Annotated Bibliographies
Rose, L. S., & Countryman, J. (2013). Repositioning ‘the elements’: How students talk about music. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 12(3): 45–64.
This article was very interesting as it explored not only the rigidity that the elements have imposed on music education when used as universal truths rather than a tool to understand but also how it limits teachers to a Euro-centrist, egotistical view of the subject and alienates many students. The alienation described was particularly heart-breaking as any students that are not afforded the opportunity to study privately are often left behind in music classes where the elements are the focus in addition to being told that their tastes in music are lesser and illegitimate, they don’t enjoy the real music studied in class. This really struck a chord with me as I was not enrolled in private teaching until the age of 13 where most violin student start as young as 3, because of this many students who started much the same way as I did felt that they were behind the rest of the class. The advantage to this was that these more experienced students brought the level of the class up and were very encouraging so we were able to perform more advanced and even more modern songs that were more palatable for the rest of the school. It was surprising to learn that teachers are resistant to changing this approach to the elements of music even though they are the ones seeing these effects first hand. Rose and Countryman quote many teachers that face pressures from school boards and colleagues to justify and legitimize their teaching practices so that they align with what is being done in other fields. This effect was very frustrating as teachers are responsible for the well being of their students, and should have the tools to explain and justify their practices and they should have to because if they are unable to argue that what they are doing is best for their students then it can and should be improved. I really enjoyed that the authors explored the ways that teenagers in particular were able to explore music in complex ways but didn’t necessarily have the language to do so and had to find creative ways to describe what they were hearing. I would like to see further exploration to see if this type of teaching improves students’ communication skills and if using the elements as a tool would help to give them the language describe what they are hearing as teenagers often struggle to express themselves.
This article was very interesting as it explored not only the rigidity that the elements have imposed on music education when used as universal truths rather than a tool to understand but also how it limits teachers to a Euro-centrist, egotistical view of the subject and alienates many students. The alienation described was particularly heart-breaking as any students that are not afforded the opportunity to study privately are often left behind in music classes where the elements are the focus in addition to being told that their tastes in music are lesser and illegitimate, they don’t enjoy the real music studied in class. This really struck a chord with me as I was not enrolled in private teaching until the age of 13 where most violin student start as young as 3, because of this many students who started much the same way as I did felt that they were behind the rest of the class. The advantage to this was that these more experienced students brought the level of the class up and were very encouraging so we were able to perform more advanced and even more modern songs that were more palatable for the rest of the school. It was surprising to learn that teachers are resistant to changing this approach to the elements of music even though they are the ones seeing these effects first hand. Rose and Countryman quote many teachers that face pressures from school boards and colleagues to justify and legitimize their teaching practices so that they align with what is being done in other fields. This effect was very frustrating as teachers are responsible for the well being of their students, and should have the tools to explain and justify their practices and they should have to because if they are unable to argue that what they are doing is best for their students then it can and should be improved. I really enjoyed that the authors explored the ways that teenagers in particular were able to explore music in complex ways but didn’t necessarily have the language to do so and had to find creative ways to describe what they were hearing. I would like to see further exploration to see if this type of teaching improves students’ communication skills and if using the elements as a tool would help to give them the language describe what they are hearing as teenagers often struggle to express themselves.
Eric Teichman Response:
Hi Sarah,
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I found your surprise at teachers’ resistance to changing their approaches interesting, because you’re right, they’re the ones seeing the limiting effects of a curriculum centered around the elements. It’s even more interesting to me then, that at the end of your reflection you are left wondering if using those elements to replace students’ creative language to describe music would help them! I think the position of the elements, as the title suggests, is very important here. Are they at the center, or are they a support? Very interesting way to work through these issues!
Hi Sarah,
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I found your surprise at teachers’ resistance to changing their approaches interesting, because you’re right, they’re the ones seeing the limiting effects of a curriculum centered around the elements. It’s even more interesting to me then, that at the end of your reflection you are left wondering if using those elements to replace students’ creative language to describe music would help them! I think the position of the elements, as the title suggests, is very important here. Are they at the center, or are they a support? Very interesting way to work through these issues!
Dawe, L. (2016). Fumbling Towards Vulnerability: Moving Out of the Familiar for Music Education’s Sake, Canadian Music Educator, (57) 2, pp.22-24.
Lesley Dawe’s article was very interesting as she explored ways to promote inquiry-based learning as well as how teacher insecurity may be holding these programs back. In this article Dawe mentions that she was a classically trained wind instrumentalist and pianist and she took comfort in this very traditional, black and white approach she was exposed to while simultaneously condemning this type of comfort zone. I really related to this as I was always exposed to a very traditional type of education, I thrived in this type of environment and developed a very particular type of perfectionism that can often stifle creativity. I was surprised though when she said that she became very nervous during a workshop at the University of Toronto where she was asked to create a small drum beat, she described a type of search for approval I think many students face when transitioning to adult life. What surprised me was not the existence of this need for approval but that she was so stunted by it, as someone who wanted to be a music educator I find it disappointing she was not encouraged seek opportunities to creatively problem solve or experiment in an academic environment even if it was not specifically music due to what she describes as “teacher insecurity”. I realise that this effect is somewhat cultural, which is very frustrating as not only an artist but as a student. A culture of seeking approval is created from the moment you enter school, sometimes earlier, and it permeates disciplines. This phenomena creates students and later adults that cannot creatively problem solve or think critically, it creates students who are afraid of tapping on a drum and adults that do not have the skills to seek out new information or examine it. But by the same token creativity and inquiry cannot be forced upon a student, I agree with Dawe that giving students the tools and environment to do so is important but inquiry-based learning is often something that is an internal learning process whose acceleration cannot be forced or judged in a learning environment. I am curious to how Dawe identifies when this comfort-zone is important to keep intact and when it is appropriate to draw children out of it without forcing them out and risking the shut-down of this type of creativity and inquiry she strives to foster.
