Music education--should it be required?

[jochanaan]

      Sorry, but I'm still skeptical about the word mandatory, and here's why - to the best of my knowledge, music has never contributed anything to other fields of study, with the possible exception of literature...While a musical education might bring a little more light into their lives, is it truly indispensible for these people?

Haven't you understood my posts?  Music can, and does, contribute things to other disciplines and even to everyday life, and it can be very helpful in developing social skills.

When I was working in data entry and customer service, I found my musical training invaluable.  In data entry, because I know how to use my hands I learned to type fast and accurately--up to 70 wpm even on unfamiliar keyboards--without the danger of carpal tunnel, since I had both strength and a relaxed style.  Later in my customer service work, my breathing and voice training meant I had an excellent phone voice and could still sound calm even when the customers were yelling at me.  Because of music, I was one of the best data entry keyers and CS reps that company had.  (And they still laid me off!  Sometimes you can't win for losing. )

My father worked in the Manhattan Project at Oak Ridge and Chicago during WWII, and from what my mother has told me about those times, there was apparently a complete orchestra among the scientific staff at Oak Ridge!  An amazing number of scientists and other professionals are also musicians.

Music's direct and indirect benefits reach far and wide.

[Josquin des Prez]

Haven't you understood my posts?  Music can, and does, contribute things to other disciplines and even to everyday life, and it can be very helpful in developing social skills.

Mmmmh, no, that's not why music is important.

[DavidRoss]

      Sorry, but I'm still skeptical about the word mandatory, and here's why - to the best of my knowledge, music has never contributed anything to other fields of study, with the possible exception of literature. Let me explain myself...

Hello?  Dana?  Anybody there?  The reason you don't know is because you haven't investigated it.  If you just follow the link to numerous studies in my previous post HERE, you will begin to learn about the many contributions of music study to other fields. 

[greg]

NINJA SMASHER INSANITY!!!!!!!!!!!

[secondwind]

Now here's a child clearly crying out for music lessons.  What do you think--piano or violin?  (No, not vioLENCE, vioLIN).                                                        

[marvinbrown]

I am being an idealist here but I believe that an education should never be forced (as in a requirement) but willingly sought after!  An educated mind would want to be exposed to knowledge of any kind  and experiences.   But I suspect I stand alone here  .

  marvin

[greg]

Now here's a child clearly crying out for music lessons.  What do you think--piano or violin?  (No, not vioLENCE, vioLIN).                                                        

Ocarina, maybe?...

[Novi]

  I retract what I said about starting music appreciation classes in later grades. Yes,it's possible for kids to start to appreciate classiocal music earlier. But from my own experiences, both in my shool days and as a
substitute music teacher, I've found that many kids have been just plain apathetic or downright hostile in these classes.
  If kids take a class on music appreciation and the teacher does not do a good job, kids can find it a really tedious experience and it can turn the off to classical music for life.

I see what you're getting at, Superhorn. I went through a system in which music was mandatory, insofar as the state curriculum stipulated a certain number of hours within however many years. It wasn't much though, covering only the bare minimum: a couple of terms learning an instrument in a group situation, and very basic music theory (crotchets and quavers, key signatures, that kind of thing). No music history at all. We treated the classes as a bit of joke, I'm afraid. Having said that, music was available as an elective subject, which was, I imagine and should hope, a much more rigorous and rewarding affair. 

That was high school. In primary school, music was more integral (twice weekly? more? I can't remember). It was largely practical - a lot of singing, taaa taaa taaa-ing, solfege with matching hand signs. That's Kodály, right? I still remember manning the xylophone for a percussion arrangement of Mozart's Symphony #40. I'm trying to picture it - 20 odd kids, drums, triangles, maracas, glockenspiels, and Mozart. Innovative teacher.

Wow, I started this post to say that I wasn't convinced of the effectiveness of my musical education at school, but I sound quite enthusiastic talking about it now. Thinking back, we must've had fun and I seem to have retained some of it after over 20 years.

[Szykneij]

If kids take a class on music appreciation and the teacher does not do a good job, kids can find it a really tedious experience and it can turn the off to classical music for life.

But bad teaching will do this to any subject, mandatory or not.

[Szykneij]

This is a subject very important to me. I've been following the thread, but haven't responded before now because I wanted to wait until I had the time and mind-set to organize my views.

I am a public school instrumental music teacher, teaching strings/orchestra grades 4-12. I occasionally teach a general music class or two to help out with scheduling issues. I have a Bachelors in Music Education and a Masters in Creative Arts in Learning. Music education should be mandatory in the schools.

