1.) Is it always this difficult?
2.) Are lesson plans a guideline or law?
3.) Feeling discouraged.
1.) After reading this chapter it occurs to me that developing an entire curriculum is very hard and quite time consuming. I noticed that it takes a lot of planning and pro-activity to pull off a successful curriculum. One thing that I cannot get my head around is that I have been given the task to form an entire educational plan for children that I do not even know.
I feel that the skills to build a curriculum should be built up slowly and over a long period of time; hopefully starting in college. My greatest question is, does it ever get any easier to develop a curriculum.
Most concepts in life are made by growth; you start from nothing and eventually build upon mistakes and successes until something is made very simple. It seems to me that this rule should apply to curriculum design. But I see many obstacles to building upon successes.
With a constantly changing system of standards and expectations a curriculum must change with what our government or school district wants. Noticing that the outcomes of what students are to know by a certain time is always in flux, how can a curriculum ever be truly successful. My hope, and wish, is that I am able to create a type of curriculum that allows for my students to learn the maximum amount that their developmental ability allows them to.
2.)Another question that I came up with was that of the function of lesson plans. Are they to be taken as law or as guidelines. From experience I would say the latter is true, but the former also has merit to it.
A lesson plan can not take into account what happens in real time. It can only provide a basic structure for what is expected to happen. Because of this, I see the lesson plan as a blueprint that should be modified if it needs to be.
On the other hand a lesson plan has been specifically made for a certain class and needs to be kept to. If a teacher diverges away from their plan too much they might end up confusing their students and lose valuable time. A lesson plan is made to have a set amount of knowledge given, and any questions or interests should be held off until another lesson plan is developed to include them.
I realize that the statement I just made may seem harsh, but one has to remember that an interest for one person does not hold true for everyone else. In general, I am more for the belief that lesson plans are guidelines and are not set in stone. Yes, you must stick to specific things within the lesson plan, but the format and methods used in the lesson may be changed at will.
3.) I have been feeling very down recently because of lesson planning and designing a unit for music. I guess I never really saw how much impact I could really have on student's lives. I found that I have a lot of power that I am not sure I am ready for.
This power is one that controls what my students know and understand about music. This is very scary to me and I feel lost at times because I do not want to let my students down. I want them to be successful and have the best experiences that they can, and many times I do not feel like I am giving them it.
I guess that means that I am motivated to find the best way to teach children, but I feel very discouraged when I do not do a good job or I see a student struggling. One might say that my quest to try and educate every student is admirable. I, on the other hand, see it as a necessity.
I have been entrusted with the job to correctly teach students skills and techniques that will continually benefit them throughout their life time. I hope that there is a day when I can act more confident and allow my natural abilities to show and feel more comfortable in my teaching.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Chap 16 POI's Version 2.0
#1. The IEP in music
#2. Fair and equal music education
#3. The issue of time
#1: Last year I had to research a topic of my choice for my Ed. Psych. class. I chose to research the IEP or Individualized Education Plan. The IEP is a document that is given to a child who has issues learning that can be accommodated for. It is this accommodation that I find very hard to implement in a setting with many studies.
The statistics that I was able to gather show an alarming percentage of students attaining IEP's. While I think it is necessary to include all students in a classroom, it should not be at the sake of other students. I am fully aware of the benefits of talking louder, using bigger hand gestures, using PowerPoint, and overall techniques that help out students who have the IEP. But many of the methods used to help 'hindered' students do not help the academically advanced ones.
This brings me to point #2 of fair and equal music education. I do not think that there is a problem if one child learns slower than another. In fact, it has been that way for centuries. I do have a problem with sacrificing the education of academically gifted students for the sake of the students that need more help.
Again, I do see many benefits in more direct and clear teaching. But students who are gifted should be challenged and have the ability to explore and advance their knowledge with the complete attention of a teacher. I think that the IEP and other laws that have teachers spend a lot of time 'catering' to troubled student's needs keeps the academically advanced stagnant.
To be absolutely fair and equal, the education system should have some sort of an IEP for every single student, or abolish it altogether. If we want to create a society that ignores the academic elite, who have a high potential to benefit our society, then they must be educated with the same tenacity that we are trying to educate students who need a bit more help.
A simple solution would be to have the teacher take time and make individual tests for each student. This is my POI #3: the issue of time. A teacher is only paid for the time that the work in their building. A teacher does not get paid to go home and read essays, grade projects, and fill out report cards. Instead a teacher is paid for their time in the classroom.
I am aware that teaching is not about the money, and it should be about the love of education and watching children learn. But, it is still the time devoted by the teacher that will make their students successful. The problem is that there is not enough time to devote to every single student.
I am all for 'mainstreaming' and I am all for inclusion in the classroom, just not at the expense of learning. With the spike in IEP's and the No Child Left Behind, many children have been left behind. It is inevitable that some children will be, for the lack of a better term, screwed over by any type of education system.
I believe that a teacher must facilitate learning, and must facilitate learning to every student. Yet, there are many factors that are keeping the teachers of America from accomplishing that feat.
#2. Fair and equal music education
#3. The issue of time
#1: Last year I had to research a topic of my choice for my Ed. Psych. class. I chose to research the IEP or Individualized Education Plan. The IEP is a document that is given to a child who has issues learning that can be accommodated for. It is this accommodation that I find very hard to implement in a setting with many studies.
The statistics that I was able to gather show an alarming percentage of students attaining IEP's. While I think it is necessary to include all students in a classroom, it should not be at the sake of other students. I am fully aware of the benefits of talking louder, using bigger hand gestures, using PowerPoint, and overall techniques that help out students who have the IEP. But many of the methods used to help 'hindered' students do not help the academically advanced ones.
This brings me to point #2 of fair and equal music education. I do not think that there is a problem if one child learns slower than another. In fact, it has been that way for centuries. I do have a problem with sacrificing the education of academically gifted students for the sake of the students that need more help.
Again, I do see many benefits in more direct and clear teaching. But students who are gifted should be challenged and have the ability to explore and advance their knowledge with the complete attention of a teacher. I think that the IEP and other laws that have teachers spend a lot of time 'catering' to troubled student's needs keeps the academically advanced stagnant.
To be absolutely fair and equal, the education system should have some sort of an IEP for every single student, or abolish it altogether. If we want to create a society that ignores the academic elite, who have a high potential to benefit our society, then they must be educated with the same tenacity that we are trying to educate students who need a bit more help.
A simple solution would be to have the teacher take time and make individual tests for each student. This is my POI #3: the issue of time. A teacher is only paid for the time that the work in their building. A teacher does not get paid to go home and read essays, grade projects, and fill out report cards. Instead a teacher is paid for their time in the classroom.
I am aware that teaching is not about the money, and it should be about the love of education and watching children learn. But, it is still the time devoted by the teacher that will make their students successful. The problem is that there is not enough time to devote to every single student.
I am all for 'mainstreaming' and I am all for inclusion in the classroom, just not at the expense of learning. With the spike in IEP's and the No Child Left Behind, many children have been left behind. It is inevitable that some children will be, for the lack of a better term, screwed over by any type of education system.
I believe that a teacher must facilitate learning, and must facilitate learning to every student. Yet, there are many factors that are keeping the teachers of America from accomplishing that feat.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Chosky on Kodaly Reading 3 POI's
POI #1. The hand symbols.
There are many reasons why these hand symbols are pedagogic gifts. On that I find most intriguing is that they can take on a religious form. When I observed at a private Christian school last semester, I noticed a poster on one of the walls in the music room. The poster contained all of the hand symbols, but each was associated with a specific aspect of Christianity.
The Do symbol represented God, as he is the foundation of everything as well as what everyone should serve. Therefor he is the base and the top of life, just as Do is always tonic. In addition, Do was elongated for Do(minus) the Latin for master.
While I do not remember the other hand symbols specifically, I do remember that all of the children used them. Outside of religion, I think that the hand symbols are a great tool for solfege. Each symbol shows the function of the note that is being used. Si or Ti points up to Do, where it will inevitably resolve. Also La sits atop Sol, as it does in a harmonic setting. I think it is a great way to teach many concepts to young and older children alike.
POI #2: Childhood development.
I found Kodaly's views on education the child based on their developmental stage very interesting; yet some how I do not think that I would use it in my classroom.
I understand why Kodaly does this. I am aware that when subjects are related to events and happenings that are more familiar with a students that they learn it quicker. However, I feel that this method does not allow a child to broaden their horizons.
I think that a child will always relate what they know to what they will learn, so when it comes time to teach a new subject or to introduce them to a new topic, it is okay to approach it from a more mature standpoint.
Of course, more complex material such as counterpoint or improvisation over chord changes will not be brought up with young students. I am not saying that all children should be taught like they are mini adults. I am only suggesting that sometimes it is okay to not teach to the child. Sometimes it is okay to teach from a more intellectual standpoint.
POI #3 Quality.