Lesley Dawe’s article was very interesting as she explored ways to promote inquiry-based learning as well as how teacher insecurity may be holding these programs back. In this article Dawe mentions that she was a classically trained wind instrumentalist and pianist and she took comfort in this very traditional, black and white approach she was exposed to while simultaneously condemning this type of comfort zone. I really related to this as I was always exposed to a very traditional type of education, I thrived in this type of environment and developed a very particular type of perfectionism that can often stifle creativity. I was surprised though when she said that she became very nervous during a workshop at the University of Toronto where she was asked to create a small drum beat, she described a type of search for approval I think many students face when transitioning to adult life. What surprised me was not the existence of this need for approval but that she was so stunted by it, as someone who wanted to be a music educator I find it disappointing she was not encouraged seek opportunities to creatively problem solve or experiment in an academic environment even if it was not specifically music due to what she describes as “teacher insecurity”. I realise that this effect is somewhat cultural, which is very frustrating as not only an artist but as a student. A culture of seeking approval is created from the moment you enter school, sometimes earlier, and it permeates disciplines. This phenomena creates students and later adults that cannot creatively problem solve or think critically, it creates students who are afraid of tapping on a drum and adults that do not have the skills to seek out new information or examine it. But by the same token creativity and inquiry cannot be forced upon a student, I agree with Dawe that giving students the tools and environment to do so is important but inquiry-based learning is often something that is an internal learning process whose acceleration cannot be forced or judged in a learning environment. I am curious to how Dawe identifies when this comfort-zone is important to keep intact and when it is appropriate to draw children out of it without forcing them out and risking the shut-down of this type of creativity and inquiry she strives to foster.
Eric Teichman Response:
Thank you for your thoughtful response. The paralyzing fear of a classically trained musician to improvise is one as common as it can be puzzling. As you identify, we perfect our playing technique and raise our expectations of ourselves to impossible heights, all while increasing the disconnect between our technical abilities and our creative ones. Then, it’s almost no surprise when accomplished performers demand high-level improvisation of themselves that they can’t produce! How can we encourage the development of these skills simultaneously early on to avoid such inconsistency later? Your last line makes me wonder, is it ever necessary to “force” children out of their comfort zones to accomplish this, or rather how can we enlarge these zones to include improvisation and creativity by incorporating as components of music education as common as performance technique?
Thank you for your thoughtful response. The paralyzing fear of a classically trained musician to improvise is one as common as it can be puzzling. As you identify, we perfect our playing technique and raise our expectations of ourselves to impossible heights, all while increasing the disconnect between our technical abilities and our creative ones. Then, it’s almost no surprise when accomplished performers demand high-level improvisation of themselves that they can’t produce! How can we encourage the development of these skills simultaneously early on to avoid such inconsistency later? Your last line makes me wonder, is it ever necessary to “force” children out of their comfort zones to accomplish this, or rather how can we enlarge these zones to include improvisation and creativity by incorporating as components of music education as common as performance technique?
Wasiak, E. (2017) Unmasking the Hidden Curriculum in Canadian Music Education Canadian Music Educator.
This was a very humbling article to read. Wasiak presents Willingham’s (2009) axiom “we teach students, not our subject” (20) and challenges the results oriented approach that most teachers take. Although I am in favour of this approach, my eyes were really open to information that I was overlooking due to my own privilege. This article challenged fond memories and experiences of mine and forced me to look for when the approach that I often thrived in was not working, for me or for others: Wasiak forced me to remember and question why I was considered musical even when I struggled when others were not. There were many issues that I was aware of in this article but one that surprised me was how gendered music in schools often is. I have personally been confronted with bosses telling me “people like female teachers” and the lack of female conductors and composers in the male-dominant industry; what I was not aware of was pressures like “women play flute/boys play trumpet […] black men play jazz/women sing jazz; and men conduct bands/women conduct choirs”. I have only ever been in orchestras where instruments are often coveted and romanticised for both genders furthermore the only school band I was in was in such a privileged area that we didn’t really see those types of pressures. As a result, Wasiak’s criticism of the “pursuit of excellence” and by extension large ensembles was frustrating to read. Although I understand that results oriented can often exclude students I believe that large ensembles are a valuable asset to music programs, especially in an education culture that doesn’t place as much value in arts programs. They teach many skills similar to sports teams while being more accessible to the physically disabled, introducing children western music that they are less likely to be exposed to and teaching discipline. Large ensembles are also the most cost effective way to involve many students in a musical experience to my knowledge and in a world where funding is being cut rapidly that is valuable. Many of the arguments presented surround the power structure within these types of large ensembles but Wasiak offers no solutions, suggestions or alternatives to this structure, I am curious to know how he would create a musical experience that would be more inclusive and without this power structure and is this type of structure really as tyrannical as described?
This was a very humbling article to read. Wasiak presents Willingham’s (2009) axiom “we teach students, not our subject” (20) and challenges the results oriented approach that most teachers take. Although I am in favour of this approach, my eyes were really open to information that I was overlooking due to my own privilege. This article challenged fond memories and experiences of mine and forced me to look for when the approach that I often thrived in was not working, for me or for others: Wasiak forced me to remember and question why I was considered musical even when I struggled when others were not. There were many issues that I was aware of in this article but one that surprised me was how gendered music in schools often is. I have personally been confronted with bosses telling me “people like female teachers” and the lack of female conductors and composers in the male-dominant industry; what I was not aware of was pressures like “women play flute/boys play trumpet […] black men play jazz/women sing jazz; and men conduct bands/women conduct choirs”. I have only ever been in orchestras where instruments are often coveted and romanticised for both genders furthermore the only school band I was in was in such a privileged area that we didn’t really see those types of pressures. As a result, Wasiak’s criticism of the “pursuit of excellence” and by extension large ensembles was frustrating to read. Although I understand that results oriented can often exclude students I believe that large ensembles are a valuable asset to music programs, especially in an education culture that doesn’t place as much value in arts programs. They teach many skills similar to sports teams while being more accessible to the physically disabled, introducing children western music that they are less likely to be exposed to and teaching discipline. Large ensembles are also the most cost effective way to involve many students in a musical experience to my knowledge and in a world where funding is being cut rapidly that is valuable. Many of the arguments presented surround the power structure within these types of large ensembles but Wasiak offers no solutions, suggestions or alternatives to this structure, I am curious to know how he would create a musical experience that would be more inclusive and without this power structure and is this type of structure really as tyrannical as described?
