don't see the educational implications in doing exercises like the ones we did in class. I think over a period of time, students could learn a lot from these types of activities, and have a greater sense of rhythm, pulse, and meter. But what I take issue with is the time and place. Like I said before, something like this is fantastic for general music. It is fun, it makes the students think for themselves, it introduces elements of improvisation, and it is a nice distraction from the rest of the day. Students will be able to learn a lot from this process, and I hope general music teachers across the world are putting it into their overall curriculum. I just don't think we have time to do it in band. Besides, the kids want to play music. They want to get their instrument out and play. Anything preventing this from happening will just make them more frustrated and anxious.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
1/28/11 - Reflections
As I began reading Chapter 1 of Instrumental Music Education, I couldn't help but find it a bit ironic that the same names and ideas are consistently at play, no matter the topic of discussion. The authors referenced Daniel Levitin, Steven Pinker and the whole idea of whether or not music was a "spandrel" of other evolutionary forces, and if music was little else than "auditory cheesecake." Because Instrumental Music Education and This Is Your Brain on Music are such recent publications, I can only surmise that this is one of the "hot topics" debated around the musical world right now. I'm grateful that through technology and through the greatest minds of our time, we can always be up-to-date on the most important issues floating around in music education.
This chapter presents the music learning theories of Gordon, Kodaly, and Suzuki. I was really happy when I came to the section heading, "Eclecticism and Hybridization." This section seemed to say that whether an educator prefers the methods of Gordon, Kodaly, or Suzuki, they are probably going to end up with similar results. I like this thought. It tastes good to me. Because each one of these theories emphasizes the sound-to-symbol principle, they will all basically lead to the same conclusion. What's more is that the teacher who is familiar with all three of the theories will be able to use greater variety in the classroom. They will be able to offer their students a more eclectic music education. Again, I cannot say how much I like this concept. A former class I took introduced the philosophies of Gordon, Kodaly, Orff, Suzuki, Dalcroze, and others one at a time in such a way that the learning was not meant to be cumulative. It seemed as though we had to choose which learning style we liked the best, and then go from there. There was no talk of "Eclecticism and Hybridization." We even went to observe teachers that were specifically "Orff" or "Kodaly" educators. While I understand that this may be standard in certain areas of music, I want to be as eclectic as I can be. I think that this will ultimately give my students a better and more well-rounded education.
It is all too true that most instrumental music education curricula will not have a place for much sound-to-symbol teaching, but just the fact that this concept is introduced in the first chapter of this publication may offer some hope. The book lists many reasons why it is not practical, historical, or economical to teach sound-to-symbol principles in instrumental music education. I know it is not the purpose of this blog for me to enumerate these, but I have some suggestions on how sound-to-symbol teaching applications would highly benefit instrumental music education. This would be in the world of improvisation and composition. Why are we teaching children to compose and improvise in general music and then stopping this practice completely until we emphasize it again sometime later in high school jazz band? This doesn't make any sense. Teaching an instrument from scratch may be difficult, but there are ways to teach instrumental music with the sound-to-symbol idea in mind. For example, once students have mastered five notes, have them go home and use these notes to come up with a song. Maybe they can use these five notes as a foundation for beginning exercises in improvisation and composition. The ideas are endless, but it is the responsibility of all of us as educators to put these theories into practice. The beginning band teacher may spend his entire career trying to implement these teaching strategies into his curriculum, but what good does it do when he/she walks away and these concepts are never mentioned again. There needs to be a greater continuity from general music to beginning band to middle school band to high school band and beyond.
This chapter presents the music learning theories of Gordon, Kodaly, and Suzuki. I was really happy when I came to the section heading, "Eclecticism and Hybridization." This section seemed to say that whether an educator prefers the methods of Gordon, Kodaly, or Suzuki, they are probably going to end up with similar results. I like this thought. It tastes good to me. Because each one of these theories emphasizes the sound-to-symbol principle, they will all basically lead to the same conclusion. What's more is that the teacher who is familiar with all three of the theories will be able to use greater variety in the classroom. They will be able to offer their students a more eclectic music education. Again, I cannot say how much I like this concept. A former class I took introduced the philosophies of Gordon, Kodaly, Orff, Suzuki, Dalcroze, and others one at a time in such a way that the learning was not meant to be cumulative. It seemed as though we had to choose which learning style we liked the best, and then go from there. There was no talk of "Eclecticism and Hybridization." We even went to observe teachers that were specifically "Orff" or "Kodaly" educators. While I understand that this may be standard in certain areas of music, I want to be as eclectic as I can be. I think that this will ultimately give my students a better and more well-rounded education.
It is all too true that most instrumental music education curricula will not have a place for much sound-to-symbol teaching, but just the fact that this concept is introduced in the first chapter of this publication may offer some hope. The book lists many reasons why it is not practical, historical, or economical to teach sound-to-symbol principles in instrumental music education. I know it is not the purpose of this blog for me to enumerate these, but I have some suggestions on how sound-to-symbol teaching applications would highly benefit instrumental music education. This would be in the world of improvisation and composition. Why are we teaching children to compose and improvise in general music and then stopping this practice completely until we emphasize it again sometime later in high school jazz band? This doesn't make any sense. Teaching an instrument from scratch may be difficult, but there are ways to teach instrumental music with the sound-to-symbol idea in mind. For example, once students have mastered five notes, have them go home and use these notes to come up with a song. Maybe they can use these five notes as a foundation for beginning exercises in improvisation and composition. The ideas are endless, but it is the responsibility of all of us as educators to put these theories into practice. The beginning band teacher may spend his entire career trying to implement these teaching strategies into his curriculum, but what good does it do when he/she walks away and these concepts are never mentioned again. There needs to be a greater continuity from general music to beginning band to middle school band to high school band and beyond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)