Still trying to deal with the aftermath of my prelim paper review by the faculty, I set out at the beginning of this week to figure out what to do with the paper to turn it into something publishable.  What follows is an account of my journey from frustration, through other realms of frustration, around yet more types of frustration, and finally to clarity.

Ok.  My prelim paper just isn't going to cut the mustard.  I have made peace with that fact.  And truthfully, I think I knew that all along.  I fought so hard with that paper, to the point that what came out onto the page really represented my internal struggle when writing the paper.  It just wanted to be too many things, talk about too many topics, and solve too many problems.  It was that realization that led me to determine that the paper was, in fact, three (or more) papers squeezed into one.  What I needed to do was unpack it, figure out what my big ideas are, and make each its own paper.

• Paper 1: Literature review of creativity research which I find applicable to music teaching and learning
• Paper 2: Drawing connections between said creativity research and research in music which should be considered creativity research
  (You see, I have come to realize that the reason I couldn't find any research on my "brand" of creativity in music is because nobody is calling it creativity!  People are researching it, but they are calling it other things like independence, constructivism, problem-solving, etc.)
• Papers 3 and more: Practical applications of creativity research to specific components of music teaching and learning.

Phew!  Should be smooth sailing from here!

My first step was to show that "creativity" in music has been hijacked by composition and improvisation and use that as a basis for why music education research, which is totally examining creativity, never uses the word creativity.  So, I figured I would sift through all the back issues of Music Educators Journal, find very article which discusses creativity, and code them as either composition/ improvisation, or not.  I'd then analyze whether there was a significant difference in the number of articles falling in each category.

I spent a whole day going through articles; I was feeling rather productive and motivated.  But my motivation started drooping and, by the end of the day, I had to ask myself if what I was researching truly mattered.  Does it matter if the majority of the articles published on creativity focus on composition/ improvisation?  Does that have any bearing on trying to show that the other research examines creativity as well?  And the answer I came up with was: no, it does not matter.  What I should be focused on is showing the relationship between said research and creativity, not trying to detract at all from the research done on composition/ improvisation.  So, a whole day wasted.

So, I started to work on tying creativity research (psychology) to music ed research (independence, constructivism, problem-solving) and realized I have waaaaaaaaaaay too much to read now that I know how much research is out there on creativity, though never mentioning creativity. 

And I had another realization.  This paper is just going to have to wait.  I still have too much to learn before trying to write about this topic for publication.  Another day wasted.

So, now I am truly frustrated.  I know I need to get published.  Yet, my publication efforts of the last almost year are now rendered temporarily useless.  What am I going to publish?  My research project is still stuck in IRB purgatory.  I have nothing!

And then...

I was talking with someone at school about my second semester directing the Temple Prep Wind Ensemble.  Remember how I decided to have the students sightread the spring concert after an abysmal performance at the winter concert?  (No?  Go back and read Season 2)  Well, there is a paper aching to be written!  And then I started thinking about other experiences I have had which would make good papers and I came up with a whole list!

• Temple Prep Sighreads the Concert
• Petting Zoo as a Method for Recruiting Balanced Instrumentation in Beginning Band and Orchestra
• That Time Ms. Johnson (Principal of the School) Took Beginning Violin with the 4th Graders for a Whole Semester

I am writing the first one first and it feels like it is writing itself.  I hope to have a working draft by next week.
 

Remember how I thought I had to take a class to keep my assistantship?  Well, I saw the dean this week and he told me I don't have to!  Once I pass my prelims, I am full time, regardless of how many credits I am carrying.  Woo!

In other news, Dr. C. and I are still working on the grad student journal, Graduate Perspectives in Music Education.  It turns out that everyone doesn't think it is a great idea.  She has been talking with her colleagues and a couple (I want to emphasize how small the number of people this represents: 2) don't like it.  One said that he cannot see why we need this journal; grad students should be submitting for publication in the "established" and "rigorous" journals of the field.  He cannot imagine why any grad advisor would recommend that students publish in such a journal. 

So, Dr. C. has decided to do some discussing with her colleagues around the country and is getting some really great feedback.  Many other professors are applauding us for having this idea and noting that this is something our field could really benefit from.  So, here I am, grad student Mitch, having an idea which is already being divisive in the field.  It is looking like we are going to get enough support for Dr. C. to feel confident to move forward.

