If you’ve been reading the newspapers, listening to the news, or following Facebook and Twitter updates over the past few months, then you know that music programs across the country are being cut at an alarming rate. Just yesterday I received an email from my former cooperating teacher in New Jersey letting me know that the elementary instrumental music program in the district is being cut next year due to drastic reductions in state funding. This district has one of the most respected music programs in the state, and this was certainly upsetting news to hear. This district is not the only one experiencing such challenges. Many of the music teachers and administrators in my PLN have posted status updates that they have lost their jobs and are looking for a new one. Music education is under attack. There are many music advocacy organizations making strident efforts to save school music programs, including SupportMusic.com and MENC. But is it enough?
Perhaps one of the reasons school districts feel that instrumental (and choral music) programs can be cut is that they often serve a small population of students – typically 20 – 30%. In no way am I suggesting that this is good fiscal or educational policy, or that instrumental and choral music programs are not essential to any solid school curriculum offering. I am just trying to rationalize why school districts feel that cutting a program is a “good idea”. When a school district with outstanding performing ensembles gets cut, any program is vulnerable. In my opinion, in order for school music programs to solidify their place as an essential part of the core school curriculum (including instrumental and vocal music), they must incorporate technology on a number of different levels. Let me be specific.
I believe that teachers can use technology as an advocacy tool for their programs. When I was in public education, I used technology constantly to disseminate information to students, parents, colleagues, and teachers. I always felt that the more visible my efforts were, the more difficult it would be to cut my program. The first thing I did was to create a monthly newsletter to keep as many stakeholders as possible informed about the many things that were going on in the music department. The newsletters included upcoming performances, highlights of student work, music advocacy articles, and more. These newsletters (while time consuming to create) were highly successful in increasing awareness about my program. Next came a music department website, filled with information about the various program offerings, details about concerts and trips, discussion forums, and lots of examples of student work – much of it compositions and podcasts. Toward the end of my tenure, I incorporated blogging and podcasting with my instrumental music students (and general music students). The parents were thrilled with the fact that I was incorporating Web 2.0 into my program, and often asked me why other subject area teachers were not doing the same. Finally, I recorded every concert and sold the recordings (after properly paying the royalties) as a fundraiser for the music program. These recordings were a big hit with the students and parents. These four simple steps were really focused on promoting my program, with very little integration directly into the rehearsal process.
The biggest role for music technology in my program however was in my general music program. I raised funds over several years to purchase a 12 station music technology lab. The projects that I did with my students included compositions, podcasts, wikis, PowerPoint presentations, website authoring, blogging, recording, and more. The crucial aspect of this effort was that I was reaching the 70 – 80% of the students in my school who were NOT in the instrumental and vocal music program. When these students went home and told their parents about the various things that they were doing in my music classroom, I would often get emails and phone calls telling me how the music class was what their child looked forward to every day. While I would like to think that my teaching style had something to do with this, I know that the projects the students were doing involved their creating content in the same medium that they were used to consuming it. This may not seem that important to other subject areas, but it is crucial in music education. When every child in the school is creatively using technology to compose film scores, create informational podcasts, and author web content, the administrators and parents look to these activities as truly 21st Century skills. In my opinion, no other subject area (aside from visual arts) has such an incredible opportunity to showcase these skills. I firmly believe that successful integration of music technology on a school-wide basis would make it extremely difficult to cut my position. While the instrumental or vocal music program might still get slashed, at least I would still have a job, and at least I would still be doing great things in music education.
I want to be clear that I am not suggesting that just having a music technology lab will save every music educators job. I do believe however that with energetic and creative music educators using technology to showcase student work and the benefits of a strong music program, we can make an impact on ensuring that music education is thought of as a perfect way to reinforce 21st Century skills (read Daniel Pink’s A Whole New mind for more information on that), and NOT as a frill that can be cut to save some money. The perfect music program is one that offers outstanding performance opportunities to interested students, and creative and engaging music making opportunities for every student in the school, including that 70 – 80%. By engaging every student in our music programs (with technology as an essential way of doing so), we can help music education grow into the 21st Century, and remain an absolutely essential aspect of a child’s education.
I welcome your comments and questions.
Amen Jim!
Pingback: Elementary Music/Music Technology Blog » Blog Archive » Check out this post by Jim Frankel about why technology is so important to music education, especially today.
Hello,
I was instrumental in getting midi workstations in our elementary,middle, and high school programs. I currently teach MS band and Music Appreciation, and am getting my Masters in Integrating Technology into the classroom. We are podcasting, creating wiki pages, and presentations about as much music as we can in both Instrumental music as well as Music Appreciation. We are using Finale and Sibelius in our programs as well. It just takes time to iron out the details.
