NYT Op Ed: "we're teaching music to our kids all wrong"

[cedar]

I enjoyed this guest essay in today's NYT.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/opinion/teach-music-better.html

 

I realize that many people many not be able to access the story, so I'll quote the sections that I found interesting:

 

Quote

Educators lament that, as with other courses, band can frequently fall prey to “teaching to the test” — in this case, teaching to the holiday concert. A class that by definition is meant to be a creative endeavor winds up emphasizing rigid reading and rote memorization, in service of a single performance. We need to abandon that approach and bring play back into the classroom by instructing students how to hear a melody on the radio and learn to play it back by ear, and encouraging students to write their own simple songs using a few chords. (The dirty secret of pop music, as Ed Sheeran has explained, is that most chart-topping songs can be played by using only four chords: G, C, D and E minor.) So start with just one chord, a funky beat and let it rip — and, voilà, you’re making music.

 

Quote

It’s often been repeated that “music is a language,” yet we’re reluctant to teach it that way. When we learn a language, we don’t simply memorize phrases or spend all day reading — we practice the language together, sharing, speaking, stumbling but ultimately finding ways to connect. This should happen in music class, too. Music should be a common pursuit: Ask any dad rock weekend band or church ensemble how it experiences music, and the performers are likely to tell you it’s not a chore but a way of building community.

Quote

Most important, we need to let kids be terrible. In fact, we should encourage it. They’ll be plenty terrible on their own — at first. But too often kids associate music in school with a difficult undertaking they can’t hope to master, which leads them to give up. Music does not have to be, and in fact, shouldn’t be, about the pursuit of perfection. And the great musicians have plenty of lessons to teach students about the usefulness of failure.

Quote

Miles Davis couldn’t hit the high notes his hero Dizzy Gillespie did, so what did he do? He found a new mellow, cool way to speak the language of jazz. Billie Holiday’s range was just over one octave — very limited for a professional singer — but that didn’t stop her from creating the definitive versions of so many American classics. Tell students these stories and watch them get excited to fail. We should let them do that, over and over again. That’s the only way they’ll learn what sounds awful but also what goes well together, what they like and what kind of music they want to make.

Quote

We also teach language through immersion, so let’s focus on creating an immersive experience in the language of music. Kids learn best when they’re part of communities filled with people of all skill levels for them to play along with, listen to music with, mess up with and just be silly with. Parents, this means you. Don’t let instrument instruction simply be something you nag your kids to endure. Music was never meant to be a lonely vigil. Play together. Make noise together. Find joy together. Take out an instrument and learn a song that you and your child both love

 

[Baldwin Funster]

Alot of kids don't want to make the kind of music you play with guitars, pianos ect. Thats "Boomer Music".

Theyve been raised in beeps, boops and rhythms that sound like 2 second snippets of typing on an IBM Selectric. Put the kids with Dr Dre so they can make beats.

 

PS, I hate that kind of music but my generation will gone by the time a toddler graduates high school so who cares?

[Docbop]

  I love Victor Wooten his playing, books, and Music Nature camps.    He and he brother Reggie's views on teaching music are a bit different but I think spot on.    This snippet from a interview that was was just posted on YT they other day.   

 

 

 

[Threadslayer]

43 minutes ago, Baldwin Funster said:

typing on an IBM Selectric

OK Boomer...

[Stokely]

Well first I'd say it would be nice to have things like music, art, PE and other classes at all for a lot of kids.

Secondly, as a recent "band dad" of a kid that lived band life in middle and high school--I was constantly amazed at what those kids can do.  I'm sure there was a lot of "teaching for the holiday concert" happening--and there kind of has to be to take kids who know zip about these hard-to-play instruments and expect anything good in a relatively short amount of time--but my kid and friends did all the other stuff on their own....mine would be watching a movie, he'd hear the soundtrack and next thing I know he's off running to his room for his trumpet and figuring it out on the fly.  And me being a (hack, rock) musician we could have some fun picking apart tunes on the radio.   I regret to say I never got him to play in a band with me, either a rock band or with his trumpet, it was always a dream of mine.  Not of his, apparently!

And the marching programs...holy hell.  His band placed 3rd in the state so they were a "competitive" level band so that's part of it, but the amount of work they put in and the complexity of those programs just left me with my jaw hanging.   When they marched in the London NYD parade (with a bunch of other high school bands) the Londoners I spoke with were just amazed that kids could be doing this.

Basically after those 4-6 years of band life I was left with the feeling that no, music is not dead with the younger generations, it's extremely alive.  Not that I disagree with any of those quotes either!