Many posters have argued persuasively in favor of music education. DavidRoss in particular has posted links to good resources and documentation. I agree with all of the benefits that have been mentioned previously, but the one that convinces me most that music should be mandatory is the ability of music to develop problem-solving and analytical skills.

The challenge of learning to play an instrument -- of coordinating both hands independently and sometimes an air flow while deciphering a complicated system of notation to interpret and recreate the ideas of another individual while adding personal expressiveness builds the brain. The complexity of this pursuit creates neural fireworks that hook up both hemispheres. Multiple synapses are created as learning progresses which not only make the student musically smarter, but smarter overall as these neural connections, once created, are not limited to the subject that produced them. Brains of musicians have been scientifically measured to show that making music develops and enlarges certain key areas.

I always relate to my beginning students how Albert Einstein, who was a not-too-shabby amateur violinist, felt playing his instrument helped him in his problem-solving ability and how Thomas Jefferson fiddled when he had writers block creating the Declaration of Independence.

I don't have access at the moment to my college texts, but there are a huge number of books available on how the brain develops and the effect of the arts in that development. I won't bore everyone with it here, but if anyone wants me to forward them a copy of my Masters project on how violin-playing makes kids smarter, just let me know.

Some will probably disagree with my points of view, but that's fine. I firmly believe in the importance of music in the lives of children and will continue to teach that way. The success I've had in helping kids enjoy music and, in turn, having music help them develop educationally and socially convinces me to do so.

My high school orchestra has over 100 students from a school population of about 1,200. One in 12 students from a diverse middle-class community is a significant number. When you add in the students involved in Band and Chorus, there are over 200 students who voluntary participate in music performance courses that involve a significant after-school commitment. Music is something kids want.

Where music teachers often drop the ball and turn kids off to music (classical music in particular) is by engaging in the elitism that repels many members of the general population. My usual high school concert program might include two or three classical pieces from various time periods along with a movie soundtrack, orchestral arrangement of a pop piece, novelty piece and perhaps a patriotic arrangement in the spring. The students become exposed to all types of music and enjoy mastering the classical pieces as much as the lighter arrangements.

I occasionally give listening assignments and provide CDs for the students to keep. There now are many ipods around the school that have Bach and Faure alongside Shakira and Akon. The neat thing is, to the students that doesn't seem strange at all.

The past school year I taught some 5th grade general music classes (10-11 year olds). This is one of the more difficult age groups for general music, but by the end of the year one of the teachers was amazed that his kids were very upset that a scheduling changed forced them to go to gym instead of my class.  Typically, by the end of a class, the kids would hear some Beatles, Mozart, Brubeck, Gnarls Barkley, Beethoven, Coldplay, Sinatra, Grieg, Glinka, and Green Day. They would listen just as carefully to the classical composers, and usually had even more questions about that music. This listening was in addition to the traditional singing and instrument playing that occurs in a well-rounded general music class.

Lately, there has been an increased focus on the inter-disciplinary approach to education, and what better subject is there to achieve this end than music? Social Studies - Absorb the history and culture of a people through music. Mathematics: Music theory is extremely mathematical Science: The acoustics of sound is fascinating Languages: Pick an opera, any opera

[jochanaan]

Mmmmh, no, that's not why music is important.

Not the only reason, perhaps, but one of the main ones.

[secondwind]

Thanks for some more interesting posts. Szykniej, you sound like the kind of music teacher I wish every child could have!  I really like the thought that there are some kids in your school now who have Bach and Faure on their iPods alongside. . . oh oh, people I've never even heard of!  I find myself torn between agreeing with Szynkniej that music education should be mandatory and agreeing with marvinbrown that education, especially music education, should not be forced.     Huh, tough to reconcile.  Perhaps music should be a standard part of the curriculum for all children in elementary and middle school, and an option available to all students at the high school level. After all, we don't give elementary children a choice about whether to learn to read or write or add or subtract.  But in high school, they have some opportunities to choose--for example, between calculus and business math, between creative writing and business writing, between keyboarding and cooking.  And while I feel that music is important on its own, I certainly also believe that the study of music and particularly of learning to play an instrument has added to my development in many ways, not the least of which are the development of persistence and a clear understanding that increased effort does improve results.  Szykniej's information about the brain development of musicians is particularly interesting.