Yes! Yes! Yes! I am not sure about how much emphasis Kodaly actually put on quality, but I think it is very important to have students experience quality music all of the time.
It is important for students to hear quality music because, well, it is quality music. There is a reason why it should be listened to. It was practiced, perfected, and performed to the highest caliber. Students should have the opportunity to listen, watch, and participate with high level players so their experience is quality.
Players that listen, in my opinion, trump those that only play. Once a player learns to listen for tone, articulation, style, dynamics, or phrasing, they are now connecting themselves with an ensemble and not individuals. When a student hears a piece that is performed by an ensemble that has performed a piece of music accurately, it is imperative that they listen.
Once the child hears this piece, they will gain insight to tone, blend, and most importantly music. I think that Kodaly wanted quality music for his students because of how much a musician can learn from listening and not just from performing.
There are many reasons why these hand symbols are pedagogic gifts. On that I find most intriguing is that they can take on a religious form. When I observed at a private Christian school last semester, I noticed a poster on one of the walls in the music room. The poster contained all of the hand symbols, but each was associated with a specific aspect of Christianity.
The Do symbol represented God, as he is the foundation of everything as well as what everyone should serve. Therefor he is the base and the top of life, just as Do is always tonic. In addition, Do was elongated for Do(minus) the Latin for master.
While I do not remember the other hand symbols specifically, I do remember that all of the children used them. Outside of religion, I think that the hand symbols are a great tool for solfege. Each symbol shows the function of the note that is being used. Si or Ti points up to Do, where it will inevitably resolve. Also La sits atop Sol, as it does in a harmonic setting. I think it is a great way to teach many concepts to young and older children alike.
POI #2: Childhood development.
I found Kodaly's views on education the child based on their developmental stage very interesting; yet some how I do not think that I would use it in my classroom.
I understand why Kodaly does this. I am aware that when subjects are related to events and happenings that are more familiar with a students that they learn it quicker. However, I feel that this method does not allow a child to broaden their horizons.
I think that a child will always relate what they know to what they will learn, so when it comes time to teach a new subject or to introduce them to a new topic, it is okay to approach it from a more mature standpoint.
Of course, more complex material such as counterpoint or improvisation over chord changes will not be brought up with young students. I am not saying that all children should be taught like they are mini adults. I am only suggesting that sometimes it is okay to not teach to the child. Sometimes it is okay to teach from a more intellectual standpoint.
POI #3 Quality.
Yes! Yes! Yes! I am not sure about how much emphasis Kodaly actually put on quality, but I think it is very important to have students experience quality music all of the time.
It is important for students to hear quality music because, well, it is quality music. There is a reason why it should be listened to. It was practiced, perfected, and performed to the highest caliber. Students should have the opportunity to listen, watch, and participate with high level players so their experience is quality.
Players that listen, in my opinion, trump those that only play. Once a player learns to listen for tone, articulation, style, dynamics, or phrasing, they are now connecting themselves with an ensemble and not individuals. When a student hears a piece that is performed by an ensemble that has performed a piece of music accurately, it is imperative that they listen.
Once the child hears this piece, they will gain insight to tone, blend, and most importantly music. I think that Kodaly wanted quality music for his students because of how much a musician can learn from listening and not just from performing.
More Than Mere Movement POI's
POI #1: "The body was conscious of the life and the movement of the music."
This is a quote that I found quite intriguing, and I have no idea why. There is so much that can be said about this statement that it bewilders me. I think that this quote was why Dalcroze came up with eurythmics. Because the body inherently moves, and reacts to music, it must be utilized in conjunction with it.
The other part of this quote that really gets to me is the term life. Music has life. I think that as musicians that we consider music to have a motion, a certain flow or direction to it. I do not think that music is usually thought of as having life. Having life, or being alive, means breathing, interacting, and communicating. Music does all of these things.
Just as our body is conscious to other forms of life, it is also tuned to music. Dalcroze was able to see this connection that the human body has with music and sought to utilize it. This may be the answer as to why I think that this quote is so amazing. It is because the human body is able to experience music the same way as it experience love, hate, and jealousy.
POI #2: An 'inner' sense of music.
Until I took eurythmics, I never thought that I had poor rhythm. I have been holding down bass lines for years before I took my first class. While I was able to maintain a steady rhythm for my ensembles, I had not really found a way to keep a steady rhythm in general. It is eurythmics' goal to develop an inner sense of music in its' students.
This inner sense of music needs many facets to grow. It needs rhythm, tonality, silence, pulse, and energy. When it comes to having good timing, one cannot forget the other facets of music. You have a rhythm, what is its' tonality, its' pulse or energy? What about when the rhythm isn't playing. Eurythmics makes you hone in on skills that develop a full musical sense.
When a musician is able to have an innate musical sense, that is, a musical sense that he does not have to tap into manually, true musicianship can occur. I sincerely feel that this was Dalcroze's purpose. He wanted music students to learn the most basic concepts of music; rhythm, tonality, pulse, silence, and energy. When the student learns these concepts until they are automatic, he will perform his art at a higher quality. His musical sense can take over, allowing a for a better performance.
POI #3: Where's Dalcroze???
This article has made me wonder why a Dalcroze approach is not as popular in an early education setting as say Kodaly or Orff. Why is it that I have seen books dedicated to a combination of Orff and Gordon, but no mention of Dalcroze.
I notice many similarities with Kodaly and Dalcroze in the way that they relate music to their students. Dalcroze chose to educate the inherent musicality of the human body, and Kodaly chose to educate the specific student. While this may seem different, it is not. Both of these styles play to the strengths of the student.
I do understand that Dalcroze is taught, but why is his method not used as popularly as the others? Also, why is it so hard to get certified as a Dalcroze instructor, but a bit simpler to be Orff certified? I am not sure if this last question is true, but it does seem to me that there are far more Orff specialized teacher rather than Dalcroze.
I wish that this could change. I believe that Dalcroze hit the nail on the head when he started to educate the innate characteristic of humanity, music.
This is a quote that I found quite intriguing, and I have no idea why. There is so much that can be said about this statement that it bewilders me. I think that this quote was why Dalcroze came up with eurythmics. Because the body inherently moves, and reacts to music, it must be utilized in conjunction with it.
The other part of this quote that really gets to me is the term life. Music has life. I think that as musicians that we consider music to have a motion, a certain flow or direction to it. I do not think that music is usually thought of as having life. Having life, or being alive, means breathing, interacting, and communicating. Music does all of these things.
Just as our body is conscious to other forms of life, it is also tuned to music. Dalcroze was able to see this connection that the human body has with music and sought to utilize it. This may be the answer as to why I think that this quote is so amazing. It is because the human body is able to experience music the same way as it experience love, hate, and jealousy.
POI #2: An 'inner' sense of music.
Until I took eurythmics, I never thought that I had poor rhythm. I have been holding down bass lines for years before I took my first class. While I was able to maintain a steady rhythm for my ensembles, I had not really found a way to keep a steady rhythm in general. It is eurythmics' goal to develop an inner sense of music in its' students.
This inner sense of music needs many facets to grow. It needs rhythm, tonality, silence, pulse, and energy. When it comes to having good timing, one cannot forget the other facets of music. You have a rhythm, what is its' tonality, its' pulse or energy? What about when the rhythm isn't playing. Eurythmics makes you hone in on skills that develop a full musical sense.
When a musician is able to have an innate musical sense, that is, a musical sense that he does not have to tap into manually, true musicianship can occur. I sincerely feel that this was Dalcroze's purpose. He wanted music students to learn the most basic concepts of music; rhythm, tonality, pulse, silence, and energy. When the student learns these concepts until they are automatic, he will perform his art at a higher quality. His musical sense can take over, allowing a for a better performance.
POI #3: Where's Dalcroze???
This article has made me wonder why a Dalcroze approach is not as popular in an early education setting as say Kodaly or Orff. Why is it that I have seen books dedicated to a combination of Orff and Gordon, but no mention of Dalcroze.
I notice many similarities with Kodaly and Dalcroze in the way that they relate music to their students. Dalcroze chose to educate the inherent musicality of the human body, and Kodaly chose to educate the specific student. While this may seem different, it is not. Both of these styles play to the strengths of the student.
I do understand that Dalcroze is taught, but why is his method not used as popularly as the others? Also, why is it so hard to get certified as a Dalcroze instructor, but a bit simpler to be Orff certified? I am not sure if this last question is true, but it does seem to me that there are far more Orff specialized teacher rather than Dalcroze.
I wish that this could change. I believe that Dalcroze hit the nail on the head when he started to educate the innate characteristic of humanity, music.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Together in Harmony 3 Points of Interest
POI 1: What a teacher's job really is.
I was a bit upset to read Gordon's theory on music aptitude. Gordon theorizes that all humans a born with a predisposed aptitude towards music. He goes on to say that after nine years old, a person's music aptitude remains stable and does not change. Therefor we should try and increase the music aptitude of children when they can be molded.
