Prior to reading the first movement “Elegy: For All the Fallen” from David Long’s Homage to Normandy (C. Alan Publications), for example, I asked the students to define “elegy.” Their responses focused on memorializing people who had died. From this working definition, I asked them what they expected to hear in the music. Their responses to this question included a lyrical or song-like quality and sadness. Some expected it to be in a minor key. “All right, let’s find out whether our ideas about an elegy are the same as those of David Long.” In this case, we started by considering the word “elegy” because not all students may know the definition, so why start our work with an uneven playing field? This is also important because it encourages them to listen beyond their own parts from the beginning. After our initial reading of this movement, we discussed whether it sounded as we had expected. It was a brief discussion, as the students quickly identified some central ideas and were ready for a second reading. This immediate opportunity to read through the piece a second time allows not only a chance to apply what was just discussed, but also the opportunity for students to perform at a higher level based on self- assessment before further rehearsal.


As we rehearsed the work, they focused on the anger they heard at one point and we discussed “lamentation”. Our thoughts soon turned to how we are going to communicate “elegy” to our audience, which led to discussions about issues such as dynamics, articulation, balance and the overall shape of the work. Most importantly, this provided a context for thinking about and applying musical decisions, rather then just learning absolute verbal definitions for musical terms. All too often, we teach students that forte is loud and piano is soft and then we spend years convincing them of the contextually dependent nuances of those terms. In this case we started from the title of the composition, but another way to get started is by sharing composer’s notes with your students


at the beginning the process. This information can support your collective consideration of your rehearsal questions. They should be encouraged to pose questions as well, which can also come in the form of asking them which rehearsal questions are the ones we need to be asking.


Building the Knowledge Base


Our efforts should not just focus on specific works, but also on how we make connections between compositions whether they are on the same concert or we perform them at different times. This can be especially useful in helping students apply genre or style knowledge. Prior to reading a march, we might ask our students to tell us everything they know about playing marches. This serves as both an excellent review and a springboard for working on the current march. Conversations about marches tend to focus on ideas such as rhythm, tempo, style, form, articulation, and key changes. Once we’ve played through it, we can talk about ways in which this march does and doesn’t fulfill our understanding of “marchness,” building our collective knowledge base about how to perform a march. Shaping our teaching this way creates a classroom where students construct robust knowledge bases and constant re- teaching becomes less necessary.


By using questions on a routine basis we are providing our students with strategies they can use for themselves. Not only does using rehearsal questions engage students in thinking about what and how they a performing, but it increases their ownership in the process. Take it step further and have your students plan rehearsals. “What do we need to work on the next time we rehearse his piece?” This increases their responsibility and commitment, leading to more focused practice and rehearsal. It is also a great way to identify problems individual students may be having. It should be noted we sometimes find out that what


we thought we were working on is not what the students thought they were working on.


Telling our students how to perform seems like an efficient way to rehearse. However, we need to consider our long-term investment in the musical development of our students. Approaches that help our students become more informed decision makers will fuel the overall growth of our performance programs. I have used this approach in ensembles from 5th


grade to university


level and have found it to be an effective way to engage all musicians.


References


Goolsby, T. (1996). Time use in instrumental rehearsals: A comparison of experienced, novice, and student teachers, Journal of Research in Music Education, 44 (4), 286-303.


Manfredo, J. (2006). Effective time management in ensemble rehearsals, Music Educators Journal, 93 (2), 42-46.


Shively, J. (2004). In the face of tradition:


Questioning the roles of conductors and ensemble members in school bands, choirs, and orchestras. In L. Bartel (Ed.). Questioning the Music Education Paradigm (pp. 179-190). Toronto: Canadian Music Educators Association.


Tishman, S. (2002). Artful reasoning. In T. Grotzer, L. Howick, S. Tishman, & D. Wise, Art works for schools. Lincoln, MA: DeCordova Museum and Sculpture Park. n


19


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28