I am reaching more students using technological instruments than traditional instruments.
CD
Pingback: TI:ME Chapter of Connecticut » Welcome
Really interesting post James. Thanks for taking the time to write about this important topic. Over here in the UK, an unparalleled period of investment in music education is coming to an end. We are also facing a General Election in a month or two and there is a lot of anxiety about the potential shape of UK education policy in a time where cuts need to be made in all areas of public life.
So, it may be that we experience something of the cuts that you are experiencing across the US. The potential use of technology to provide a greater degree of access to music as an activity (whether that be as a performer, composer, improviser, etc) is undeniable. You have given a lot of really good examples from your own work. It is interesting to read about how you consider this ‘technological’ dimension to music education fits alongside the vocal and instrumental programmes. This distinction is not so clear in the UK. There is a degree of integration between musical activities in school-based music, with technology serving various purposes. Either way, I think it is important not to differentiate between students who use technology for music and those who sing, play traditional instruments, or whatever. I know you are not trying to do this. But sometimes I hear teachers in schools here talking about the ‘musical’ kids (i.e. those who play in the band, etc) and those who use technology for different purposes.
We have to be careful about this in our examination frameworks too. In the UK, we have fallen into the trap of having a whole suite of music technology qualifications which exist alongside the ‘music’ ones. There is quite a marked difference in the ‘type’ of student who would take a particular qualification. I’ll leave you to guess who does which!
At the end of the day, most music making is achieved through a technology of some sort – digital or otherwise. Whilst I agree that digital technologies do broaden access to many musical processes, they should not be seen as a substitute for other musical activities, and other activities should not be seen as a substitute for using digital technologies as part of a rounded musical education. Towards that end, we all need teachers with skillful pedagogies who know what to do when, how to go about it and with the appropriate choice of tools.
Thank you for your comments Jonathan – you raise some very good points. Your global perspective on the issue is very much appreciated.
Jim
Jim, I am an employee of MakeMusic Inc. (makers of Finale and SmartMusic). Your blog today hits close to home as the focus of my advanced degree was Funding for Technology in Music Education. My colleagues and I at SmartMusic have dedicated a portion of our website to helping music educators hunt for funding. We’d love to share our page. I hope your readers find this helpful:
http://www.smartmusic.com/Educators/Resources/Funding.aspx
Pingback: Importance of Music Technology Today « Douglas Laustsen
Pingback: Twitter Trackbacks for Music Technology in Education » Blog Archive » Never has technology been more important to music education [musiced.net] on Topsy.com
I completely agree with you that technology reaches more students and is the future of music education. With the new Bloom’s taxonomy having “create” on top, it only makes music technology is more important. While we still need to support the performance end of music education, the creative or composing end, using music technology can no longer be placed on the back burner. Just today I had a convert, an eighth grade language arts teacher, she was so impressed with the poems her students created as a multi-media project, she made a point to show me the files. The students had learned how to make movies, create music, and put together a multi-media project in MY classes, thus allowing her to use that knowledge to make her look GOOD. Thanks for the great post:)
Pingback: uberVU - social comments
Pingback: Twitter Trackbacks for Music Technology in Education » Blog Archive » Never has technology been more important to music education [musiced.net] on Topsy.com
So important ~ thank you! Change does not come easy to education, and music teacher education must recognize and change with the times as well. A great post to share with my students.
Thanks so much for your comments Kathy! Please let me know what your students think. I would love to hear their views on this important issue.
Jim
As a fairly new to public school music teacher (this is my 4th year), this semester, I have begun using technology in ALL my music classes (K – 5). Using my school website and the help of my technical specialist, I created a music department website with links to various music education sites where students can learn about orchestra instruments, notation, develop reading and aural skills through fun musical games. I also used GarageBand in the computer lab with all my intermediate students to allow them to explore musical styles, arrangements, recording software skills and to create their own musical projects to accompany original lyrics. My students LOVE coming to music class to use technology in a way that allows them to work at an individualized pace and create something personal. Especially since I teach over 400 students per week, this individualized method allows me a great freedom to assess each student’s skill level and encourage their personal creativity and skill development.
I am encouraged by your article’s mention of the use of technology in music class as a way for all students to develop ’21st century skills’. As my Assistant Principal (formerly a music/chorus educator) reminded me, we will see future musicians using technology more than the traditional route of joining orchestras. Or at least, in tandem with such musical career pathways.
