Page 1 of 1
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:58 pm
by mceuph
I don't disagree in the sense that all of the benchmarks you named would be extremely helpful to a prospective teacher. However, I generally disagree with you based on the following:
1. the aforementioned practicality of placing these requirements within a reasonable time frame, especially considering the rising cost of college tuition. Music ed degrees are already bloated with the necessary general education classes on top of a massive music courseload.
2. I fundamentally disagree with the general idea that a college degree should be expected to teach you EVERYTHING you need to know for your chosen profession. 1st, I believe that there is a difference between "education" and "job training", and that a good degree program should certainly emphasize both in a teaching degree. 2nd, I believe that while a degree should offer the student the basic practical skills necessary for initial success in their profession, the overall goal is to give them the mindset and tools to learn and problem solve on their own. You could easily add about 100 additional items to your list (things like fundraising, recruiting, interacting with parents, etc.) and you still wouldn't cover everything. Hence the term "experience."
just my $.02.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2016 11:47 pm
by ohrlund
I don't think performing moderately difficult works is necessary in getting a good education. What is important is demonstrating solid fundamentals on each instrument, and having instructional resources available to you and your students. If something is beyond your playing ability, find a quality recording of the work. If a student has a question about alternate fingerings, use your textbooks. Knowing where and how to look for information is a more important skill to get out of a bachelor's program than being a stellar performing force on each instrument.
In South Dakota, the board of regents decided that all bachelors degrees should be an equal 120 credits. The music ed degree was 156 credits, and they needed to "lose" some credits. The first things that were cut were the methods classes. High brass (3 cr.) and Low Brass (3 cr.) were combined and the hours were slashed to form Brass Methods (2 cr.). This happened across the board. (I believe the current catalog is at 138 credits. It says 130, but class piano is listed as 0 credits, and it is only offered for two)
In one semester, you get introduced to the trumpet, horn, trombone, euphonium, and tuba. Is it realistic to expect a grade 4 solo on instruments that you get less than an month of instruction?
In South Dakota, unless you teach in Sioux Falls, or Rapid City, most likely, your school is going to have less than 200 kids total, and your talent pool is going to be somewhat limited. Chances are, you won't be that far behind your students anyway.
Of course it would be nice if we were all highly proficient in every instrumental area, but I don't think there is a practical way of implementing that.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 1:26 am
by k001k47
I disagree completely bloke.
A "real" music education degree recital should include the following:
1)An arranged multi movement wind band/orchestra/choral work conducted by the candidate.
2)An original composition for [insert ensemble here] conducted by the candidate.
3) A sight singing session session demonstrating the candidate can "read" a score. (Required for hearing, but not part of recital)
4) A piano solo demonstrating an acceptable level of piano proficiency
5) Only ONE grade four or higher multi movement solo on instrument of choice.
I mean, yeah, you teach the kids how to form embouchures, make the right noises, and push the right buttons, but in the end, your job is to direct the ensemble and conduct them, not have the ability to be able to play their parts better than them. A sound understanding of music theory, arranging - or composing -, and score reading abilities go much farther.
I think my recital prepares them more for what they actually do in their field, which rarely includes playing every instrument in the band all day.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 5:35 am
by k001k47
nworbekim wrote:i agree with most that has been presented. a good addition for me, would have been some business classes, managerial techniques, and diplomacy for dealing with former coaches kicked upstairs to administration after having failed at coaching, to make room for the next hire.
I think being moderately amiable and not an asshole makes "dealing with [people]" easier. Wish they had a mandatory class for that at all universities.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 8:07 am
by Three Valves
The first year my High School band director came on board he was a screaming hot head I thought would never last.
He retired after three decades.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 8:59 am
by tuba-jesus
bloke wrote:
I believe just about all people can do "hard" things...and that the vast majority of people can accomplish things that are quite "hard" indeed - particularly if those things are expected (and routinely expected) of them.
(I cut out a lot of the quote that I wasn't going to reference.
)
Quite frankly, a person who wants to be a music educator needs to be quite prepared to do hard things -- at least in my area, there are MANY more qualified applicants than there ever will be jobs, and if they want to stand a chance they have to be prepared to do them.
The real question is what hard things will be most beneficial to the BD in training, I think. While it would be lovely to have BDs semi-proficient in many instruments, I feel just a basic grasp of each is needed. A firm grasp of music theory, good teaching and conducting method, etc. will get them much further.