The reason this upsets me is because this takes a teacher out of the equation. Secondary school teachers are the inherently useless if the aptitude of their students is fixed. The goal of a teacher is to help their students surpass their predisposed expectations and further them academically, socially, and intellectually.
I feel that all humans have a music sense that is embedded within our DNA. Because of this inherent sense, we will continually work with music and continue to watch it grow as an art form. It does not matter what a students aptitude is to music, a teachers goal is the same, to help that student understand how music will affect their life.
POI 2: Where was Dalcroze?
I like the fact that Diane Lange decided to combine the strongest aspects of both Orff and Gordon, but I feel that she left out Dalcroze in her combination. From personal experience, I can say that taking a Dalcroze Eurythmics class has been essential to my musicianship. I see no reason that it should be left out of any teaching strategy.
I understand that both Gordon and Orff have very similar styles in their teaching. They both seem to highlight the same strength in children. I feel that a Dalcroze approach should have been taken into account because of the skills that it tries to hone in with students.
Maybe I am a bit biased when it comes to Eurythmics, but I have seen the benefits of it very quickly. How I approach many of the 'beginning' aspects of music has changed. I am much more aware of space in relation to time as well as pulse (the music's and my own). I think that if a Dalcroze approach were added to this philosophy that it could only be made stronger.
POI 3: A bit extreme.
I am no expert in what should me taught musically in our schools. I do have my own thoughts on what a general music class should teach children about music. My own thoughts are geared more towards music as a function of life (clapping, singing folk songs, personal enjoyment); I see Lange's purpose geared more towards a professional career.
The things that she wants to teach students in a general music class are things that I first learned when I expressed and interest in a musical career. I am not sure if she wants to breed musicians or just very talented humans. Either way, I feel that she is covering some very complex things that may be better being saved for a later date.
I understand that I am not a leading expert on pedagogy, but I am a musician and an educator and I feel that there is a natural progression to teaching children. For instance, I would never teach an altissimo fingering on the sax to a student in my band. You will never see a note the requires an altissimo fingering unless you are dealing with advanced solo repertoire or advanced chamber music.
There would be no need for a student, who joins band for credit, to learn this. While it would be very nice for him to learn it, it would make more sense to further his education in something that he would benefit more from.
There is a series of teaching. It goes from simple to complex. That is why you learn algebra before calculus and root position chords before inverted secondary dominant chords. I feel that Lange is giving her students too much information for their age to handle. Again, I am no expert, but I feel that she is really trying to educate her students beyond what they can handle.
I was a bit upset to read Gordon's theory on music aptitude. Gordon theorizes that all humans a born with a predisposed aptitude towards music. He goes on to say that after nine years old, a person's music aptitude remains stable and does not change. Therefor we should try and increase the music aptitude of children when they can be molded.
The reason this upsets me is because this takes a teacher out of the equation. Secondary school teachers are the inherently useless if the aptitude of their students is fixed. The goal of a teacher is to help their students surpass their predisposed expectations and further them academically, socially, and intellectually.
I feel that all humans have a music sense that is embedded within our DNA. Because of this inherent sense, we will continually work with music and continue to watch it grow as an art form. It does not matter what a students aptitude is to music, a teachers goal is the same, to help that student understand how music will affect their life.
POI 2: Where was Dalcroze?
I like the fact that Diane Lange decided to combine the strongest aspects of both Orff and Gordon, but I feel that she left out Dalcroze in her combination. From personal experience, I can say that taking a Dalcroze Eurythmics class has been essential to my musicianship. I see no reason that it should be left out of any teaching strategy.
I understand that both Gordon and Orff have very similar styles in their teaching. They both seem to highlight the same strength in children. I feel that a Dalcroze approach should have been taken into account because of the skills that it tries to hone in with students.
Maybe I am a bit biased when it comes to Eurythmics, but I have seen the benefits of it very quickly. How I approach many of the 'beginning' aspects of music has changed. I am much more aware of space in relation to time as well as pulse (the music's and my own). I think that if a Dalcroze approach were added to this philosophy that it could only be made stronger.
POI 3: A bit extreme.
I am no expert in what should me taught musically in our schools. I do have my own thoughts on what a general music class should teach children about music. My own thoughts are geared more towards music as a function of life (clapping, singing folk songs, personal enjoyment); I see Lange's purpose geared more towards a professional career.
The things that she wants to teach students in a general music class are things that I first learned when I expressed and interest in a musical career. I am not sure if she wants to breed musicians or just very talented humans. Either way, I feel that she is covering some very complex things that may be better being saved for a later date.
I understand that I am not a leading expert on pedagogy, but I am a musician and an educator and I feel that there is a natural progression to teaching children. For instance, I would never teach an altissimo fingering on the sax to a student in my band. You will never see a note the requires an altissimo fingering unless you are dealing with advanced solo repertoire or advanced chamber music.
There would be no need for a student, who joins band for credit, to learn this. While it would be very nice for him to learn it, it would make more sense to further his education in something that he would benefit more from.
There is a series of teaching. It goes from simple to complex. That is why you learn algebra before calculus and root position chords before inverted secondary dominant chords. I feel that Lange is giving her students too much information for their age to handle. Again, I am no expert, but I feel that she is really trying to educate her students beyond what they can handle.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Chapter 10 Pointes of Interest
POI #1: Too much creative freedom.
Having your students be able to explore is a wonderful thing. Giving them the chance to invent and improvise is truly amazing. However I believe that it is only so fantastic up to a certain point. I think of creating as a bell curve. A student should be allowed the right amount of creativity to perform as best they can. Otherwise too little creativity will create a mundane performance whereas too much may muddle what concepts need to get across to an audience member.
A few examples of this are; improvising out of key, not keeping the proper tonality, playing instruments in new ways that make them sound poor or not at all, or not following proper form to where a piece becomes inaccurate and historically wrong.
I feel that it is important to allow children to use their creativity, just as long as they retain their musical aspects. If the composition starts to turn from a round into a chaconne, do not call the piece around. You must explain to the student that they have now created a new piece that is different from a round. If a student starts to play an instrument incorrectly, it must be fixed so their musicality does not suffer. Sometimes I see teachers allowing too much freedom with their students to a point where their musicality is affected greatly.
POI #2 Crossing into other academia
I feel that creating obviously open the door to crossing content boundaries. Children may want to make up their own movements to dance or their won pictures to music. They may relate pieces to aspects of history or places that they have been. I think that having your students thinking "outside the box" about music will help them in the long run.
Fantasia is a perfect example of music and art together. Disney animators do a wonderful job of showing the music with their art. Their art also does not take away from the magnificence of the music. It combines to mediums into a wonderful piece of work. The first was so successful that they made another one in 2000 aptly named Fantasia 2000. I highly recommend these movies to anyone who has an appreciation of art and music.
POI #3: Making instruments
I love this, I absolutely love this. Making instruments is a wonderful way for students to start to understand how sound works. Making instruments shows students different aspects of instruments that they might miss. This could include the finger holes with different pitches, the resonating chambers of guitars and stringed instruments, or the vibrations of cymbals.
Having students explore by creating instruments allows them to understand concepts that sometimes do not get taught in a school setting. If a teacher can utilize how to make instruments, they can easily have more educated students. As long as the teacher is willing to explain how and why instruments make sounds, their students will start to realize how the "real" instruments that they play function.
Claire de Lune (deleted scene from Fantasia)
Having your students be able to explore is a wonderful thing. Giving them the chance to invent and improvise is truly amazing. However I believe that it is only so fantastic up to a certain point. I think of creating as a bell curve. A student should be allowed the right amount of creativity to perform as best they can. Otherwise too little creativity will create a mundane performance whereas too much may muddle what concepts need to get across to an audience member.
A few examples of this are; improvising out of key, not keeping the proper tonality, playing instruments in new ways that make them sound poor or not at all, or not following proper form to where a piece becomes inaccurate and historically wrong.
I feel that it is important to allow children to use their creativity, just as long as they retain their musical aspects. If the composition starts to turn from a round into a chaconne, do not call the piece around. You must explain to the student that they have now created a new piece that is different from a round. If a student starts to play an instrument incorrectly, it must be fixed so their musicality does not suffer. Sometimes I see teachers allowing too much freedom with their students to a point where their musicality is affected greatly.
POI #2 Crossing into other academia
I feel that creating obviously open the door to crossing content boundaries. Children may want to make up their own movements to dance or their won pictures to music. They may relate pieces to aspects of history or places that they have been. I think that having your students thinking "outside the box" about music will help them in the long run.
Fantasia is a perfect example of music and art together. Disney animators do a wonderful job of showing the music with their art. Their art also does not take away from the magnificence of the music. It combines to mediums into a wonderful piece of work. The first was so successful that they made another one in 2000 aptly named Fantasia 2000. I highly recommend these movies to anyone who has an appreciation of art and music.