I realized last week that I wrote a lot about the articles I read.  So, moving forward, I am just going to discuss the articles I read which I find thought provoking, relevant, and challenging.  I will, of course, still be reading the whole journal.  This week, I read Journal of Music Teacher Education 26(1).

What Can One Person Do? - Susan Conkling

Though, not a full feature article, there were some interesting points made in this piece about social justice and prejudice in America.  She cited research on how children categorize people based on race, gender, ethnicity, etc.  Because such categorizing happens at such a young age, the author admonished music teachers to consider the imagery in class materials.  She hinted at making sure the materials used in music classes don't inadvertently cause students to categorize music making as a white male activity.  She also talked about the importance of collaborative work in breaking down stereotypes and prejudice.  Appropriate use of cooperative learning in music classes can help students see each other on a level playing field.

Doctoral Students in Music Education: Occupational Identity, Career Intent and Commitment, and Confidence for Teaching in Higher Education - Lisa D. Martin

This was a really cool study because it is about me! 

In all seriousness, though, this study looked at music education doctoral students and their potential professional life post-graduation.  The researchers found that, though doctoral students do develop an identity as a teacher mentor or teacher educator through the course of their studies, they do not perceive that others view them in the same way.  I can identify with this finding.  I can totally see myself as a college professor, educating the next generation of music teachers.  But, I feel like those already in the professorate will view me as unqualified, green, or otherwise not ready for the task.  How about that?  Research that is meant to be generalizable to a larger population, and it is!

The study made note of the potential differences between online learning experiences and in person ones.  The researchers suggested that online learning may do less to develop a new professional identity among doctoral students, they may be less appropriate for preparing future college professors.  Since, as you might recall, I was not a fan of my online learning experience, I find this point interesting and worth future consideration.

The article made use of some statistical terms I am either unfamiliar with or less familiar with than I should be.

• Sampling Frame: a list of all items or people forming the population from which a sample is derived.
• Cronbach's Alpha: a test of reliability for survey instruments (among other uses).  If I do survey research, I am going to need to have a much stronger grasp of this statistical test.
• Additionally, this study cited research on creating test instruments.  If I every do a survey, I will need to make sure to read research on test creation.
• Factor Analysis: a way of grouping test questions together by theme to see how much of the variance is explained by the overarching themes.  We learned this in stats, but I need to revisit it.

Toward Solving the Problem of Problem Solving: An Analysis Framework - Rebecca A. Roesler

This was another really cool study.  It is a grounded theory study (grounded theory research seeks to define a theory which explains an observed phenomenon).  This study looked at problem solving in one-on-one music lessons and attempted to define the components of problem-solving behavior.  The researcher determined that there are 5 components to musical problem solving:

• Establish Goals
• Evaluate Performance
• Conceive and Consider Options
• Generalize and Apply Principles
• Decide and Act

The researchers found that this is not a delineated sequence, which must be completed in order.  Rather, the components are addressed in a number of combinations and sequences when solving musical problems.

I think these components accurately describe the creative process and they are consistent with the research on creativity which I have been reading.  Many psychologists consider creativity a dynamic process, comprised of an ecosystem of cognitive components.  In fact, these 5 components look very similar to Runco and Chand's (1995) 5 components of creativity.

So, here, is another example of music research, which is obviously tied to creativity, which does not mention creativity.  I am really starting to feel like the field of music education has let the composition and improvisation folks corner the market on creativity.  But, this did give me another keyword to use in my searches for creativity-related research in music education: problem solving.

Anyway, the author makes a point of saying that problem solving is a skill which must be practiced.  Though, we have an innate propensity for it, the researcher observed marked differences in the efficiency of problem solving between experienced and novice musical problem solvers.  This is ammunition for the case that if students are not given opportunities in school music learning to be creative, they will not learn the skill and transfer it to non school music making.

The researcher also noted that, students and teachers will often keep their consideration of options as an internal process.  For me, this creates two problems:

1. if students keep their problem solving processes internal, teachers have no way of assessing their creativity, and
2. if teachers keep their problem solving processes internal, students may misinterpret teachers' behavior as a model showing that problem solving is a convergent task since they only every experience one of the options the teacher considered (the final one).

This article presented two words, which I did not know, but liked:

• Replete: filled or well-supplied with something
• Tractable: easy to control or influence

So, until next week, Future Dr. Mitch, out!

