Reading #7

Transforming Music Study from its Foundations: A Manifesto for Progressive Change in the Undergraduate Preparation of Music Majors.

Report of the Task force on the Undergraduate Music Major

(Published by the College Music Society)

Read pp. 1-40, 57 -end.

NOTE: You will probably want to print this and use your highlighter!

What parts of the reading do you agree with? What parts do you disagree with?

If you could have designed the theory requirements for your undergraduate degree program, what would it look like? Consider: 1.) core classes 2.) required upper-division classes 3.) Elective upper-division classes. Keep in mind that there still needs to be room for your other required classes and that the degree should fit realistically into four years.

NOTE: It will be very helpful if you do this in outline form using a word processor, then paste it here with appropriate line breaks so it's easy to read.

Reading #6: AP Music Theory Exam Critique

Take one of the versions of the AP Released Exam, on reserve in the library, and post your score on the multiple choice section by class time on Monday, Nov. 10.
Instructions for taking the test and posting your score are found here.

Share your thoughts on the exam by commenting below. Your comments are due by class time on Wednesday, Nov. 12. (Your lesson Plan for Teaching Project #2 is also due at this time.)

• How long did it take you to complete the test? 
• What theory and ear training concepts does it assess? 

According to the AP system, high school students normally have a one-year course to prepare for this exam. Some colleges will then accept a successful AP score as credit for one or more semesters of theory.

• Do you think that a one-year high school course would offer sufficient time to prepare a student to be successful on this test? What kind of background would they need prior to beginning a high-school AP course?
• How much, if any, college credit should be awarded for a successful score? How many semesters of theory?

Reading 5 1/2

Don Traut, "A Comparative Review of The Complete Musician by Steven G. Laitz, Harmony in Context by Miguel Roig-Francolí, and A Musician’s Guide to Theory and Analysis by Jane Piper Clendinning and Elizabeth West Marvin"

Journal of Music Theory Pedagogy, vol 20 (2006). You can access the hard copy on reserve in the library, or find it online here. To access the article online, you will need to join JMTP if you haven't done so already. Student price is $10.

The books under review are also available on reserve for this course. It will be very helpful if you follow them while reading the review.

The suggested questions for this reading are pretty straightforward: 

• Consider the range of topics addressed by the review, and the differences in pedagogy manifested by the different books. Is there anything that surprised you? For example, "I had no idea there were such different ways to approach [insert topic here] " Or, "I had never thought about approaching [topic] this way before."
• In reading the review AND looking at the textbooks that are on reserve, do you think that the review is fair, balanced, and accurate? Why or why not?

Reading #5

Rogers, Chapter 6, pp. 153-165

Official due date: Friday, Oct. 24 by 11:59 pm.
The truth: Please post your comments before class time on Monday, Oct. 27.

Some questions to consider:

• In this chapter, Rogers outlines some specific teaching techniques in a numbered list. Which of these resonates the most with you, and why? Perhaps there's something on the list that an influential teacher did/does, or something that you aspire to do as a teacher yourself. 
• In point #1, Rogers talks about the "spiral learning" approach. Can you think of a piece of music that might lend itself to this approach? (That is, a piece that you could return to again and again to teach multiple concepts.) 
• In point #5 (starting at the bottom of p. 154), Rogers talks about the different situations that can give rise to student errors. If you were a person who had trouble in theory or aural skills, can you point to any of these reasons for your difficulty?
• The passage on Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) is kind of dated. (For example, substitute "computer lab" for "tape lab"!) Do you think significant progress has been made in the area of computer-assisted drill? If so, how? Which, if any, of Rogers' points still ring true?
• Again, considering that this book was originally written in 1984, consider the passage on 162-3 about general attitudes toward teaching as a profession, an avocation, an art. Do you think attitudes have improved since the 80's? Why or why not?

Reading #4

Comments due Friday, Oct. 10 by 11:59 pm

Rogers, pp. 138-149: Twentieth-Century Ear Training, Rhythm, and Broader Ear-Training Approaches

Twentieth-Century Ear Training:

• Rogers outlines two approaches to hearing/singing/understanding post-tonal and quasi-tonal music. What are they? Do you prefer one over another? Why?

