Music on or off the curriculum ?

[MrGongGong]

Since the much discussed Henley report it's all gone a bit quiet
however we are likely to loose music from the national curriculum "by stealth" as it seems that schools that have introduced the Ebacc are effectively removing it entirely

some interesting reporting here

http://jsavage.org.uk/?cat=106

as well as this for the NAME mag (National Association of Music Educators)

http://jsavage.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/name_piece.pdf

some will say "so what , its all rubbish anyhow" and make up a load of nonsense to support their argument that the musicology they did in the old days was far superior to what happens now

but for some of us this is very worrying indeed not necessarily for the loss of work but the loss of opportunity
once you have lost some things they are almost impossible to get back

[french frank]

but for some of us this is very worrying indeed not necessarily for the loss of work but the loss of opportunity
once you have lost some things they are almost impossible to get back

I suppose - arguably - people might say that that's what's happened with the discipline of music: once the thinking is introduced that musicology is old-fashioned, stuffy and not the only (or best) way, it's dropped. Like the 'ridiculous' idea of teaching 11-year-olds Latin. You replace them with something more in tune () with current thinking, and that just becomes the next target.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

there is a strong case for as much music making as possible at primary and secondary levels based on the evidence for the cognitive development that is facilitated in youth by music and sustained in old age by having learnt music as a young person never mind the more 'intrinsic' benefits of enjoyment, aesthetics, culture etc ... but it all boils down to putting ££££ before purpose and the Gradgrind pose so beloved of our decadent politicos .... and pseudo Benthamite anti elitism [and the notable inconvenience that difficult subjects or even handwriting and reading, lead to difficulties wit targets etc]

[StephenO]

there is a strong case for as much music making as possible at primary and secondary levels based on the evidence for the cognitive development that is facilitated in youth by music and sustained in old age by having learnt music as a young person never mind the more 'intrinsic' benefits of enjoyment, aesthetics, culture etc ...

Agreed. That's why, thankfully, the (state) school where I teach is continuing to offer Music at KS4. It's a popular option and students can choose to take the subject as either a GCSE or a BTEC. There's also a large take up for students learning instruments, ranging from piano and violin to saxophone, guitar and drums. We have a school orchestra, two choirs and a rock band and regularly put on concerts and musicals.

Perhaps we're just one of the lucky ones - we're also carrying on with Art, Drama, RE and ICT, all of which a lot of schools are dropping. Education is far too important to allow it to be turned into glorified job training.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

StephenO, I think schools like yours are becoming less common. The demise of school orchestras, bands and choirs began during the period 1985-86, which was the last time that teachers and government were is serious conflict. Although most schools recovered from the working-to-rule during that period, Kenneth Baker responded by imposing a new contract, making such action much less effective and followed this by the National Curriculum, which strangled good music teaching in favour of something that was both prescribed and wishy-washy. Unfortunately it was backed up by Ofsted, who could only see tick boxed and 30 pieces of silver. O-level was replaced by GCSE (a tinkered CSE) and now everyone can get a C grade, even of they can't read music.
But to get back to the point, the pressure on schools was so great that the more philistine headteachers made it difficult for music teachers to have choir and ensemble practices. The introduction of lunchtime supervisors to counter the teachers' work-to-rule resulted in worsening of behaviour. The logical solution was to cut lunchtimes from 75 minutes to 65, then 60, then 45, then 40, so that rehearsing had to take place after school, when all the buses had left. It doesn't take a genius to work out that not too many people were quite so keen to attend...
That's why I left class teaching. Working for a music service is less secure though, and orchestration jobs, although not infrequent, cannot be relied upon.

[MrGongGong]

Did you look at the stories on Johnathan's blog Alpen ?
GCSE is hardly a "tinkered CSE"
there are many things wrong with it
BUT
the change from the music O level that I did , where I got a good grade but made NO sound at all
to what my daughter did for GCSE where music making was part of the exam
is a good thing

the reading of music notation is a contentious subject amongst educators , there is a good case to be made for not teaching reading skills in a "language that you can't speak" which is why the Suzuki method is praised by some. I think the real problem comes at A level with this , there is a cultural resistance to learning notation even when it would be useful.

There is also a great deal of confusion about exactly WHAT music teaching should be about, I'm very much in favour of music as a practical subject but that does mean that some of the more esoteric issues of aesthetics (that many of us find fascinating) are not addressed.

Ironically young people play more music these days than did when I was young and the standard of musicianship at music colleges is much much higher.......