Doctoral Candidate Mitch, Season 5, Episode 2

Ok, folks.  I can't keep it in any longer, so I have to lead with the main story of the week.  I passed my Preliminary Exam and have been elevated to doctoral candidate.






That's right, the happy dance.  It's ok, you can dance along with me.  I know you want to!

Funny story, though.  When preparing for the exam, they only give us a list of terms, people, acronyms, events, publication, etc. that we have to know.  They do not tell us what we have to know about those terms.  It is up to us to research them and gather information.  So, it turns out I made a mistake when I was studying.  I did a Google search for one of the acronyms and found an organization, which was related to music education.  I learned a lot of information about the organization and was able to remember it all during the test.  The problem is that the organization I studied was not the organization they wanted.  They had the same acronym, though.  But, since I found an organization which matched the acronym and I provided correct information about it, they still gave me credit for it!

***

I wrote something here.  But my voice of reason, AKA my mom, advised me not to post it.  I am going to think it over and decide whether to post it next week or not.

***

So, I ran into a library problem this week.  Believe it or not, this was the first time in my time at Temple that I went up into the stacks.  I had to get a textbook since the one I ordered was not going to arrive on time.  My problem: the library has books... books about things I want to learn!  So, I went up to the stacks to get my textbook.  And it was on the shelf directly above the where the books on creativity begin.  So, I started perusing the creativity books and, in addition to my textbook, I left with two others:

• Critical Creative Processes, edited by Mark Runco
• Nurturing Creativity in the Classroom, edited by Ronald Beghetto and James Kaufman

I am hoping to start reading them this week.  I will report back what I learn.

Speaking of reporting back on things I read, as promised, I completed my journal for the week.  For this week, I decided to read the most current issue of the Music Educators Journal Volume 102, Issue 4.  (It is no longer the most current issue)

Featherless Dinosaurs and the Hip-Hop Simulacrum

This article made the case for hip-hop's inclusion in school music programs.  Shouldn't music education be relevant to the students?  I believe so.  And, therefore, shouldn't the music to which students relate be included in the curriculum?  Again, yes I believe so.  The article highlighted inappropriate language and content as the major barriers standing between hip-hop and school music curricula.  The article also made a case for reevaluating what constitutes inappropriate, taking into account context, audience, and educational purpose.  The idea being that a reevaluation of appropriate vs. inappropriate may open the door to more controversial content being worthy of study.  I have to admit to not knowing enough about hip-hop to make an educated argument either for or against its use in curricula.  But, this article did get me to think about my own conceptions, misguided or not, about hip-hop.  Yes, I do think that the music contains a lot of profanity and lives in content surrounding violence, drug use, anti-feminism, and more.  That being said, I have not listened to enough hip-hop to be able to substantiate those ideas, so I am not sure where they come from.  Even if that is the case and hip-hop is profane and promotes behaviors I do not condone, does that mean that it is not worth studying?  The music could be used as a portal to the examination and discussion of the circumstances which gave rise to such music.  And what if my conceptions are, in fact, misguided, and there is a large body of hip-hop which uses "clean" language and promotes positive behavior, and tackles a variety of social issues from a positive stance?  Have my biases kept me from including positive music in my curricula?  And that question circles back to the first one: does music have to be positive to have a positive place in learning?

More than anything, this article left me with questions:

1. Is there a prevailing trend in the content of hip-hop music?
2. What type of language is really employed in the music?
3. What are the musical merits of hip-hop?
4. How can the music be employed in curricula to promote discussions of extra-musical ideas?
5. How can the music be studied to deepen students' understanding of music? 

I'd say that before making any decision or forming a stance on hip-hop in music curricula, I need to learn more about it and listen to much more of it with a more critical ear.

Do Students See Themselves in the Music Curriculum?

This article detailed a research project held at and focusing on the school of music at the University of Wisconsin - Eau Claire.  The goal of the project was to determine the extent to which the school of music had been exclusionary in its practices.  Of major concern to the authors was gender inequality which manifested itself in the compositions chosen for study and performance by the school's ensembles, the personnel in the ensembles (specifically jazz ensembles), and the distribution of the genders across the instruments.  The article also made note of inequities in repertoire selection from composers of non white, European ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

I think that we do have an obligation to present students with music written by a wide variety of composers.  However, I think it is important that works not be studied simply for diversity's sake.  Repertoire must represent quality, artistic inspiration and spark creativity and intrigue in the players who perform it.  Yes, we should seek out works by women, ethnic minorities, and other under represented groups.  But, we should be seeking out quality works by those folks to ensure we aren't merely doing lip service to issues of inclusion and multiculturalism.

