Interactivity #3

Music is a subject that not only embraces technology but almost requires technology. In order to run a band rehearsal an electronic tuner, a CD or other playback device, and other ways of amplification are necessities. In the general music classroom, lessons can be fully reliant on technology. A teacher who doesn't use some kind of technology can't truly be teaching music (instruments are technically a technology). 

While the basic technologies listed in our inventory are beneficial, we collectively ran out of technologies after a while. You can group many of the technologies into categories like "Mac Apps," "Video games," and "Recording software." Many of the technologies we listed were similar or almost exactly the same as other technologies. I don’t believe I will use most of these technologies in my classroom as I feel most of them inhibit learning. Using a computer notation software allows students to rely on prefabricated sounds instead of training their ears to hear the notes. YouTube can be a great tool to expose children but more often than not ends up giving a false understanding, not to mention most performances on YouTube are not good performances. I would obviously use metronomes and tuners, but I’m not sure all of our fancy teaching assistance technologies help us; I fear they allow teachers to know less and allow a textbook or other source to teach a class for them. 

Interactivity 2: The Phonograph

The technology I feel that has had the greatest impact on music education is the phonograph. Invented in 1877 by New Jersey’s own Thomas Edison (whom I share a birthday with), the phonograph allowed not only for sound to be recorded, but also allowed playback of recorded sound. Before the introduction of the phonograph, students of music spent hours during their studies traveling to cities and concert halls to hear music being performed live just to take notes and learn a thing or two about music. J. S. Bach once traveled 280 miles through Germany to hear Dietrich Buxtehude play a recital and ended up staying several months to train with the organist. The phonograph and recorded music paved the way for contemporary music education and public school music education.

The invention of the phonograph allowed music to come to the classroom. A new group of recording musicians, who we now call ethnomusicologists, emerged and began traveling the world to record the music they heard in different cultures. One such recorder, Frances Densmore, took a liking to Native Americans. Her work recording the sounds of Native Americans brought a new light to a population largely misunderstood. She recorded songs used for rituals and praise, but more interestingly recorded sounds that the Native Americans used in every day speech. This was not only important for those studying music but also ethnologists, anthropologists and psychologists in understanding the culture of Native American tribes.

Such recordings were not accepted by all, however. There were many, as Vanessa Domine calls them, “protectionists” who felt recording music took away from live musicing process one can only truly engage with in real time. While this is true, recording has an educational benefit that is left out of this argument. Before recordings were available, students relied on their own interpretation for much of what they learned. Music education was something that happened outside the classroom and was seldom taken seriously. It wasn’t until mid-20^th century that music education began emerging in the schools, and even then it differs greatly from what we call music education today. Recording has almost become synonymous with music today and the way people access music has almost reversed. When recordings were first made available, they only appealed to devout musicians and music lovers. Today, it is much simpler to download the newest song instantly through the air to a computer or other electronic device, and it is much more difficult (and much more expensive) to see that music performed live by the artist(s).

While I believe the phonograph was a useful tool and recordings enhance learning to this day, it can be argued that it also destroyed music education. Bringing recordings to the students can be listed as a reason for the “entitlement” students feel they have due to the privileges and luxuries in the classroom. Likewise, students no longer have to put any effort into hearing the best musicians perform the best repertoire. While this opens up more time for practice and study, it lessens the value of the music; you’re more likely to appreciate music you walk 280 miles to hear than music you can download with the click of a button.

As I have argued, the phonograph and general recording has had an enormous impact on music education. Since it’s invention, music has become a highly recorded art, for the sake of distribution and profit. Before recording, one could take pride in truly experiencing the musicing process and, while music has never been free of political or economic influence, feel that music is truly free and written for all people. However, recording music has contributed to an interdisciplinary focus on bringing the world to the classroom for students to truly engage and understand people from around the world. Recorded music is the difference between private and public music education; while private music education revolves around the student’s performance, public music education relies on existing performance and understanding music as an academic subject. 

Picture is in my last post

Interactivity #2: Picture

"A studio recording is perfection, but emotion and passion come only when you turn on the machine and go for the groove." -Chuck Mangione

Digital Language: helpful, or hinderance?

With the creation of the digital world, we have also seen the creation of a digital language. When English was originally written, it was spoken almost the same as it was written. The tradition continued but eventually dialects emerged while the written text remained the same. Even today, we hold a traditional way of communicating through more formal digital means, but we now have three ways of conversing: talking, formal digital (used for academia) and informal digital (used in text messaging and the like). On top of that, many people speak different dialects to many people.

If a stranger was to walk into Chapin Hall on any given day, they may be surprised by the seemingly illiterate students shouting fragments at the top of their lungs. A literacy has risen out of my own friend circle, that of the awful grammer and ear-piercing yelps. Each of us has our own twang on the slang, mine including phrases like "vasdas?" meaning "what is this?" and "you do tings?" meaning anything from "did you eat yet?" to "did you do the homework?" or even "have you studied this music?" Most of my friends, in addition, have their own buzzwords. Samples of these words include "HEP!" "Lady?" yayyy!" and "brrbrbrbrbrbrbrbbr"

What does all this mean? We have many ways of communicating with people, and digital communication is probably the farthest from "correct" English. While I type this blog (with some mistakes I'm sure) I am using a type of English that any literate adult in the country, perhaps even the world, would understand. However, if I was writing this homework in a text message, i wouldnt care enough to type correct grammer everywhere haha lol :D. One reason for this other digital language can be blamed on the physical nature of cell phones: typing fully with the thumbs is a complete role-reversal from typing on a computer keyboard, and is frankly awkward and painful after any set amount of time. I often find myself typing just with my right index setting my phone on a flat surface to relieve the pain.

It is important to consider this type of communication when referencing technology in the classroom. Many professors advocate for the use of digital media, using technology for answering homework questions, using remote controls and personal computers in the classroom. I would have to understand my students well before I implement such technology and be prepared for the answers I receive. While someone may not speak derogatory or intolerant words, they may feel comfortable when they can use an outlet (technology) for these feelings. I fear that the informal digital dialect could be something to consider deeply before using technology.

Music Technology

My high school (something I don't particularly care to talk about) was technologically lacking, especially our music classrooms. If you can call them classrooms. The only technology in our music wing was a Dell desktop shared by the three music teachers in their shared office and a CD player. The administration was more concerned about the falling ceiling tiles and vegetation growing through the walls than buying adequate materials to teach. Now, I think about how much more learning could have been done if we had technology in the classroom. If our ensembles could have recorded rehearsals, listened to ourselves playing, maybe we would have realized how awful we were. If we had technology to assist learning, we could have spent more time looking at music and less time buried in our scores. We could have learned so much about music.
But, we didn't. How could I use technology in my classroom? That depends on the hundreds of different kinds of music classes I could be asked to teach. In a rehearsing ensemble, I could use smart boards and projections of music to talk about phrases, historical context within the music, and I could assign in-class projects to the group. In a general music setting, I could easily navigate between listening to music, individual improvisation and composition, and even conducting new music. In music lessons or sectionals, I could teach my students about their instruments, famous players, and how to produce "good" sound on their instruments. I just hope I have access to such technology, because it now seems almost impossible to teach without technology.