[timwat]

That Wooten clip is wonderful, particularly from the perspective of a wider view of teaching and what it means to be willing to improvise for the sake of meeting students where they are. 

 

There are, of course, thousands of practical and pragmatic choices a teacher will make in terms of how / when / in what ways one advances this journey whilst still providing guidance, exposure to foundational material, and helping a student pursue "a long obedience in the same direction" (title of an unrelated, old book from 40 years ago). What Wooten describes as a first early engagement doesn't sum up all of what the Wootens teach students.

 

I need to think more about the premise of joy of discovery before right/wrong notes he describes at the beginning of the clip. It's such an alien idea to me, and nothing like my formative instruction, that I find I don't even have a fully-formed reaction to the suggestion.

 

 

[Iconoclast]

21 minutes ago, Threadslayer said:

OK Boomer...

Pretty much guaranteeing Kharmatically that someday your own children are going to tell you to $&#$*@(#.

Or did I miss the clever emoji that would have somehow made that humorous? 🤔

Anyway, children are the great equalizer. You've never really lived until a genetic copy of yourself sorts your sh!t out for you. And I generally find that anyone who uses that phrase has not had that experience. 🧐

[Baldwin Funster]

34 minutes ago, Threadslayer said:

OK Boomer...

I am a Boomer and wear it proudly.

[AROIOS]

2 hours ago, Baldwin Funster said:

Alot of kids don't want to make the kind of music you play with guitars, pianos ect. Thats "Boomer Music".
 

Theyve been raised in beeps, boops and rhythms that sound like 2 second snippets of typing on an IBM Selectric. Put the kids with Dr Dre so they can make beats.

 

PS, I hate that kind of music but my generation will gone by the time a toddler graduates high school so who cares?

Let's see how quickly the usual suspects come out to gaslight you about that "Millenial/GenZ stereotype". 😃

[stoken6]

1 hour ago, Threadslayer said:

OK Boomer...

I tell my kids about once a week: I'm NOT a Boomer.

 

I'm Gen X. There's a difference.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[Threadslayer]

1 hour ago, Baldwin Funster said:

I am a Boomer and wear it proudly.

Me too. Born in late 1955 - the epicenter of Boomerism. My reply was indeed meant to be humorous in response to this:

 

Alot of kids don't want to make the kind of music you play with guitars, pianos ect. Thats "Boomer Music".

Theyve been raised in beeps, boops and rhythms that sound like 2 second snippets of typing on an IBM Selectric

 

Didn't really think it needed an explanatory emojii

[Rod S]

3 hours ago, cedar said:

Quote from article - "Educators lament that, as with other courses, band can frequently fall prey to “teaching to the test” — in this case, teaching to the holiday concert. A class that by definition is meant to be a creative endeavor winds up emphasizing rigid reading and rote memorization, in service of a single performance. We need to abandon that approach and bring play back into the classroom by instructing students how to hear a melody on the radio and learn to play it back by ear, and encouraging students to write their own simple songs using a few chords. (The dirty secret of pop music, as Ed Sheeran has explained, is that most chart-topping songs can be played by using only four chords: G, C, D and E minor.) So start with just one chord, a funky beat and let it rip — and, voilà, you’re making music."

 

 

I want to discuss this one.  I think BOTH are needed.   I think the exploring is important, promotes a positive learning experience and I think is critical to a long time attachment to learning and playing an instrument.   However, I do think the short-term objective of a performance helps focus, team play (if it's a group performance), and gives a clear objective - as long as it's not treated a test but part of the learning.    Alone, as the sole focus, I agree it can be detrimental.      My interests have always been sciences, graduated as an engineer, but I always say a lot of my personal growth in my teens came from the arts (music and theater).     Did a lot of high school plays (my school has an extraordinary drama programa), and the drive, focus, group work needed to get to a presentation was something very different from regular academics.  

[Baldwin Funster]

20 minutes ago, Threadslayer said:

Me too. Born in late 1955 - the epicenter of Boomerism. My reply was indeed meant to be humorous in response to this:

 

Alot of kids don't want to make the kind of music you play with guitars, pianos ect. Thats "Boomer Music".

Theyve been raised in beeps, boops and rhythms that sound like 2 second snippets of typing on an IBM Selectric

 

Didn't really think it needed an explanatory emojii

I'm 1963 and I think the last year of boomerism. It's the generation that won the wars, saved the world, created the golden age of the best music this planet ever heard.

Then squandered it all.

That's the human condition in a nutshell. 

[ElmerJFudd]

In my own experience because the musical experiences and preferences are so different for every teacher.  And since there is huge flexibility in how we teach the curriculum, students in every classroom will have a completely different experience across the nation.  

