The Future of Bands, Choirs, and Orchestras

My most recent post reminded me of a conversation I once had with a conductor of a college wind ensemble program. This person is very well-known and respected amongst their peers. We got to talking about the progressive ideas that I so often ramble about. And this professor asked whether I thought that ensembles would continue to play a role in school music programs in the future. This baffled me because…of course they will (I thought). But it also made me realize that there was this entire community of music educators that either thought ensembles would not remain a part of school music programs, or questioned their relevance in a society where music making is evolving into something much different than our traditional way of conceptualizing music-making.

So I continue to think about this. Will our school ensembles still exist in 20, 50, 100 years? Should they? Music has always been a part of education in this country. Instrumental ensembles are a phenomenon of the mid-1950’s. Before this, we had great ensembles and instrumentalists who would meet and rehearse on their own. Music was a class like any other. Removing ensembles from schools would allow teachers the flexibility to focus on a student-centered curriculum based on a constructivist ideology – I’m all for that. But I can’t help this feeling that something would be missing if we did not have these ensembles in school. Perhaps it doesn’t seem right because I was raised that way, and the generation who taught me was raised that way.

I often wonder what school music education was like for my grandparents and great-grandparents. Would it be different now that we have technology to make music and music making available almost anywhere? Would ensembles have become as prevalent if teachers were using Garageband, Sibelius, and Audacity back then? At the time, were ensembles considered a better way of teaching music? Is our generation (or a future generation) ready to move on to something else if it is thought to be so? I’m asking because, frankly, I don’t know.

The ‘Director of Bands’ Syndrome

I just returned from the IMEA convention, and was pleased to see greater representation of progressive ideas related to music curriculum in our schools. I do, however, feel the need to comment on some of the peripheral aspects of this conference. Namely, the overwhelming majority of junior high and high school teachers who refer to themselves as Director of ______ when describing their craft.

Let’s approach this from the perspective of an administrator. Here we have a teacher who tries to advocate for the many benefits of music education in the context of a holistic education by anointing themselves as what essentially equates to a music coach. Just think…what would happen if chemistry teachers started calling themselves Directors of Bunsen Burners? Bands, orchestras, and choirs are a vehicle for music learning, but in no way do these terms summarize what we do. Your job (and my job) is much larger than that. The title Director of _____ constrains the scope of your job. In the age of music education needing to extend to other disciplines as well as shoring up our own priorities, dressing ourselves in straight-jackets by worrying about glorified titles is the last thing we need.

If you teach at a college, and your only job is to be a conductor of a top-level ensemble, and you consider that to be all that you do, then you may consider yourself a Director of ____. If you feel that your reach is a little greater than that, consider changing your business card to read ‘Music Educator’ or ‘Purveyor of Sound-Based Art and Culture’…anything that accurately describes the scope of what we do. If your administration lists this as your job title, take the opportunity to educate them about the many things you do besides direct bands, choirs, and orchestras. Our advocacy efforts will only stand tall once we stop cutting ourselves off at the knees. Consider the words of our newly-elected MENC President, and use your personal forum as part of a larger effort that will benefit all the students of your community and the art of music as a vital part of a holistic education.

Creative Music Class

I’m trying to write curriculum for a new class proposal at school. I want this class to be completely independent from our ensembles, and geared toward the school’s general population of students who have little or no experience in music. The question I keep asking myself, and now you as well, is, “What kind of music-specific knowledge should I plan to teach in the class?” Music theory is offered at the school, both as an introductory course and AP(one semester each). Should this be a prerequisite? Take the intro theory course before you’re able to enroll in the creative class? My concern with this is that it takes the opportunity away for any student to take it – as some students do not have two free semesters. If I offer the class with no prerequisite, there are still theory-related issues to be dealt with. Should these be dealt with on an as-needed basis?

My feeling right now is that a very quick introduction to theory would be appropriate, and then tackle other issues as needed. This would allow for the maximum amount of ‘constructivism’. These types of student-driven classes are starting to be prevalent in Great Britain, and I see no reason why they would not work here either. In fact, they may very well exist and I’m simply not aware of them. Have you ever experienced a class such as this? What are your feelings about having a class where the teacher acts as an advisor/facilitator rather than a supreme being of knowledge?