The under representation of women in ensembles is a bit more of a complex issue for me.  To me, it is a symptom of other issues.  Addressing it directly could cause new problems to arise and cause the underlying issues to persist.  What should be examined is the path students take, which leads them to placement in those ensembles and the conditions which result in women not traveling that path.

I feel unmoved by the gender associations of instruments.  I seem to recall from my child development class that the gendering of objects and activities is a natural part of a child's development.  Should everyone be given the opportunity to play every instrument?  Yes.  Should anyone be denied the opportunity to play an instrument because of gender?  Absolutely not.  But, should it be an issue if people have chosen instrument based on gender association and they are happy in that choice?  I don't think so.

I often wonder how much my views on issues such as this are affected by me being a white male.  It is always good for me to read articles like this to remind myself that there are people out there feeling marginalized, neglected, and forgotten.  Just because I feel comfortable, does not mean everyone else does. 

Fostering Musical Independence

This article addresses the growing desire of music educators to teach students to be independent musicians, capable of making music within the style in which they were indoctrinated and being able to use that foundation as a springboard to explore other styles and innovate music in their own unique voices.  The central theme of the article is empowering students to "make musical decisions that matter."  The article did not go in the direction I was hoping it would, though it did make mention of allowing students the opportunity to make such decisions in the ensemble rehearsal.  Rather, the article spoke to the need to expand our notion of what constitutes school music learning and how students can be given the independence to go beyond the types of music making common to the schools.  One example given in the article is that participating in orchestra is just one way to play the violin.  Students should be allowed to innovate with the instrument and find new ways to use the violin.  Musical applications other than orchestral participation should not be seen as devaluing the benefits of playing the violin; in fact, the authors argue just the opposite.

The authors present an idea held by many that independence is a natural outgrowth of skill acquisition.  But, I challenge this idea.  I think that skill and knowledge acquisition is necessary for independence.  However, independence is a unique, discrete skill.  It requires things beyond a mastery over content.  It requires motivation and confidence, to name two.  I think independence needs to be fostered in an environment conducive to it.  I am reminded of a conversation I had with a graduate student in one of the Temple University ensembles.  The student remarked that, when playing in the ensemble, he automatically allows the conductor to make all decisions regarding both the ensemble product and his own contributions to it.  I believe that, though this person has gained a large degree of skill and knowledge, he has been indoctrinated into a culture which fosters dependence, not independence.

The authors go on to explain an opposing theory on independence: that independence is gained through problem-based and learner-centered learning experiences.  This is the view I take.  Problem-based learning gives the learner the opportunity to apply the knowledge and skills they have gained and practice using them as independent music practitioners.  Independence, like any human process, is honed with practice, and it is the teacher's job to provide opportunities for that practice.

The authors mentioned an organization called the Association for the Advancement of Creative Musicians (AACM).  They don't go into great detail about the organization, other than to say that it is built upon the idea that a musician's musical voice is unique and that musicians should be given the space to innovate with that voice to create music which is uniquely theirs.  I need to learn more about this organization.

http://www.aacmchicago.org/#about-home

This article presented an "A-HA" moment for me.  I had been struggling, you might recall, with my preliminary paper.  I detailed why in last week's blog.  I was having so much trouble finding people writing about creativity in rehearsal in regard to activities and process which are not involved in composition and improvisation.  This article made me realize that people are talking about these things.  They are just not calling them creativity.  They are using labels like constructivism and independence.  I am coming to realize that my ideas on student-centered creativity in rehearsal are not new or unique.  People have researched and written about them extensively.  The new perspective I am bringing to the table is to link these ideas, teaching methods, and music education philosophies to the research on creativity; to show that creativity in music and music education is not just limited to composition and improvisation.

Needless to say, now I have a lot more to read!

Singing, Sissies, and Sexual Identity: How LGBTQ Choral Directors Negotiate Gender Discourse

This article talked about current practices in trying to get boys to join choir and how they perpetuate a conception of masculinity which can be damaging to those who identify as male, but do not match the male conception.  This was an interesting read, but I think I am too far removed from all of the topics in the article for it to have had a real impact on my music education perspective.

