1. "A music curriculum may be established for teachers by a state or a local school district" (pg. 303). It frustrates me that certain school districts mandate such strict expectations for their teachers. Are teachers meant to be a machine at the end of an assembly line? Are they meant to be the means whereby politicians and other officials carry out their agendas? My father has been in business his entire life, and he has taught me some good principles - the principles of delegation and trust. Of course the opposite of this would be the scary world of micromanagement. I believe that if you higher a professional to do a job, like a teacher, you should let them do what they're trained to do. You place trust in the teacher by hiring and paying them. You don't need to micromanage everything that teachers do. Not only is this aggravating, infuriating, and frustrating, it doesn't show trust or proper management skill. I agree with a system of checks and balances to make sure that the teacher you hired for general music isn't teaching the children how to smoke marijuana, but administrators should let their teachers design their own curriculum. I say, let the teachers earn the money that they don't make.
2. "When planning a curriculum, teachers need to have a big picture and a specific picture in mind" (pg. 306). I like how this sentence is worded. I think it's another way of saying, "Reach for the stars, but keep your feet on the ground." Although I don't agree with this quote in every instance, I think it applies well here. As teachers, we all have grandiose visions of what we want to accomplish. We want to teach 100% of the students 100% of the time. But in real life we know that this never really works. There needs to be some sort of compromise. So we need to think big, but we also need to think realistically. Another thing I think the author is trying to say is that educators need to plan practically for how they are going to teach their lessons. How do we turn a proactive scholar into a practitioner? I think that this is the most important thing that I'm going to have to learn in order to be a successful teacher. Although going to college is one way of learning this craft, I think nothing can substitute for the experience of teaching in the schools. So, in other words, this will come as I mature and learn by experience.
3. "The result of trying to do a little bit of everything can be that children receive a superficial experience, rather than an in-depth experience, leaving them mentally impoverished" (pg. 321). As I look back on my experiences in middle school and high school, it doesn't take me long to remember experiences I had when teachers would try to cram down every last lesson in the text book into our heads. The result was just as the quote said: I felt "mentally impoverished." This always seemed to happen in math class too. I think there was a lot of pressure for the teachers to get through every math lesson in the book, which is hard because math is full of complicated concepts and procedures that take awhile for some students to grasp (like me). I don't think we have nearly the same problem in the world of music education. However, we too need to be careful of balance and flow. For example, I thought it was a good thing in world music how we only had a couple of specific units. How can you possibly cover the entire world in a semester? Obviously you cannot. But I strongly believe that presenting a large unit on one area makes a lot more sense than trying to teach a little bit of everything.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
11/3/10 - 3 Points of Interest on Chapter 16
1. "The federal government encourages but does not require states to create and fund special programs for gifted and talented students" (pg. 399). I think it's great that the federal government even goes so far as to encourage states and school districts to have special programs for gifted and talented students. But I don't believe it is the government's job to provide the money for such programs. I think that public schools have enough trouble getting money to have running water and electricity that works. From an idealistic vantage point, it always sounds like a good idea to create special programs for the gifted and talented, but are these programs practical? Perhaps the answer lies in technology. Hopefully there will come a time when children can learn at their own pace due to the technological capacity of the future music room.
2. "Because learning disabled is an umbrella term covering a wide range of behaviors, it is difficult to state principles that will apply in every case" (pg. 407). Music educators should plan and be ready for every type of situation one may encounter. Obviously, the new music educator will have to learn by experience all the different types of disabilities, diseases, and disorders that a child may come into the classroom with. Even a veteran music educator who has been teaching for a very long time might come into contact with certain cases that he or she has never experienced before. I think in all cases a good deal of patience will go a long way in helping the teacher, student, and specialist(s) to assist the child.
