Wow. I haven’t posted anything here in a looooong time. I suppose that could mean one of two things: either I’m working too hard, or I’ve completely given up the fight. Well, I will tell you for sure that I haven’t given up. I’m still trying to implement the progressive ideas that I think music education urgently needs, and I’m still trying to make these changes in all classes…including the performance-based class that I have.

So now that you know I’m still at it, I thought it might be good to write some reflections from the first few weeks. I’ll focus on my new class, which is called music creation and production. For those who do not know, this is a class based on constructivist ideology. Students create their own music (with little guidance from me), and then we have critiques. They may ask myself or any of their peers to evaluate their work, for which I have made a form to fill out. The form is very basic – things you liked, things to improve, suggestions for future revisions. They then revise their work, and turn in a total of three projects at the end of the semester – all ‘drafts’ and evaluation forms included.

Here’s how it’s going:

- Our first challenge was space. I have eight students in the class, and while they are encouraged to work in groups, their immediate tendency is to pair up or work alone. This necessitates the need for at least 4 areas for work. We are fortunate to be able to accommodate, but obviously not everyone can record at the same time (as we only have one computer for multi-tracking, and one handheld for getting ideas down).

- Another issue is scheduling. It was great that the administration gave us 5 days out of 7 to have class (we’re on a 7-day cycle schedule), and we even have a double period on one of those days. Time is certainly not an issue in terms of quantity. I will say that I would much prefer to have another double period rather than meeting during one 45 minute class most days. It is difficult for students to come into class and just turn on the creativity switch in a span of one 45-minute period. Understandably so.

- Equipment is always a challenge. You always wish you had this and that without knowing whether or not it would actually be used. Ultimately, I think we have almost the right amount of ’stuff’…except for a MIDI controller. I will ask for another laptop next year if the number of students warrants it.

- In the future, I will look for group improvisational activities to start the class out with. I think the students are agonizing too much in the early stages of their work. In my way of thinking, it is important to get a few good ideas down, and then expand them. Improvisation skills will benefit these ‘brainstorms’.

- I will have specific dates for turning in drafts for evaluation. Many of the students are not doing these on a regular basis. They feel as though they need a completed project before it is evaluated. There is also quite a bit of inconsistent focus. A few of the students tend to jump from project to project without really completing any of them. Having required ‘check-ins’ will help.

That’s all for now. Thanks to those who have inquired about my class, and have  expressed interest and support. It is a very new process to me, and one that I think is very relevant in modern education. I will continue to reflect on how I can best provide a forum for creative exploration in music. I hope you do the same.

PS – I went to see Wilco the other night, and have never seen a better live performance in my life. Go see them when you can. Pay whatever the asking price is for tickets. You will not be disappointed. Bravo, Wilco!

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

I don’t usually give book recommendations. Ever. My taste in literature is about as eclectic as my taste in music. However, I recently started reading The Rest is Noise by Alex Ross, and although I’m only now finishing the first chapter, I can tell anyone who is interested in music that it is absolutely awesome. The book is even accompanied by an online blog and listening guide provided by the author. Not only is this a great work, but it is a peek at what is to come in multimedia.

I’m not sure what took me so long, but this is definitely one to add to your list if you are interested in music.

I think it would be cool to have some of those who read (or stumble upon) my blog to write guest letters. So, if you have something that you’re ready to get out there, send me an e-mail at aschlip@gmail.com with your thoughts. I may revise (as I am a teacher and extremely uptight about grammar), but I would like to get a sense for what teachers and interested parties to the profession think about our future. Don’t be shy, and feel free to expand the context of what has been said so far.

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.

Students and teachers alike tend to get enamored with the latest and greatest gadgets in music. So often, we adopt new technologies before considering their long-term impact. I was an undergraduate student when music education technology really started to become a reality in schools, and I was assigned to teach the same classes I took as an undergraduate in my graduate study. Music ed. technology has played a huge role in my academic and professional worlds. My critique is based on my own experience and research, though, so your contributions are more than welcomed.

I think it goes without saying that the majority of teachers are intimidated by music education technology. Veteran teachers have the desire to learn certain software, but often do not see the value in the less structured, individual learning that technology can afford. Many of us, veteran and novice, shrink a bit when there isn’t a certain level of structure in a class. I believe a majority of this trepidation is related to the lack of familiarity with the software. Obviously, if you are unsure of what a program can do, you are much less likely to allow for creative experiences with it. Perhaps you need to hear that one idea that you either borrow, or transform for your teaching situation. I have found that a lot of ideas and presentations (at state conventions for example) are one or two details away from being really good and creative lessons in music. I am interested to hear any ideas that you have experience with. I, of course will give you some of my own to rip apart and form into your own concoctions.

I’m of the opinion that too many people reserve music technology for music theory and general music classes. Very few consider how they might put technology in the hands of student ensembles. I have creative projects as a part of my ensemble curriculum. These projects are completely open to what the student wants to do, though I do give a few suggestions to get them thinking creatively. I try to keep technology as an integral part of these projects, and to allow any of my suggestions be accomplished with freely available software. If a student requires specific software, I will make accommodations for the student to use it on a school computer. As always with an assignment like this, I am not as concerned with the product as I am the process of what the student did and learned to arrive at the finished product.

I think by incorporating music technology into a creative part of the ensemble curriculum, we expand the re-creative nature of ensembles and begin to reach our goal of using technology in a transformative way.