Hourigan, R. M. (2009). The invisible student: Understanding social identity construction within performing ensembles. Music Educators Journal, 34-38.
Serres, D. Think Everything’s “Normal?” Then It’s Time To Reconsider And Promote A New Narrative Of Disability. Retrieved from http://organizingchange.org/think-everythings-normal-then-its-time-to-reconsider-and-promote-a-new-narrative-of-disability/
I found both the Hourigan and Serres articles very thought provoking but as I connected to Hourigan’s article on a personal level and still have some thinking to do about Serres’ article, I will be talking about them separately. Serres’ article was confusing to me and although my lack of experience with persons with disabilities is a contributing factor there are still things I would like to discuss. The first thing I noticed was the language used regarding the medical community, specifically the sectors that provide support to persons with disabilities. I found their rhetoric a little too similar to what is used in some extremist groups such as when they discuss the “medical-industrial complex” and the “corporatization of medicine” which to me was reminiscent of the phrase “big pharma” often used to demonize western medicine. It was unclear to me if they were calling for better research as the current information is outdated, or if it was simply stigma towards the medical community. I was also very surprised by the lack of support for current programs in place such as “Special Education” classes and Individualized Education Plans (IEP). My experience as an outsider looking into the Special Education class at my school was that it allowed children who needed more support to get it through smaller classes, teachers who were better able to give them access to the resources appropriate for them, and a learning environment in which students could thrive. My personal experience with IEPs was positive; I feel they are a very good resource to help both myself and others who learned more independently or needed fewer accommodations to get the support that they needed from their teachers to thrive in the classroom, but as mentioned in the article for these programs to work, support from both teachers and administration is imperative. I think this article requires more thinking on my part to fully understand it, which made this an overall frustrating read because their critiques directly oppose my personal experience. I would really benefit from clarification on societal changes versus “overcoming” disabilities - is it more of a language and mindset shift, or is this problem a fundamental structural problem in the treatments and the rights of disabled persons, or both?
I was pleasantly surprised by the focus on the Traumatic Brain Injury Syndrome (TBI) of Jason as it is something I personally have struggled through and is not something I have seen included in discussions surrounding disabilities. I really enjoyed the emphasis on the “invisible” as a condition, as I have often seen described - it can feel very ostracizing because you feel like you are the only one who can see how much you are struggling. That being said, I feel the author did not discuss contributing factors to the social isolation in the specific example that they used. Specifically with traumatic brain injuries, things like concentration, processing emotions, frustration, fatigue and depression are important factors to consider when looking at social withdrawal because when most of the child’s scarce energy is being spent on just staying afloat, it becomes very difficult to participate in high energy activities such as socialization. Furthermore TBIs can cause or worsen a pre-existing depression, further complicating social interactions and the need for increased awareness by teachers, caretakers and parents is a factor I don’t feel was stressed enough in this article. It’s very frustrating to finally see a very common obstacle for young people to face being discussed and have it misunderstood. One point that really surprised and frustrated me was one of their solutions when travelling. Switching rooms every night is not an effective strategy for all children struggling with socialization – for some, all it will accomplish is allowing them less time with others to warm up and robbing them of the chance to connect with other children meaningfully. My suggestion would be to put them in a room that is missing one person or make a bus chart and have them sit near another child that is outgoing, as it takes the pressure off the “invisible child” to instigate social interactions. I went on one of these trips and these were some of the strategies that really helped me reconnect with my peers and make new friends with whom I still keep in contact. If there was one thing I could stress to this author it would be the “danger of a single story”, as it was obvious that they took the experience of one young child who was unable to articulate their experience clearly, as gospel. I feel that the points brought up in this article could be much more effective if more research was done on the experiences of students with “invisible” obstacles and I would really enjoy hearing their thoughts on educational reform, once that research has been done.
A study done at McMaster University by Carol DeMatteo may help enrich the understanding of those interested.
https://canchild.ca/en/research-in-practice/current-studies/safely-returning-children-and-youth-to-activity-after-mtbi-concussion
Serres, D. Think Everything’s “Normal?” Then It’s Time To Reconsider And Promote A New Narrative Of Disability. Retrieved from http://organizingchange.org/think-everythings-normal-then-its-time-to-reconsider-and-promote-a-new-narrative-of-disability/
I found both the Hourigan and Serres articles very thought provoking but as I connected to Hourigan’s article on a personal level and still have some thinking to do about Serres’ article, I will be talking about them separately. Serres’ article was confusing to me and although my lack of experience with persons with disabilities is a contributing factor there are still things I would like to discuss. The first thing I noticed was the language used regarding the medical community, specifically the sectors that provide support to persons with disabilities. I found their rhetoric a little too similar to what is used in some extremist groups such as when they discuss the “medical-industrial complex” and the “corporatization of medicine” which to me was reminiscent of the phrase “big pharma” often used to demonize western medicine. It was unclear to me if they were calling for better research as the current information is outdated, or if it was simply stigma towards the medical community. I was also very surprised by the lack of support for current programs in place such as “Special Education” classes and Individualized Education Plans (IEP). My experience as an outsider looking into the Special Education class at my school was that it allowed children who needed more support to get it through smaller classes, teachers who were better able to give them access to the resources appropriate for them, and a learning environment in which students could thrive. My personal experience with IEPs was positive; I feel they are a very good resource to help both myself and others who learned more independently or needed fewer accommodations to get the support that they needed from their teachers to thrive in the classroom, but as mentioned in the article for these programs to work, support from both teachers and administration is imperative. I think this article requires more thinking on my part to fully understand it, which made this an overall frustrating read because their critiques directly oppose my personal experience. I would really benefit from clarification on societal changes versus “overcoming” disabilities - is it more of a language and mindset shift, or is this problem a fundamental structural problem in the treatments and the rights of disabled persons, or both?