Applications of Peer Assessment and Self-Assessment in Music

I had a conversation with Dr. C. the other day about not assuming your readers know everything you do.  This article is an example of that.  The article talks about the difference between summative and formative assessments, and the usefulness of peer and self-assessment in music education.  These are topics I have been well-educated on and which I know very well.  But, I forget that there are teachers out there who are not as well informed on the topic as I am.  While this article did not present any new information to me, there are likely many teachers out in the world for whom articles like this are useful.  I should take this article as an example of the need to write about all topics to keep teachers of a variety of backgrounds and education levels informed of all the current trends in music education.

Conceptualizing Conceptual Teaching: Practical Strategies for Large Instrumental Ensembles

Like the article on independence, this article articulated many things about my beliefs on music education.  Back when I was leaving the school system to enter the doctoral program, I had a conversation with my supervisor about some of the frustrating aspects of teaching where I taught.  One of the things I discussed with him was the middle schoolers' lack of conceptual understanding of musical concepts.  This made it difficult to teach them as high schoolers because, though they had been playing their instruments for a long time, they hadn't actually learned anything transferrable and I had to reteach everything!  This was frustrating for both the students and for me.

This article spoke to this problem and is very much in line with many of the ideas which underpin my conception of creativity.  The author talks about the difference between telling students to do something and teaching students how to do something.  When students follow instructions, they learn to follow that instruction; when they learn a process or concept, they can apply that process or concept to novel situations.

I was previously unaware that there was research on this topic, but it turns out there is actually a great body of research!  I am going to have to dive into the research studies on conceptual teaching as they can serve as a solid foundation for my work in creative thinking in music.

Sound Foundations: Organic Approaches to Learning Notation in Beginning Band

This article did not present any new information to me, but it is a very well-written article.  It presents practical ways to go from sound to symbol and keep students motivated and engaged in beginning instrumental instruction.  This is an article I will keep around for future students to read when they struggle with the place and function of notation in beginning instrumental instruction.

Thinking in Music from the Very Beginning: Introducing an After-School Band Project

This article detailed an after school project which focused on composition and improvisation for band students.  It is yet another example of how music education researchers are focusing on composition and improvisation as musical creativity.  I find this view on creativity very narrow in scope.  I think there are many ways to be creative in music, including composition and improvisation.  But, when we focus solely on composition and improvisation, it marginalizes the other kinds of creativity that happen in music learning.

Well, sorry for the delay in this post.  I will be more timely next week.  Until then,

Future Dr. Mitch, out!

What happened to summer? Season 5, Episode 1

Ok!  I ready to begin summer break!  Woo!


Wait... you're saying that summer break is over?  It already happened?  WWWWHHHHAAAAATTTTT?????????

Well, I spent my summer writing and studying.  It seems that both of those, along with the summer job, consumed my whole life for the past few months.  So, here is how it turned out:

Writing:
You may recall that, in order to be elevated to the status of Doctoral Candidate, one must write a paper of publishable quality and have it approved by all the faculty of the music education department.  I'd had this great paper idea, which turned out to be the bane of my existence for the past many months.

The paper topic: using the new National Core Arts Standards as a framework for infusing creative thinking into many aspects of ensemble learning experiences.  It seemed like a simple enough paper.  But, boy was I wrong.  I had trouble finding my voice, my message, my delivery.  I like to think that I am a good writer, but I struggled a lot with this paper.  Finally, after months of writing and re-writing, I had something that felt good.  It seemed to say what I wanted and do so in a succinct kind of way.  I submitted the paper to the professors and, though they all gave it a pass, they all had major comments needing to be addressed before I can consider submitting the paper.  The big ones which I need to address are:

1. The paper has an identity crisis between being a philosophy paper and giving practical information which can be used in the classroom.
2. I do not cite enough music education research in creativity.
3. There is disagreement over how I define creativity.

Issue 1: The paper does have an identity crisis.  And it is something I fought form the moment I started writing it.  I think the problem is that I haven't written a philosophy paper on this topic yet, so I felt like I needed to get those thoughts on paper before I could use them as a basis for practical suggestions.  I think my next step is to extract the personal philosophy elements and use them as a basis for a philosophy paper, upon which a separate practical paper can be based.  My fear is that, being so new to the field and not having read as extensively as more seasoned academics, I don't have the academic weight or requisite background knowledge to write a publishable philosophy paper.  Though, maybe I should write it anyway and amend it as I read more. 

