We are being trained to teach cross-curricular. Yes - my 45 minute, once a week class isn't only for teaching music, but math, reading, social studies, science, social skills, and character education. I wonder - is the math teacher (who teaches 90 minutes 5 times a week) teaching music? Is the reading teacher teaching music? WHO'S teaching music to these students? It can't be me - I'm teaching everything else! Is music class only relevant because a more important subject can be taught by using music? NOW I'm being told that I am also responsible for assessing the math lesson I'm teaching in the music classroom!?!
America's music classrooms are being dumbed down when we are expected to cover all subject areas in our once a week music class.
I know that music classes have wonderful connections to other subjects. Song texts give us great insights to historical events and lifestyles. Science is covered in many songs about nature. The understanding of rhythm is firmly based in mathematics. And just the ability to read music enhances reading. These are natural cross-curricular applications. I can look at any of my relevant lessons and find at least one other subject that can be connected. But I should not design a lesson purely for the intent of teaching another subject. Just as the math teacher is not going to design a lesson simply to teach music.
America's music classrooms are being dumbed down when our students can't read or write music.
In some of the music education workshops I've attended, I've seen wonderful lessons for keeping beat, how to play beautiful orchestrations on instruments - by rote, fun dances and games, great ways to teach improvisation, and gorgeous part singing songs. The focus of the lessons? Beat, playing, improvising, moving, part singing. That's all and good. We need that in our classroom. But where is the music literacy? Now that you can keep the beat - can you add rhythm to that? Now that you can play an instrument - can you start reading the music to play it? Now that you can play a game or a dance - can you identify which music notation on the board is the one we just sang? Now that you can improvise - can you compose? Now that you can part sing - can you read an octavo in a choral ensemble?
I'm so grateful our students get reading class every day, for 90 minutes. I expect that by 1st or 2nd grade, these students will be reading independently. But they didn't start learning to read in Kindergarten. They started learning to read the first time someone spoke to them - "hear the language". The next step in learning to read is when someone reads to them - "see the language". They hear the words for years and years before we started showing them the letters, identifying the sounds of the letters, and putting them together to make words.
Music teachers do a great job in the first steps of teaching music reading. First the students have to "hear the language" - we sing to them. Then they have to "see the language" - we put music on the board or in their hands. At this point, they still can't read, but they have visual exposure to the language. This should go on for years - preferably before they go to Kindergarten. Now it's time to "show them the letters" (notes on a staff, rhythm values), identify the sounds of the letters (sing with solfege or absolute pitch, tap the rhythms) and put them together (sight sing). This is music literacy. If we're so busy with teaching other subjects and providing less relevant lessons - how many of us music teachers are producing literate musicians?
As music teachers, we have many teaching responsibilities: singing, playing, improvising, composing, reading, writing, listening, evaluating, relating to other areas, and understanding music history. That's a challenge for once a week, 45 minutes. It's daunting if we're responsible for teaching other subject areas in addition to our own.
No comments:
Post a Comment