POI #3: Making instruments
I love this, I absolutely love this. Making instruments is a wonderful way for students to start to understand how sound works. Making instruments shows students different aspects of instruments that they might miss. This could include the finger holes with different pitches, the resonating chambers of guitars and stringed instruments, or the vibrations of cymbals.
Having students explore by creating instruments allows them to understand concepts that sometimes do not get taught in a school setting. If a teacher can utilize how to make instruments, they can easily have more educated students. As long as the teacher is willing to explain how and why instruments make sounds, their students will start to realize how the "real" instruments that they play function.
Claire de Lune (deleted scene from Fantasia)
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Chapter 9 POI"s
POI #1: Listening for Complexity.
I was very confused by this concept. More clearly defined in the book as humans are drawn to complexity. I would actually tend to disagree with this statement. I would argue the exact opposite and that humans are drawn to the more simplistic.
As a human race our goal has been to simplify everything. Inventions like the wheel, paper, and ramps, have made very difficult tasks far easier to accomplish. I believe that this characteristic carries over to music. I see it in the fact that a human can perform music alone with only their voice and body.
In my opinion, music that is too complex loses its appeal and therefor loses its audience. I am for teaching children about more complex music, but basing it off the fact that humans are drawn to complexity, I feel, is wrong.
POI #2: Active Listening
I have grown to love active listening. I think it is a great tool to have in your back pocket as a teacher. There are just so many activities that you can do with active listening that it can be put into any curriculum with a great amount of ease.
Another wonderful thing about active listening is how easily it enables as cross curricular opportunity. Without going into too many specifics, I feel that having students develop a sense for active listening will enable them to focus themselves in other areas. When a students must listen for a specific pattern or dynamic or even an instrument, you give listening a purpose rather than for just enjoyment.
This skill will prepare students if they will have a future in professional music. Being able to hear a seventh rubbing against an octave or being able to pick out the slightly out of tune trumpet. Developing the active listening skill now will prepare a student to be a fantastic musician.
POI #3: A POI Inspired by Chapter 9
I have always been curious why certain songs and keys evoke the emotions that they do. I have surmised that there is something aurally special about certain keys and phrases that make this so. Over the summer I was trying to determine why some of this truth was so evident in the musical world.
For instance, the key of C minor has been considered a very dark key. If you wrote in C minor you meant business. For some reason when a composer wants to write in a fashion that depicts triumph or agony or melancholy, C minor seemed to be the key of preference.
Another example is the key of F minor. Again this key is very popular among many jazz standards as well as many British tunes. Holst's Second Suite in F utilizes the power of F minor frequently. Adding the 7th to a F minor triad creates such a wonderful pull that when many jazz players improvise they play it.
I am still unsure as to why this appreciation or drive to use certain keys to evoke certain emotions . It may very well be a human instinct just like the pull to the number three. But I am sure that certain keys, phrases, rhythmic patters, and timbres are more comforting and appealing to every human ear.
I was very confused by this concept. More clearly defined in the book as humans are drawn to complexity. I would actually tend to disagree with this statement. I would argue the exact opposite and that humans are drawn to the more simplistic.
As a human race our goal has been to simplify everything. Inventions like the wheel, paper, and ramps, have made very difficult tasks far easier to accomplish. I believe that this characteristic carries over to music. I see it in the fact that a human can perform music alone with only their voice and body.
In my opinion, music that is too complex loses its appeal and therefor loses its audience. I am for teaching children about more complex music, but basing it off the fact that humans are drawn to complexity, I feel, is wrong.
POI #2: Active Listening
I have grown to love active listening. I think it is a great tool to have in your back pocket as a teacher. There are just so many activities that you can do with active listening that it can be put into any curriculum with a great amount of ease.
Another wonderful thing about active listening is how easily it enables as cross curricular opportunity. Without going into too many specifics, I feel that having students develop a sense for active listening will enable them to focus themselves in other areas. When a students must listen for a specific pattern or dynamic or even an instrument, you give listening a purpose rather than for just enjoyment.
This skill will prepare students if they will have a future in professional music. Being able to hear a seventh rubbing against an octave or being able to pick out the slightly out of tune trumpet. Developing the active listening skill now will prepare a student to be a fantastic musician.
POI #3: A POI Inspired by Chapter 9
I have always been curious why certain songs and keys evoke the emotions that they do. I have surmised that there is something aurally special about certain keys and phrases that make this so. Over the summer I was trying to determine why some of this truth was so evident in the musical world.
For instance, the key of C minor has been considered a very dark key. If you wrote in C minor you meant business. For some reason when a composer wants to write in a fashion that depicts triumph or agony or melancholy, C minor seemed to be the key of preference.
Another example is the key of F minor. Again this key is very popular among many jazz standards as well as many British tunes. Holst's Second Suite in F utilizes the power of F minor frequently. Adding the 7th to a F minor triad creates such a wonderful pull that when many jazz players improvise they play it.
I am still unsure as to why this appreciation or drive to use certain keys to evoke certain emotions . It may very well be a human instinct just like the pull to the number three. But I am sure that certain keys, phrases, rhythmic patters, and timbres are more comforting and appealing to every human ear.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Chapter 13 Points of Interest
Assessment
POI #1: Assessing students at the start of their musical program.
I agree with this view very much so. I would say that assessing your students as soon as possible is the key factor in having a successful musical career. Assessment is a surefire way to notice flaws and praise success.
I love the fact that you can start assessment early on in the musical development of the student. I think a difference that needs to be distinguished between assessment and nitpicking. It is important that one assess their students and does not nitpick. Assessment is done with the goal of improvement in mine. Nitpicking is done to point out flaws, no matter how minor they are.
Students should not be nitpicked, because then there will be no self confidence instilled in the child. If a student is assessed their are learning how to identify issues that are not up to a standard. It is now about how badly a student is doing, but how much success they are having.
POI #2 Continuous assessment
This POI stuck out to me because I feel that assessment should always be continuous because assessment can never stop. It is the goal of the musician to convey their emotions through their music, as it is a dancer's job to show their thoughts through their dance, or an artist through his canvas. If you are to continually grow as a musician, you cannot stop thinking about how to improve, and you will continually assess yourself.
The section that I got this POI from was teacher assessment of students. Again if you want your band to improve and grow you need to continually assess it. In addition you also need to continually asses yourself as a teacher. I do not see why a teacher would stop assessing themselves let alone their students.
I love finding new ways of teaching subjects to children, and I find that I need to asses myself more often than I assess my students. Because my students learn from me, I need to make sure that I am on the top of my game so that they can be on the top of theirs.
POI #3 The children talked about in the chapter.
I got the impression that this chapter was focusing more on students in a high school setting. Many of the questions that should be used to help children perform higher thinking seemed geared to those children who have an understanding of music history in the context of a high school education.
For instance, interpretation of a piece of music feels like a more suited idea for an older students who is able to comprehend the slightly confusing history of the war of the roses. Justifying a choice also seems like an idea suited for the high school classroom. Again I feel that a well rounded knowledge base is needed to answer the questions posed.
However, I may be talking myself into a hole. I have not tried to ask a child to devise their own criteria for performance or to identify key ideas when they compose a piece of music. Maybe I am a bit naive in thinking that an elementary student cannot answer these questions. But, I feel that these types of questions need to be posed when a student has a stronger grasp of music, one that comes from experience and not one from a classroom.
Lang Lang on an iPad
POI #1: Assessing students at the start of their musical program.
I agree with this view very much so. I would say that assessing your students as soon as possible is the key factor in having a successful musical career. Assessment is a surefire way to notice flaws and praise success.
I love the fact that you can start assessment early on in the musical development of the student. I think a difference that needs to be distinguished between assessment and nitpicking. It is important that one assess their students and does not nitpick. Assessment is done with the goal of improvement in mine. Nitpicking is done to point out flaws, no matter how minor they are.
Students should not be nitpicked, because then there will be no self confidence instilled in the child. If a student is assessed their are learning how to identify issues that are not up to a standard. It is now about how badly a student is doing, but how much success they are having.
POI #2 Continuous assessment
This POI stuck out to me because I feel that assessment should always be continuous because assessment can never stop. It is the goal of the musician to convey their emotions through their music, as it is a dancer's job to show their thoughts through their dance, or an artist through his canvas. If you are to continually grow as a musician, you cannot stop thinking about how to improve, and you will continually assess yourself.
The section that I got this POI from was teacher assessment of students. Again if you want your band to improve and grow you need to continually assess it. In addition you also need to continually asses yourself as a teacher. I do not see why a teacher would stop assessing themselves let alone their students.
I love finding new ways of teaching subjects to children, and I find that I need to asses myself more often than I assess my students. Because my students learn from me, I need to make sure that I am on the top of my game so that they can be on the top of theirs.
POI #3 The children talked about in the chapter.
I got the impression that this chapter was focusing more on students in a high school setting. Many of the questions that should be used to help children perform higher thinking seemed geared to those children who have an understanding of music history in the context of a high school education.