I also feel like I tried to attack too many issues at once, arguing for many facets of creative thinking in ensemble instructions.  I think I need to focus that in a bit more.  I can gain depth with the loss of breadth.  I think I should focus specifically on rehearsal, leaving the aspects of planning, preparation, and evaluation for other articles. 

Issue 2: I certainly neglected some music education researchers that I should have acknowledged.  Of particular note is Peter Webster, whose stuff I love!  I am kicking myself for forgetting him in my paper.  The suggestion was made to reference Maud Hickey as well.  My problem here is that, as far as I have read, her research into creativity in music education is pretty well focused on composition and improvisation.  My stance is that, though composition and improvisation are absolutely creative musical outlets, they are not the only game in town.  It is a point which, though I believe very strongly, I have now come to realize I did not explicitly argue in the paper.  I made an assumption that the reader would be able to glean that point from the content of the paper.  But, I was clearly wrong in that assumption.  Maybe that needs to be the topic of my philosophy paper: Creativity in Music is not Limited to Composition and Improvisation.  In that paper, I can certainly give a nod to research on composition and improvisation and use it as a springboard for the expansion of our conception of what constitutes creativity in the ensemble classroom.  Maybe I can tie in a quickie research study on conceptions of creativity in music education.

Issue 3:I think this ties into the above paragraph.

So, I am planning on meeting with a few of the professors next week to discuss my ideas and see what they think.  Look forward to a report on those meeting in the next post.  Once I have a good working draft of the next set of revisions, I will be looking for people to read and comment on it.  Let me know if you're interested!

Studying:
The other gateway to being elevated to doctoral candidate is passing the preliminary exam.  I studied my butt off for this exam.  The amount of flashcards I made would make your head spin!  But, I studied and studied, and took the test this past Monday.  I cannot divulge any specifics about the exam.  But, I came out of it feeling ok.  Not great, but ok.  In the writing section, I felt like I rambled a bit (as I am prone to do), so I hope I was able to make enough quality points in an eloquent enough way to gain passing scores.  But, on the memorization portion, I think I kicked butt! 

I should know the results of the exam tomorrow.  Keep your fingers crossed!


Moving on...

So, since my coursework in the past 4 semesters satisfied all the required classes and got me to the required number of credits needed to progress into dissertation work, I figured I was done taking courses.




It turns out that, in order to keep my assistantship, I need 6 or more credits on my schedule each semester.  So, in addition to taking my pre-dissertation research, I need to have an actual class.  So, I will be taking Learning Theories in the Educational Psychology department.  I hope it is a good class!

As a result of what I have learned from my preliminary paper and exam, I realize that I need to read more!  So, each week, I am going to read a journal, cover to cover.  I am going to look at music ed journals, general education journals, creativity journals, psychology journals and anything else that seems interesting.  Each week, I will present a synopsis of what I read.  Look forward to it!

Well, that is it for now.  I am excited to be getting back to school.  Have a great week and I will reach out again next Sunday.

Until then, Future Dr. Mitch, out!

Spring Break: When Classes Don't Get in the Way of Work, Season 4, Episode 8

Hello and welcome to the spring break edition of my blog!

One of the projects in Graduate Seminar in Music Education this semester is to do a mini presentation in progress for our peers and receive comments and critique.  This past week was our first presentation session.  Guess who got to go first.  That's right, me!  Since it is so early in the semester, I didn't have a full presentation ready, so I worked my way through the framework of a presentation.  I presented some actual content, but largely worked through my train of thought and the sequence of ideas that would be present in the actual presentation.  I elected to do my presentation on band curricula, or rather the lack of band curricula.  Specifically, I decided to attack the notion that the repertoire is the curriculum.

There is a widely-held belief that the repertoire is the curriculum.  Meaning, a band director chooses quality music and extracts from it the content that will be taught in class.  I believe that the repertoire-curriculum relationship should work the other way: that curricular outcomes should be solidified and then repertoire should be chosen to meet those curricular goals.  

