In this blog I mostly just want to get out some ideas I've had as the year has progressed and my education classes have made me think. I'd love to hear your thoughts about these. Sometimes I have great ideas, and sometimes they're crazy, and the bad news is that I rarely know the difference!
One topic I've read about deals with creating a community of learners. There are certain prerequisites, such as having a positive classroom environment (both in terms of the room's organization as well as good classroom management). But the idea is that you take the focus away from yourself as the teacher, and focus on student centered activities. This involves less lecturing and individual practice, and more group activities and discussion. Everyone is learning, including the teacher, and everyone helps each other to learn.
There are a LOT of things they talk about in education classes that band pretty much has built into it. But I think in regards to this one, I'm not so sure. Traditional rehearsals are entirely grounded in the idea that when you're not playing, you're not talking, and you're devoting 100% of your attention to the conductor, even if they're not talking to you, else you'll face the wrath. Of course, as players we always find ways to communicate, whether it's whispering extremely quietly, or whatever. When conductors are dictators, students find ways to bend those rules, even if just a little bit. At least that's my experience coming up in bands with that kind of environment. And hey, it works.
But what if there were more ways to make students responsible for each other's learning, and thus improving their learning in the process? Specifically, teaching a concept has the highest retainment rate and helps you to achieve a deeper level of learning than does anything else. So what are some ways to better create a community of learners and give students more ownership? I wonder how some of these ideas would work out.
Marching and Playing Fundamentals
My typical experience of marching techniques involves an explanation/demonstration of a marching technique by an instructor, with guided practice by the instructor in a block. Following that you'll usually break into sections, and the section leaders drill the new technique while giving the section more individualized attention. The ratio of officer to section members varies, of course, but it's better than the large block. Notice that the section leaders are now teaching, which increases their understanding and ultimately helps them become the stand out marchers of the band. After several minutes you'll return to the large block and drill some more. Some teachers have one group of students watch another, whether it's through the form of a section contest, or whatever kind of contest. This can be useful as you can see what makes someone look good or bad, but there is no guarantee that all students will watch intently. Though when you make a contest out of it, those chances do increase.
What if we were to do something like this? After reviewing previous techniques, we teach them the new technique and drill it for several minutes in a group setting. Then we number the columns or rows in 1's and 2's. Students turn towards their partner, introduce themselves, and then fall back into attention. We can then have the 1's fall out and watch the 2's display the technique, reminding them before hand of the check list of things they should look for, and with a previously instilled attitude concept that says they are ultimately responsible for the band's total success, and that every one of them really is a vital member of the band, along with some tips on how to give and receive constructive criticism (again, a safe environment is a prerequisite for establishing a community of learners).
Now what happens? Now we have a student teacher ratio of 1:1. The 1's are getting a deeper understanding of the marching techniques by not just watching it, but teaching it, and the 2's are getting one on one attention to help them improve. I think we could have the 2's display the technique a total of three times, with feedback after the first two. As soon as they stop, 1's assume the position of attention, and then 2's become the teachers. Having just had comments on their technique, they'll be even better prepared to coach the 1's (this seems unavoidable). We could even have the students shake hands or hug afterwards and say thanks for the help. We could either drill as a large group again to assess the total progress to that point, or go straight to sectionals where the section leaders, who have more training and probably better trained eyes (and probably higher expectations) will try to catch anything that was missed. Then we can still conclude with a giant group block at the end to review. I'd also be willing to instruct students to stand between two different people at each session so they're getting coached and coaching people they're unfamiliar with.
And yet there would be an element of urgency to this process, and a sense that students should be grateful for each other's help, because I am a big believer in having a marching certification process. For anyone who is unfamiliar, marching certification is like your marching techniques final exam, where you march through an established drill (ex: series of box drills), and demonstrate perfect marching fundamentals. This is with the threat (I hate to say it) that they must be certified to have a spot on the field during the half time show. The sequence should be challenging, but achievable, so that it is doable by everyone, but there is a real sense of accomplishment at the end. Then you do whatever it takes to make sure every student passes certification. Those who get certified right off the bat can root on those who are still trying, and can even coach students who are having significant trouble. The goal for an entire session is to pass certification, and you stay behind at the end of the day to keep working with anyone who couldn't do it in that time period.
Regardless of how hard it is, you hype it up as being a challenge. With this test of skills on the horizon, I think students can bond together with the common goal of helping each other to get through it, even on a one on one level. My only concern is that some students will be less experienced and knowledgeable than others, but rotating partners at each session should help to lessen the impact on any one student and give all students a more consistent experience. I don't know, I just think it could work.
I've also heard of a similar approach to teaching playing fundamentals in beginning band, such as having partners check each other for posture, horn carriage, etc. I don't think you can use this in all situations, but I think it would work well for certain things.
I went into much more detail on that than I had intended.
In Music Rehearsal?
I honestly think the most important thing you can get the students to do to improve during rehearsal is to motivate them to focus on improving at something no matter what's going on. For example, when I work with a group I say up front that if I start addressing one section, I expect the students not in that section to do something to get better. They can mentally count rhythms, finger through passages, etc. etc. There is music to memorize, and much to be done in general, and because time is the one commodity we never get back, they shouldn't waste a moment of it just because I'm addressing a section or an individual.
However, I think it's still somewhat possible to have a "community of learners" in the context of rehearsal. But you have to sacrifice something. Silence. Now this one I'm still undecided on, and I will probably arrive at a conclusion within the first couple of years of teaching, but here is what I'm debating. Actually, I tried this out over the summer and generally liked the results.
