I spent a lot of time this week working on a paper for Psychology of Music Learning and Behavior. The paper, a review of literature, was to be 14 pages in length (this will become important shortly) and based in literature written no earlier than 1990 (this will also become important shortly). We were allowed to pick any topic we wanted, as long as it relates to the course material. I chose to research psychological factors that influence children's decisions regarding which instrument to play. Promoting good instrumentation is a focus of mine and I figured that doing a review of this literature would inform some potential, future, original research of my own.
So, I set out to find research on the topic that has been written since 1990 (I told you it would become important in a minute). Unfortunately, as one of the articles I read was quick to point out, there has been a paucity - yes, I learned a new word; it means a lack of something or an insufficient quantity of something - of research on the topic over the past couple decades. Gack! Those are the decades I was supposed to be finding research in! Well, it turns out, we were allowed to use some earlier research if it is regarded as being pivotal research on the topic. Phew! Fortunately, I found enough new research that I only had to use one, pre-1990 study. I did reference some others, though. So, I read and wrote and read and wrote and wrote and wrote... You get the idea. I kept my eye on my page count (I told you that 14 page limit was going to be important too) because I figured I would miss the mark either way small or way big. Oddly enough, as I finished writing I was in a really good spot. I had written about 12 and a half pages. I figured that gave me a little wiggle room if I wanted to expand my introduction or discussion section. But, alas, the contented feeling of a job well done was not long lived. As I started my final formatting, I realized my computer has a default font setting of 11pt Calibri. "No biggie," I told myself. I'll just switch it all over to 12pt Times New Roman. Easy enough. Except, when I did it my page count jumped to 15 pages. 15 pages! 15 PAGES! And you know what did it? It was my reference section. It was one reference too long, so it took up 2 pages of my page count instead of 1. And because Word has this wonderful automatic reference function, I had so much trouble getting it formatted to fit on one page. And then, my headers kept disappearing! I know they have streamlined Word so anyone can use it. But, all the default settings drive me nuts!
Anyway, I ended up solving all my issues and put out a pretty solid paper. Or so I hope. Read it!
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1sduojYTl_cdW1nSkMxUEpFMUE/view?usp=sharing
(Now without spelling errors. Thanks, Katy!)
This concert cycle with the ensembles (I am playing with both Wind Symphony and Orchestra at the moment) has been an interesting one. We are very heavily immersed in contemporary music. I totally understand the need to study and perform this genre of music in an academic setting. I am just not sure I like the music. I am working my butt off, playing it as best I can, and am keeping an open mind to it. I am actually appreciating the music a bit more the more I study it. But, I am starting to have a craving for a cadence. Just a quick little PAC would be fantastic!
(PAC = Perfect Authentic Cadence)
Also, here is a page from the piece I am playing with Orchestra:
Notice anything? Let me help you out:
That's right, folks. A contrabassoon part written in tenor clef! I never thought I would see the day.
On Tuesday, I went to a Pennsylvania Music Educators Association event. Dr. C. asked me to help her with one of her sessions. So, I did. Hopefully I earned some solid brownie points. I sat in on her second session and learned a lot, both about her topic and about giving presentations at an event like that. Then I got free lunch. Woo! The second half of the day was all about Gordon's Music Learning Theory. The jury is still out about how I feel regarding Music Learning Theory. Sitting through the sessions didn't quite make a believer out of me yet. I did learn some things I liked about the theory, though. It has a solid emphasis on improvisation, which I think is important. It relies heavily on singing, which I think is good for instrumentalists. But, it promotes a delay in reading and relies, at least in the early stages, on rote teaching. I am not sure I can get behind this aspect of it. I have a lot more learning to do about Music Learning Theory and will dismantle it all for you once I am much less of a fledgeling on the topic More to come later.
I had my second statistics quiz on Wednesday. I missed the actual quiz date because of the PMEA event. So, the professor let me take it the next day. When he handed me the quiz, he told me that a lot of the class had trouble with it and took the entire 2 and a half hour period to complete it. He also described wrestling the quiz out of some folks' hands when time was up. Unfortunately, I only had an hour in my schedule to take the quiz. He told me to do what I could in the hour, that we would see how far I got, and assess the situation after the hour was up. So, I finished the quiz in 50 minutes. This is either a really good sign or a really bad one. I felt like I understood all the questions. He remarked that I was really fast at completing the test. I hope I did ok! We will find out on Tuesday. Well, I will find out on Tuesday. You will find out next week.
On a bright note, the Ravens are back to winning. Although, it was against the Titans. But, a win is a win. And, even with that win and a Steelers loss, we are still in last place. How about that AFC North? All of the teams with winning records. And the Browns in first place. The Browns in first place? I had to see it a few times before I believed it. We should be back atop the pack before long... I hope.
Well, it is almost 1am and I am exhausted. So, I am off to bed. Until next week,
Future Doctor Mitch, out!
No comments:
Post a Comment