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

GCSE is hardly a "tinkered CSE"

No, they've hardly tinkered with it at all.

the change from the music O level that I did , where I got a good grade but made NO sound at all
to what my daughter did for GCSE where music making was part of the exam is a good thing

It is, but geting high marks for bashing hell out of a drumkit with no dynamic below ffff is not.

the reading of music notation is a contentious subject amongst educators , there is a good case to be made for not teaching reading skills in a "language that you can't speak" which is why the Suzuki method is praised by some. I think the real problem comes at A level with this , there is a cultural resistance to learning notation even when it would be useful.

Oh dear me. Is that theory still being thrown around? I hope they're going to stop teaching children to read. It obviously inhibits them from talking.

Ironically young people play more music these days than did when I was young and the standard of musicianship at music colleges is much much higher.......

What do they play? Keyboards badly? Drums, otherwise known as antisocial behaviour if you live nect door to a teenage drummer. I'm uncertain whether the standard in music colleges is higher, but if it is, this has nothing whatever to do with classroom music teaching - they learn in spite of it, not because of it, and with increasing cuts, this will only be for the wealthy.

[MrGongGong]

Oh dear me. Is that theory still being thrown around? I hope they're going to stop teaching children to read. It obviously inhibits them from talking.

I can't seriously believe that you really have missed this point so spectacularly ???

Music is a sonic phenomenon
Notation is PART of it

When you learn't to read and write words you already were fluent in what they meant

learning to read music notation when you can't "speak" it is one of the reasons why so many people give up
even accomplished students often have a huge block where this is concerned

now, you and I obviously find notation easy , I never had a problem with it (though I'm a bit rusty on my German vs French VIths) but many do, do we deny participation in music making to those who find the abstraction of notation initially confusing ? Don't get me wrong I do think notation should be taught, but taught well NOT like it was in the past............ start with Volumina or Játékok


Classroom music , that you so rightly mention as a means of access for many inevitably has to include musical practices that you might dislike (like percussion) unless, of course, insist on only teaching children who can play the violin to grade V standard !

I'm seeing Dave Hockings later this week
I'll pass on your comments about drummers !

[Suffolkcoastal]

I'm in agreement with you Alpensinfonie. Having sat in a university class last autumn in which around 70% of the 40 odd students failed a Grade V Music Theory paper, and when I felt that sociology and psychology would have been a better preparation for the course, then you know something is seriously wrong with music teaching and examining in this country.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I can't seriously believe that you really have missed this point so spectacularly ???

That's because I'm an utter dimwit. Or maybe I just disagree with what you are saying.

I have read Jonathan's blog and it confirms what I see in many schools.

[MrGongGong]

That's because I'm an utter dimwit. Or maybe I just disagree with what you are saying.

I have read Jonathan's blog and it confirms what I see in many schools.

So I guess the solution is for us all to go back to the wonderful 1970's
where everyone sat at desks quietly listening in awe to the words of wisdom

I have taught notation to students who's musical landscape consists entirely of guitar based rock music
but as I said it's only a PART of music

i guess you are disagreeing then with the idea that we should become sonically and aurally fluent before finding ways of recording this. So when you learnt to read and write you obviously didn't know any words of what a word was ?

Chapter 7 of Sloboda's "The musical mind, The Cognitive Psychology of music" has some interesting things to say on this subject !

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

People are sonically aware long before starting to read music. They do still sing (or should do) at an early age. True, it may be the trash dished out by SingUp, but I suppose that's better than nothing.

[Suffolkcoastal]

For some areas of music, notation isn't important, but for many others it is essential. I'd rather be back in the 70's if the present day standards produce music undergraduates and teaching of the poor standard I witnessed last year.

[MrGongGong]

Discussions about methodology are interesting
but if many schools loose music all together then they become more than a little empty

the obvious difference between now and the 70's is the number of people studying
there's an ocean of difference between undergraduate music at (for example !) Durham, Oxford and York Universities and at other places

one needs to compare like with like

though there's no excuse for poor teaching anywhere

[aeolium]

For some areas of music, notation isn't important, but for many others it is essential. I'd rather be back in the 70's if the present day standards produce music undergraduates and teaching of the poor standard I witnessed last year.

sc, don't you think that the standard of technical accomplishment is generally far higher now than in the seventies - I mean over a whole range of different genres and ensembles, orchestras, chamber groups, soloists? Someone must be doing something right.

I went to a local concert the other day as part of the (very small scale) festival the town is putting on and saw two really talented musicians of schoolboy age, one on piano and one on marimba and vibraphone. The quality of playing was really impressive (the pianist is going to study at the RCM, apparently, and performed wonders with a fairly dodgy piano!)

I keep hearing dire predictions of the death of music education, and I keep seeing and hearing impressive performances by young musicians - something doesn't tally there