My assumption is that a class like this will be wildly popular – especially amongst student who are ‘amateur’ musicians (the rock dudes). Currently, the program at my school is ill-equipped to serve this group of students, and I would imagine we are not alone in this shortcoming. If you have any thoughts or suggestions on this type of curriculum, I would be happy to get your input. As it stands, this program would be highly experimental, but I am interested to observe instances of success as part of action research in implementing this class.

My Resolution

2009 will hopefully prove to be a year of hope and change in the world. The masses have come out in support of a new kind of civil revolution. So too shall we have an uprising in the music education community of progressive thought. I have made it my goal to make this the year that I formulate my philosophy statements into a conference presentation as a contribution to this much needed critique of music in schools.

What I would encourage all who read this or are involved in music education to do is give serious thought to the state of music in the schools. Are we, as teachers, providing student-centered programs that are available to the entire population in addition to our traditional performance classes? Is creativity (and not re-creativity) a major part of the curriculum? Is music learning made meaningful for all our students? These are the questions that will drive me probably for the remainder of my career (as change is never a simple, overnight matter), and I am always appreciative of the thoughts of my friends and colleagues. Cheers to you all in ‘09!

Music Education Needs a Bailout

Much like the auto industry, our profession has been in jeopardy for a while now. I can’t remember a time when advocacy wasn’t a critical issue due to school budget constraints. This is how we are learning to become proactive. We are discovering that we can affect our own destiny by highlighting the positive impact of an education that includes music, and we are slowly seeing an improvement in support from our administrators – I believe. But, much like the automakers, the support we receive must be met with substance and a willingness to critique our own ‘product’.

Make no mistake, there are strings attached to the support you earn. An administrator may come to your concert and compliment you on how wonderful everything was, but when the time comes to make difficult budget decisions, our activity of preparing students for a concert starts to look more like an extravagance than a necessity. Even those of us who teach performance really well are not completely safe.

You may teach according to the Comprehensive Musicianship model and have students who can play anything you put in front of them. You have cultivated their general musicianship and performance skills to a point where they enjoy making music at a very high level every day. This is a great accomplishment. I would argue, however, that it is not the only goal we should be striving toward. The music education bailout I speak of has little to do with financial support, and everything to do with the content of our curricula. Here are a few steps that music teachers might take to improve their own standing and the future of our profession.

#1 – Emphasize Musical Literacy
Teach your students how to read, write, interpret, critique, and listen. Not just the music you choose, and not just the music they choose, but a sample of all music. This also includes composing and improvising for all students.

#2 – Reduce Performances and Cut Competition
This is a hard sell. I believe that in order for students to have a meaningful creative experience in music that includes composing, improvising, etc., they have to be given time to explore these new areas. It is nearly impossible when everyone is scrambling to get from one performance to the next, all the while trying to uphold this inflated level of performance that seems to be expected. High school students can accomplish great things in performance, but teachers need to expand students’ conceptions of what is possible in music. Simply put, there is more to music than performance.

As for competitions, I think they are meaningless and antithetical to the goal of school music education. They may provide some minute level of extrinsic motivation, but the glory of winning first place at the University of X Marching Band Festival is no substitute for the intrinsic reward that learning to be creative within the realm of music provides.

#3 – Extra-Curriculars Should Remain Extra-Curricular
Allow me to state, up front, that I am not a huge marching band fan. I think a good marching program can work well in the context of an educational setting, though too many programs make it the top priority. Marching band is great for rallying student enthusiasm and community spirit. It is not great as a focused environment for musical learning.

That said, it is not possible for some schools to have marching band (or any other extra-curricular) unless they use the time allotted for ensemble rehearsal. However, if your administration is willing to support steps 1 and 2, you will probably have no trouble convincing them that this step is absolutely necessary. When extra-curriculars become exactly that (EXTRA-curriculars), then teachers will be free to teach music as a subject and an art…and not as an activity or sport.

#4 – Teach Music as a Subject…Not an Activity!
This goes along with all the other steps, but it is probably the fundamental reason why music loses its support in schools. We have a unique opportunity in that we teach a subject that does not simply exist as a piece of paper covered in ink. Our subject is omnipresent in the lives of…well, everyone. If 99% of all students are interested in music, and we are, on average, only serving between 10 and 20 percent at present, how can we expect to secure ourselves as an integral part of the school curriculum? Music has slowly become for only those who choose it at a very young age. We are not helping ourselves by being so exclusive (or even elitist).