I was pleasantly surprised by the focus on the Traumatic Brain Injury Syndrome (TBI) of Jason as it is something I personally have struggled through and is not something I have seen included in discussions surrounding disabilities. I really enjoyed the emphasis on the “invisible” as a condition, as I have often seen described - it can feel very ostracizing because you feel like you are the only one who can see how much you are struggling. That being said, I feel the author did not discuss contributing factors to the social isolation in the specific example that they used. Specifically with traumatic brain injuries, things like concentration, processing emotions, frustration, fatigue and depression are important factors to consider when looking at social withdrawal because when most of the child’s scarce energy is being spent on just staying afloat, it becomes very difficult to participate in high energy activities such as socialization. Furthermore TBIs can cause or worsen a pre-existing depression, further complicating social interactions and the need for increased awareness by teachers, caretakers and parents is a factor I don’t feel was stressed enough in this article. It’s very frustrating to finally see a very common obstacle for young people to face being discussed and have it misunderstood. One point that really surprised and frustrated me was one of their solutions when travelling. Switching rooms every night is not an effective strategy for all children struggling with socialization – for some, all it will accomplish is allowing them less time with others to warm up and robbing them of the chance to connect with other children meaningfully. My suggestion would be to put them in a room that is missing one person or make a bus chart and have them sit near another child that is outgoing, as it takes the pressure off the “invisible child” to instigate social interactions. I went on one of these trips and these were some of the strategies that really helped me reconnect with my peers and make new friends with whom I still keep in contact. If there was one thing I could stress to this author it would be the “danger of a single story”, as it was obvious that they took the experience of one young child who was unable to articulate their experience clearly, as gospel. I feel that the points brought up in this article could be much more effective if more research was done on the experiences of students with “invisible” obstacles and I would really enjoy hearing their thoughts on educational reform, once that research has been done.
A study done at McMaster University by Carol DeMatteo may help enrich the understanding of those interested.
https://canchild.ca/en/research-in-practice/current-studies/safely-returning-children-and-youth-to-activity-after-mtbi-concussion
Teacher Interview
I had the opportunity to interview my childhood teacher of 10 years Jennifer Spleit-Landry who is the owner of the Bel Canto Music Academy where she teaches both private, group lessons and orchestras, she also teaches at a variety of different schools such as Mohawk College and Southern Ontario Collegiate (an international private school). I was really excited to interview her as she has experience teaching such a wide variety of students, age groups and settings and I thought she could give a really interesting perspective to music education.
How do you think language impacts learning?
“Well when I’m working with ESL learners there is a barrier to the teaching, it really changes the lesson. It takes longer to give a lesson, particularly when students are unfamiliar with the topic. So with beginner students musically (when they are unfamiliar with traditional musical terms and symbols or the ability to play an instrument) giving the instruction takes 3 times as long as performing the actual task because you have to explain it in so many different ways (different words or exaggerated body motions) [so that they understand the lesson fully]. It’s much easier if you are working with someone who has experience playing already because you can do a call and response, so you demonstrate and they play back because you can actually cut out most of the vocabulary and express what you want them to play using the instrument. [….].
Do you change your language with young students versus more mature students (even if they are not ESL)?
Well with younger kids I try to use more memory tricks to help with understanding words or posture, so for instance for the violin bow grip I will say “your spider bow grip”, so little analogies and memory tools that I might not have to use with an adult. Although, with a beginner adult learner I use a lot of those same little tricks [for example] the “every good boy deserves fudge” trick to remember the lines in the treble clef staff. Just because an adult can comprehend the idea better that you climb up alphabetically does necessarily mean they will remember it any faster. So yes some things changes with younger kids like sentence structure. Adults also want to delve into the philosophy a lot more and want to know what specific muscle groups they are using but a kid you can just say ‘use your arm’ or ‘use your back’ […]. With the high school class that I teach is ESL but Ontario guidelines say that you are not allowed to change your lesson so it is geared towards different language learners. So you can change your delivery of a lesson but you cannot change the content so they still have to learn complex words like heterophony and monophony and texture and articulation, where as they are still learning basic English words [and grammar]. So I change my delivery and sentence structure; I use more punctuated and shorter sentences but in general try not to change the terms because you want to grow the same learning and vocabulary.
How do you think culture influences their learning or your teaching style?
There are definitely different cultures in regards to music, absolutely. In my experience when I have had ESL learners who are coming from places like China or Korea they often already have a background studying music even if it’s not with the instrument they are studying with me[…]. It seems to be more ingrained into school systems that everybody (and just culturally) has some music background. Parents also tend to be more supportive, so it’s a lot easier to get across the idea of daily discipline or scales practice, it’s almost like you don’t have to discuss it as much, they just think of that as being part of daily life and routine. Now of course we are getting into stereotypes but for instance in North America you’ll find some people who are really in support of arts programs and by extension music programs but there is a wider general public that just thinks that it just not as integral to learning. So when you get someone who is from a family like that it they are not necessarily supporting their child’s practice and that is influenced onto the child: that the activity is one only of enjoyment. So as soon as they are not having fun, they are not going to do it, which means they are not going to continue as long in a program, they are not going to pay as much attention to the minute details, it’s not interesting, they are not going to do the daily routine of practicing, they will not want to do the performances and the learning can stop. Definitely there are cultural influences on it.