Thanks for speaking out on the validity of music and technology in today’s educational system.
Pingback: Brad’s Blog » How to become necessary again?
Pingback: reblog Never has technology been more important to music education | Music Is Not for Insects
Jim,
I agree with you 100% on this topic! Since 2006 I have acquired hand-me-down technology to build a semi-functional lab alongside my VH1 Save the Music keyboard lab and the results have been astonishing. Here in Denver the arts in the elementary schools are thriving, but our PE program has been cut and our technology coach may be next. However, with the opportunities I have been providing for my students in the areas of music technology, the music position is solid for now. Even though I am working with second-rate equipment that is well past it’s prime and runs slower than my grandma, kids are loving the experience and I hope they will take it with them beyond middle school and high school where our music programs are being cut the most. Thanks for your blog and for continuing to be an e-mentor for me.
Pingback: Monday Morning Music Mix -Music Education News Weekly ~3-29-10 | MusTech.Net: Music Education, Music Technology, & Education!
This article is so flawed, I hardly know where to begin to rebutt it, but I will start with this: why should the ‘technology’ companies reap the lion’s share of the music budget?
There. That’s said. Here’s another: ‘Music’ is a ‘technology’ — putting computer chips in things does not make them ‘advanced’, if anything, it makes them dumber, harder to use, more prone to malfunction, less portable, astronomically more expensive, less flexible, shortens their lifespan and gives the wrong lesson about why it is that human beings spend so much time and effort to learn how to use the technology called ‘music’.
It may shock you know to that human beings have been making music on this planet for well over one hundred thousand years before the advent of electronic circuitry. It is true, go look it up. And that’s just the printed music. The practice of music is lost in antiquity, but we do know that everyone does it, every culture of every era, every culture of every era except this ‘culture’, this culture of money where American Idol is held out as an ideal of high culture, a goal for the children to aspire towards.
Now, here is an experiment: Put a live musician on a subway train, tell them to play, observe the commuter traffic reaction, even among those who appear to “not like” the intrusion — you don’t actually need to do this experiment because there are ample examples on YouTube of musical groups doing precisely this. Now, for part II: take your very best digital sound ‘technology’ and play that, at the same volume, on the same commuter route and notice the reaction to that So what is going on there, why is one enjoyed or at least tolerated where as the other is only tolerated reluctantly and very often evokes ardent complaint? Could it be that ‘music’ is more than just the sound it makes?
Could it be then that teaching children that the shadow of music (air-borne compression waves) is the whole of the story is in fact robbing children of one hundred thousand years of birthright?
Others will no doubt disagree with me, regardless the research I heap upon them, and that is ok, because every human being by nature must explore their own personal strategy towards the advancement of the species, but I would challenge my detractors to explain why, for example, if technology is prerequisite to viable music programs, why then the astounding success of El Sistema in Venezuela, and why then the astouning popularity of music across the other 85% of the population of earth that does not have access to the latest computer gadgetry.
MrG
Thanks for taking the time to comment on my blog.
You have missed my point entirely. I am guessing that you do not teach music in the public schools.
I am not arguing that technology should ever replace live music making opportunities for children. I am arguing that technology is an important way to promote existing programs and connecting with a much larger student population.
If you had read the post a little more carefully before venting, you would have known that.
Jim
Great post, thanks James – a really fascinating glimpse into the fight for music education in the U.S., and it’s always refreshing to hear someone actively proposing solutions rather than just bemoaning the situation.
Using technology in the teaching of music, and building a new image for music education which is strongly centered around modern methods and tools is really interesting to me. I think it’s very much a different angle on the issue we’re tackling at EasyEarTraining.com – that ear training (like music education in general?) has an image of old-fashioned methods which can easily end up falling by the wayside in today’s tech-hungry world. By finding new ways to integrate technology into ear training, and exploit modern tools (the internet, sequencers, podcasts, mobile phone apps) to assist the training process, I think we can re-forge the image of ear training as something much more appealing to the upcoming generations. Your experience shows that the same is certainly true for music education.
Government is often criticised for blindly trying to throw I.T. at a problem to modernise a system and make it more attractive to the public, but I think there can be few subjects which can genuinely benefit as much from modern technology as music, and music education in particular.
Bravo James, I hope others will find your experience and practical suggestions to be inspiring as I have.
I agree with Jim’s post and I know how wonderful music technology programs can be for students. I am now able to teach many more students (including special education, low-income, etc.) who otherwise would not have had a chance to participate in our elementary instrumental music program. The students do not have to pay to be in the program. They do not have to own a keyboard, computer or have access to the Internet.
