Rose Countryman Response
September 15, 2019
Rose, L. S., & Countryman, J. (2013). Repositioning ‘the elements’: How students talk aboutÂ
music. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 12(3): 45-64.Â
The article Repositioning ‘The Elements’: How Students Talk About music, provides interesting opinions on the use of the elements of music in the classroom setting.Â
Somethings I found interesting that the article highlighted that I had not considered before were the perspective and ideas present within the paper. Before reading this article, I had not thought about the musical elements in the same way that Rose and Countryman described them within this paper. For example, the elements are described to be rigid definitions that do not allow students to form their own understanding. I agree that there are different and sometimes better methods that can be used when teaching students about the subject of music. The authors provided a contrasting perspective that I found to be very eye-opening and educational as an individual interested in music education as a career. The article offers new ideas and methods that can be used within the classroom in order to properly teach each individual student and make accommodations for every method of learning present among classrooms. An assumption that I had before reading this article was that the elements of music are a basic foundation for all musical understanding. This article offered a different perspective which challenged my belief and allowed me to discover a new way of thinking and teaching. It highlighted the negative aspects of using the elements of music as a framework for teaching such as the lack of diversity and barriers it creates within a teaching environment. Something that surprised me from the article was the negative impact that a basic and structured curriculum is said to have on teachers and students. The article argued that this structure in the education system controls teachers and forces them to be deliverers of information rather than educators. Although the authors offered very firm arguments that were backed up by years of teaching experience, I do not completely agree with their stance on using the elements of music in education. Often, the elements of music are taught to younger students or students who are new to the world of making music. While I agree that when taken too literally the elements can have negative impacts on learning, I still believe that teaching the elements as a foundation for other musical knowledge is beneficial to new musicians. One thing I would like to ask the authors would be if they believe that eliminating the elements of music from the mandatory curriculum or altering the way in which they are being taught to students could have a negative impact on students who understand and learn best from these structured methods of teaching.
Powell & Burstein Response
Oct 6, 2019
Powell, B., & Burstein, B. (2017). Popular music and Modern Band principles. The Routledge Research Companion to Popular Music Education, 243-254. 10.4324/ 9781315613444-20
The article, Popular music and Modern Band principles, provides interesting perspectives and methods of teaching that can be applied in the classroom setting.
I found the section about music performance anxiety very fascinating. The idea of creating a ‘comfort zone’ for students really resonated with me. As an individual who experiences music performance anxiety, I believe that this would be an effective way to make students more comfortable in the classroom and ease their anxiety. By creating ‘comfort zones’ in the classroom, students will feel more comfortable expressing themselves and experimenting with music. I also found the idea of anxious students forming an ‘affective filter’ or ‘mental block’ very interesting. It is clear that it can be more difficult for students with lower self-esteem and motivation to obtain a great amount of success as a result of this mental block they have created. The article provides helpful advice and specific methods to lower a student’s affective filter, like playing in larger groups for example. Before reading this article, I thought of Modern Band as a completely separate entity from ‘traditional’ band, but the reading opened my eyes to the many similarities that also exist between them. I now understand that Modern Band incorporates both broad and narrow genres of music while still following a curriculum. The curriculum does differ slightly as the Modern Band is more student based and reflects the general interests of each student. Something that I found to be surprising in the article was the comparison made between learning music and learning a new language. I found this to be shocking because I had not thought about learning music in this way prior to reading the article. I agree with this idea and see how the two topics connect and how someone can understand one by examining the other. This connection also makes sense when thinking about music as language itself. Communication and interaction with others are how a child learns to speak and can also be applied to learning music. Something in the article that I found to be frustrating was the idea that teachers are solely responsible for the type of environment present in their classrooms. Although the teachers do have a large responsibility when it comes to creating and maintaining a welcoming and friendly classroom environment, I believe that it is also important for the students to understand that it is their responsibility to do this as well. Typically, it is said to be the teacher’s role to create a safe space in their classroom, however, I feel that teaching the students how to do this themselves would ensure that they can bring these skills into any classroom setting they enter. I would like to ask the authors if the core values of Modern Band are only effective when used altogether or could they be beneficial even if applied separately?
Burwell, Carey, and Bennett Response
October 28, 2019
Burwell, K., Carey, G., & Bennett, D. (2017). Isolation in studio music: The secret garden, 1–18.
The article, ‘Isolation in Studio Music Teaching: The Secret Garden’, displays an interesting stance and a variety of ideas regarding private studio teaching.
Although I do agree with the article in the fact that studio teaching can be very isolating, I was interested in many of the arguments and perspectives that I had not considered prior to reading this article. For example, I had not previously related elitism to studio teaching. I see how the privacy of this way of teaching and learning makes it seem as though only a select number of musicians have the ‘privilege’ of experiencing music in this way. The ways in which studio teaching separates students and teachers from other methods like classroom teaching, for example, make it seem as though it is better or above it in some ways. In reality, both are equally valid and have similar benefits for students and teachers. Something from the lecture that I found interesting was what Professor Chiles said about assigning his students etudes along with their pieces. He explained that he did this to teach them to apply the techniques learned from the etude to actual music. I thought this idea was very smart as it urges the students to not only learn one specific thing but also acquire a tool that can be used in a variety of different scenarios throughout their musical career. I began reading this article with an open mind and only a few ideas in mind, so I didn’t feel as though any of these assumptions that I made were challenged but instead supported. This article helped to deepen my understanding of this aspect of music teaching and learning. Before reading this article, I had not considered the idea that studio teaching can be isolating for the teachers as well. I found it surprising that studio teachers may feel self-conscious or insecure about their teaching as a result of not being able to compare and consult with other teachers in a professional environment like a school. I had not considered the isolation of this type of teaching from the perspective of a teacher. I found it frustrating to read about the hierarchy that is believed to exist in studio teaching where the teacher is above the student. While I do understand the point that Professor Chiles brought up about teachers being the ‘master’ and the student being the ‘apprentice’ I do not agree that the teachers should completely dominate each lesson. Instead, I believe that learning/teaching music requires teamwork and a fairly equal amount of effort from both the student and teacher. Of course, there will be more effort and work required from the student as they are expected to practice and apply the things learned in lessons outside of their lessons and in their practice time. One thing I would like to say to the authors is, have you considered the fact that some students might work and learn best in this type of environment, with this type of learning? Another thing that I found frustrating is the way in which this article creates a lot of generalizations to show the negative aspects of studio teaching. When taking into consideration each individual student and their personal needs, studio teaching and the isolation that comes along with it might be beneficial for some students. As a teacher, it is important to consider the different ways in which students learn and thrive. Some students may require this one-on-one method in a quiet and private environment. Learning is a very personalized process, so while studio teaching might not be the best fit for some students it is possible that other students may prefer this method over any other.