There are music classes that can serve an entire population of students. These classes can also be interesting and relevant to your students’ interests. Using a constructivist approach, we can find the aspects of music that students have an interest in, and base learning around their individual needs and goals. Meanwhile, they are creating music using any and all tools that are at hand. Even if they are using preexisting material to remix, there are still a plethora of concepts to be taught. Technology makes music more accessible. Instead of complaining that this is lessening the quality of contemporary music, we should be teaching the artists of tomorrow what makes music “good” – (Someone taught Thom Yorke and Jonny Greenwood).

#5 – Be Fearless, Even in Failure
No one ever intends for an idea to fail. Teachers (and especially music teachers) feel such immense pressure to produce something that is of high quality that we often unintentionally neglect our primary purpose. We rehearse and rehearse, and refine and refine to the detriment of our students. Ignoring competition all together, a flawless performance of overly-difficult music is not a worthwhile goal in student-centered universe. And I suppose that’s what it all comes down to – we need to accept that our reputations as teachers are on the line. If you want to be a conductor of a great ensemble, go wave your arms at a college where the goal is to prepare professional, flawless musicians. If you want to teach – really teach – consider the long-term implications of the material you present, and the process that students follow. Performance is important, but not singularly important. There are other worthy skills that music teaches. If we can’t teach students to be creative and expressive, where are they going to get it? And what purpose are we left to serve in the school?

A music education bailout needs to begin with teachers realizing the breadth of what we do, and how narrow a focus we currently have.

All-State Festivals and the Like

I recently took one (yes one) student to audition for the IMEA District 7 Orchestra. I used to be a staunch advocate for activities like this. I used to think it was an important thing for students to do. I have since changed my stance a bit. To me, it seems like “more of the same.” Many say that it offers students an opportunity to play challenging music with a group of their highly skilled peers. I cannot argue this point. It is absolutely true. But I can’t help but go back to my argument of our focus in this country on a completely re-creative activity. We really need to stop confusing music playing and music making.

Is it wrong to be “against” these kinds of activities? (Read this as: I support any student who wants to do these festivals, but I will never make it an emphasis of my program). Should music teachers strive to do more than make our students better players? I am not convinced that I am right, and I am always happy to have disagreements about this, but I can’t help but point out some of these flaws with the profession. We want to advocate for ourselves as a vital part of the school curriculum, but we keep having these activities that are analogous to sporting events. If we perpetuate our image as an activity, we cannot promote our value as a core subject and an art.

The Future of What We Do

It seems to me that music education, like everything else, is an evolving entity. We might be a bit slower in our evolution, but there is no doubt that we have and are changing. In this country, our emphasis has gone from rote learning and song books to the incorporation of Orff/Kodaly/Dalcroze methods, to the advent of instrumental music in the schools. As I and many others have asked, “Is this the end of the line?” In other words, do we want to continue to perpetuate the same type of education in music that has been going on for the past 50 years? Obviously we cannot. Yet new and veteran teachers alike seem to be more interested in keeping up the vocational-type education that is prevalent in most every school that I am familiar with.

Is this the best way for us to grow our discipline while trying to find and solidify its place in the school curriculum? As several people on this blog have discussed, many people (and I might say most) go into music education for the wrong reasons. Perhaps herein lies the problem. Shouldn’t music teachers be more interested in effectively reaching their students than the mode in which they are reached? Maybe instrumental ensembles are becoming obsolete in schools. I don’t think they are, but even of they were, we would still be ill-equipped to continue music education as a discipline.

As always, I do not have a definitive solution. However, music is music and I believe we as teachers need to not place value judgments on what that means. Our students come to us as blank slates and we should be filling those slates with valuable information, yes, but always allowing that blank slate to find its place in the vast chalkboard of music.

A Hint of Optimism

I know. From my writing so far it may seem rare to look at the bright side of things. This is actually not the case at all. I wouldn’t be working as hard as I do if I didn’t think that we music educators were making a difference. So, I thought I would take a break from the professional critiques to highlight a few things that I observe which are positives in music education.