Besides this, it will be difficult for the educator in question to keep up proficiency in every instrument after they've gained it. While learning up until grade 4 is nice, it would do nothing if the person in question didn't keep playing every instrument on a semi-regular basis afterwards -- and educators who don't have ready access to those instruments (i.e. have the job) may not be able to do this.
bloke wrote:...and just to clarify: With epidemic substance abuse and poor parenting, I would view the s.o.p. requirement of a general curriculum "Psychology" course to be more important than ever.
This. Music educators are in a special position to help kids, but they need to know how to do so effectively. (That, though, is largely opinion.)
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 9:32 am
by anonymous4
bloke wrote:Further, I view "the pretense of a music performance conservatory when pursuing a music education degree" as one of the contributory factors to widely-admitted-to instrumental music educators' clinical depression (aka "burnout").
I'm curious as to why you think this is a factor that causes burnout. In my conversations with former educators, most of them site problems with administration, wanting to spend time with family, or wanting to make more money as the reason they left the profession.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:27 am
by bigboymusic
It also depends greatly on how the school runs the program. I am a HUGE proponent of doing your best to master an instrument while working on your Ed degree. That is due largely to the teachers I had who pushed this and always had good arguements for it. Mostly understanding sacrifice and dedication, as you will teach kids on their instruments.
That said... I know of a couple schools within driving distance of me where the demands of the performance side of the degree are CRAZY.... Some require a recital EVERY semester. Not my circus, but I don't understand it..... Every school handles the division a bit different.
As to all the Instruments.. One thing I have found to be true in 99% of my travels. Proficiency on playing an instrument has almost NO correlation with the ability to teach the instrument well. The amount of bands I've seen where the conductor is a trumpet player and the trumpets suck... Or the conductor is a percussionist and she has the best tubas I've heard. In general I have seen that directors tend to teach the instrument they play WORST the best. Because we had to dive in and learn the guts of it and truly study how each instrument functions. That is why I think that, yes, students should study ALL the main instruments privately, and not just a semester of high or low instruments. But the focus should be on PEDAGOGY. The best classes I ever took for teaching instruments were UMKC's brass, percussion, and woodwind pedagogy classes. Not WW tech or Brass Tech, but highly detailed and graded just as detailed....
Until they are willing to get rid of some of the 'gen ed' coureses' and some of the Ed courses (like secondary reading techniques) a really good degree will continue to take most of these kids 4 1/2 - 5 years to complete.
And yes, the old saying that your first year of teaching is the best part of your education will always stand.....
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 11:03 am
by Mudman
Great topic.
I have one idea to contribute. The reason it is important to try to excel on a primary instrument is that teachers need to experience music making at a higher level to be able to teach it. Teaching great phrasing, shaping, tone shading, and other musical subtleties is hard to do if the teacher hasn't done it in their own playing. On the other hand, it is pretty easy to teach which buttons to push. Teaching rhythmic groove is another challenge that rises beyond explaining dots on the paper--far easier to do if the teacher can groove.
As somebody in the pointy-hat field, I will be the first to say that many music-education majors aren't very good on their primary instrument. Bloke's idea might make these players better teachers.
The public school teachers that I respect are usually good enough to do some freelancing on their main instrument. Coincidentally, these same teachers tend to have the strongest programs.
Music education is a tough field to go in to these days. More state requirements, less support, less pay, and entitled students who are in to instant gratification. There will always be a few good teachers who are drawn to the field. Hats off to these driven people.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:09 pm
by Mudman
bloke wrote:Good points all..."Grade four or higher" doesn't mean "no phrasing" or "bad time"...
bloke "...or does it...??"
I've heard it all
Bad time, no phrasing = many professional events. (I've heard it said that US student players try to tackle the hardest music possible, where European students focus on playing easier rep in a musical manner. No idea if this is still true.)
There are places where nearly every student takes private lessons, from middle school on up. I'm thinking of what I have heard about some of the schools in Texas. In a place like that, it might be more important to be a good CEO and musician than to know each instrument. But in other places where lessons are less common, the band teacher needs to know it all.
I'm just glad some people still get a kick out of playing an unwieldy piece of plumbing. Talk about delayed gratification! (I probably did it for the girls.)
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 12:24 pm
by Three Valves
Mudman wrote: (I probably did it for the girls.)