I have spent many years acquiring materials and older computers to put together an effective music technology program that now has more than 200 students per week participating. (Next year the number will increase in a school that has less than 700 students.) This program has been so effective that it led to me teaching this full-time instead of being a traveling band teacher with a small number of students at each school.
The students are engaged in actively learning to play keyboards as a pre-band instrument. I still use a few (acoustic) percussion instruments with the students to go along with playing the keyboards. We learn many concepts besides just playing the keyboard. The students learn how to compose music using notation software and how to create multimedia materials that can be used in other classes.
Our state and school system are going through a terrible economic time, like most of the other music programs in the country. We have many music programs in our own school system that are being cut. However, our music technology program is growing. We have a huge website that is known internationally and is used to advocate music technology programs in other schools. We are also working with the Alabama Symphony in a collaborative effort that will include my students performing on the keyboards before a Symphony concert next month.
A music technology program is not designed to replace music performance…. it is designed to enhance the learning of music and foster the creative efforts of students. They develop an appreciation of music and also learn important technology skills at the same time.
Thank you for your post, Jim!
James, as always, thank you for your writings and postings. This article hits very close to home because, as the District-Wide Chairperson of Music, I know exactly what you’re talking about. I have been trying to locate the funds to create a technology lab in each school; the challenge is also space AND getting teachers interested in technology. I would love to be more involved in this!
Pingback: Music Education Blog Carnival | Be A Techie:)
great post – this is a very useful and educational blog.
Sorry to chime in on this a month late but I LOVE your post. Beautifully said.
One statement particularly resonates:
“The crucial aspect of this effort was that I was reaching the 70 – 80% of the students in my school who were NOT in the instrumental and vocal music program.”
I strongly believe that the broad engagement of NON band/orch/chorus students should be the primary goal of every music program, beginning at the elementary level. Early learning of musical fundamentals combined with later training using music production software enables ANY student to have an active participation in both the experience of performing music and the process of creating it.. This is achievable without great expense to the school and without all students becoming proficient instrumentalists.
Once upon a time (five years ago?) it was only possible for students to interact and/or learn about music either by becoming a performer/vocalist or as a consumer/listener/enthusiast. However, current technology offers the potential for every student to have an intimate, individualized, first-hand music learning experience. Where once kids were either listeners or performers, now, with the help of computer apps like GarageBand, Record, Mixdown, etc., each student can find their own spot on the curve between passive listener and creator/performer. This is the real power of technology enhanced music education and it is in every way the same as the “scaffolding†techniques we use to teach many other disciplines. One student may only “compose†GarageBand, loop-based based musical collages, another uses the software as a recording tool to capture their own instrumental performances and another delves deeply into orchestral composition using sample libraries to model the orchestra. The computer-assisted experience blurs the definition of what we currently consider to be “performing†or â€composingâ€.
In the English and Math departments we generally accept the point of view that students will rise to various levels of achievement across a broad spectrum as they grow into adulthood. Everybody gets some piece of the action, a couple of people become professionals and everyone else lands somewhere further down the curve. Not all will become authors or poets but we expect most of us to be able to post a comment on a music blog.
The only reasons I can think of to teach music, other than the quaint notion that art and music somehow enhance us intellectually, is that the study of music immerses us in an environment where nonlinear thinking is essential, engages our creativity and puts us in touch with the non intellectual, “lower†portions of our brains. Is it necessary for our music programs us to continue to churn out armies of mediocre instrumentalists in order to achieve this? It is as if our goal is to train huge numbers of carpenters but no architects.
Joe Carroll
Founder
Manhattan Producers Alliance
email: jc@manhatpro.com
Pingback: Music Technology in Education » Blog Archive » The Other 80%: An Industry Perspective
Very good article James. Very inspiring and a pleasure to read! This fills me with hope since I am an up and coming music teacher that hopes to accomplish similar things in the realm of music education. It is exciting to see these sorts of ideas in motion.
One thing I’m grappling with right now is how to integrate these ideas with a traditional music program. Some schools seem very hard set in their ways, and I think some would initially resist these ideas. So my question is how do you think you could use some of these ideas in a traditional ensemble rehearsal setting?
And lastly, if you haven’t seen this incredible article before I think you would really like it:
http://www.menc.org/documents/Centennial_MEJNov071.pdf
It’s written by Dr. John Kratus at Michigan State University and discusses the future of music education. Many of his thoughts resonate closely with yours…especially the part about serving the “other 70-80%”. I hope you enjoy it!
Thanks again,
Andy Jarema