School music teachers are also extremely limited in their access to children.  Relegated to a large group rehearsal 1-5 times a week max.  In current times, parents do not accept the notion of pursuing music as a post HS - university major.  They don’t want to let their students out of other courses for a rotating lesson.   If students are not taking private instrumental lessons in many cases the large group rehearsal is all they are getting.  
 

So the pressure is to get the concert music learned one way or another to put up for the winter and fall seasons.  
 

If we want our kids to play musical instruments they have to love it.  Which means exposing them to a lot of music and a variety of music early so they did something they love.  Let them be involved in selecting their instrument when the time comes and support them with lessons if you can afford it. But loving it is definitely the first step.  

[Lou Gehrig Charles]

2 hours ago, Baldwin Funster said:

Alot of kids don't want to make the kind of music you play with guitars, pianos ect. Thats "Boomer Music".

 

Perhaps, but a lot of them do like that kind of music.  If there's a School of Rock location in your town, check out the kid's shows.  It's all "Boomer music" plus newer stuff like 90s grunge and 2000s emo stuff.  Our location has over a hundred kids and I watched their show they did last weekend....  The had sets devoted to Rockabilly, Guitar Gods, 80s/90s, "Pat Benatar & Joan Jett", R&B, Hair Metal, the Who, etc, etc, etc.  I think the place is pretty much always close to full capacity and that probably wouldn't be the case if the kids didn't like the music. 

 

 

[Lou Gehrig Charles]

5 minutes ago, Baldwin Funster said:

I'm 1963 and I think the last year of boomerism. It's the generation that won the wars, saved the world, created the golden age of the best music this planet ever heard.

 

I'm 1964.....  And late in the year.  Depending on whose definition you choose to believe, I could be a Boomer, or an "X".

 

Emotionally, I'm still about 17. 

[Stokely]

I think some of you might be surprised at what (some) younger people listen to.

My former coworker, early 30s at the time, rattled off a string of 80s groups and albums and some of them I only vaguely remembered...I asked him how the hell he knew any of that and he simply said "every tuesday at the local pub is 80s night".   I helped my oldest pack his stuff for moving across the state and noticed he had a vinyl album of The Nightfly...I think I remembered playing that once or twice while he was in the car with me but never figured it 'stuck'   

I don't like the whole boomer/generation X stereotype stuff.  People want to play that dumb game have fun, but I don't buy into it at all.

[SMcD]

I believe every generation has believed, by and large, that music peaked with their coming-of-age.

 

What a coincidence it would be if one of those generations turned out to be right. I figure it's more likely that all of us - boomers, millennials, and everyone else - are wrong. Like what you like, and realize that change isn't necessarily deterioration (any more than it was in the 40's, or the 60's, or the 80's). Wheel keeps spinning.

[cedar]

11 minutes ago, SMcD said:

I believe every generation has believed, by and large, that music peaked with their coming-of-age.

Not my experience.

I'm born in 1963 (and always understood "boomers" ended in 1964).  In college, all of my friends (who listened to rock) thought that the best music occurred 1965-1975.  

 

My kids (born in 1994 and 1997) believe that the best music came out a generation before them.

[dazzjazz]

Initially, music should be taught in a similar manner to speaking: imitating sounds we hear combined with our inmate desire to communicate. Instead we tend to put hyrogliphs (sheet music) in front of kids and wonder why they struggle with music. Not to mention wrestling with the strange interface of whichever instrument gets chosen for them. 
 

I always cite the example of people learning to play the tabla drums in India. If you want to learn to play that instrument, you have to be able to speak all of the traditional rhythms before they let you anywhere near those drums. To me that makes so much sense.

[jerrythek]

What a beautiful clip with Victor Wooten - he's so in touch with the many aspects of teaching beyond knowing the content. My hat's off to him. And it's only fitting to see that clip on the day that the interviewer, Dom Famularo passed away. A wonderful and influential gentlemen who spent his life inspiring, supporting and promoting music and players of all ages.

[bill5]

The old style of teaching music may still be around, but my impression is that it has been changing for the better for some time now (maybe not fast enough). I remember taking piano lessons and my teacher was old school...."OK play those scales. Do it again. Do it again. Do it again." I didn't take lessons for long. Eating all my veggies was fun in comparison. Sure, there's work involved in learning how to play an instrument, but kids need to see a payoff, some fun and worthwhile aspect, at the same time. Like teach them a few simple chords and then teach them a few songs using those chords, if possible, one of their favs. Then they see the payoff of learning. Billy Joel once said how he hated the "classically trained" bit and his disgust for the old school way of teaching...it was something about how the teachers don't get that the kids aren't trying to be Mozart. They just want to learn enough to play some songs with or for their friends and enjoy it.

