Brinkman, D. J. (2010). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(2), 48-50. doi:10.1080/1063 2910903455785
This article brings up memories of my experience in school. I believe that life is influenced by our relationships. That being said I agree that the teacher can influence the students to be creative by the being creative themselves. This seems to be, through out the article, to be the starting point for creativity in the classroom. The list of creative ideas are something that I had never really thought about but I guess just knew they were true. For example, every creative person I admire has a mixture of the personality traits that are mentioned in the article or understanding the difference between a big C and small c creativity at first read. An interesting part of the article was introducing the idea that creativity takes time. Previously I guess I thought that creativity and creative thoughts just came naturally and, just like the improvisation topic, some were good at it and some weren't. I once heard that creativity and passion is trudging through the trudgery. As the article said, not all ideas will be appropriate for the situation but it doesn't mean that it's not called being creative. I also liked that Brinkman suggests bringing in the students when brainstorming creativity. I feel, even at Western, that the only people who are truly creative are the composition or jazz majors. I've spent most of my life in a choir so blend and uniformity were the only things I knew going into this program. Even then I feel as though I feel as though they are after the same thing even though I'm performing individually. Not only does this idea relate back to my choir days but it also relates back to the very first reading. A reading that coincides with this articles want to teach the elements in a more exciting and free way. I always wondered how teachers stayed motived or how they didn't feel stuck. For example, a first grade teacher teaching simple addition or reading picture books, how would they keep their advanced knowledge from school after years of doing it. That being said, I'm glad that they brought this up. That they wrote to teachers about it, and of good advice as well.
0 Comments
Thibeault, M. D. (2012). The power of limits and the pleasure of games: An easy and fun piano duo improvisation. General Music Today, 1048371311435523.
I thought this article was quite fun. Improvisation is something that I myself want to get better at so I was immediately intrigued when I started reading. Thibeault started the article with the idea that improvisation is important to allow student to express music expression. This concept, I would say, is a commonly believed but, what I thought was even more interesting is that through out the rest of the article he states things that would some what contradict what is previously believed about improvisation. The first of which being the structure involved with the game he uses. While explaining the rules of this "game" he instructs us to use a major scale. He states: "...in practice I have found that students within a structure that provides space for imagination within limits". This statement poses other questions like, do students thrive with structure because they always been given structure? If given structure is it truly improvisation, since there are already millions of combinations? All that aside I think that the rules of the game creates a safe enivornment and doesn't make the student feel to far out of their comfort zone when beginning to improvise. I've been thinking a lot lately about what the role of teacher is in the classroom, or rather IF the teacher is needed in the classroom. I think that this article puts this into perspective nicely. The teacher is there to listen and guide. This job description makes sense to me in circumstances other than this as well which makes me question is the job of a teacher even to pass on information for the generation before? I realize this article isn't designed to answer these questions but non the less it evokes them in me. Another area that evokes questions from me is the statement by Nachmanvitch that says "Improvisation is not in the ed the breaking with forms and limitations just to be "free", but using them as the very means of transcending ourselves". I guess this doesn't so much evoke questions as it does help understand what improvisation is and how it is done. I used to think that you were either good at improvisation or bad at it. That is was something that couldn't be learned and that people who could were some what a better musician than me. I guess this article helped me more than help show me anther way of teaching. Williams, D. A. (2014). Another Perspective. Music Educators Journal, 101(1), 93-98. doi:10.1177/0027432114540476
My first impression of this article was that I'm impressed. Not only for the sheer fact that iPad instruments are very hard to master as I often get upset with the programs and resort back to the real instruments, but also for the ability to coordinate these virtual instruments that often lag or freeze. I find myself constantly being torn with the readings because, on the one hand, I think that technology should be integrated into the music program as much as it is in our society, and on the other hand, it scares me to introduce technology into the classroom because I can't seem to find where traditional music pedagogy would lie in the classroom or if it should. I enjoyed the part where Williams draws attention to the similarities between iPad instruments and classical instruments. It made me realize that anything can become an instrument, not only an iPad but also a couple of pens as Kelly taught us, the music really comes from the human being playing it. This coincides with the iPad ensemble goals of playing musically, a common goal for all ensembles and musicians. It's really cool how they collaborate with different art types because they themselves are experimenting with a different art medium. I think people can stick to partnerships in their own art. Using iPads in an ensemble would probably be less money as well, apart from the initial cost of the iPads. Budget is something I feel that a lot of school music programs are struggling with. Also, like the article said, the possibilities of instruments and combinations of instruments are endless. The article continues on to mention some of the cons, which is important to include, but I think that the benefits, for smaller music programs, outweigh the cons. I noticed by the way Williams talks about instruments, or music in general, that he has a perspective of music that goes beyond the performance. Like we talk about in this class, Williams believes that music and ensembles can teach lessons about being a human being not just a musician. However, a music program does have the opportunity to teach students how to play instruments. Programs on an iPad don't require people to play instruments the way they are meant to be in real life. I wonder if this is really a disservice to the students? Tobias, E. S. (2013). Toward Convergence Adapting Music Education to Contemporary Society and Participatory Culture. Music Educators Journal, 99(4), 29-36.