Is there anything you do to combat that or is it something where you just do your best?
Personally I incorporate, particularly with my beginner students or my ESL students who are new to instruments or music learning, daily reminders and daily proofs of studies and analogies to how music contributes to completing a whole person. I always keep trying to keep bringing up “think about how you are like a scientist right now, what do scientists have to do [when they experiment]? Well they have to go back and start from scratch and change a variable and they have to perform that experiment over and over again until they achieve a result. So when I try to teach kids or teenagers I try to explain the value of the skills that they are learning through music education because I think if you don’t point them out, the people that have not grown up in a culture supporting it, they don’t realize how what they are doing right now, playing Ode to Joy on the guitar for instance, is going to impact in any way their career as a scientist or as a mathematician or whatever their other paths happen to be. With older kids I try to do a lot more lesson planning and journaling like “what were your challenges? What were your gains? What is your short term goal (for the end of the week)? What is your long term goal (for the end of the semester)?” And then how do you then break that down to achieve those goals. I try incorporating those kinds of things so they have study tools or life tools through music education so they can more easily see the value in what they are doing.
What does creativity look like in the different settings you teach in?
That is actually part of the Ontario educational guidelines […] so you can teach strategies for improvisation or composition which is personal creativity, but the question is in a high school class how you achieve that. You have to teach foundational information so for example dynamics and then you have to teach a piece so that they can play the notes and then give the students an opportunity to experiment with those dynamics in their own practice and chose how they want to use them in a piece […], or as a group you can experiment with different dynamics and then they decide collectively as a group if they want it to be piano or forte. So I like to use information that has a more concise answer but then student then choses how they want to apply them, so same thing with composition […]. In kids classes I use it more in terms of emotions, scenes or pictures. So “let’s all think about how we felt today at school. If one kid says happy then let’s play a scale or hot cross buns but trying to impart that emotion when they play and encourage them to improvise or go home and write something or compose something. It harder in a group setting but in a private lesson there is more pressure […] so maybe there is a comfort in learning and “failing” as a group. In private lessons creativity is more based on what the student enjoys because you can build your whole lesson plan around that.
We have talked about how the elements of music can effect music education, do you feel they are pushed too hard or do you feel you still have enough freedom to teach them effectively and still allow the kids to be creative?
I think it is harder when you have a language barrier because you can express things more easily in your native language […] it’s also easier when you [have more ‘advanced’ students]. But I do think that that information is foundational and you need [them] to then be creative […]. For instance how are you going to get creative on an instrument if you don’t know how to set it up? That’s where having a culture that doesn’t support music really is the flaw; because if students already had a background on those ‘basics’ or had more support in learning the ‘basics’ like in an elementary music program so that by the time they get to say high school they [then have the confidence] and can then be creative with it. […] That being said I that doesn’t mean that they need to know every style to be creative but I don’t think that it’s a limitation that they are trying to impose but students start to recognize the ‘importance’ of the elements before you can get to the next step and that’s why being able to explain a long term goal becomes really essential.
In talking to Jennifer I felt I got a really wonderful and realistic look into some of the challenges one might face when navigating language in a classroom, how to facilitate creativity in more confined circumstance and how to help people find value in music education regardless of if they come from a culture that does not necessarily value it. I really enjoyed how she thinks of music as contributing to personhood as a whole rather than it being a segregated “guilty pleasure” that I have often seen it treated as. It was also interesting to see someone who has one foot in a more rigid teaching circumstance, and another in complete music education freedom to interpret the “foundations” of music as useful tools to help facilitate learning and later creativity by giving them more tools that they can pull out of their musical tool box and employ in addition to “resume skills” such as long term planning and creative problem solving. I felt this was really integral to her teaching philosophy not only from our conversation but also when I reflect upon my own views and skills that developed during the 10 years I studied with her. In talking to Jennifer I also realized that constant development of yourself and your teaching philosophy is integral to being a teacher as the cultural and emotional nature of music requires her to confront many values that may be foreign to her but she will have to incorporate and learn from. For Jennifer it is important that these types of connections are authentic, in my time studying and teaching alongside her I have seen her introduce songs from a variety of cultures and bringing in people to pass on firsthand knowledge of the culture and context of these songs. In addition to doing this she creates a supportive, safe learning environment that encourages creativity by tailoring her language to help her students feel comfortable such as adjusting her sentence structure without “dumbing down” the content because they are “beginners” or ESL learners. One phrase I remember from when I was little and she continues to use is “you have to be fun to have fun” and this really translates throughout Jennifer’s teaching and she creates an environment where students are part of a team that creates music and where experimentation and “failure” are integral and parts of this creative process that not there to be overcome or to be ashamed of.
I had the opportunity to interview my childhood teacher of 10 years Jennifer Spleit-Landry who is the owner of the Bel Canto Music Academy where she teaches both private, group lessons and orchestras, she also teaches at a variety of different schools such as Mohawk College and Southern Ontario Collegiate (an international private school). I was really excited to interview her as she has experience teaching such a wide variety of students, age groups and settings and I thought she could give a really interesting perspective to music education.
How do you think language impacts learning?
“Well when I’m working with ESL learners there is a barrier to the teaching, it really changes the lesson. It takes longer to give a lesson, particularly when students are unfamiliar with the topic. So with beginner students musically (when they are unfamiliar with traditional musical terms and symbols or the ability to play an instrument) giving the instruction takes 3 times as long as performing the actual task because you have to explain it in so many different ways (different words or exaggerated body motions) [so that they understand the lesson fully]. It’s much easier if you are working with someone who has experience playing already because you can do a call and response, so you demonstrate and they play back because you can actually cut out most of the vocabulary and express what you want them to play using the instrument. [….].
