Hourigan, R.M. The invisible student: Understanding social identity construction within performing ensembles. Music educators journal 34-38
Hourigan, R. (2009). The Invisible Student: Understanding Social Identity Construction within Performing Ensembles. Music Educators Journal, 95(4), 34-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0027432109335435
In this article, Hourigan focusses on music education and examines inclusion within a larger musical ensemble such as a choir or band. The article points towards self evaluation through group work. Hourigan states that “The basic understanding is that how a person feels about his or her value to a group can directly affect his or her self-worth and self-identity” (35). He speaks about inclusiveness in the classroom and how it affects the students and the classroom environment.
My thoughts on this article are that being inclusive is very important. Teachers should be inclusive at all times, but this is not always true. Some teachers believe that they must have “the upper hand” and that they must be in charge at all times, but I do not believe in this. Students must take charge of the classroom every once and a while. Let them lead the class and as the teacher step back and let the students figure out things for themselves, only intervene when the students are getting off track. Some of Hourigan’s points are not suitable for all ages. I think this article is aimed towards elementary school teachers and his point about a “buddy system” doesn’t work for all ages. So how could you teach the same lesson with older students but without giving your students the feeling of being “babied”?
September 26, 2016
Hourigan, R. (2009). The Invisible Student: Understanding Social Identity Construction within Performing Ensembles. Music Educators Journal, 95(4), 34-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0027432109335435
In this article, Hourigan focusses on music education and examines inclusion within a larger musical ensemble such as a choir or band. The article points towards self evaluation through group work. Hourigan states that “The basic understanding is that how a person feels about his or her value to a group can directly affect his or her self-worth and self-identity” (35). He speaks about inclusiveness in the classroom and how it affects the students and the classroom environment.
My thoughts on this article are that being inclusive is very important. Teachers should be inclusive at all times, but this is not always true. Some teachers believe that they must have “the upper hand” and that they must be in charge at all times, but I do not believe in this. Students must take charge of the classroom every once and a while. Let them lead the class and as the teacher step back and let the students figure out things for themselves, only intervene when the students are getting off track. Some of Hourigan’s points are not suitable for all ages. I think this article is aimed towards elementary school teachers and his point about a “buddy system” doesn’t work for all ages. So how could you teach the same lesson with older students but without giving your students the feeling of being “babied”?
September 26, 2016
Serres, D. (2016). Think Everything's “Normal?” Then It’s Time To Reconsider And Promote A New Narrative Of Disability. Organizing Change. Retrieved from http://organizingchange.org/think-everythings-normal-then-its-time-to-reconsider-and-promote-a-new-narrative-of-disability/
Serres talks about “the culture of normalcy” and the demeaning of education for people with disabilities. He starts with the question: “what is normal?” then explores what normal means. I believe that normal is what you believe to be normal in your brain. Whatever you think is normal, is. Serres wrote in his article that “normal” is unattainable, but I believe that it is attainable for everyone in their own way. Normal is something different for everyone, whether it be what kind of food you eat, where you live, or what God you worship, its different for every person on earth. This may take time for some people to figure out what their “normal” is, and if they have a “normal”. These are the everyday struggles and questions that we as humans ponder: “what is normal? Am I normal? Who is normal? Why is this normal for me and not for someone else?”. Normal shouldn’t be something to be worried about because everyone is normal in their own way. But sometimes in life normal is something completely different for someone else around you and you may feel strange because of their way of normal. Someone with a disability may have their version of normal compared to someone without a disability. I believe that everyone has their own version of normal, but maybe what I just realized is that normal doesn’t exist. It is just a thought in everyone’s head that normal is something “perfect”. And there is no “perfect” only what we believe in out minds. So, I ask again: “what is normal?” is it just something that we think it is in our brain? Or is it something concrete that we can wrap our brains around?
Serres talks about “the culture of normalcy” and the demeaning of education for people with disabilities. He starts with the question: “what is normal?” then explores what normal means. I believe that normal is what you believe to be normal in your brain. Whatever you think is normal, is. Serres wrote in his article that “normal” is unattainable, but I believe that it is attainable for everyone in their own way. Normal is something different for everyone, whether it be what kind of food you eat, where you live, or what God you worship, its different for every person on earth. This may take time for some people to figure out what their “normal” is, and if they have a “normal”. These are the everyday struggles and questions that we as humans ponder: “what is normal? Am I normal? Who is normal? Why is this normal for me and not for someone else?”. Normal shouldn’t be something to be worried about because everyone is normal in their own way. But sometimes in life normal is something completely different for someone else around you and you may feel strange because of their way of normal. Someone with a disability may have their version of normal compared to someone without a disability. I believe that everyone has their own version of normal, but maybe what I just realized is that normal doesn’t exist. It is just a thought in everyone’s head that normal is something “perfect”. And there is no “perfect” only what we believe in out minds. So, I ask again: “what is normal?” is it just something that we think it is in our brain? Or is it something concrete that we can wrap our brains around?
Tobias, E. S. (2013). Toward Convergence Adapting Music Education to Contemporary Society and Participatory Culture. Music Educators Journal, 99(4), 29-36.
Tobias writes about how you must get your students to play to learn about contemporary music. I think he is talking about how in a regular music classroom, students are talked to and they don’t learn from being lectured. Students need to be hands on to learn how to do certain things: how rhythms work and how certain beats or instruments sound together. After this, it is encouraged that students will take these skills learned and apply them outside of the classroom. Tobias believes that technology is a wonderful tool to get students excited about music and active in learning about it.