At first read I thought that the concept explored in this article seemed familiar. As I continued to read I realized that all terms and scenarios are things that happen in my generation on a daily basis. Off the top of my head I can think of pentatonix, a two time grammy award a cappella group, my friend Kaylee who has started her music career by being featured with different artists on soundcloud. I appreciated that the article mentioned collaborating with other artist because I feel like that is a growing problem with my generation. I feel that because people can do everything themselves, many singer don't even require bands anymore, the need for collaborating has gone down. Not only that but because they are by themselves they feel a certain sense of ownership toward there song. I find that because of this a lot of artists have a hard time collaborating, or getting feedback on their work. A possible solution for this in classroom is having the students present their work to the class. After they explain their musical choices, the rest of the class should anonymously write down their impressions/critques and hand them into the student. I think it an important to mention the fact that, as of now, incorporating contempoarary music into schools is rarely present. Like the article mentions, the only incorporation is a separate class in some high schools. I agree with what the article is saying, I think that contemporary music should be within the curriculum of music class, not a separate class altogether. As part of this, I enjoyed that the article is trying to add contemporary music into the classroom but with bringing in technology not without it. I think that without it, doing this type of music would be hard to do because the entire essence of contemporary music is the part technology plays in it. I know that technology is a hard thing to incorporate into the classroom without it getting out of hand but I know that some day we will find a way that students only see it as a tool in the classroom, not a distraction. Hourigan, R. (2009). The Invisible Student: Understanding Social Identity Construction within Performing Ensembles. Music Educators Journal, 95(4), 34-38. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy1.lib.uwo.ca/stable/30219236
I connect with this article quite a lot. For most of my education I would've considered myself an "invisible student" and to a certain degree still am. I spend about 80% of my time alone and very much enjoy it. I realized some time in high school that the education system was catered to extrverted students so I modified my behaviour and forced myself outside of my comfort zone in classes. I enjoyed that the article stated many time that's looking out for the invisible student would mean more work for the educator but it's worth it. I think it's good to up front that it will take more conscience thinking on their part to lead by example. Jason's story made me think of my time in ensembles. I began to pick out people in the past that were possible an invisible student and it actually hindered their musical experience. Everyone wants to belong to a "tribe", as I've heard it before. I realized that the people that spent one year in my choir or only took grade 9 band may have been these kinds of student. I wonder if there was something that I could have said to make that student feel more seen? I am a strong advocate for knowing the people you sing/play with. There are massive differences between listening to an ensemble that has spent two week with each other and a string quartet that has been playing together for years. It's not just the technical aspect but also the connection between the music and the players as a whole. So why, if I advocate for this so whole heartedly, do I not feel the need to introduce myself to the younger girls in my choir or the quiet ones that are always on time. This article made me think of the kind of what kind of educator I want to, whether I teach music or another subject. I would have never thought to consider room or bus assignments. Although, when reading this sections I was reminded of the times that I had no one to sit with and how I felt. Sometimes I find it hard to put myself into the shoes of younger students and think that they have felt the way I have before. I really liked the idea of a "big-brother/big-sister" program that was mentioned. My choir had ones of these and they were called "mentors". You would sit beside during rehearsals and they would be there for any questions you had about the music, where we were, what something meant, anything. I don't actually know what happened to that program but I do remember how much I enjoyed it, Just like the soph program at Western, it creates less of a gap between the incoming people and the upper years. In one section it documented the inability of Jason and his classmates to intiate conversations outside of the classroom. the article went on to say to lead by example ad gave suggestions of standing at the door while students walk in. I don't feel that things like this made a difference in my experience. Like I said before, I modified my personality to do well in my classes. This wasn't a solution I took from anyone's lead, it was a conclusion I came to on my own. I can see how it may help I just haven't experienced it. Think Everything's. (n.d.). Retrieved January 29, 2017, from http://organizingchange.org/think-everythings-normal-then-its-time-to-reconsider-and-promote-a-new-narrative-of-disability/