3. As a result of their behavior, depressed children are often socially isolated and in trouble academically" (pg. 410). Like all children, children that suffer from depression come in all varieties. Some appear as though they are shy and detach themselves from the group. Others are more animated and just as likely to participate in a normal fashion like most children. Often times, children suffering from depression are ignored and considered a nuisance for teachers to deal with. In situations when it is apparent that children are suffering from depression, there is a lot that a music educator can do to help the child to feel at ease, or feel better about their situation. A lot of the time, this depression comes from the home, and teachers need to be extra sensitive when dealing with these students. They need love and support, encouragement, and strength. But most of the time, I think they just want to be treated like everyone else.
2. "Because learning disabled is an umbrella term covering a wide range of behaviors, it is difficult to state principles that will apply in every case" (pg. 407). Music educators should plan and be ready for every type of situation one may encounter. Obviously, the new music educator will have to learn by experience all the different types of disabilities, diseases, and disorders that a child may come into the classroom with. Even a veteran music educator who has been teaching for a very long time might come into contact with certain cases that he or she has never experienced before. I think in all cases a good deal of patience will go a long way in helping the teacher, student, and specialist(s) to assist the child.
3. As a result of their behavior, depressed children are often socially isolated and in trouble academically" (pg. 410). Like all children, children that suffer from depression come in all varieties. Some appear as though they are shy and detach themselves from the group. Others are more animated and just as likely to participate in a normal fashion like most children. Often times, children suffering from depression are ignored and considered a nuisance for teachers to deal with. In situations when it is apparent that children are suffering from depression, there is a lot that a music educator can do to help the child to feel at ease, or feel better about their situation. A lot of the time, this depression comes from the home, and teachers need to be extra sensitive when dealing with these students. They need love and support, encouragement, and strength. But most of the time, I think they just want to be treated like everyone else.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
10/13/10 - 3 Points of Interest on Kodaly and Dalcroze
1. "In terms of rhythm, moving rhythms are more child-related than sustained ones" (pg. 10, Choksy). I think this would be common sense to most people. Even as Chosky talks about, children are used to seeing things move and they are used to walking, running, hearing their heart beat, and doing lots of things with movement. Children have a lot of energy, and they learn a lot about their outside world through touching, feeling, and experiencing what it is like to run on an incline, or roll down a hill. It is only natural that children would connect so easily to music by means of rhythm and movement. Thus I agree with Choksy that music educators need to put a lot of different moving rhythms in their lesson plans.
2. "None of the pedagogical tools or processes associated with the Kodaly method were invented by Kodaly and his colleagues" (pg. 16). This comes as a huge surprise to me. I knew that solfege dated to around the middle ages or before, but I had no idea that none of the pedagogical tools or processes came from Kodaly or his group of intellectuals. If this is the case, can Kodaly really put his name on everything that he is known for? It seems to me that he is more of a philosopher than an inventor. I understand the Kodaly philosophy and its implications for students in the classroom, but I don't understand how names get attached to tools and processes that did not originate with the so called "founder" himself.
3. "The work of Dalcroze has been recognized not only by musicians, but also by dancers, actors, therapists, and educators around the world" (pg. 46, Mead). This makes perfect sense to me. So much of Dalcroze and Eurythmics stems from the world of movement, and movement is the essential element in dance and one of the major essential elements in acting. I can understand how therapists can use the methodologies of Dalcroze too. I used to participate in "Bio-Feedback" where you can literally train your body (particularly the muscles) to relax and perform in a certain way. You can literally teach your body how to loosen up, and this decreases your anxiety. After awhile, you can guess the levels of stress you are putting on yourself, and teach your body how to counteract stress with thoughts of relaxation. But the neat thing is that your body can learn to do this automatically. It is important for educators everywhere to be aware of Dalcroze, and the teachings he promoted. They can have a great effect in many professions.