I gave the students permission to talk, but with certain restrictions. Above all else, they had to restrict their discussion to music related items. This way, if someone needed help (like a fingering or rhythm question), they had my permission to ask a neighbor before asking me. I figure the most problems they can fix on their own, the better for all of us. They were required to use the softest voice possible so that I could still communicate with who I needed to. If I could not communicate easily with who I needed to, I could remove that right. Finally, they could only ask each other questions if I was addressing someone else. If I was addressing them, I required their full attention.
You sacrifice the complete silence that most directors cherish. But silence is an interesting thing. Some students are able to focus better in complete silence, while others (particularly those who have enough siblings and animals at home) concentrate better when there is at least a little bit of ambient noise. So as long as the noise is of a low level such that I can easily communicate with who I need to, I don't think it hurts me. Silence or noise? Either way, some students are better off than others. If the noise level gets too loud, enforce the whisper rule, and if it happens again, enforce a "talk out". For non-WT people, the idea of a "talk out" is that, once enacted, only the director may speak a word. The consequences for uttering even a syllable during a talk about are apparently severe, though I never asked what happens. Everyone just shut up and I assumed if I talked I would get kicked out of band or something. I could just as easily have a student immediately put their instrument away and exit the ensemble formation, and call home after class. So through this concept it might be possible to create a community of learners even in music rehearsal, even if it was more limited. Maybe this will end up being totally wrong. But as long as the general rule is that they quietly stay on task individually until a question arises, I think it could work. Certainly a mad house is unacceptable. I've seen directors work in such an environment, but I can't imagine how, and the bands themselves were usually not that great. Of course, almost all of the talking was not related to the task at hand. But that kind of volume just plain made me angry. Anyway, I guess we'll see.
Other ideas to promote student ownership...
Have you ever considered that most subjects have student tutors, but band doesn't? Granted, even your best players have bad habits that you don't want them to pass on, but at the same time they could still offer some valuable help. I know in my high school tuba section, we traded tips all the time. In large enough cities you might have a small army of lesson teachers, but not all students can afford that, and I rarely see Jr. High/Middle School students taking lessons. Worse, what do you do if you're in a small town where no lesson teachers are available? Well, of course you can set aside some time each day to teach a private lesson or two, but you'll probably give priority to your older students, or at least those in the high school.
Keep in mind this specific idea is for small school bands, where often the Middle School and High School are merged onto one campus.
Why not have students from your top band, who are willing, able, and (based on your judgement) capable, teach lessons to beginning band students? Call them Band Tutors. Let your high school students know that these players are the future of the band, so the more help we can give them, the better the band will become when they become members. In larger areas with middle schools that have students start in the 6th grade, with 7th and 8th graders split between two skill based bands, you might still be able to find students willing to tutor beginners, but I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. But that first year of band is covering material so easy that it should be easy for even 8th graders to coach their 6th grade peers, as long as they've been well taught.
White sheets - of course. Ben Zander, conductor of the Boston Philharmonic (among other things), promotes a practice in which students answer the following question on a blank white sheet at the end of rehearsal - "What can we do to make more beautiful music?" For students, it might be that they need a cue, or need more help with a passage. But ideally what you want is feedback on the interpretation of the music itself. It might be a beautiful chord they want held out longer, or something else. You can then read over the suggestions and pick the ones you're interested in experimenting with the next time you hit those sections. With this practice, the end result is more of a collaborative effort than strictly the interpretation of the conductor (though that is the heaviest influence). Using student recommendations that are appropriate gives students a stronger feeling of ownership and pride in the music, in addition to having given them more liberty to exercise their artistic creativity.
As this has turned into a long post already, I'll conclude with these two brief ideas.
One question I've asked myself is how we can use the high school band to help support social causes both as a means for student intellectual growth as well as to build support among the community. I recall my high school band doing a food drive at least once, and at the concert the director explained that it had come from the band members and shook hands with the director of that organization on stage. Sure, it could be something as simple as that, or preferably we could maybe perform at an event or offer some volunteers or something. I'm not sure.
But what I'd like to do is compose a list of local organizations that advance various causes. At some point during the year I could give this list, with a description of the organization's purposes, to the students with instructions to read about the organizations and causes. At some point towards the end of the year we could take some time to vote on which organization(s) the students want to support in the next year. We narrow it down to 1-2, and then I can get in touch with those organizations to see how we could get involved. This way, not only are we building a positive reputation and positive connections throughout the community, but the students are learning positive values in the process, and have ownership over which causes the band supports. Hopefully it will involve a performance of some type, but that might not always be the case.
Finally, I'm also interested in having students choose the theme for the marching show each year. I'm currently preparing for the event that, like most other ASU music grads, I'll end up with a job as a director at a small school (though I wouldn't mind a job working with beginners in a large area, as I think it would benefit me more in the long run). With that in mind, I'm gradually piecing together a show, just in case that happens. But after that first year I could let the students help with that. My instructions would include paying more attention in their core classes to discover the underlying lessons and themes that can apply broadly to benefit us as Americans, or as a human race. For example, a student studying World War II in history, or related literature in English, may discover some important lessons about the evils of oppression. If the theme of oppression (not a show title, but a theme... part of the show's message) made the final cut, then I could go forth and find music that suited that theme. Shostakovitch or any number of composers would have great music that could be applicable to such a theme. I would provide guidance through the elimination process, but the end result would be based on what the students wanted the show to convey. Then I could go find the music and put the show together. This way the students get at least a small amount of ownership at the ground level of the show, while I still do the most important aspect (at least in my view), programming. But just this small thing makes the show their show, their message, and so on.
Well, that's a LOT of ideas I've thrown out there. What are your thoughts? Are any of them good? Or are they crazy? Your feedback is always appreciated. Thank you, as always, for reading, and take care!
Musically yours,
Mr. Cooper