I see the need to belong to a tribe in my every day life. I believe it's ingrained in the thoughts we have every day. I experience this when I enter the caf and think "who am I going to sit with?", In the way I dress, feeling more "accepted" and "confident" on days where I dress like the majority of students. Choosing who to live with, who to talk to in class, what clubs/sports teams you join, the list goes on. Our entire society is built off categorizing ourselves into boxes. I have had the great pleasure in my life to be in school environments that created a safe and inclusive place for people that had disabilities. From elementary school, with Blendi who had non-verbal autism and was genuinely befriended by everyone in my year, to high school, where I had the privilege of going to a school with a very secure best buddies program. I know that if it weren't for these experiences my view on this matter would be vastly different. I did however see these friends sometimes be ostracized and taught to "overcome their abilities" as the article said. I don't think that they live any less of a life than I do. When putting students with disabilities in separate curriculums I think that the school program's heart is in the right place. My brother has a learning disability and had actually really enjoyed the help and modification. I can see how others may not though. Like I said, I think that the term mental illness does put off an atmosphere that people are sick rather than having to live their life modified and I do believe that phrases like 'suffering from' are detrimental to our society. I think, though, that language is a tough area to not only correct but also decide. Which terms are better then other? Words are nothing without meaning behind them and meaning stems from everyone's personal experience. For example, the word "big bird" to most would bring up comforting memories of the character on Sesame Street but to me it bring memories of being made fun of and called that in elementary school. Just like the word "blinding" as the authour mentions, to some it is a term for expressing another persons lack of figurative perception but for other it represents a derogatory term. I found it very interesting to find out that many deaf people see them selves as a language minority. Although, now looking back I think I may have already seen them like that because I 've been wanting to learn sign language since I was a child so I could speak to these people. Especially now when there a quite a few deaf people that come into my workplace that I would like to offer help. There were some areas of this article that felt very outwardly bias. The first being Mia Mingus' testimony of corporate medicine. We as the readers don't know what her condition was in order to wear a back brace. It very well could have been something detrimental to her health not just her walking, and we are being led believe that is the corporation's grubby hands on her. I was angered by some of the points in the article as well. It stated that although there is a rise in diagnosed mental health there is no actual definition of mental illness. Yes, I agree that the term mental illness does create a atmosphere of oppression to those with one but I don't think that the rise in diagnosed mental illness is a result of society telling us that we are abnormal. It angered me because just like finding out you have a cold and have to adjust your lifestyle, having a mental illness means adjusting your lifestyle. It's not telling us that they are different; they are different. They sense the world different them the majority of people and to live their lives comfortably they need to be classicifed so that they can get the proper help. This in turn classifies us as having a mental illness. I believe there is a rise because society previous idea of normalcy created a stigma and fear that our generation is overcoming. There is a rise because we are not all the same like the article is articulating, some of us need help, it is not lesser and not matter what it is called the best way for those who need it to receive proper help, is to be classified. People that are kept in homes do need to live full lives. I think that they are right in saying that they shouldn't be left in home but it makes it difficult when in home care is outrageously priced even for a middle class family. I speak from experience. This would be the only outcome the article is eluding to because any other solutions involves complete dependency on the family which inhibits their ability to live a full life, contradicting their own thesis of the article that everyone is entitled to a free and full life. Through my childhood I remember the villain in crime shows having undiagnosed schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, something along these lines. I enjoy that children's channels like Disney are including more character with learning disabilities and/or mental illness'. Although strides are being, there is something to be said that most of these characters are only said that they have this desease and we never see their method of coping. Over all I didn't enjoy this article s much the others. I felt like it made a lot of grand statements but then didn't expand on them properly. I felt that it just led to confusion and/or anger because I was probably taking one of their points in a way they didn't intend. I also didn't like the fact that they were grouping learning disabilities, mental handicaps and mental illness all in with each other and bouncing between them. Each one of these is vastly different and therefore "treated" differently. Each has it's own flaws that should be dealt with separately. While reading this article, it felt very much like an extension of the last article. It felt like the "how to" that was missing, or rather the "how one person is doing it". From out talk on Monday I am trying to remind myself that there is no one way to teach a student-centered education, nor is there a right way.