Chicks dig a big horn.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 1:21 pm
by Tom
If the point is that music education degrees shouldn't be thinly veiled performance degrees + a bunch of music education material and instrumental methods courses, then I agree. The emphasis on performance on the major instrument just seems a bit unnecessary and not terribly beneficial for the music educator that will ultimately end up as a band, orchestra, or choir director. There are, I think, more valuable things that could be done with that time.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 2:01 pm
by anonymous4
bloke wrote:yup...the main point...
...which brings up THIS question:
Without the facade of a "music conservatory / performance emphasis" cocoon SURROUNDING the "music education" curriculum, what percentage of these (many: "just in case"...??) music EDUCATION majors would be willing to turn on the overhead lights and truly face the profession to which this degree actually leads ?
I'm assuming far fewer. Part of the reason this is possible is that a semi-competent student can just BS the music ed requirements at a lot of schools and just focus on performance. However, the music education degree is something that really "sells" people on majoring in music, as it is THE degree that provides some degree of peace of mind that you can get a job out of school.
Little Johnny can tell his mom and dad he's an education major to help them relax even if in his own mind he thinks nevermind that teacher stuff....he's going to be in the Phil four years from now. This is obviously behavior that should be discouraged, but how will it affect the school's enrollment and cash flow, which we know is what they REALLY care about.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:20 pm
by Woods
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 8:42 am
by Woods
bloke wrote:
If you DO want to be a band director, you're doing just what you need to do.
If you do NOT want to be a band director, this is a band director degree, with the goal of receiving a band directing teaching certificate (along with a diploma) from your state.
If you definitely do NOT want to be a band director, maybe (??) ask some smart people (including yourself) if MINORING in music PERFORMANCE and MAJORING in something-you-might-possibly-be-interested-in-doing
Well I plan on minoring in performance and majoring in Ed. My ultimate goal is to teach at the collegiate level so I want to keep going after my bachelors degree. Is music Ed the right plan for what I want to do?
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:50 am
by Jayhawker
Yes.
Here's my $.02 for what it is worth...
The benefit of an Ed. degree is not in how many ensembles you play in or how many instruments you can master. The benefit is in learning the art of teaching. My undergrad is in MusEd and I never, ever thought I would use it, but like many I viewed it as a "fall back" degree so that if I failed at getting a performance job I could still teach and make money and be happy.
Now, as a college teacher AND public school teacher I can say that the invaluable courses I took were classes that focused on the actual skill of teaching. Courses where you learn the "psychology" of your students, where you learn about the maturation of children(which lets be honest, most college students are still children at the outset) and the actual art of teaching become invaluable no matter what you do. Besides, even if you go forth and finish an Ed degree and then win a job in the NY Phil you're still going to be teaching! Why not at least be somewhat prepared for that? Are there wasteful courses? Oh hell yes. Are there bad teachers? Most assuredly. I believe, however, that the whole idea of a MusEd degree is to create outstanding musicians with the ability to teach. You can teach anyone to teach, but if you're teaching music you should be an outstanding musician as well.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 12:02 am
by anonymous4
Woods wrote:My ultimate goal is to teach at the collegiate level so I want to keep going after my bachelors degree. Is music Ed the right plan for what I want to do?
Music Ed is the right degree. Your plan for after your bachelor's is the issue. Once you leave school with that first degree, you are never again going to be as employable as in that moment. You are the rookie first rounder. Somebody with little record of achievement, with a ton of potential, who is CHEAP. School districts don't have a lot of money to play around with. After your degree, go teach for at least three years. Then, go get your master's/doctorate.
Why? Let's say you skip out on getting a job right out of school and just go right down the path of master's/doctorate. You better be ready for the long long slog of trying to find a job in academia right out of school. If you are thinking that after grad school it will be easy to get a band director gig, think again. At least in the beginning, those degrees make you less valuable. You still are essentially a first year teacher, but if they want to bring you on, they have to pay you the salary of five teachers. Why would a principal want to do that? It's a different story if you show up, fancy degrees in hand, plus the EXPERIENCE to back it up. Then you'll be making the big bucks. At least as big as it gets in the music teaching realm.
Addendum: say you don't heed this advice and still go the degree, degree, degree path in hopes of teaching in college. Don't spend all that time locked up in a practice room or library. You need to be seeking adjunct work, trying to get published, making recordings, etc. In the "old days" just having a doctorate might have been enough, but now days most places toss your materials right in the trash if the best thing you can say about yourself is "I have a DMA".
Addendum 2: be prepared for a some people to not count "graduate assistant" as a legitimate teaching experience.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 5:23 pm
by Woods
I'm going to the university of North Texas (UNT) for my bachelors. From my understanding it's a good school but I still plan to move around for the others for more connections. Also I like the idea of getting some experience before going straight into a masters program so I will probably do that.