Do you change your language with young students versus more mature students (even if they are not ESL)?
Well with younger kids I try to use more memory tricks to help with understanding words or posture, so for instance for the violin bow grip I will say “your spider bow grip”, so little analogies and memory tools that I might not have to use with an adult. Although, with a beginner adult learner I use a lot of those same little tricks [for example] the “every good boy deserves fudge” trick to remember the lines in the treble clef staff. Just because an adult can comprehend the idea better that you climb up alphabetically does necessarily mean they will remember it any faster. So yes some things changes with younger kids like sentence structure. Adults also want to delve into the philosophy a lot more and want to know what specific muscle groups they are using but a kid you can just say ‘use your arm’ or ‘use your back’ […]. With the high school class that I teach is ESL but Ontario guidelines say that you are not allowed to change your lesson so it is geared towards different language learners. So you can change your delivery of a lesson but you cannot change the content so they still have to learn complex words like heterophony and monophony and texture and articulation, where as they are still learning basic English words [and grammar]. So I change my delivery and sentence structure; I use more punctuated and shorter sentences but in general try not to change the terms because you want to grow the same learning and vocabulary.
How do you think culture influences their learning or your teaching style?
There are definitely different cultures in regards to music, absolutely. In my experience when I have had ESL learners who are coming from places like China or Korea they often already have a background studying music even if it’s not with the instrument they are studying with me[…]. It seems to be more ingrained into school systems that everybody (and just culturally) has some music background. Parents also tend to be more supportive, so it’s a lot easier to get across the idea of daily discipline or scales practice, it’s almost like you don’t have to discuss it as much, they just think of that as being part of daily life and routine. Now of course we are getting into stereotypes but for instance in North America you’ll find some people who are really in support of arts programs and by extension music programs but there is a wider general public that just thinks that it just not as integral to learning. So when you get someone who is from a family like that it they are not necessarily supporting their child’s practice and that is influenced onto the child: that the activity is one only of enjoyment. So as soon as they are not having fun, they are not going to do it, which means they are not going to continue as long in a program, they are not going to pay as much attention to the minute details, it’s not interesting, they are not going to do the daily routine of practicing, they will not want to do the performances and the learning can stop. Definitely there are cultural influences on it.
Is there anything you do to combat that or is it something where you just do your best?
Personally I incorporate, particularly with my beginner students or my ESL students who are new to instruments or music learning, daily reminders and daily proofs of studies and analogies to how music contributes to completing a whole person. I always keep trying to keep bringing up “think about how you are like a scientist right now, what do scientists have to do [when they experiment]? Well they have to go back and start from scratch and change a variable and they have to perform that experiment over and over again until they achieve a result. So when I try to teach kids or teenagers I try to explain the value of the skills that they are learning through music education because I think if you don’t point them out, the people that have not grown up in a culture supporting it, they don’t realize how what they are doing right now, playing Ode to Joy on the guitar for instance, is going to impact in any way their career as a scientist or as a mathematician or whatever their other paths happen to be. With older kids I try to do a lot more lesson planning and journaling like “what were your challenges? What were your gains? What is your short term goal (for the end of the week)? What is your long term goal (for the end of the semester)?” And then how do you then break that down to achieve those goals. I try incorporating those kinds of things so they have study tools or life tools through music education so they can more easily see the value in what they are doing.
What does creativity look like in the different settings you teach in?
That is actually part of the Ontario educational guidelines […] so you can teach strategies for improvisation or composition which is personal creativity, but the question is in a high school class how you achieve that. You have to teach foundational information so for example dynamics and then you have to teach a piece so that they can play the notes and then give the students an opportunity to experiment with those dynamics in their own practice and chose how they want to use them in a piece […], or as a group you can experiment with different dynamics and then they decide collectively as a group if they want it to be piano or forte. So I like to use information that has a more concise answer but then student then choses how they want to apply them, so same thing with composition […]. In kids classes I use it more in terms of emotions, scenes or pictures. So “let’s all think about how we felt today at school. If one kid says happy then let’s play a scale or hot cross buns but trying to impart that emotion when they play and encourage them to improvise or go home and write something or compose something. It harder in a group setting but in a private lesson there is more pressure […] so maybe there is a comfort in learning and “failing” as a group. In private lessons creativity is more based on what the student enjoys because you can build your whole lesson plan around that.
We have talked about how the elements of music can effect music education, do you feel they are pushed too hard or do you feel you still have enough freedom to teach them effectively and still allow the kids to be creative?
I think it is harder when you have a language barrier because you can express things more easily in your native language […] it’s also easier when you [have more ‘advanced’ students]. But I do think that that information is foundational and you need [them] to then be creative […]. For instance how are you going to get creative on an instrument if you don’t know how to set it up? That’s where having a culture that doesn’t support music really is the flaw; because if students already had a background on those ‘basics’ or had more support in learning the ‘basics’ like in an elementary music program so that by the time they get to say high school they [then have the confidence] and can then be creative with it. […] That being said I that doesn’t mean that they need to know every style to be creative but I don’t think that it’s a limitation that they are trying to impose but students start to recognize the ‘importance’ of the elements before you can get to the next step and that’s why being able to explain a long term goal becomes really essential.