2. "None of the pedagogical tools or processes associated with the Kodaly method were invented by Kodaly and his colleagues" (pg. 16). This comes as a huge surprise to me. I knew that solfege dated to around the middle ages or before, but I had no idea that none of the pedagogical tools or processes came from Kodaly or his group of intellectuals. If this is the case, can Kodaly really put his name on everything that he is known for? It seems to me that he is more of a philosopher than an inventor. I understand the Kodaly philosophy and its implications for students in the classroom, but I don't understand how names get attached to tools and processes that did not originate with the so called "founder" himself.
3. "The work of Dalcroze has been recognized not only by musicians, but also by dancers, actors, therapists, and educators around the world" (pg. 46, Mead). This makes perfect sense to me. So much of Dalcroze and Eurythmics stems from the world of movement, and movement is the essential element in dance and one of the major essential elements in acting. I can understand how therapists can use the methodologies of Dalcroze too. I used to participate in "Bio-Feedback" where you can literally train your body (particularly the muscles) to relax and perform in a certain way. You can literally teach your body how to loosen up, and this decreases your anxiety. After awhile, you can guess the levels of stress you are putting on yourself, and teach your body how to counteract stress with thoughts of relaxation. But the neat thing is that your body can learn to do this automatically. It is important for educators everywhere to be aware of Dalcroze, and the teachings he promoted. They can have a great effect in many professions.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
10/6/10 - 3 Points of Interest on "Together In Harmony" (pg. 9-39)
1. "Once something is experienced in the body, it is usually not forgotten" (pg. 12). I think it is amazing that the songs and musical experiences I remember most from childhood are the ones that involved some type of "body percussion" or other physical movement. One of the very first songs I learned as a child was, "If You're Happy and You Know it, Clap Your Hands!" I wouldn't be surprised if the original author of this song was an Orff educator, because they put a form of body percussion into the actual title of the song! What an amazing concept. But it's interesting that I can remember exactly where I was as a three year old when I was learning this song for the first time. I remember my teacher, the other students, the happy music, and the action of clapping, stamping, and using my head voice. Clearly, there is evidence that kinetic movement plays a huge role in helping young students to remember music.
2. "The teaching process involved in Orff Schulwerk is its greatest strength" (pg. 15). After reading these pages I learned all the things an Orff teacher needs to be trained how to do. It is amazing to me that a trained Orff teacher can look at a piece of music, automatically write an accompaniment, assign different parts to each student, and be able to teach it so naturally and quickly. I have a feeling that this type of ability must come more natural to some than others. Still, it must take a lot of practice and concentration to be able to get to the level where composing accompaniments comes automatically. As I think back to my childhood, I don't think I ever had an Orff teacher. I had classes where we used "Orff" instruments, but I was never instructed in the exact manner that they teach in this book. I'm wondering if my classmates had different experiences?
3. "Music Learning Theory advocates that students be taught songs in a wide variety of tonalities" (pg. 23). I agree with this statement, but find its inclusion somewhat superfluous. To me, this is like saying, "We advocate here that little Johnny have friends from a wide variety of racial backgrounds." Doesn't that sound ludicrous? Of course we should teach children songs from different tonalities, but we shouldn't focus our lesson plans in a way that we must include one from every mode in a given period of time. I find this to be too constricting. I also think that a mindset like this will ultimately take away from the music. Off the top of my head I can think of many wonderful songs for children, and they happen to be in four different modes. We teach the songs because they are good and because they have lasting value. We might point out that a particular song is in such and such a mode, but that should not be the focus. After all, the difference between modes is so incredibly small to begin with. Just teach them great music!
2. "The teaching process involved in Orff Schulwerk is its greatest strength" (pg. 15). After reading these pages I learned all the things an Orff teacher needs to be trained how to do. It is amazing to me that a trained Orff teacher can look at a piece of music, automatically write an accompaniment, assign different parts to each student, and be able to teach it so naturally and quickly. I have a feeling that this type of ability must come more natural to some than others. Still, it must take a lot of practice and concentration to be able to get to the level where composing accompaniments comes automatically. As I think back to my childhood, I don't think I ever had an Orff teacher. I had classes where we used "Orff" instruments, but I was never instructed in the exact manner that they teach in this book. I'm wondering if my classmates had different experiences?