For instance, interpretation of a piece of music feels like a more suited idea for an older students who is able to comprehend the slightly confusing history of the war of the roses. Justifying a choice also seems like an idea suited for the high school classroom. Again I feel that a well rounded knowledge base is needed to answer the questions posed.
However, I may be talking myself into a hole. I have not tried to ask a child to devise their own criteria for performance or to identify key ideas when they compose a piece of music. Maybe I am a bit naive in thinking that an elementary student cannot answer these questions. But, I feel that these types of questions need to be posed when a student has a stronger grasp of music, one that comes from experience and not one from a classroom.
Lang Lang on an iPad
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Chapter 8 Points of Interest
The Playing Child
The first point of interest was the section about the body as a percussion instrument. I really like this section because it is very hopeful. Something that everyone must remember that we can lose everything, including our voice, and we can still make music with our bodies. I think this is such a great concept and I love that kids are encouraged to explore their musical talents this way.
One of my simple goals as a teacher is for kids to clap to a steady beat. This is a necessary life skill. You look foolish if you cannot clap correctly to a piece of music, and even more foolish if you do it when everyone is clapping correctly. Having my students start to clap early helps them understand a kinesthetic beat.
Furthermore one of my favorite art forms is stepping. Stepping requires to make the beat and rhythm up with your body. It is very cool to watch when done well. Another art form that I found that comes from this is called 'hambone'. Again, one must create a beat and rhythm with their own body. Very cool.
The second and third points of interests are the sections on the different instruments, pitched and non pitched. I was intrigued by how similar and different these two types of instruments really are. Because non pitched instruments tend to dwell in the percussion (hence why it is called percussion) class of instrument. This grouping separates these instruments from those who chose to play a wind or string instrument. This cannot happen.
It is necessary for students to understand the concepts of non pitched instruments so they can focus on rhythm and not different notes. Non pitched instruments takes out a hard concept that some students struggle with. Another thing that non pitched instruments do it put everyone on the same playing field. What I mean by this is, no one has an instrument that makes the the stereotype of the band. No one is bass line or melody, they are all just rhythm. This is also necessary for many different reasons; a big one being ego breaking.
However it is also necessary to teach pitched instruments so students can differentiate pitches and develop a good sense of tonality and texture. Again percussionists are usually shunned from this category because they start on non pitched instruments. Where there are cons to pitched instruments there are also pros.
Having every instrument assigned to a student gives that student a certain job. This teaches responsibility and self confidence in a job well done. Also pitched instruments develop and ear for tone, color, and timbre. These qualities are but a few of things that make great pitched instrument players.
I do realize that I left out harmony instruments. And while I do see a need for them, I was wondering why you cannot teach harmony with the single pitched instruments. I am not saying that we should get rid of pitched instruments, but I wonder if we can teach harmony without them. However, every child should be acquainted with a piano and know how to find noted on one. That is a necessary skill.
Tallie Brinson (Stepping starts at 50 seconds)
Steve Hickman & Matthew Olwell (Hambone)
The first point of interest was the section about the body as a percussion instrument. I really like this section because it is very hopeful. Something that everyone must remember that we can lose everything, including our voice, and we can still make music with our bodies. I think this is such a great concept and I love that kids are encouraged to explore their musical talents this way.
One of my simple goals as a teacher is for kids to clap to a steady beat. This is a necessary life skill. You look foolish if you cannot clap correctly to a piece of music, and even more foolish if you do it when everyone is clapping correctly. Having my students start to clap early helps them understand a kinesthetic beat.
Furthermore one of my favorite art forms is stepping. Stepping requires to make the beat and rhythm up with your body. It is very cool to watch when done well. Another art form that I found that comes from this is called 'hambone'. Again, one must create a beat and rhythm with their own body. Very cool.
The second and third points of interests are the sections on the different instruments, pitched and non pitched. I was intrigued by how similar and different these two types of instruments really are. Because non pitched instruments tend to dwell in the percussion (hence why it is called percussion) class of instrument. This grouping separates these instruments from those who chose to play a wind or string instrument. This cannot happen.
It is necessary for students to understand the concepts of non pitched instruments so they can focus on rhythm and not different notes. Non pitched instruments takes out a hard concept that some students struggle with. Another thing that non pitched instruments do it put everyone on the same playing field. What I mean by this is, no one has an instrument that makes the the stereotype of the band. No one is bass line or melody, they are all just rhythm. This is also necessary for many different reasons; a big one being ego breaking.
However it is also necessary to teach pitched instruments so students can differentiate pitches and develop a good sense of tonality and texture. Again percussionists are usually shunned from this category because they start on non pitched instruments. Where there are cons to pitched instruments there are also pros.
Having every instrument assigned to a student gives that student a certain job. This teaches responsibility and self confidence in a job well done. Also pitched instruments develop and ear for tone, color, and timbre. These qualities are but a few of things that make great pitched instrument players.
I do realize that I left out harmony instruments. And while I do see a need for them, I was wondering why you cannot teach harmony with the single pitched instruments. I am not saying that we should get rid of pitched instruments, but I wonder if we can teach harmony without them. However, every child should be acquainted with a piano and know how to find noted on one. That is a necessary skill.
Tallie Brinson (Stepping starts at 50 seconds)
Steve Hickman & Matthew Olwell (Hambone)
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Chapter 16 Points of Interest
This chapter covered a very controversial issue for many teachers. Exceptional Children.
My first point of interest comes from a line that starts the section on identifying exceptional children. "Although it may be said that on some level every child is exceptional, with unique abilities and needs, current practice defines exceptional children as "those whole require special education and related services if they are to realize their full human potential (Hallahan and Kauffman, 2000, p. 7).
This quote bothers me because it leaves a lot to be desired. As an educator I want to know what an exceptional child is. This definition makes me confused by using the term 'special education' and 'full human potential'. I think that every child is exceptional and should be specially educated so they can achieve their full human potential. I do not think that this definition is correct at all.
The one point I would like to get across (to stop myself from writing a philosophic epic) is that even if every child is not a 'exceptional child' they should be taught as if they are. If the goal of teaching exceptional children is to help them reach their full human potential then every child should be taught as if they are exceptional.
The IEP and music also caught my eye. For my educational psychology class I wrote an essay on the IEP in our schools and its effects. I found that the number of students who attain an IEP has skyrocketed since the installment of the IEP. This is why I think that the IEP should be done with.
The IEP was meant to help both the student and teacher. The student would get the appropriate help that they needed and the teacher was given the exact parameters of the student's needs. While the IEP does accomplish this, it has been heavily abused.
Many students obtain an IEP but, do not show a specific deficiency in which they would actually need an IEP for. Some of my research showed that while the number of students with IEP's increased in major cities, the number of students with disabilities (both physical and learning) was going down. This fact showed me that many students, who may not necessarily need the IEP, were getting them like candy.
My third point of interest is a bit of a cop out. I found this chapter very interesting in that it is so controversial. While every student does need to be educated, it cannot be at the cost of other students. I find that many special education programs start impacting other students negatively. If it is the right of all Americans to have a public education then another student's education may not come before another student's.
While this comment may seem harsh, I do firmly believe it. There is a saying from one of the founding fathers, "My rights end where my fellow citizen's rights begin." This should follow through to education. It is our goal as educators to find a way to educate all of our students to a point where they can understand and appreciate what we are teaching them.
As a music educator I want my students to accomplish three things. They must be able to sing happy birthday, clap to a steady beat, and pick a favorite piece of music. I feel that these three things carry through everyone life. If, at the base of my teaching, I accomplish these three things, then I have succeeded in starting the love of music in a student's life.
My first point of interest comes from a line that starts the section on identifying exceptional children. "Although it may be said that on some level every child is exceptional, with unique abilities and needs, current practice defines exceptional children as "those whole require special education and related services if they are to realize their full human potential (Hallahan and Kauffman, 2000, p. 7).
This quote bothers me because it leaves a lot to be desired. As an educator I want to know what an exceptional child is. This definition makes me confused by using the term 'special education' and 'full human potential'. I think that every child is exceptional and should be specially educated so they can achieve their full human potential. I do not think that this definition is correct at all.
The one point I would like to get across (to stop myself from writing a philosophic epic) is that even if every child is not a 'exceptional child' they should be taught as if they are. If the goal of teaching exceptional children is to help them reach their full human potential then every child should be taught as if they are exceptional.
The IEP and music also caught my eye. For my educational psychology class I wrote an essay on the IEP in our schools and its effects. I found that the number of students who attain an IEP has skyrocketed since the installment of the IEP. This is why I think that the IEP should be done with.
The IEP was meant to help both the student and teacher. The student would get the appropriate help that they needed and the teacher was given the exact parameters of the student's needs. While the IEP does accomplish this, it has been heavily abused.
