| |
Philosophy of the Alliance for Active Music Making
Janet L.S. Moore
General
music is the first important part of a formal music education in
America. When done well, with full use of comprehensive experiences
leading to true musical learning, it is very powerful, leading children
through lasting impressions that set the stage for a long-term valuing
of music in their lives. Unfortunately, general music is often
marginalized within a music education profession that tends to favor
goal-oriented performance approaches aimed most directly at training
for the highest level of music production. Such limited goals are often
taught exclusively, to the detriment of true musical understanding and
comprehensive learning within each student. From the perspective of the
goals of a comprehensive music education, this is an inversion of our
values. To foster the artistry, creative abilities, and music-making of
our children and youth means to nurture their conceptual awareness,
musical discernment and holistic experiences at the earliest stages. We
are mistaken if we seek lesser goals.
The
widely-recognized music teaching and learning approaches of Edwin
Gordon, Emile Jaques-Dalcroze, Zoltan Kodaly, and Carl Orff have
something important to contribute to the ideal whole of a music
education. A music education that is comprehensive and holistic
prepares children to be artists and creators, and not just producers
and consumers of music. Therefore, actual music-making needs to be
coordinated with various conceptual learning experiences, offered in a
systematic approach within each child and youth’s regular music study.
Our
children and youth need the arts to enrich their present lives, to
escape the dullness of schooling and the dominance of science and
technology, to counter the narrowness and over-emphasis on linear
thinking, and to broaden educational practices that overstate
rationality, facts, standardization, and the need to conform. Such
schooling ignores the child’s budding sensitivities, spontaneous
feelings and natural inclinations. There is a need for balance,
allowing time to learn other ways of knowing through the openness,
artistry and creative thinking fostered in well-taught music classes.
Here, children’s imaginations, intuitions, deeper feelings and natural
impulses are encouraged to thrive. Their critical thinking, sense of
adventure, curiosity, and experimental nature are exercised. Their
individuality and creativity are valued, encouraged, and confirmed.
In
the heterogeneous culture in which we live, music educators must be
flexible, resilient, responsive, and resourceful to meet the needs of
multicultural classrooms, diverse student bodies and the many varieties
of schools in which they must serve. There is a need to customize music
education for the school and situation, rather than to mass-produce it.
Furthermore, we are moving into a global age, as opposed to more
parochial times of the past. We see the growth of entrepreneurship and
individualizing organizations, and our society is promoting the success
of these. It is a widely known expectation that future educators will
need to have stronger skills in adapting and customizing their
instruction to meet the needs of their ever-changing school situations.
This
scenario for teaching requires more creative thinking and a higher
level of engagement by the music teacher than that provided by the
traditional “mass produced” curriculum that served in the past as
“recipes for success.” The teacher’s artistry and creativity are
necessary parts for bringing true creative musical understanding and
active music–making into the classroom. Attention to the General Music
teacher curriculum is needed to provide effective strategies that
foster new teachers’ creative thinking and higher levels of engagement.
Why Gordon, Jaques-Dalcroze, Kodaly and Orff?
The term “active music-making” is recognized as a dominant, unifying
quality among the four approaches founded by Edwin Gordon, Emile
Jaques-Dalcroze, Zoltan Kodaly, and Carl Orff. It refers to these four
approaches because they share significant principles or tenets that
require engagement in active musical behaviors on the part of the
learner for major portions of instructional time throughout the musical
experience. This is not to say that other approaches cannot or do not
involve active music-making, but rather that such is generally not
their dominant feature. It is used here to identify the heavy emphasis
within the four approaches upon children’s engagement in active,
physical involvement at the earliest stages of musical learning.
Indeed, there is a focus upon engagement and active, purposeful
music-making strategies from the start—even before higher understanding
is expected in the process.
Substantial
exposure to these four approaches in the preparation of future music
teachers, including study of foundational tenets and significant
strategies/methods to each approach, will help ensure that future
teachers are adequately informed for making a conscious choice later to
pursue additional professional development in at least one of the
approaches. One does not expect that all that is needed in music
teaching can be taught in the 4-5 year teacher preparation/curriculum.
Rather, future music teachers should know they will need to continue to
learn and grow as teachers. That is why music education is a learned
profession and not just training for a job in the schools. The music
education profession requires music teachers to develop into skilled
practitioners or experts beyond their early, specialized study.
With
time, as beginning teachers develop into experienced professionals,
music educators often feel a responsibility to explore several of the
other widely-recognized approaches to find even more strategies and
tools for music teaching. Eventually, the boundaries between each
approach may be softened. Skillful practitioners learn to move easily
from one approach to the other in their quest to reach the learners
better. Ideas and strategies between approaches meld into the other,
rather than being held within the usual silos of conventional practice.
Thus, the music educator can teach children and youth more effectively,
utilizing their own intuition and insights as a master teacher. They
continue to grow in their abilities, rather than “staying true” to one
approach only and limiting their intellectual boundaries.
We
are now well into what has been called the Information Age, as
demonstrated by our new access to information on the internet and other
technological means. There is a spirit today of cooperation and
inclusiveness in education, not competitiveness and exclusiveness.
Cooperation and communal sharing can occur between different
approaches. We believe that being well-grounded in at least one
approach is essential, but many more strategies for music teaching and
learning can be used by the music educator who is grounded in two or
more approaches. This is much like the fluent musician who does not
limit his or her choice of instrument for music-making, or does not
limit the use of art forms to explore, or does not limit the use of
relevant knowledge from different disciplines. In the best moments of
teaching, creative ideas and worthy practices grow from one to the
other, for the sake of the learner. We use all resources while
constantly forging new solutions in music teaching for children’s
musical understanding, valuing, and active music-making.
One
must question if the “pure form” of any one approach is possible or
even appropriate in American music education of the 21st century. As we
think of our history, of our people, of our crafting of public music
education through time, we must consider how all have been far from any
“pure form.” American culture has been described by many metaphors,
such as being a mosaic, a melting pot, a woven tapestry, or a quilt of
many colors and textures. At the same time, America has been a New
World where there is freedom for new things to be imagined and
explored. We believe the music educator must have the freedom to move
in and out of different approaches, guided by foundational tenets that
assist the intuitive teacher in discerning the best solution to meet
the learner’s needs. Music teacher preparation must foster continued
learning and provide that means. |
|