3. "Music Learning Theory advocates that students be taught songs in a wide variety of tonalities" (pg. 23). I agree with this statement, but find its inclusion somewhat superfluous. To me, this is like saying, "We advocate here that little Johnny have friends from a wide variety of racial backgrounds." Doesn't that sound ludicrous? Of course we should teach children songs from different tonalities, but we shouldn't focus our lesson plans in a way that we must include one from every mode in a given period of time. I find this to be too constricting. I also think that a mindset like this will ultimately take away from the music. Off the top of my head I can think of many wonderful songs for children, and they happen to be in four different modes. We teach the songs because they are good and because they have lasting value. We might point out that a particular song is in such and such a mode, but that should not be the focus. After all, the difference between modes is so incredibly small to begin with. Just teach them great music!
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
9/29/10 - 3 Points of Interest on Chapter 10
1. "Improvisation at a beginning level allows children to play with sounds and with musical syntax (or putting those sounds together)" (pg. 253). I strongly believe that whether they are aware of it or not, children are always improvising one way or another. It is a child's natural process to discover the world around him/her. What does the marimba sound like? What does the snare drum sound like? What do recorders sound like? I remember when I was a child, I used to play everything I could get my hands on. Even children who appear to be less musical find it enjoyable to have opportunities to play around on instruments. One of my first real musical instruments was this really cheap synthesizer (complete with two and one-half octaves). I would spend day after day coming up with my own melodies and discovering new beats and rhythm patterns. I even composed my very first pieces by listening to the sound I was creating. It was a marvelous experience, and as music educators, we need to make sure that all children get this same experience.
2. "Improvisation can play several valuable roles in the creative process" (pg. 255). In my experience with the synthesizer, I not only learned about the notes on the keyboard, I learned valuable concepts like melody, rhythm, timbre, meter, and harmony, just to name a few. Maybe I didn't know the name of these terms at such a young age. But somewhere deep in my brain and in my soul, I was completely aware of them. Whether children are improvising formally or informally, they will discover ideas from one another that will inspire them to be creative not only in music, but also in the other arts. Their brains might also develop to think about things differently in math and science. We know how valuable improvisation is because many of the greatest composers who ever lived were all well-trained in the art of improvisation. It is truly a tool that will help to develop the creative mind.
3. "Once children have a sense of the compositional process through creating aural plans, the use of notation can be introduced" (pg. 261). Although I strongly believe that the creation of aural plans can be an effective tool in getting students started to understand musical lines, I don't think that it's imperative that we teach them aural plans before the standard system of notation. I never learned about aural plans as a child. In fact, I can remember being taught the standard notation system at an early age, and I turned out okay. Please understand, I don't want to take away from their usefulness in the classroom. I've been very impressed with a lot of aural plans that I have seen. I just don't think we should delay teaching students about standard notation in favor of something completely abstract. Some of the youngest children may turn out to be all-stars in their Suzuki classes!
2. "Improvisation can play several valuable roles in the creative process" (pg. 255). In my experience with the synthesizer, I not only learned about the notes on the keyboard, I learned valuable concepts like melody, rhythm, timbre, meter, and harmony, just to name a few. Maybe I didn't know the name of these terms at such a young age. But somewhere deep in my brain and in my soul, I was completely aware of them. Whether children are improvising formally or informally, they will discover ideas from one another that will inspire them to be creative not only in music, but also in the other arts. Their brains might also develop to think about things differently in math and science. We know how valuable improvisation is because many of the greatest composers who ever lived were all well-trained in the art of improvisation. It is truly a tool that will help to develop the creative mind.