Many students obtain an IEP but, do not show a specific deficiency in which they would actually need an IEP for. Some of my research showed that while the number of students with IEP's increased in major cities, the number of students with disabilities (both physical and learning) was going down. This fact showed me that many students, who may not necessarily need the IEP, were getting them like candy.
My third point of interest is a bit of a cop out. I found this chapter very interesting in that it is so controversial. While every student does need to be educated, it cannot be at the cost of other students. I find that many special education programs start impacting other students negatively. If it is the right of all Americans to have a public education then another student's education may not come before another student's.
While this comment may seem harsh, I do firmly believe it. There is a saying from one of the founding fathers, "My rights end where my fellow citizen's rights begin." This should follow through to education. It is our goal as educators to find a way to educate all of our students to a point where they can understand and appreciate what we are teaching them.
As a music educator I want my students to accomplish three things. They must be able to sing happy birthday, clap to a steady beat, and pick a favorite piece of music. I feel that these three things carry through everyone life. If, at the base of my teaching, I accomplish these three things, then I have succeeded in starting the love of music in a student's life.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Chapter 11 Points of interest
Chapter 11 was about Motivation and Management, two key factors in running an efficient classroom. My first point of interest came later in the chapter than I would have expected.
The section that talks about competition as a motivator was a bit lost on me. This summer I started to read a book called "Compassion". It was about Christianity and what it truly means to be compassionate. The authors of the book found that in order to be completely compassionate humans had to forgo any competition. The only problem with this statement is that humans are competitive by nature.
Competition is how we make decisions. Which person would I like to date? What food do I want to eat? These two questions are trivial but they compare different object, thus causing a competitive mindset. I feel that using this mindset in the classroom is completely natural.
If competition does not happen externally (with another person) it will happen internally (with oneself). This competitiveness with oneself is more commonly known as motivation. I see no problem in having a sense of competition in my classroom. I feel it is an innate human characteristic and should be utilized.
My next point of interest comes a couple of pages later in the section about Enneagrams. I thought that this section was very questionable, yet I feel that it is overall useful.
Enneagrams are personality trait tests. These tests determine what type of personality you have, such as a perfectionist. The tests come in handy when a teacher needs to adopt specific strategies for students.
Knowing that you have many reclusive students is a good thing to know if you have an abrasive and brash personality. I think in the grand scheme of things, you do get a feel for people's personalities and are able to change your own if you are to accommodate them. For teachers this skill is necessary.
The last section that I thought stood out was "remembering student's names". Again my first reaction was "Well duh." Then I realized how important a name is to a child.
From my camp experiences as a specialist I have to remember every kid's name. I find that is it pretty easy. However I can see the look on a child's face when I either forget their name or call them the wrong one. They are less likely to participate because they no longer feel connected to me as a 'friend'.
It is such a very simple concept to remember a name, and yet people forget them so often. A good colleague of mine, Brad Hruska, told me some great advice. He said to memorize your students' names before your first day. I asked him how his first day went. He smiled and he said, "Better than if I hadn't learned any at all." Some of the best words of advice I have heard.
I will leave you with some more words of wisdom from Dan Crain. "Your students will never care how much you know, until they know how much you care." Priceless.
The section that talks about competition as a motivator was a bit lost on me. This summer I started to read a book called "Compassion". It was about Christianity and what it truly means to be compassionate. The authors of the book found that in order to be completely compassionate humans had to forgo any competition. The only problem with this statement is that humans are competitive by nature.
Competition is how we make decisions. Which person would I like to date? What food do I want to eat? These two questions are trivial but they compare different object, thus causing a competitive mindset. I feel that using this mindset in the classroom is completely natural.
If competition does not happen externally (with another person) it will happen internally (with oneself). This competitiveness with oneself is more commonly known as motivation. I see no problem in having a sense of competition in my classroom. I feel it is an innate human characteristic and should be utilized.
My next point of interest comes a couple of pages later in the section about Enneagrams. I thought that this section was very questionable, yet I feel that it is overall useful.
Enneagrams are personality trait tests. These tests determine what type of personality you have, such as a perfectionist. The tests come in handy when a teacher needs to adopt specific strategies for students.
Knowing that you have many reclusive students is a good thing to know if you have an abrasive and brash personality. I think in the grand scheme of things, you do get a feel for people's personalities and are able to change your own if you are to accommodate them. For teachers this skill is necessary.
The last section that I thought stood out was "remembering student's names". Again my first reaction was "Well duh." Then I realized how important a name is to a child.
From my camp experiences as a specialist I have to remember every kid's name. I find that is it pretty easy. However I can see the look on a child's face when I either forget their name or call them the wrong one. They are less likely to participate because they no longer feel connected to me as a 'friend'.
It is such a very simple concept to remember a name, and yet people forget them so often. A good colleague of mine, Brad Hruska, told me some great advice. He said to memorize your students' names before your first day. I asked him how his first day went. He smiled and he said, "Better than if I hadn't learned any at all." Some of the best words of advice I have heard.
I will leave you with some more words of wisdom from Dan Crain. "Your students will never care how much you know, until they know how much you care." Priceless.
Chapter 6 Points of Interest
I was intrigued by this chapter. I love to incorporate movement in my teaching strategies. This chapter posed a lot of questions for me about movement. I think I have a general understanding of movement and the human body, but this chapter threw me some loops.
My first question and point of interest was where do you define the difference from just movement and dance. This was very confusing to me even after I read the definition of what 'dance' is. I still am having trouble with the differentiation with the two.
Dance seems to specify that there needs to be intent and choreography to be considered dance. While that is all fine and dandy, the 'creative movement' and eurythmics described in this chapter turn out to be dancing. Choreography is planning movements that fit with each other in context of the music and intent to move is giving a purpose to the movement being done. I am having trouble deciding what is plain movement, even if it is creative, and dancing.
I am not sure that it is such a big deal, but I feel that it is because the concepts I want to teach through 'dance' are not those that I want to teach through movement alone.
An observation I made about this chapter was that a lot of common sense is needed to be able to teach movement along with music. I found myself saying aloud, "Well duh!" at the book. Movement is one of the hardest concepts for the human body. I do not know why, but if you take a look at our sports and entertainment, physical roles of the human body are enhanced and pushed to their limit.
I felt like a big point of this chapter was to make motion and music connect and feel that they naturally fit together. Because music uses motion as a base to make sound (singers move wind over their vocal chords as well as facial expressions, string players bow, and wind players tongue and finger) it should be natural that movement should go hand in hand with music.
The last point that I found started me thinking about higher education and teaching dance. The book said that it was important that kids learn to move their bodies in conjunction with the music. The book also said that a great way to do this was to teach folk dances.
To further this thought, I think it almost necessary to teach older musicians how to dance classic dance forms like a jig (gigue), minuet, passpied, or salterello. I feel that teaching musicians these dance forms will help them perform better in general because they understand the movements that are associated with them. It is an interesting idea that I would be interested in perusing myself.
Lastly while on the dance topic, here are a few videos of some fantastic dancers from So You Think You Can Dance.
Billy Bell and Ade Obayomi (Contemporary)
Lauren Froederman and tWitch Boss (Hip Hop)
Robert Roldan and DTrix Sandoval (Hip Hop)
Kent Boyd and Allison Holker (Contemporary)
Travis Wall
Alex Wong and Allison Holker
My first question and point of interest was where do you define the difference from just movement and dance. This was very confusing to me even after I read the definition of what 'dance' is. I still am having trouble with the differentiation with the two.
Dance seems to specify that there needs to be intent and choreography to be considered dance. While that is all fine and dandy, the 'creative movement' and eurythmics described in this chapter turn out to be dancing. Choreography is planning movements that fit with each other in context of the music and intent to move is giving a purpose to the movement being done. I am having trouble deciding what is plain movement, even if it is creative, and dancing.
I am not sure that it is such a big deal, but I feel that it is because the concepts I want to teach through 'dance' are not those that I want to teach through movement alone.
An observation I made about this chapter was that a lot of common sense is needed to be able to teach movement along with music. I found myself saying aloud, "Well duh!" at the book. Movement is one of the hardest concepts for the human body. I do not know why, but if you take a look at our sports and entertainment, physical roles of the human body are enhanced and pushed to their limit.
I felt like a big point of this chapter was to make motion and music connect and feel that they naturally fit together. Because music uses motion as a base to make sound (singers move wind over their vocal chords as well as facial expressions, string players bow, and wind players tongue and finger) it should be natural that movement should go hand in hand with music.
The last point that I found started me thinking about higher education and teaching dance. The book said that it was important that kids learn to move their bodies in conjunction with the music. The book also said that a great way to do this was to teach folk dances.
To further this thought, I think it almost necessary to teach older musicians how to dance classic dance forms like a jig (gigue), minuet, passpied, or salterello. I feel that teaching musicians these dance forms will help them perform better in general because they understand the movements that are associated with them. It is an interesting idea that I would be interested in perusing myself.
Lastly while on the dance topic, here are a few videos of some fantastic dancers from So You Think You Can Dance.
