Introducing: Professor Mitch, Season 4, Episode 6

Finally, with all my clearances in hand, I was able to visit my student teacher this week!  I was actually really nervous as my visit with her approached.  Her concentration is choral music education and is student teaching in a high school chorus placement.  As you probably know, my concentration is instrumental music.  I have never taught a day of chorus in my life.  I only had one choral methods class in undergrad and I remember very little from it.  I remember working with vowels (but I don't remember what we actually discussed about them), I remember talking about the placement of voices in an ensemble, and I remember discussing the challenges of keeping boys interested and involved in chorus, and that is it.  How on earth could I have anything constructive to tell her?  I kept telling myself that good teaching is good teaching and, while I may not be as familiar with the content, I would be able to discuss teaching with her.  And I was right!  It turned out I had a lot to talk about.  I was able to discuss effective communication, body language, methods of instructional delivery, conducting, lesson planning, and other things.  I think V. received most of my comments quite positively.  She seemed very receptive to the things I talked about with her.  I told her - and I do believe this - that I view my purpose largely to prompt her to think critically about the choices she makes in designing, delivering, and evaluating instruction.  There is no one way to do things.  So, I really want to help her explore the possibilities that are open to her.  I am quite proud that I was able to ask her some philosophical questions that she couldn't answer right away.  I hope that she went home and considered her stance on the issues I raised.  For myself, I want to make sure that I sprinkle enough complimentary feedback into the constructive feedback I give her.  I don't think I was overly critical.  But, it is so easy to take notice of the things that may need future attention and gloss over the things done well.  The next time I observe her, I am going to make a conscious effort to identify and celebrate the things she does well.

I took particular issue with something the guest conductor said in Wind Symphony this week.  We are working on a piece entitled, Farewell to Gray, by Donald Grantham.  It's not my favorite piece, but it is worth a listen if you don't know it. 

There is a particular ritardando (gradual slowing of tempo), which he has spent some time working on with the ensemble.  I think he is not happy with how well the group follows him in the ritardando.  He told the group, "I am going to do it differently each time to make sure you're paying attention."  I understand he is likely frustrated that the group isn't following him.  But, I wonder if this approach is the most effective.  (I don't think it is).  I think that statement communicates to the ensemble that the important thing in that moment is to get eyes up and stay with the conductor.  But, is that what that section of the music is really about?  Staying together and following the directions of the conductor?  I believe there to be a more musical, collaborative, and effective way to handle situations like that.  "Follow what I do" prompts the ensemble to only consider the "what" in performance and not the "why" or "how."  I wonder how much more effective he could have been if he described his musical thoughts for the effect and involved the ensemble in a discussion on possible other alternatives - and tried them!  It's like Simon Sinek says in his TED Talk: you get buy in from other people when you start from "why" and then move out through "how" and "what".  Wait?  You're not familiar with his talk?  You should totally watch it.  It is one of my absolute favorites (despite his reference to outdated brain research).

It also acknowledges the musicians as creative individuals rather than the mechanical arm of the conductor's creativity.

So, this damn paper I am struggling to write.  You remember the paper.  It is the same one I wrote about last week.  And possibly the week before.  I spent all week trying to rewrite 2 paragraphs.  Granted they are the opening paragraphs, so they are pretty important.  I spent the week writing, deleting, writing again, deleting, etc.  I think I finally figured out my problem.  I wanted to write the paper about creativity and using chamber music as a means to support it.  The issue is that I am not a creativity expert.  I have just barely begun my reading on creativity.  So, I needed to flip the paper around.  I needed to write about chamber music and use the creative benefits as the support for it.  Because, you see, I am an expert in implementing chamber music assignments in my ensemble classes.  I did it successfully for 9 years of teaching.  Once I realized that, I found it a little easier to write.  I am still not happy with this past week's stab at the paper's introduction, but I am much closer than the previous week's offering.  Once I iron it out a little more, I will post it for you to read.

I fell behind this week.  I got so hung up on that paper, that I neglected just about everything else.  I don't have as much to write about in this entry because of it.  I need to be much better about my time management.  This coming week will be an insane week as I try to catch up on the things I dropped last week.  Wish me luck!

Until next time: Future Dr. Mitch, out!