I believe that technology is important but to a certain extent. You can only let students play on ipads and phones for a while before they try “real” instruments. I enjoy the part of the article where Tobias talks about covering off students’ favorite artists. I believe this is an important step because students will have to cover multiple milestones while achieving this. They will have to use listening skills to create the cover, and discover which sounds make what. I believe starting children off with technology is brilliant but after a while get them playing on the real thing. This is a relatively new idea for music education, so maybe in the future students will benefit from this way of teaching.
Tobias writes about how you must get your students to play to learn about contemporary music. I think he is talking about how in a regular music classroom, students are talked to and they don’t learn from being lectured. Students need to be hands on to learn how to do certain things: how rhythms work and how certain beats or instruments sound together. After this, it is encouraged that students will take these skills learned and apply them outside of the classroom. Tobias believes that technology is a wonderful tool to get students excited about music and active in learning about it.
I believe that technology is important but to a certain extent. You can only let students play on ipads and phones for a while before they try “real” instruments. I enjoy the part of the article where Tobias talks about covering off students’ favorite artists. I believe this is an important step because students will have to cover multiple milestones while achieving this. They will have to use listening skills to create the cover, and discover which sounds make what. I believe starting children off with technology is brilliant but after a while get them playing on the real thing. This is a relatively new idea for music education, so maybe in the future students will benefit from this way of teaching.
Wayne d. bowman, wayne d. “pop” goes…? Taking popular music seriously “in Rodrigues, c. (Ed.) bridging the gap: popular music and music education. US: MENC.
Wayne Bowman struggles with the question of whether pop music should be in the curriculum for music education. He asks the reader to decide for themselves. I believe that all music should be taught, whether it is classical or Justin Bieber. All music has different forms and a different style. In a “perfect” world, music education in high school would be filled with pop classes, music history classes, different era classes, etc. but that world unfortunately doesn’t exist. Pop music is just as important as any other era even if it is pretty current and I might be biased here but not as “good” as classical music. I wish that I had been taught how to play the guitar in high school or elementary school, but we had to play recorder or harmonica. Pop music is not seen as a “good” thing in music education, but I believe that it is just another learning possibility.
Wayne Bowman struggles with the question of whether pop music should be in the curriculum for music education. He asks the reader to decide for themselves. I believe that all music should be taught, whether it is classical or Justin Bieber. All music has different forms and a different style. In a “perfect” world, music education in high school would be filled with pop classes, music history classes, different era classes, etc. but that world unfortunately doesn’t exist. Pop music is just as important as any other era even if it is pretty current and I might be biased here but not as “good” as classical music. I wish that I had been taught how to play the guitar in high school or elementary school, but we had to play recorder or harmonica. Pop music is not seen as a “good” thing in music education, but I believe that it is just another learning possibility.
Thibeault, Matthew D. (2012). The Power of Limits and the Pleasure of Games: An Easy and Fun Piano Duo Improvisation. National Association for Music Education, 25(3) 50–53.
Thibeault believes that improvisation skills are very important for a music student. I agree entirely with this statement. I wish that I had more opportunities to improvise now in university. Being a clarinetist I wish that I could have some more jazz opportunities. I played a little jazz in high school band but that doesn’t compare at all to Benny Goodman! I wish that I had been taught how to listen better to people around me when playing in a band. I still feel today at university that I could listen more carefully when in band or just playing a solo in masterclass. Music needs to be a social thing and I believe that I am missing out on so many opportunities. How can I build these connections now? Can I still learn to improvise? How could I learn now?
Thibeault believes that improvisation skills are very important for a music student. I agree entirely with this statement. I wish that I had more opportunities to improvise now in university. Being a clarinetist I wish that I could have some more jazz opportunities. I played a little jazz in high school band but that doesn’t compare at all to Benny Goodman! I wish that I had been taught how to listen better to people around me when playing in a band. I still feel today at university that I could listen more carefully when in band or just playing a solo in masterclass. Music needs to be a social thing and I believe that I am missing out on so many opportunities. How can I build these connections now? Can I still learn to improvise? How could I learn now?
Williams, D. A. (2014). Another Perspective The iPad Is a REAL Musical Instrument. Music Educators Journal, 101(1), 93-98.
Williams’ article supports using technology in the classroom. He believes that teaching through technology will help the students connect more with making music because students these days are all on technology. I personally believe this only works to a certain extent. Sure, if you only have a music class once every two weeks for one hour each class, this method may work for younger children. Getting them to listen to the piece, listening to the different sounds and how they work together. But in the long run, how will this work in groups, or if the student wants to try a “real” instrument. I do not think that an iPad is a real instrument, and think that after a while you should introduce “real” instruments into the classroom. Even if they are a little simpler like Orff instruments, get the students more familiar with “real” music making after they have learned how beats work and what sounds “good” to them. I think educators need to ask themselves: “what is a “real” instrument? And when is it a good time to introduce “real instruments?”
Williams’ article supports using technology in the classroom. He believes that teaching through technology will help the students connect more with making music because students these days are all on technology. I personally believe this only works to a certain extent. Sure, if you only have a music class once every two weeks for one hour each class, this method may work for younger children. Getting them to listen to the piece, listening to the different sounds and how they work together. But in the long run, how will this work in groups, or if the student wants to try a “real” instrument. I do not think that an iPad is a real instrument, and think that after a while you should introduce “real” instruments into the classroom. Even if they are a little simpler like Orff instruments, get the students more familiar with “real” music making after they have learned how beats work and what sounds “good” to them. I think educators need to ask themselves: “what is a “real” instrument? And when is it a good time to introduce “real instruments?”