So, in my presentation, I touched on the need for meaningful (or transferable) learning in band class rather than "teaching to the test" and rote learning, the lack of specific curricula for ensemble classes, how a band director can create a curriculum for an ensemble class, and how to choose literature that addresses the curriculum.  The feedback I got highlights two of my current struggles: I put way too much information in my work, and I have trouble with free-flowing speech.  A few people remarked that my presentation was too dense.  And, upon reflection, it absolutely was.  I think I see the big picture as such a syndrome of contributing ideas that it is hard for me to divorce specific underlying issues from the big picture and talk about them individually.  I feel the need to talk about how interconnected and reliant each component is with each other and the big picture.  So, I need to work on being more specific.  I have been working on my presentation style, trying to maintain a conversational and unrehearsed feeling.  But, since I don't read from a script, sometimes I use filler words as I am formulating my thoughts.  You know, words like uh, um, ah, and such.  I need to work on being able to speak on my topics without needing to fill space.  I think this will come with time as I become more comfortable with talking about my topics.

My presentation sparked a couple interesting conversations.  The first was about what constitutes appropriate repertoire for a school ensemble.  I maintain that to be appropriate, the music must present interesting, engaging, and challenging musical opportunities for all members of the ensemble.  I acknowledge that this does remove some pieces that are considered important works of art from the curricular possibilities for my ensembles.  For example, O Magnum Mysterium by Lauridsen, arr. Reynolds is a beautiful piece of music and considered by many to be standard literature for wind bands.  Here is a recording:

Is it beautiful? Yes.  Does it present many opportunities for musicality? Yes.  Do I love the piece?  Yes.  Did I program it and conduct it with the Category 5 Wind Ensemble?  Yes.  Did I use it as my conducting project in Conducting Seminar last semester?  Yes.  Would I ever program it with my school group?  Absolutely not.  The biggest reason is that the tuba part has only 2 notes: a pickup to a pedal tone and the pedal tone, which lasts all of 8 measures.  I would be hard pressed to say that the piece is engaging, interesting, and challenging for the tuba players.  I believe that there are other pieces I could program that provide the same lyrical beauty as this one, but which will present learning opportunities for all of my students, regardless of the instrument they play.  Off the top of my head, the first thing I can think of is Ticheli's Amazing Grace.  It is the same difficulty level, features lyrical playing, and is engaging across the orchestration.  Do I love it as much as O Magnum?  No.  But, do I think it is a better teaching tool?  Absolutely.

The other side of the discussion was that students should be exposed to the masterworks and that there are ways of engaging students even when they are not playing.  Students can engage in active listening and participate in the evaluative and rehearsal processes.  The case was made that a boring viola part should not be a reason for withholding an orchestral masterwork from the ensemble, that the quality of the music as a whole makes up for the content in any one part.

What do you think?  Leave comments here or on Facebook with where you stand on the issue and why.

Another conversation that arose was whether band directors really need to write a curriculum or if the method book is enough.  I presented the argument that the method book provides a starting point, but it is not enough on its own to constitute a curriculum.  Yes, the method book presents a series of new skills and concepts in a sequential progression.  But, it does not tell the teacher when students should master the concepts contained within, to what degree the concepts need to be mastered, and how to assess mastery over them.  I contend that the material from the method book must be extracted, combined with concepts not included in the book, and worked into a matrix that includes time frames, benchmarks, standards, activities, assessments, and other educational considerations.  Some of my classmates argued the opposite: that teachers need not spend time creating curricula because so much is laid out in the method books already.  

What do you think?  Are the method books enough, or does the teacher have to elaborate on and extend what is presented in the book?

The final interesting thing that came out of my presentation in Seminar was a comment from one of my classmates.  She dislikes the term "feeder program" when describing a school which graduates students into another school.  She said it made her feel like her job as an elementary band director was to prepare students for middle school, rather than to excel in music in her own right.  I never thought of it that way.  I'd always just used the term and I think it is a standard term to describe that relationship.  I wonder what term might be used to supplant it and make all teachers feel important without regard to where the students go after they leave the school.

On Wednesday, I had my midterm exam in History and Philosophy of Music Education.  Once again, the clunkiness of the technology gave me issues.  It was a timed, online exam in essay format.  We had to write 4 essays in 3 hours.  When I got to the third essay, the online word processing tool we were using started malfunctioning.  When I got to the end of a line of text, instead of creating a new line and dropping the cursor down, it sent the cursor back to the beginning of the line I just typed and started displaying the new words over the words I had just written.  Since it was a timed test, I didn't want to take time to email my professor about the issue and just manually inserted a new line after each line of text.  When I was done, I emailed Dr. P. and let her know about the issue.  She checked on my exam and told me that it had not saved my answers to the third or fourth questions!  Gaaaah!  Thankfully, she let me redo those questions.  But, it brings up the issue of technological errors in an age increasing technology use in education.  How much am I really willing to rely on technology when it counts?