New teachers are becoming independent thinkers. This seems to be much more prevalent in today’s music education student than it was just twelve short years ago when I began my undergraduate career. Back then it seemed that everyone wanted to be the best conductor of the best ensemble that ever existed in a school. We idolized those who attained these goals, and shunned the teachers who seemed to try and break this mold. The more I work with young teachers, the more I believe that they are sincere in goals for music education – not just for producing students who play really well, etc. We should never lose sight of the successes that we all have. In tumultuous economic times, everyone suffers…music programs especially. But it is good to know that there are those out there who will continue to demonstrate the vitality and urgency of keeping music in the education system.

Can/Should We Truly Implement the National Standards for Music Education?

I know most of us are beaten over the head with MENC’s National Standards so much that we would really rather not even think about them after we are asked to recite them in our sleep. So why do we learn them? Why do we even have them? Many teachers will tell you that the standards are too idealistic and do little for the situations that schools face. Others will say that they are too general and give no specific instruction for implementation. To me, these seem like excuses rather than valid arguments.

The National Standards for Music Education were not meant to dictate everything that can and should be done in the context of a music classroom, nor were they intended as a script that music teachers to follow. “OK, kids, today MENC says I have to teach you about music in relation to the arts and disciplines outside the arts.” They were intended, I believe, to serve as the backdrop for your curriculum. They outline the main points of teaching well-rounded musicianship and give students the tools necessary to truly interact with, and not just play, music.

I believe most ensemble classroom teachers struggle with the standards. This is mainly due to the rehearsal checklist techniques that are forced into our minds from the beginning of our lives as musicians. We play music, and if some thing is bad, we fix it. When you think about your musical experiences from the past, you may come to the same conclusion as I did; that music was not something that I did, it was something that was done to me. Check that note, your rhythm is wrong, the articulation is unclear, etc. Most teachers do not deviate from this level of instruction. I think the National Standards can help us get beyond this level of instruction by providing an outline for teachers to be creative in their planning, and allow for students to be actively engaged in creative music learning. I have attached an article that I wrote with some specific suggestions for this. The article is unpublished, but that will hopefully change soon.

The final point of consideration is how to spread the use of the standards to all schools. Even if everyone were to agree that the standards were a great guideline, how do we ensure that they are being implemented effectively? My thought is to have students keep portfolios of their work, including ensemble concerts. Maybe not immediately, but eventually the performance product would be very high. These materials should be presented to anyone and everyone; parents at open house, administrators at a school board meeting, and to colleagues at professional conferences. If more forward-thinking teachers begin to model for others (bad teaching strategy, but its the only way to get things done in music education it seems), we may actually see more elements of creative music learning make their way into all aspects of our schools’ music curricula. Enjoy this piece, and feel free to comment on the strategies for implementation, or as always, anything else that you’d like.

Standards-Based Instruction Article

What makes a great teacher?

We’ve all had really great teachers as well as some really…not so great ones. What is the difference? Is it subject knowledge, a general compassion for students, classroom manner, or some intangible that is more difficult to describe?

In music education, there are a plethora of subject-savvy teachers who are ultimately forced into submission because of an inability (real or perceived) to connect with students, or fail to find the musical satisfaction that they sought when entering the profession. A wiser man than myself once said that once you get the job, expect your responsibilities to be about fifteen percent music and eighty-five percent “other stuff”. I think it is safe to say that we are rarely well-prepared for this aspect of our job. We get into music education because we love music and we want to share that with students; not to fill out paperwork, go to meetings, etc. So the question remains, how do we improve upon our current retention rate of approximately one in five new teachers making it beyond their first five years? Do we need to, or is this just the sort of natural selection that goes on in any profession? My guess is that many great would-be teachers have been a part of the four that choose a different path.

I guess I’m wondering if we can still use the traditional benchmarks to evaluate good teaching. It seems to me that the best teachers have their own unique standard; one which no one else can be compared to. After all, becoming your own brand of teacher is a long process. It requires years of personal reflection and criticism. Maybe this kind of process is not possible in today’s society where instant gratification reigns supreme. But I would like to think (and, really, I know it to be true) that the next wave of greatness is out there. We just need time to find ourselves.