[secondwind]

An article in today's Washington Post raises a related question--can perfect pitch be taught, and if it can, should children receive this musical training?  The article is about the Eguchi Method, currently used in Japan, that teaches very young children to recognize first chords and then individual notes in chords.  You can read the article and see a brief video of the method in action by going to www.washingtonpost.com/science.  Another indication of the importance of an early start in music--the article says "The ideal starting age is 2 to 2 1/2 years, and training is not effective after 8".    I think it is interesting that this method is most effective if started at about the same age that children are learning to distinguish and name colors.  Perhaps the same type of process is involved in identifying pitch, but few of us are ever told as very young children "that's and A" or encouraged to develop the ability to recognize and identify pitch. 

[Szykneij]

An article in today's Washington Post raises a related question--can perfect pitch be taught, and if it can, should children receive this musical training?  The article is about the Eguchi Method, currently used in Japan, that teaches very young children to recognize first chords and then individual notes in chords.  You can read the article and see a brief video of the method in action by going to www.washingtonpost.com/science.  Another indication of the importance of an early start in music--the article says "The ideal starting age is 2 to 2 1/2 years, and training is not effective after 8".    I think it is interesting that this method is most effective if started at about the same age that children are learning to distinguish and name colors.  Perhaps the same type of process is involved in identifying pitch, but few of us are ever told as very young children "that's and A" or encouraged to develop the ability to recognize and identify pitch. 

I couldn't access the article, but I did google "Eguchi Method" and came up with this:

http://www.dr-p.jp/dr_p_what_is_absolute_pitch.html

I'm really not sure what great benefit is gained by acquiring "absolute pitch", if indeed that is possible. As the website says, most musicians don't have it. Relative pitch ability is what is important. Beethoven didn't require "absolute pitch" to compose after going deaf as the website claims.

[secondwind]

I'll try providing another link to the article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/07/26/ST2009072602370.html?sid=ST2009072602370  I don't know what benefits there might be from having perfect pitch.  The only person I know who is so gifted (or afflicted) complains when he plays with me from a score that shows the clarinet part as written for clarinet instead of in concert pitch.  He says it makes his head hurt.  On the other hand, when listening to music he has what seems to me to be an extraordinary and immediate understanding of the harmonic structure of a piece.  Now that, I would like to have.  Does anyone have any personal experience with advantages of absolute pitch?

[Szykneij]

On the other hand, when listening to music he has what seems to me to be an extraordinary and immediate understanding of the harmonic structure of a piece. 

Ah ... Yes, I can see where that might be related to his perfect pitch ability.

[Dana]

An article in today's Washington Post raises a related question--can perfect pitch be taught, and if it can, should children receive this musical training?

Another random question that I wonder about on slow days - did people with perfect pitch back in the 18th century know A=440, or A=437, or somewhere around there?

[jochanaan]

...Does anyone have any personal experience with advantages of absolute pitch?

I have perfect pitch.  It's very advantageous in several ways.  I can give pitch to a choir without a pitch pipe, and because I mostly sing bass I help keep them on pitch as long as they listen to me. It's also helpful when I improvise, although I've known several great improvisers who don't have perfect pitch and yet pick up the background harmonies for improvisation instantly.

I also tune pianos, and it's helpful in immediately identifying whether I'll have to raise the pitch or not, although I always check my pitch sense with a tuning fork just for precision.  I can't quite guarantee my A is A440, but I can come very close.

As for transposing parts in scores, I've learned to deal with it.  It's somewhat harder when I actually have to PLAY transposing instruments like the English horn or Bb clarinet.

Another random question that I wonder about on slow days - did people with perfect pitch back in the 18th century know A=440, or A=437, or somewhere around there?

I would guess they mostly experiened endless frustration with the varying pitch.  I feel it a little when I hear period-instrument groups; they mostly play at about A415, which sound a half-step flat to me.  Some of the French groups seem to play at about A390 or so, since they sound a whole step flat to my ears...

[Superhorn]

  I have absolute pitch too. It helped me to transpose as a horn player.
This is something every young aspiring horn or trumpet player has to master, and it's difficult for many.
  However, when I hear a performance of say, Mozart's Jupiter symphony on period instruments and it's a half tone lower, it's truly weird hearing something which normally sounds like C major as B major!  But I've found that my ear can adjust.
Perhaps Mozart, who also had absolute pitch, if he could come back today and hear modern instruments, would be upset by hearing what sounded to him like C major sounding a half tone higher also.
 

[karlhenning]

Or he might say, Who knew D-flat major could sound so cool?