3. "Once children have a sense of the compositional process through creating aural plans, the use of notation can be introduced" (pg. 261). Although I strongly believe that the creation of aural plans can be an effective tool in getting students started to understand musical lines, I don't think that it's imperative that we teach them aural plans before the standard system of notation. I never learned about aural plans as a child. In fact, I can remember being taught the standard notation system at an early age, and I turned out okay. Please understand, I don't want to take away from their usefulness in the classroom. I've been very impressed with a lot of aural plans that I have seen. I just don't think we should delay teaching students about standard notation in favor of something completely abstract. Some of the youngest children may turn out to be all-stars in their Suzuki classes!
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
9/22/10 - 3 Points of Interest on Chapter 9
1. "The auditory sense develops early and is remarkably keen in most children" (pg. 223). I think it is fascinating that the auditory sense develops so early in children. I also think it is remarkable that as children, all five senses (hearing, touching, smelling, tasting, and seeing) seem to develop at different rates. It is wonderful to think that we have so many ways of comprehending the world around us. And through the ability to hear sounds, our brains can begin to map out sounds that go together and eventually assemble the sounds as "music." I truly feel sorry for those who are not able to ever have the ability to hear. A lot of children are born deaf, or with decreased capacities to hear certain sounds. Other children can only hear at a certain volume. Many will one day lose their hearing until they can hardly hear at all. As someone who enjoys his hearing and respects the ear, I think that all of us who have been blessed with the ability to hear should protect our hearing. This means watching how loud we listen to music, and making sure we are doing all we can to use proper noise-reducing ear-plugs and other devices.
2. "Young children from preschool through the age of eight are usually remarkably open to all kinds of music" (pg. 224). I think that there is a lot of truth in this statement. I remember being open to a lot of music during this period of my life. However, I strongly favored music that had a strong beat and was fun to listen to. I tended to shy away from classical music and really all of western concert music. I simply thought it was boring and was for older, intellectual people. I didn't really discover or like classical music until I was in high school. However, once I was old enough, I found this to be the more pleasing music (though I still love popular music). I think children in general will react to music that is fun, and easy to listen to.
3. "Active listening to recorded music means involving more than the ears and the mind" (pg. 228). I know that this is true, especially for the younger student just being introduced to music. For example, teaching aids always seem to be helpful to teach children music, especially if the music is hard or complex. For example, I really liked what Vanessa did at "The Music Settlement" the other day. I liked the "road map" she used to teach the students the main melody from "The Moldau." The kids really responded well to this activity, and they learned more about the phrasing of music. The kids even used movement to respond to the "peaks" and "valleys" of the music. Using these "active" techniques really helped the children to learn the music at a faster pace. I think it also will help them to recall the music in the future.
2. "Young children from preschool through the age of eight are usually remarkably open to all kinds of music" (pg. 224). I think that there is a lot of truth in this statement. I remember being open to a lot of music during this period of my life. However, I strongly favored music that had a strong beat and was fun to listen to. I tended to shy away from classical music and really all of western concert music. I simply thought it was boring and was for older, intellectual people. I didn't really discover or like classical music until I was in high school. However, once I was old enough, I found this to be the more pleasing music (though I still love popular music). I think children in general will react to music that is fun, and easy to listen to.
3. "Active listening to recorded music means involving more than the ears and the mind" (pg. 228). I know that this is true, especially for the younger student just being introduced to music. For example, teaching aids always seem to be helpful to teach children music, especially if the music is hard or complex. For example, I really liked what Vanessa did at "The Music Settlement" the other day. I liked the "road map" she used to teach the students the main melody from "The Moldau." The kids really responded well to this activity, and they learned more about the phrasing of music. The kids even used movement to respond to the "peaks" and "valleys" of the music. Using these "active" techniques really helped the children to learn the music at a faster pace. I think it also will help them to recall the music in the future.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
9/20/10 - 3 Points of Interest on Chapter 13
1. "Music teachers who anticipate a formal evaluation of their program and teaching need to be proactive in communicating their vision and clear goals to their administrator early in the school year" (pg. 328). Since I have never been a licensed teacher, this is a difficult one for me to respond on primarily because I lack practical experience. All I can comment on is what I have heard other (more experienced) colleagues say on the matter. There is a lot of chatter when it comes to a basic "disconnect" between teachers and their administrators. This disconnect has become quite apparent to me because so many teachers are always talking to one another and arguing about it! I'm almost pessimistic about my future experiences with administrators. This pessimism has been forged by years of overhearing students and teachers complain that the administration is "out of touch" with students' needs and with various visions certain teachers have from time to time. This is really something I could use your feedback on, and I look forward to discussing it in class.