The first thing that caught my attention was the moment when she explained her feeling of enjoyment in the strict music system because she felt comfort in its familiarity. I realized during this that I actually had been feeling the same way and that it was the reason I was having such a hard time letting go of my rule following mindset in university. I relish in the moments when a conductor or teacher tells me how to interpret a piece of music because it's easier than trying to figure it out myself. I mask it as "they have the experience and knowledge of what is best", like Leslie Dawe stated in the article, but really it my way of being lazy and ensuring that I never fail. The day I was reading this article I actually had a similar situation as Leslie. In choir we were given the starting note and asked if we could figure out the rest of a new section. Although I was quite sure that I had the right melody I didn't put my hand up out of fear that I was wrong even though my conductor consistant reminded us that we were only leaning and that she welcomed mistakes. It was a strange feeling, like she mentions in the article, that I felt terrified to try even though I was the only person putting up the obstacle of perfection. The simple difference of authority between being the teacher and being the student and the confidence that comes with the prior still baffles me. It also baffles me how ingrained consonance and pleasing melodies were in us. That we "shy away from cognitive dissonance, or anything that threatens our comfort" as Leslie says. I have a solo in choir and I have free reign over the tempo and inanition although every time I sing it, it feels wrong and uncomfortable to me. As I talked with the conductor after, she informed me that the song was supposed to make people feel uncomfortable. I remember having a conversation like this in history last semester as well. That in non-western places syncopation and dissonance are welcomed and expected ideas. This article brings to light the same things that I mentioned in the class discussion about my friend and her love of Ed Sheeran. I believe students are moved by and care about music whether they are in class or not. I really enjoyed that near the end she stated, although she found it extremely difficult to admit, she is okay with being wrong. I never understood the concept that the teacher is the be all and end all of knowledge. I feel like this stigma was created to ensure that the teacher received respect but instead it created an oppression of students. I think there's a difference between respect and oppression. I know the people that I truly respect and it wasn't created by an establishment of authority over me. After reading this article I started thinking about different way that students could be more engaged in their learning. What I wonder is, what if they had an imput on the curriculum they learned at the most basic level? What if we had an entire, although it would take a lot of will power and work, cirricullum change but students are polled or have more of an imput into what they will actually learn? Dawe, L. (2016). Fumbling Towards Vulnerability: Moving Out of the Familiar for Music Education’s Sake, Canadian Music Educator, (57)2, pp.22-24 I agree with this article completely. Every where I look, whether walking downtown or riding bus to Western, there are people all around me that have earphones in and are listening to some sort of music. I have always wondered how music affects everyone so deeply and yet public school music programs continuously decrease in numbers.
While reading the article I was reminded of my own experience of music class in high school. My classmates and I had no say in the repitoire that we sang or played and often times if felt like as if my teacher was just reading of a list that was provided for her. Whether that is a testament to her teaching ability or not, I do believe that it is a testament to "academicking", as the article called it, music. I think that the education system's heart was in the right place in acknowledging that music and the creative arts are an important area for each child to learn, I just think that it got lost along the way. By giving music a set of rules in an attempt to measure a child's progress, they also stopped that child's progress. I had relatively no say in my pieces in high school that I struggle with that exact task in university. I feel at a loss when asked to do a simple task as choosing a song that speaks to me. I was surprised, during the Naming the elements as a Framework of Dominance, because I had never realized how selective the canon was. I mean, I knew that it was mainly white, German men but I had thought that the advances for women, ethnic, and popular music were far more equal that it actually is. When looking at it as a whole, these sections such as "world" music, are to vast to be covered in a single 2-3 week unit. Part 2 was also quite interesting to me because it brought to light observations that I had made in my own life. The conversations I have about music with anyone in my life are all the same; passionate and intellectual. Just the other day I had a conversation with a close friend who said that she felt very connected to the music on Ed Sheeran's first album and went on and on about the intricacies of the lyrics and instrumentation. This article solidified the observation I had that all people are deeply affected by music in ways that we still don't completely understand. I, like the children interviewed in this article, wonder at this constantly. The only thing that frustrated me, was that I felt this article didn't actually state any solutions. Yes, it is only a research essay but I felt that it only stated what the education system is doing wrong without examples of new ways of educating, despite the authors themselves being teacher educators. Other than that it was a very informative and supported article. 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. |
Archives
Categories |