Rhythm:

• What are your thoughts on conducting while sight singing? Is there another (maybe better) way to ensure that a student is articulating the beat as (s)he performs?
• In point #4, Rogers enthusiastically advocates subdivision. In his point #5, he talks about an approach closer to Professor Johnston's "Rhythm Blocks" (i.e., memorize and recall short rhythmic patterns). Do you think that these two points are in conflict? Or can rhythm blocks and subdivision work together? If so, how?

Broader Ear Training Approaches:

• What creative activities can you add to Rogers' list of 10 on p. 148? For any activity that you list, also describe the skill being developed and/or the real-world application.

Reading #3

Rogers, Chapter 5 (pp. 100-138).
Remember, you can always talk about any aspect of the reading, but here are some questions to consider, if you like.

1. Rogers begins the chapter by saying something that I think is probably obvious to us by now: that "dictation and sight singing should be thought of as opposite sides of the same coin." Were you (or are you) markedly better at one than the other? Why do you think that is? Or perhaps you're okay at both skills, but one of them developed more quickly than the other.

2. Rogers goes on to say that "a well-rounded ear training program includes at least two discernible phases: perception and context (or "musical relationships.") He says that this distinction is "between letting sound simply strike the ear drum and and plugging that sound into conceptual frameworks." Can you give an example of this? Perhaps an aural "event" that you learned --such as an interval, triad type, mode, or a certain progression--that you later recognized in a piece of real music? (I'm talking about something you discovered yourself--a "lightbulb" moment--not something the teacher necessarily pointed out.)

3. Other topics as you see fit! There's a lot of good stuff in here. Your responses are due Frida 10.3 by 11:59 pm.

Reading #2

Rogers 33-73 (Fundamentals)

Your comments are due by 11:59 pm on Friday Sept. 12

Some things to ponder after you've done the readings:

• Rogers believes that any problem a student has with "advanced" theory concepts (for example, augmented sixth chords) can be traced back to a weakness in fundamentals. Do you agree? If you were a student who struggled with music theory classes, do you think that having a more firm grounding in scales, key signatures, etc. would have made a difference?
• Rogers suggests that, to achieve fluency in music fundamentals, students must grasp the very large network of patterns and relationships that tie the fundamentals together. (For example, key signatures dictate scales which dictate interval qualities, which dictate triad qualities, etc.) However, some students do not grasp abstract patterns as well as others. (Some people can do Sudoku, others can't. I'm in the second group.) Can you think of a different, more intuitive path that these students could take as they work toward fluency? (Here's a hint: Think repertoire!)
• 
  

Remember, these questions are seeds. You don't have to address all of them, or ANY of them for that matter. If the readings move you to bring up other ideas that you find interesting/important, then by all means, go there!

Reading #1

BEFORE YOU POST: Please read the discussion guidelines. Thanks!

Rogers, pp. 1-30

• Comments Due by Friday, August 29 at 11:59 pm. But...please feel free to respond to others' comments after the due date.
  
• It will be helpful if you can post early so that others have a chance to read and respond!
  
• Remember that your response should be between about 100 - 500 words. You might find it helpful to type and edit your response in a Word Processor and do a word count there.  
  
• FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THINGS HOLY, please put line breaks between your paragraphs!

Here are some ideas to get you started. You don't have to comment on ALL of them; focus on what was meaningful to you in the reading, and please feel free to add questions/comments of your own.

• Last week, we spent some time talking about why so many students dislike music theory. In his opening pages (ca. 1-5), Rogers addresses this problem in some detail. What is his reasoning for this, and what kinds of remedies does he suggest?

• What ARE the "Purposes and Goals of Music Theory"? In other words, consider this scenario: You teach the entire music theory core at a small college, where you have a small class of only the brightest and best. They do everything you tell them to, and study what you tell them to study, and grasp all the concepts. You have them for a complete four or five semesters. Under these very ideal circumstances, what skills would you want them to have when you're done with them? What should they have learned? What should they be able to do?

• On page 7, Rogers says "That answers for [Music Theory] are necessarily elusive is no excuse for failing to grapple with the questions. Viewed in this context, the ultimate value of the endeavor will lie as much in the quality of new questions raised as in the answers given." What kinds of questions do you wish had been raised in your undergraduate music theory courses?