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 10:39 pm
by southtubist
I like Bloke's ideas on music ed. I actually (!!!!) watch the conductor, and I really appreciate it when the conductor is competent. I think a lot of music ed majors do not get enough training/experience in this area. Not really blaming anyone, just my observation.
Also, for performance majors, why not learn how to do something unrelated to music? I ended up quitting performance majoring a long time ago (burnout and a desire to not be poor), and have gone down a completely different path. I could retire in 10-20 years pretty easily, which would free up a lot of time to take lessons and practice. I could get pretty good with a few years of unlimited practicing + high end tubas.
Or, one could get extremely rich and just buy/found/hire an entire orchestra, and then appoint oneself as the principal tubist! Then you could program good stuff and never be tacit!
Re: a "real" music education degree
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:39 pm
by BMadsen
bloke wrote:
I see no purpose for a "major instrument" related to a "music education degree with an emphasis in secondary school instrumental music", and see it as appropriate that candidates for this degree should perform one of each of these on their required undergraduate recital:
- grade four or higher multi-movement soprano instrument woodwind solo
- grade four or higher multi-movement bass instrument woodwind solo
- grade four or higher multi-movement soprano instrument brass solo
- grade four or higher multi-movement bass instrument brass solo
- grade four or higher multi-movement percussion solo
(minimum 50 minutes of actual music, with a minimum of 7 minutes per multi-movement work)
------------------------------------
Further, I view "the pretense of a music performance conservatory when pursuing a music education degree" as one of the contributory factors to widely-admitted-to instrumental music educators' clinical depression (aka "burnout").
-------------------------------------
If someone ALSO wants to pursue a "major instrument" (along with their music education degree), they should (yes?) MINOR in music performance and ALSO (for that "minor") be required to perform a recital on THAT instrument that includes 30 actual minutes of grade-five-or-higher solo music on that instrument...yes?
-----------------------------
No university studio teachers would be teaching fewer students, because a very high percentage of the students who would pursue and complete this degree would be required to be their students sometime during their pursuit of this degree.
-----------------------------
"Major ensemble" professors would certainly not be out of work, because those pursuing this degree would need to be participating with the various instruments they are learning to play (well enough to TEACH), and (probably...) those same students should be allowed to set down their instruments and run portions of major ensemble rehearsals.
WOULD these "music education major ensembles" be rehearsing/performing "Grade 7" music? likely not.
WOULD these "music education major ensembles" be of TREMENDOUS BENEFIT to future band directors? ABSOLUTELY they would!
-----------------------------
Practical considerations will cause the vast majority to balk at this.
...but those considerations are really not "practical", but are POLITICAL (or fear-of-change based) are they not?
I was a teacher for 5 years. The ONLY reason I feel I had half-way decent woodwinds, was because my woodwinds methods course was setup up much like the above. Not as intense, but we had to do the following:
1. All of us started on one of 3 instruments (clarinet, flute, or sax). Out of a 15 week course, we spent 7 weeks on this first instrument - class was evenly divided between these instruments. We completed this first 7 weeks with a performance of a grade 4 piece selected by the professor for a grade.
2. We switched, and were taught by the students who took the instrument before us, giving us practical teaching experience teaching outside our home instruments. At the end of 4 weeks, we had to do a grade 3 piece selected by the professor. Repeat for 4 more weeks with the last instrument.
Important to note: My school allowed us to test out of methods courses by doing one day of observed teaching of the instruments in the methods course in question through a program for underprivileged youth. The teacher hired to teach brass would observe college students teaching for the day and pass or fail us.
My percussion wasn't great, but they were passable (they didn't offer a percussion methods class while I was there - it was a 1 year program and there wasn't room in the schedule for it). My brass and woodwinds were solid, though.
I think a much higher performance requirement outside the students field of comfort (meaning, a brass player needs to perform more percussion and woodwind music, for example) would greatly strengthen band programs.
This would also mean an end to performance programs disguised as ed programs, which is producing teachers who can't teach in some cases (from my own observations in NY).
Would it decrease the number of ed majors? I'm sure, at least a little. But, would the candidates be stronger? Definitely. And, in many parts of the country, there are more music teachers than jobs, so by removing the performance program requirements, you can increase the employment chances for those who actually want to teach band/orchestra/chorus.
I think this sounds like a marvelous idea.