[Bobby Simons]

Born in '52 and just love where that placed me in the scheme of things and the musical life I lived. Of course, that makes me older than dirt now, but what the hey. . . .

[ElmerJFudd]

59 minutes ago, bill5 said:

The old style of teaching music may still be around, but my impression is that it has been changing for the better for some time now (maybe not fast enough). I remember taking piano lessons and my teacher was old school...."OK play those scales. Do it again. Do it again. Do it again." I didn't take lessons for long. Eating all my veggies was fun in comparison. Sure, there's work involved in learning how to play an instrument, but kids need to see a payoff, some fun and worthwhile aspect, at the same time. Like teach them a few simple chords and then teach them a few songs using those chords, if possible, one of their favs. Then they see the payoff of learning. Billy Joel once said how he hated the "classically trained" bit and his disgust for the old school way of teaching...it was something about how the teachers don't get that the kids aren't trying to be Mozart. They just want to learn enough to play some songs with or for their friends and enjoy it.

YouTube does a great job of this. 

[jazzpiano88]

I think the basics can and are effectively regimentally taught.    Academic Classes,  Piano Teachers, etc....   They get you to play some of the easier classical pieces.

 

But after this, most of the really successful musicians are then further taught in a apprentice like fashion by either an established player one-on-one, or in an established player's band.   This of course is separate from the music conservatory class.

 

My regret, is that I only did the former, and then learned by imitation and osmosis because music was secondary to my more predictable employable skill, math and engineering.  

 

Youtube is learning by imitation, not by having a mentor.    Better than listening to records in the old days, but nowhere near effective as having a weekly teacher who has had success in the business.

[bill5]

3 minutes ago, JazzPiano88 said:

I think the basics can and are effectively regimentally taught.

If it's regimentally taught, IMO far more often than not, it's not effective.

 

Quote

They get you to play some of the easier classical pieces.

Another way to totally turn (most) kids off to music. Or you could do what mine did and proudly announce I was finally ready to try my hand at an actual song and was treated to fun-filled tunes like "Little Brown Jug."  Wow let's throw a party, eh

 

Quote

Youtube is learning by imitation, not by having a mentor.    Better than listening to records in the old days, but nowhere near effective as having a weekly teacher who has had success in the business.

That depends on the teacher. I learned far more by imitation and reading on my own than by someone hammering me over the head with scale exercises. But that's me. Obviously some kids can hang with the drill sargeant methods or even thrive with it, and that's great. Also weird.   

 

[jazzpiano88]

9 minutes ago, bill5 said:

Quote

Youtube is learning by imitation, not by having a mentor.    Better than listening to records in the old days, but nowhere near effective as having a weekly teacher who has had success in the business.

That depends on the teacher. I learned far more by imitation and reading on my own than by someone hammering me over the head with scale exercises. But that's me. Obviously some kids can hang with the drill sargeant methods or even thrive with it, and that's great. Also weird.   

 

 

I think you misunderstood my point.   This teacher isn't teaching you exercises.   He/She is already an established player and is teaching you your shortcomings to allow you to become a great player.   Ask most great players "Who did you learn from"?   They don't say my third grade piano teacher.   They say I learned from "......." who is established and/or famous in his/her own right.

[CyberGene]

If you compare a classical music work, especially a large one such as a symphony, and even a little piano piece, to any pop/rock/jazz/… piece, the difference is so huge, it becomes silly and even offensive to try to make it appear as though boomer genres are somehow better than modern ones. No, they’re all the same. We should stop trying to educate kids “right”. We’re not right. They’re not wrong. Nobody is right or wrong. Let’s just move on. Or as they say, hey, teacher, leave them kids alone 😉

 

For the record, I’m an X-er. 

[bill5]

27 minutes ago, CyberGene said:

If you compare a classical music work, especially a large one such as a symphony, and even a little piano piece, to any pop/rock/jazz/… piece, the difference is so huge, it becomes silly and even offensive to try to make it appear as though boomer genres are somehow better than modern ones.

?? It sounds like you're saying the younger generations are mostly listening to classical. Trust me, they aren't (nor were boomers). If you want to compare the musical tastes/sensibilities of of two generations (generally speaking), listen to what is or was popular at the time.

 

You're right that there is a huge difference between classical and pop or rock or jazz. And? 

[CyberGene]

2 hours ago, bill5 said:

It sounds like you're saying the younger generations are mostly listening to classical.

No, no, no! 😀 I meant, compared to classical music, both boomer genres and modern genres are equally light, so to speak.