2. "In many ways, music educators have always used authentic assessments, particularly of performance" (pg. 330). I have no problems with authentic assessments of performance, as long as they are done in private. In every level of band, (grade school, middle school, high school, college), teachers love to test students in front of their peers. I know for sure that many of these students were not able to perform as well as they would have liked due to the added pressure that was placed on them. But maybe there is something to be said for this method of assessment? After all, don't students need to be able to perform in front of their peers because part of being able to succeed in music revolves around one's ability to play effortlessly in front of people? I think this is a valid point, but I also think that they start testing kids in class too early. As a matter of fact, my 5th grade band teacher used to say, "After you are done with your test, come up to the grade book and see what grade you received. In fact, look and see what all the other kids got as well!" I found that to be a little much for 5th grade.
3. "Another way to involve students in real-world assessment in music is to have them critique the work of their peers. Teachers are often afraid to open to this possibility because they do not want children to be negative" (pg. 337). I think that, generally speaking, this is a positive way to assess students. It is always great to receive feedback from your peers, and I don't think that children are generally hurt by what others have to say. From time to time, there might be a negative comment here and there, but most mature children know how to be nice and give positive feedback that doesn't destroy an individual's self-esteem. This is a practice that I would use sparingly, however. I would also wait until the later years to employ it in the classroom. Younger students aren't as mature and more likely to say whatever is on their mind. This can often present a difficult situation for everyone involved because even though children are usually very honest, brutal honesty can be hurtful at a young age. I would try to teach my students to make positive, constructive statements. I would also teach them how to critique each other in positive, uplifting ways. (They do exist after all!)
2. "In many ways, music educators have always used authentic assessments, particularly of performance" (pg. 330). I have no problems with authentic assessments of performance, as long as they are done in private. In every level of band, (grade school, middle school, high school, college), teachers love to test students in front of their peers. I know for sure that many of these students were not able to perform as well as they would have liked due to the added pressure that was placed on them. But maybe there is something to be said for this method of assessment? After all, don't students need to be able to perform in front of their peers because part of being able to succeed in music revolves around one's ability to play effortlessly in front of people? I think this is a valid point, but I also think that they start testing kids in class too early. As a matter of fact, my 5th grade band teacher used to say, "After you are done with your test, come up to the grade book and see what grade you received. In fact, look and see what all the other kids got as well!" I found that to be a little much for 5th grade.
3. "Another way to involve students in real-world assessment in music is to have them critique the work of their peers. Teachers are often afraid to open to this possibility because they do not want children to be negative" (pg. 337). I think that, generally speaking, this is a positive way to assess students. It is always great to receive feedback from your peers, and I don't think that children are generally hurt by what others have to say. From time to time, there might be a negative comment here and there, but most mature children know how to be nice and give positive feedback that doesn't destroy an individual's self-esteem. This is a practice that I would use sparingly, however. I would also wait until the later years to employ it in the classroom. Younger students aren't as mature and more likely to say whatever is on their mind. This can often present a difficult situation for everyone involved because even though children are usually very honest, brutal honesty can be hurtful at a young age. I would try to teach my students to make positive, constructive statements. I would also teach them how to critique each other in positive, uplifting ways. (They do exist after all!)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)