Creating Musicalily Flexibile Musicans Through Ensemble

How do we determine if someone is a good musician? 

Usually, within the ensemble setting, if someone reads and performs music well with good tone, technique, expression, and phrasing in a way that is accurate and pleasing to the ear, we tend to think of them as being a good musician. While these are all certainly marks of a good musician, I think we can all agree that there is much more to it than that. 

Are they able to write music, do they have a strong ear, can they transpose, do they have a strong understanding of different musical styles? This list goes on and on.

As a society we tend to think of music as being a creative and free art form, only in most public school ensembles, it isn't treated that way at all. 

In his piece, Creating Musical Flexibility Though the Ensemble, Brandt Schneider writes,

"Bands and orchestras are often repertoire machines – churning out a fixed collection of pieces year after year. Directors are judged by the pieces they select and how their ensembles perform at concerts and competitive festivals. Through all of this, rehearsals become desperate scrambles to the finish line – a process that, while it can be rewarding, leaves little room for creativity from the members of the ensemble. This system creates an overemphasis on reading and performing music, a fraction of our national standards.”

He's right, isn't he? Is this not exactly what the vast majority of today's music programs are like? I don't think it's something anyone does conscientiously; it's just the nature of the program. Music teachers are under a constant pressure to teach music, as quickly and accurately as possible in order to make the "deadlines" of the concerts where parents, colleagues, community member, and administrators will be judging our abilities as educators based on our students' abilities. As a result, not only are we leaving out half of the national music standards, but we're not turning out fully creative and flexible musicians. Perhaps we just don't feel that we have the rehearsal time, the energy, and the ability as educators; or maybe, we just don't know how to begin. 

Schneider persuasively writes about the different ways that we as music educators can help our students grow musically through four specific means of focus:

1. Musical Discipline
2. Technique
3. Theory
4. Composition 

What does he mean by "Musical Discipline"?

I interpret musical discipline as making students musically responsible for what they are performing. In nearly every ensemble there will be kids who are only there because their best friend is there, or their parents are telling them to be, or because they'd rather play an instrument than sit sewing. They may show up on time, play the right notes, and go through the motions, but are they really growing as a musician? What if we made a conscientious effort to "shake things up" by presenting them "out of the box" opportunities to create music like giving a flute part to a percussionist and asking them to learn it on mallets? Or asking them to learn a simple piece by ear in a specific key rather than by reading off a page? These are just a few examples of how to hold students accountable for their own musical growth.

Technique

I feel as though often times music teachers measure a student’s technique in very basic terms: Can they play their music accurately or not? Can they play a two-octave D Major scale with the right fingers/positions or not? Etc. But why not really challenge them to learn their instruments inside and out? What if we took that same tune that we asked them to learn by ear in Bb major and ask them to learn it in every key?

Theory

I think that we (myself included) tend to think that musical theory can only be taught with 12 kids sitting at desks with staff paper and textbooks. But theory (understanding it and being able to use it in real life situations) is not practiced that way. Schneider writes, " It was important to me that my students had some understanding as to what was happening both melodically and harmonically in the music we chose to rehearse and perform. Finding ways to move them beyond a mere “button pushing” experience and towards a broader conception of “musician” proved to be my biggest challenge." The point he wants to make is that any ensemble can and should be a theory class because theory is about practical use, not just the stuff you find in textbooks.

Composition

Composition is one of the key areas of "creating" music. Teaching a musician how to read but not notate and compose music would be like teaching an English class to read books but never write anything. What if we made time, it doesn't even have to be a lot of time, to allow student to try their hand at composition? It could be done the class(es) after a concert, it could be for half a class every other week, but it should have a place in every ensemble.


Schneider advocates for giving students real world experience in music and having them get involved in musical activities that will help them grow in more musically inclined ways. The only way to do this is by holding students to very high and real-life standards and treating them like professional musicians as much as possible. In the long run it will benefit them (and you) more, and they will probably enjoy the experience more as a result of being in an environment where they are constantly being challenged and every class holds something unique.

Schneider's piece is filled with interesting ideas that worth taking the time to explore and consist of differently concepts I will be incorporating into my own teaching one day. It is so important to have students exposed to real life musical problems and situations because that is truly the best way to get them to grow into flexible and creative musicians. These strategies will make them feel empowered, inspired, engaged, motivated, and allow them to have fun simply because it is fun to be good!