In talking to Jennifer I felt I got a really wonderful and realistic look into some of the challenges one might face when navigating language in a classroom, how to facilitate creativity in more confined circumstance and how to help people find value in music education regardless of if they come from a culture that does not necessarily value it. I really enjoyed how she thinks of music as contributing to personhood as a whole rather than it being a segregated “guilty pleasure” that I have often seen it treated as. It was also interesting to see someone who has one foot in a more rigid teaching circumstance, and another in complete music education freedom to interpret the “foundations” of music as useful tools to help facilitate learning and later creativity by giving them more tools that they can pull out of their musical tool box and employ in addition to “resume skills” such as long term planning and creative problem solving. I felt this was really integral to her teaching philosophy not only from our conversation but also when I reflect upon my own views and skills that developed during the 10 years I studied with her. In talking to Jennifer I also realized that constant development of yourself and your teaching philosophy is integral to being a teacher as the cultural and emotional nature of music requires her to confront many values that may be foreign to her but she will have to incorporate and learn from. For Jennifer it is important that these types of connections are authentic, in my time studying and teaching alongside her I have seen her introduce songs from a variety of cultures and bringing in people to pass on firsthand knowledge of the culture and context of these songs. In addition to doing this she creates a supportive, safe learning environment that encourages creativity by tailoring her language to help her students feel comfortable such as adjusting her sentence structure without “dumbing down” the content because they are “beginners” or ESL learners. One phrase I remember from when I was little and she continues to use is “you have to be fun to have fun” and this really translates throughout Jennifer’s teaching and she creates an environment where students are part of a team that creates music and where experimentation and “failure” are integral and parts of this creative process that not there to be overcome or to be ashamed of.
Student Interview
I interviewed 3 students Matthew Botsford, Jessica vanLoon and Leif Portkey who all have varying experience with music and asked them to share why they have or have not studied or continued to study music and what may have been barriers for them.
Do you listening to music often and why?
Yes I do listen to music often, I usually enjoy listening to music on the bus or while I’m doing work. I find that the rhythm or the beat can help me get things done faster sometimes. But I also like to do nothing but listen to music, like just lay back and really listen while I’m relaxing.
-Matthew Botsford
Not particularly unless it’s to pass time or fill silence – its distracting.
-Leif Portkey
This was a common theme when I asked all 3 students if they enjoyed listening to music, they all sited listening to music most while on the bus or doing other work. Although they all listened to various genres, some picking favourites and but others have more neutral opinions electing to listen to a wide variety of genres equally.
Do you enjoy playing the same kind of music you enjoy listening to?
Yes I enjoyed playing the same kind of music I listen to in orchestra. I thought it was a nice change from classical music which we played most often.
-Jessica vanLoon
Yes I most enjoy playing the music I listened to in addition to listening to it obviously. It’s what I enjoy playing on the guitar.
-Matthew Botsford
The students who did play music did most enjoy playing the same kind of music they listened to which at first I didn’t find particularly surprising. I later discussed this with my peers who either continue study music formally or are majoring in music at university and many of them enjoy listening to different music from what they play. When we were discussing why we prefer playing different music than we listen to many people said it was because it feels like we live in the music that we play. When listening to “classical” music many of the musicians I spoke to feel that it the type of music they studied felt like “work music” regardless of genre and would elect to listen to music they didn’t over-analyze. I believe culturally classical music is considered not only a more valid but it is believed that it must be enjoyed a certain way, further excluding those who are unable or chose not to immerse themselves in it.
Have you ever studied music formally?
I have only ever taken music in elementary school so no; I would not consider myself as having a formal music education.
-Leif Portkey
Yes I studied music formally. I stared playing violin in my first year but switched to viola. I joined the orchestra because I liked music and I had a good group of friends who were playing with me. I also loved performing at concerts.
-Jessica vanLoon
No, I have never played music formally outside of elementary school. I studied guitar informally I guess... but I haven’t for a while.
-Matthew Botsford
Why didn’t you start to study music?
Despite enjoying it at the time, I chose to pursue different interests due to cost and time.
-Leif Portkey
Unfortunately this student was prevented from further pursing music because it was inaccessible to him. Music is often very expensive to pursue especially if seeking formal lessons rendering it inaccessible to many families. This is because music and the study of it is considered frivolous and a luxury to many families due to the high cost of instruments, lessons and the pompous stereotype that surrounds classical music study. Cost is a very large consideration when young families are choosing whether or not to enroll their child extra-curricular activities and the inaccessibility of music to less privileged families plays a large roll in why music stays a luxury.
Why did you stop studying music?
I stopped because I was only in the school orchestra and music class but the class was only offered at one time and another class that I needed for university was also only offered at that one time. I really miss it and wish I could have continued.
-Jessica vanLoon
I stopped playing music mostly because of my lifestyle. Music was always a hobby and I needed to focus more on school and I started to go out more with my friends and I sorta lost interest a little bit. There was nothing in particular that drove me away from music I just sorta lost interest and time.
-Matthew Botsford.
Based on these interviews music is generally enjoyed by the students who do not pursue it but is abandoned when they have to take on “more pressing “responsibilities. The joy playing music brings in childhood is often shoved to the back of their heads as they are forced to pursue “compulsory courses” or have to “be more serious about their education”. Later in life enjoying music looks a lot more like stolen moments and “I wish I could have kept it up but I just don’t have time”. We are taught “time is money” growing up and when spare time becomes as rare as it is in university we are forced to prioritize and leave what we enjoy behind and pursue what is “serious”. Music is often presented to people as an all or nothing deal, if you cannot fully commit to it, you don’t deserve it. You must be worthy of being listened to if you wish to pursue the study. Music is rarely presented as an internal enjoyment that doesn’t need justification or validation to be enjoyed. Once a student reaches adolescence music is often presented as if you cannot commit to “selling your soul to the devil” as Paganini did you aren’t really committed and therefore are not “really” a violinist. I think that finding small moments in your day like when on the bus or when falling asleep are beautiful ways to keep music in a life and should be considered enjoyment and not discounted as “just passing the time”. Furthermore, I feel the students I spoke to don’t feel that playing the music they enjoy is studying music because it doesn’t have the lofty status of classical music. This is part of what makes the study of music so inaccessible to those who do not enjoy classical music and contributes to the devaluation of listening to music as a pastime. There are many cultural hurdles that students must overcome to study music starting right at birth with it being expensive all the way to later in life when they are discouraged from returning to it because they don’t feel their playing is worthy of being heard. Music is an intimidating subject to study and I believe as musicians and teachers it is our responsibility to initiate a culture shift to one that allows the internal enjoyment of music and not just the external pursuit of perfection.