Billy Bell and Ade Obayomi (Contemporary)
Lauren Froederman and tWitch Boss (Hip Hop)
Robert Roldan and DTrix Sandoval (Hip Hop)
Kent Boyd and Allison Holker (Contemporary)
Travis Wall
Alex Wong and Allison Holker
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Chapter 5 Points of Interest
#1. I found myself at a disadvantage in this chapter. I read the section about the male voice in its relation to children's voices. I am not a singer by any means and have trouble even in my own limited range. Now that I have learned that children will try to alter their natural voice to match my bass voice I really need to be careful on how I sing with students.
#2 Another point of interest came at the end of the chapter on helping children to think musically. I have always thought that teaching students certain things would help them to think musically. I believe that there is a natural path to thinking musically; I never really noticed how much instruction and guidance is needed to make children think in a musical manner.
The paragraph states many strategies that can be used to help kids on their way to think musically. Singing, moving, playing, listening, reading and creating. The next sentence says that discussion and reflection is key in the process to thinking like a good musician. I also appreciate the statement how the strategies must be carefully selected over time. The road to thinking musically is long and does not happen overnight.
#3. The last point of interest that hit me was the perception of children in relation to pitch. I never actually realized (although I should have) that a keyboard is not a great way to teach pitch. When a child visualizes a keyboard, or sees one in real life, it is on a horizontal plain. The fact that pitches sound 'higher' and lower' than one another is lost on a child looking at a keyboard. Because higher and lower denote a vertical plane, showing pitch on a horizontal plane is not a good idea at all.
Reading this section has made me more aware of some of the mistakes that I have made with children. I now have an idea as to why some of the concepts I like children to get, they do not. They have not reached the appropriate stage for me to be teaching them concepts the way I did. Thankfully I changed the concepts to match; although I did so thinking that my students were a bit slower than normal. It will now remain in my mind that students must have reached an appropriate developmental level before I start mixing and matching concepts together.
#2 Another point of interest came at the end of the chapter on helping children to think musically. I have always thought that teaching students certain things would help them to think musically. I believe that there is a natural path to thinking musically; I never really noticed how much instruction and guidance is needed to make children think in a musical manner.
The paragraph states many strategies that can be used to help kids on their way to think musically. Singing, moving, playing, listening, reading and creating. The next sentence says that discussion and reflection is key in the process to thinking like a good musician. I also appreciate the statement how the strategies must be carefully selected over time. The road to thinking musically is long and does not happen overnight.
#3. The last point of interest that hit me was the perception of children in relation to pitch. I never actually realized (although I should have) that a keyboard is not a great way to teach pitch. When a child visualizes a keyboard, or sees one in real life, it is on a horizontal plain. The fact that pitches sound 'higher' and lower' than one another is lost on a child looking at a keyboard. Because higher and lower denote a vertical plane, showing pitch on a horizontal plane is not a good idea at all.
Reading this section has made me more aware of some of the mistakes that I have made with children. I now have an idea as to why some of the concepts I like children to get, they do not. They have not reached the appropriate stage for me to be teaching them concepts the way I did. Thankfully I changed the concepts to match; although I did so thinking that my students were a bit slower than normal. It will now remain in my mind that students must have reached an appropriate developmental level before I start mixing and matching concepts together.
Chapter 4 Points of Interest
My first point of interest of this chapter was about the phrase "folk-song singing has been replaced by rock-song shouting." I was rolling this idea around in my head for a while. I finally came to a conclusion that I do not mind this statement. In fact it makes me happy.
Aside from the 'shouting' part of this phrase I would absolutely agree with it. Many children do not sing folk songs and would much rather hear the melodies of modern music. I personally do not see why this is such a problem. Rock music today is much simplified from the classic rock that my mother grew up with. Complex rhythms are mostly left out, melodies are simple and catchy, and they reach a wide range of humans around the world.
If anything, I see rock music as a huge benefit to the music educator. Because the songs are easy to teach and are so accessible they become great teaching tools. I am actually glad that students know so many rock songs because, at the very least, they are listening to some type of music.
The second point of interest that I landed on was the simile of the marionette. I have more recently been acquainted with this simile and actually like it a lot. However I have never seen it used in conjunction with an actual puppet.
I like the fact that the students can see what is going on with the marionette's and adjust their own to match it. I find this concept of visual comparison very useful, especially because an adult's body is so much different than a child's.
The last point that struck me was the assessment tools that were used. I have a great respect for these tools and was trying to find a huge fault in them; and I could not.
The only concern that I would have is that something was left out of it. I cannot put my finger completely on it, but I have a gut instinct that something else should be assessed in addition to what is on the list.
I do particularly like the expression assessment. Because wind players have to keep so many facial muscles in place for optimal sound, they show little emotion. So having an assessment that deals directly with expression and intent is really interesting to me.
Aside from the 'shouting' part of this phrase I would absolutely agree with it. Many children do not sing folk songs and would much rather hear the melodies of modern music. I personally do not see why this is such a problem. Rock music today is much simplified from the classic rock that my mother grew up with. Complex rhythms are mostly left out, melodies are simple and catchy, and they reach a wide range of humans around the world.
If anything, I see rock music as a huge benefit to the music educator. Because the songs are easy to teach and are so accessible they become great teaching tools. I am actually glad that students know so many rock songs because, at the very least, they are listening to some type of music.
The second point of interest that I landed on was the simile of the marionette. I have more recently been acquainted with this simile and actually like it a lot. However I have never seen it used in conjunction with an actual puppet.
I like the fact that the students can see what is going on with the marionette's and adjust their own to match it. I find this concept of visual comparison very useful, especially because an adult's body is so much different than a child's.
The last point that struck me was the assessment tools that were used. I have a great respect for these tools and was trying to find a huge fault in them; and I could not.
The only concern that I would have is that something was left out of it. I cannot put my finger completely on it, but I have a gut instinct that something else should be assessed in addition to what is on the list.
I do particularly like the expression assessment. Because wind players have to keep so many facial muscles in place for optimal sound, they show little emotion. So having an assessment that deals directly with expression and intent is really interesting to me.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
MUED 350 Article Reaction
This article was a bit tough for me to get through. I am not sure if it was the writer, theme, or the PDF, but I found it extremely difficult to get through. However I took a lot from this article that I found very fascinating.
The first point I would like to share is the 'music babble'. I thought that this concept was very intuitive and most likely a good way of explaining how young children learn music. I like the fact that it is based (a little bit) off of language. The one question that I was left with was that of a musical impediment.
Just like speech, a child must hear their respective language spoken. If that child manages to somehow screw up what he hears, then he will mess up how he will repeat what he hears. I am wondering if a child could end up with an impediment in which they cannot fully play notes correctly or cannot fix certain rhythms that they have physically and mentally memorized.
I am not at all sure that this is possible, but it is some nice food for thought.
The next point I would like to talk about is more of a question that came up from this reading. What do we do with the talented children that just have no interest in music whatsoever? I have seen many kids that I deem musically talented and have watched as they perform at a high standard and could not care less.
I understand that as music educators we are supposed to reach every student and give them musical experiences, but it seems unfair that this child will not be sharing his talent with the world. This brings me to my next point of what do you do with a student that wants to continue in music, but as no musical intuition at all? Again I do not expect a direct answer, and I am sure there is probably not one, but I feel that I have met my fair share of music educators that seemingly have less than optimal musical intuition.
My last point of interest was the part that talked about the musical aptitude before the age of 9. I was very intrigued by the facts that came up during this section of the chapter. I was a bit wary to believe them, and I still am considering what I have experienced. I am not expert on musical aptitude, but I find it impossible that someone has an almost stagnant aptitude after the age of 9.
Humans continually learn throughout their life. As humans we must accommodate our changing bodies as they age, therefor we must always be learners. I have my doubts that someone aptitude to learn something stops at such a young age. I am not sure if I misread that passage, but as a music educator I do not want to give up on students who have had their aptitude diagnosed at 9. As long as someone has the love to learn music, they should have the right to, and because they love it, it will not matter what aptitude they have because they will succeed no matter what.
The first point I would like to share is the 'music babble'. I thought that this concept was very intuitive and most likely a good way of explaining how young children learn music. I like the fact that it is based (a little bit) off of language. The one question that I was left with was that of a musical impediment.
Just like speech, a child must hear their respective language spoken. If that child manages to somehow screw up what he hears, then he will mess up how he will repeat what he hears. I am wondering if a child could end up with an impediment in which they cannot fully play notes correctly or cannot fix certain rhythms that they have physically and mentally memorized.
I am not at all sure that this is possible, but it is some nice food for thought.
The next point I would like to talk about is more of a question that came up from this reading. What do we do with the talented children that just have no interest in music whatsoever? I have seen many kids that I deem musically talented and have watched as they perform at a high standard and could not care less.