That being said, I got a 98 out of 100 on the exam, a score I am quite excited about.  Here are Dr. P.'s comments:

 

Mitch-You wrote tirelessly and completely. Your examination is thorough and speaks to both historical and contemporary issues. Bravo. 
Essay 1
You provided an in-depth treatment of the material, quite impressive! You are compelling and eloquent in your arguments for music education in Boston. I appreciate that you are able to thread your examples and content substantively  through to contemporary times without cutting any part short. Well done. I agree that music’s value is in the tripartite and thus music education should be invested as well. I look forward to interrogating these ideas in relationship to music philosophy shortly.
Essay 2
You make interesting choices of moments in music education history. Perhaps not surprisingly, there was a wide array of proposed moments in our class. You situate each example strongly within music education history and practices, and, though briefly, consider challenges for the future. As I read your responses, I wondered how what historical events shaped the necessity for comprehensive musicianship? You discuss music education’s fractured ways, but I do not read other supports toward the CM movement outside of music. What about the 60s brought CM to a fore? Something to consider.
Essay 3
Strongly written. I appreciate that you denote the modern instrumental teacher as resilient and creative. I imagine one must be, or he will, as Bennett Reimer stated at GMEA in 2012, “make himself irrelevant.” 
Essay 4
The tides of connection between philosophy and science were quite strong in the early-mid 20^th century. Seashore and Mursell represented both scientists and philosophers, not unlike Descartes and other earlier thinkers. How might you respond to the perceived fractures between philosophy and science in music education?

I did some good work on the graduate student journal, which I am tentatively calling Graduate Student Perspectives in Music Education.  I have come up with a working draft of the mission statement for the journal.  And here it is:

The Temple University Graduate Student Journal of Music Education will be a scholarly writing outlet for graduate students, run by graduate students.  The journal recognizes graduate students as having fresh ideas in the field of music education.  To that end, graduate student scholarship will be showcased as a meaningful contribution to the ever-growing music education knowledge base.  The journal will represent no particular music education philosophy; instead, it will be an academic space for the interaction of a variety of innovative and progressive perspectives.  The journal welcomes work representing opposing viewpoints as a means of opening intellectual discourse for the advancement of music education.

            Having content furnished only by graduate students is not meant as an affront to the extant scholarly and peer-reviewed music education journals.  Rather, it is meant to include graduate students in the discussion of music education’s evolution.  It is a forum for graduate students to share ideas with one another, for music education researchers and academics to engage with graduate student work being carried out at other institutions, and to bring the fruits of those discussions to music teachers in the classroom.  It is the intention of the journal that seasoned music education academics regard graduate student publications within its pages as learning experiences for those students, and reach out with positive and constructive support to any student whose work sparks interest and intrigue.    

            The journal will be a venue for the discussion of any topic subsumed under the umbrella of music education.  Topics may include, but are not limited to, instrumental music, choral music, general music, early childhood music education, school music education, adult music education, preservice music teacher education, music education theory and philosophy, and music education advocacy.  The journal will accept many types of academic writing including research articles of all research paradigms, philosophy papers, theoretical papers, practitioner articles, and scholarly reviews.  Acknowledging the experience amassed by graduate students and their need for authentic learning experiences, submissions to the journal will be peer-reviewed by an editorial board comprised of Temple University music education graduate students, under the auspices of the Temple University music education faculty. 

            Because graduate students are likely at the beginning of their careers in academia, the journal will be presented in open-source format.  This will allow a wider audience access to the journal and promote greater networking and recognition for the graduate students published within it.  The journal will operate under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License.  Under this license, readers of the journal are free to share and adapt material published within it, as long as the original author(s) are cited when doing so; readers are not, however, allowed to use any of the content of the journal commercially or for profit.  It is our hope that, with the open access to the journal’s content, the graduate student work it publishes will spark vibrant debates and help move music education forward.

The next step is to write the submission guidelines for the journal.  Look for those next week!

Since this week is spring break, I am not sure if I will write again next week or if I will take return the week after.  Either way, keep your eyes peeled for the next episode.  And don't forget to leave comments!

Future Dr. Mitch, out!