KAME – Contemporary pedagogies part 1 : weeks 7-9

It is currently week 9 in Semester 2 of 2020. This entry will be solely on the contemporary pedagogies we have looked at in weeks 7-9. I will attempt not to turn this into a boring essay, instead I will make some simple points as a way to consolidate the important parts of these topics. Although there will be much greater detail available in research and in the academic world in general, this is simply for my own reflection as a future music educator.

Week 7’s contemporary pedagogy was the “creative music movement”. Some of the key names mentioned here were Brain Dennis, Murray Schaffer and Richard Gill. What I took away from this was that composition and experimentation are critical to music education, as it is the first and simplest way to actively engage students. This can be achieved by viewing one’s teaching role as less of a dictator and more of a facilitator of music. In class we have also mentioned that perhaps the division of time between performing, composing and listening is not always as even as it could be, and perhaps even some those areas are not fully explored in music education. Another key point which pops up time and time again, is the importance of removing status and hierarchy of various musics, instead viewing all music as significant to human kind and culture around the world.

Week 8’s contemporary pedagogy was “comprehensive musicianship” which is at once something that I am often considering the possibilities for in my upcoming future profession, and something that seems a little elusive, although perhaps it’s not as complex as I think it may be. A key academic that was mentioned by James is T Heavner, who is advocating for music education that encompasses a complete and integrated understanding of the music being taught. This relates to not only listening to the style of music in question, not only playing it, not only dissecting the music theory that is common language in the style, not only the social and historical aspects that informed and influenced musicians to create the style, but all of these together. Heavner puts forth that comprehensive music education can and should include music theory, history, literature, ear training, composition, improvisation, performance, conducting and aesthetics. Beyond this, another key part of this topic was a discussion on the concepts of music. Two key points arise here, one being that the concepts should not be the actual focus for lesson plans or units of work (how frustratingly boring would that be… for everyone involved). The concepts should instead be used to embellish on the learning of a certain kind of music or piece, as a method to look into the details in the music. However, the second point here leads off that last idea, which is that using the concepts to dissect music can often lead to a very face value and generalised understanding of certain musics. Certainly I remember doing a non western transcription task in Aural training class last year and attempting to describe the didgeridoo playing in terms of accents and rhythm, without having the knowledge or adequate time to research if that’s even how that instrument functions within that style. In class this week we also learnt parts of a song by an Indigenous Australian musician and James discussed with us whether or not it was appropriate to use songs with potentially strong political, social or other kinds of themes as a teaching tool. Not only could it be considered cultural appropriation, it could be skipping over part of the historical and cultural value of the music, linking back to Heavner’s ideas. I certainly plan on learning more about using music appropriately in the classroom (James if you’re reading I plan on asking you more about this!).

(That was a long one)

Week 9’s contemporary pedagogy was informal learning. An Academic named Lucy Green was mentioned for her work in considering the value of how modern day musicians in popular music spheres learn, perform and create music. Namely, it was found that learning by ear and memory is significant for modern musicians, instead of notation and formal training. This research eventually led to the musical futures movement around the world, which aims to engage students based on the music they enjoy and methods of learning that are far more common to the youth of today, and even many professional musicians at large. I won’t go into great detail on the specifics here as to not misrepresent their work, but suffice to say that it is indeed tapping into great potential and represents a massive step forward in engaging with music as a true art form of cultures and communities around the world who create and perform popular music. Linking back to week 7, the teacher in this method is also seen to be a facilitator rather than a dictator. In class, we learnt a song called happy place. After we had a warm up song to learn as a class, James led us to learn the song on our own (just to work out the chords on our chord instruments). By learning the song on my own, I was able to learn not only the chords, but the structure by listening to the dynamics of the track, the strumming patterns and the expressive techniques of muted strumming and so on. By learning all of this personally, having been led to this by our teacher, it made a greater impact on my ability to discover something and retain the information, as well as absorbing it in a way that is valuable to me. I guess this pedagogy works then?

More posts on learning the ukulele incoming soon. No more chord chart screenshots I promise (although it has changed about two or three times again anyway!)