I interviewed 3 students Matthew Botsford, Jessica vanLoon and Leif Portkey who all have varying experience with music and asked them to share why they have or have not studied or continued to study music and what may have been barriers for them.
Do you listening to music often and why?
Yes I do listen to music often, I usually enjoy listening to music on the bus or while I’m doing work. I find that the rhythm or the beat can help me get things done faster sometimes. But I also like to do nothing but listen to music, like just lay back and really listen while I’m relaxing.
-Matthew Botsford
Not particularly unless it’s to pass time or fill silence – its distracting.
-Leif Portkey
This was a common theme when I asked all 3 students if they enjoyed listening to music, they all sited listening to music most while on the bus or doing other work. Although they all listened to various genres, some picking favourites and but others have more neutral opinions electing to listen to a wide variety of genres equally.
Do you enjoy playing the same kind of music you enjoy listening to?
Yes I enjoyed playing the same kind of music I listen to in orchestra. I thought it was a nice change from classical music which we played most often.
-Jessica vanLoon
Yes I most enjoy playing the music I listened to in addition to listening to it obviously. It’s what I enjoy playing on the guitar.
-Matthew Botsford
The students who did play music did most enjoy playing the same kind of music they listened to which at first I didn’t find particularly surprising. I later discussed this with my peers who either continue study music formally or are majoring in music at university and many of them enjoy listening to different music from what they play. When we were discussing why we prefer playing different music than we listen to many people said it was because it feels like we live in the music that we play. When listening to “classical” music many of the musicians I spoke to feel that it the type of music they studied felt like “work music” regardless of genre and would elect to listen to music they didn’t over-analyze. I believe culturally classical music is considered not only a more valid but it is believed that it must be enjoyed a certain way, further excluding those who are unable or chose not to immerse themselves in it.
Have you ever studied music formally?
I have only ever taken music in elementary school so no; I would not consider myself as having a formal music education.
-Leif Portkey
Yes I studied music formally. I stared playing violin in my first year but switched to viola. I joined the orchestra because I liked music and I had a good group of friends who were playing with me. I also loved performing at concerts.
-Jessica vanLoon
No, I have never played music formally outside of elementary school. I studied guitar informally I guess... but I haven’t for a while.
-Matthew Botsford
Why didn’t you start to study music?
Despite enjoying it at the time, I chose to pursue different interests due to cost and time.
-Leif Portkey
Unfortunately this student was prevented from further pursing music because it was inaccessible to him. Music is often very expensive to pursue especially if seeking formal lessons rendering it inaccessible to many families. This is because music and the study of it is considered frivolous and a luxury to many families due to the high cost of instruments, lessons and the pompous stereotype that surrounds classical music study. Cost is a very large consideration when young families are choosing whether or not to enroll their child extra-curricular activities and the inaccessibility of music to less privileged families plays a large roll in why music stays a luxury.
Why did you stop studying music?
I stopped because I was only in the school orchestra and music class but the class was only offered at one time and another class that I needed for university was also only offered at that one time. I really miss it and wish I could have continued.
-Jessica vanLoon
I stopped playing music mostly because of my lifestyle. Music was always a hobby and I needed to focus more on school and I started to go out more with my friends and I sorta lost interest a little bit. There was nothing in particular that drove me away from music I just sorta lost interest and time.
-Matthew Botsford.
Based on these interviews music is generally enjoyed by the students who do not pursue it but is abandoned when they have to take on “more pressing “responsibilities. The joy playing music brings in childhood is often shoved to the back of their heads as they are forced to pursue “compulsory courses” or have to “be more serious about their education”. Later in life enjoying music looks a lot more like stolen moments and “I wish I could have kept it up but I just don’t have time”. We are taught “time is money” growing up and when spare time becomes as rare as it is in university we are forced to prioritize and leave what we enjoy behind and pursue what is “serious”. Music is often presented to people as an all or nothing deal, if you cannot fully commit to it, you don’t deserve it. You must be worthy of being listened to if you wish to pursue the study. Music is rarely presented as an internal enjoyment that doesn’t need justification or validation to be enjoyed. Once a student reaches adolescence music is often presented as if you cannot commit to “selling your soul to the devil” as Paganini did you aren’t really committed and therefore are not “really” a violinist. I think that finding small moments in your day like when on the bus or when falling asleep are beautiful ways to keep music in a life and should be considered enjoyment and not discounted as “just passing the time”. Furthermore, I feel the students I spoke to don’t feel that playing the music they enjoy is studying music because it doesn’t have the lofty status of classical music. This is part of what makes the study of music so inaccessible to those who do not enjoy classical music and contributes to the devaluation of listening to music as a pastime. There are many cultural hurdles that students must overcome to study music starting right at birth with it being expensive all the way to later in life when they are discouraged from returning to it because they don’t feel their playing is worthy of being heard. Music is an intimidating subject to study and I believe as musicians and teachers it is our responsibility to initiate a culture shift to one that allows the internal enjoyment of music and not just the external pursuit of perfection.
Student - Teacher Perspectives
education.pptx | |
File Size: | 2031 kb |
File Type: | pptx |
In this powerpoint I explore how teachers view the education atmosphere they are creating and how the experiences of students differ in a culture that doesn't always support the education of the arts.