I understand that as music educators we are supposed to reach every student and give them musical experiences, but it seems unfair that this child will not be sharing his talent with the world. This brings me to my next point of what do you do with a student that wants to continue in music, but as no musical intuition at all? Again I do not expect a direct answer, and I am sure there is probably not one, but I feel that I have met my fair share of music educators that seemingly have less than optimal musical intuition.
My last point of interest was the part that talked about the musical aptitude before the age of 9. I was very intrigued by the facts that came up during this section of the chapter. I was a bit wary to believe them, and I still am considering what I have experienced. I am not expert on musical aptitude, but I find it impossible that someone has an almost stagnant aptitude after the age of 9.
Humans continually learn throughout their life. As humans we must accommodate our changing bodies as they age, therefor we must always be learners. I have my doubts that someone aptitude to learn something stops at such a young age. I am not sure if I misread that passage, but as a music educator I do not want to give up on students who have had their aptitude diagnosed at 9. As long as someone has the love to learn music, they should have the right to, and because they love it, it will not matter what aptitude they have because they will succeed no matter what.
MUED 350 Chapter 3 Points of Interest
I found myself very impressed with many of the ideals that were mentioned in this chapter. I have been thinking a lot about what I would want out of a classroom of musicians. What keys can I give to my students that will help them as adults? I found a lot of help in this chapter with a lot of my thoughts.
The first key point I wanted to share about this chapter is a realization that Emile Dalcroze came to; children (as well as adults) fall into a trap of having tremendous understanding of mechanics, but no understanding of music. This means that people may be technical virtuosi on their instruments, but have no way of making their technique musical. As I have been performing much more regularly, I have seen how a technically player can bring down an ensemble.
I think it is very smart of Dalcroze to address this in his style of teaching. Children especially need to know key musical processes such as counting in 4/4 against 2/2 or how to correctly place a triplet. The fact that Dalcroze puts emphasis on this key point of 'breeding' musicians instead of mechanics is brilliant to me.
The second point I found key was also from the Dalcroze section. I actually touched on this point in my last paragraph. Dalcroze attempted, in his teachings, to create a foundation through musicianship. Again, I love this approach to teaching. The way that I took this approach was to take care of the "problems" that occur in later music and learning as the students are still children. I am not sure quite how to do this at the moment, but a good example is to teach what a triplet is.
Playing Paul Ferguson's jazz numbers have required me to be so 'tight' on my Dalcroze eurythmics that I have found them invaluable. Knowing how to correctly place a triplet has been imperative in many jazz arrangements that I have played. I wish that I could teach every student of mine how to do this (it took a good two semesters to accomplish my learning). Just having the tools to figure out rhythms, notes, and time signatures as a child would greatly help out any musician in the future.
The last point I found interesting in this chapter was Kodaly's idea to incorporate the pentatonic scale in his teachings. I do not want to talk too much on this topic, but I will say that the pentatonic scale may be the key for getting the world to appreciate music and keep it in the schools. This video shows why.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne6tB2KiZuk
I love the pentatonic scale and its powers.
The first key point I wanted to share about this chapter is a realization that Emile Dalcroze came to; children (as well as adults) fall into a trap of having tremendous understanding of mechanics, but no understanding of music. This means that people may be technical virtuosi on their instruments, but have no way of making their technique musical. As I have been performing much more regularly, I have seen how a technically player can bring down an ensemble.
I think it is very smart of Dalcroze to address this in his style of teaching. Children especially need to know key musical processes such as counting in 4/4 against 2/2 or how to correctly place a triplet. The fact that Dalcroze puts emphasis on this key point of 'breeding' musicians instead of mechanics is brilliant to me.
The second point I found key was also from the Dalcroze section. I actually touched on this point in my last paragraph. Dalcroze attempted, in his teachings, to create a foundation through musicianship. Again, I love this approach to teaching. The way that I took this approach was to take care of the "problems" that occur in later music and learning as the students are still children. I am not sure quite how to do this at the moment, but a good example is to teach what a triplet is.
Playing Paul Ferguson's jazz numbers have required me to be so 'tight' on my Dalcroze eurythmics that I have found them invaluable. Knowing how to correctly place a triplet has been imperative in many jazz arrangements that I have played. I wish that I could teach every student of mine how to do this (it took a good two semesters to accomplish my learning). Just having the tools to figure out rhythms, notes, and time signatures as a child would greatly help out any musician in the future.
The last point I found interesting in this chapter was Kodaly's idea to incorporate the pentatonic scale in his teachings. I do not want to talk too much on this topic, but I will say that the pentatonic scale may be the key for getting the world to appreciate music and keep it in the schools. This video shows why.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne6tB2KiZuk
I love the pentatonic scale and its powers.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
MUED 350 Chapter 2 Points of Interest
My apologies for being tardy with this assignment, this week has been a little hectic for me. However "Music In Childhood" took me back to my days in Educational Psychology. With the names of Vygotsky and Piaget as well as Bandura being used, it was a little hard not to get nostalgic.
Three points that struck a chord with me were Gardener's Theory of Multiple Intelligences. I have been intrigued by this theory for many reasons. First of all Gardener's theory claims that an individual may possess more than one type of intelligence. This means that a person can be intelligent in many ways such as musically, mathematically, and spatially. This is a very cool way to look at the intelligence of humans and fascinates me.
I have a theory of my own that fits into this model of multiple intelligence. I believe that intelligence is the skill to adapt and modify new and old material to fit present and trying situations. This definition of mine stems from a few observations that I have made.
Sometimes people can be very good at moving their bodies, like being talented at a sport, but they cannot perform well once pressure is on or the sun casts shadows. I feel as though Gardner's theory can only be used if this is taken into account. I do agree with there being many different form of intelligence, but it must be known that being 'unintelligent' at on means being 'unintelligent' at others.
The second point of interest that I found was the three learning modalities; aural, kinesthetic, and visual. a Although it was simple to understand it makes so much sense to me. I find it very interesting when a student is able to connect the three modalities together. Watch the "aha" moment on a child's face is a precious moment. I think I appreciated this section because of how much that moment means to me.
The last interest point was the Myers, Briggs, McCaulley, and Most personality traits. There are 8 traits that can be compared in four groups of two. Introversion/Extroversion, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, and Judging/Perceiving. After a person decides what trait they identify more with, they can then find out what type of personality they are. Then they can compare their personality with others that have also taken this test.
While I do not ultimately agree with this specific personality labeling, I still like to see what I am. I actually took this test not to long ago (my girlfriend suggested it), and I had a lot of trouble identifying what I am. I feel that a lot of people have this problem. Not everyone is a strict extrovert or introvert, as well as a judge versus a 'perceiver'. While the end results of a more extensive test that uses these characteristics may be helpful, this specific one (Myers, Briggs, McCaulley, and Most) may be misleading.
Although these points stuck out to me, this chapter was a nice refresher to the many different ways that children may learn and mature. We may never know the exact way that children learn, but it will always be important for teachers to be there to guide them on their journey.
Three points that struck a chord with me were Gardener's Theory of Multiple Intelligences. I have been intrigued by this theory for many reasons. First of all Gardener's theory claims that an individual may possess more than one type of intelligence. This means that a person can be intelligent in many ways such as musically, mathematically, and spatially. This is a very cool way to look at the intelligence of humans and fascinates me.
I have a theory of my own that fits into this model of multiple intelligence. I believe that intelligence is the skill to adapt and modify new and old material to fit present and trying situations. This definition of mine stems from a few observations that I have made.
Sometimes people can be very good at moving their bodies, like being talented at a sport, but they cannot perform well once pressure is on or the sun casts shadows. I feel as though Gardner's theory can only be used if this is taken into account. I do agree with there being many different form of intelligence, but it must be known that being 'unintelligent' at on means being 'unintelligent' at others.
The second point of interest that I found was the three learning modalities; aural, kinesthetic, and visual. a Although it was simple to understand it makes so much sense to me. I find it very interesting when a student is able to connect the three modalities together. Watch the "aha" moment on a child's face is a precious moment. I think I appreciated this section because of how much that moment means to me.
The last interest point was the Myers, Briggs, McCaulley, and Most personality traits. There are 8 traits that can be compared in four groups of two. Introversion/Extroversion, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, and Judging/Perceiving. After a person decides what trait they identify more with, they can then find out what type of personality they are. Then they can compare their personality with others that have also taken this test.
While I do not ultimately agree with this specific personality labeling, I still like to see what I am. I actually took this test not to long ago (my girlfriend suggested it), and I had a lot of trouble identifying what I am. I feel that a lot of people have this problem. Not everyone is a strict extrovert or introvert, as well as a judge versus a 'perceiver'. While the end results of a more extensive test that uses these characteristics may be helpful, this specific one (Myers, Briggs, McCaulley, and Most) may be misleading.
Although these points stuck out to me, this chapter was a nice refresher to the many different ways that children may learn and mature. We may never know the exact way that children learn, but it will always be important for teachers to be there to guide them on their journey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)