It has been a long and hard few weeks and I'm finally finding/forming words to articulate my thoughts (be it in long-winded and maybe too theoretical a form). I share this as an illustration of my internal dialogue right now:
​
It is awe-ful/some what kind of strawmen/women we can make of each other when we are entrenched within a point of view/regime of truth and confronted by challenging discourses. I am as guilty as any in this as we all are. In encountering strawmen/women, we encounter distorted shadows, jarred reflections of one another. In attempting to communicate in such an "encounter," we rarely find dialogue or openings to commune.
​
I'm meditating on Sandy Stauffer's discussion of "radical listening" and the notion of being a "friend" to a text-person-idea (in a DeleuzeoGuattarian sense, see "What is Philosophy"). I'm contemplating on how learners and colleagues (be they "teachers," "students," "peers," etc.) can foster intellectual friendships in which radical-critical-ethical listening can support genuine dialogue as a ground for mutual learning-grown-exploring

A reflection one criticism and self-critique. 

To hear the concern from students (directly or indirectly) that they feel that "I want them to think like me" causes me to ask myself so many things:
- What am I doing that might feed this misconception?
- What am I doing to welcome everyone to think/do in their own ways and have troubling but safe discussions/actions when we have conflicting visions?
- What am I doing to encourage everyone that they can be critical and caring at the same time?
- What am I doing to model ethical thinking and doing?
- What can more can I do? What should I minimize? What should I stop doing?
- What can I do to encourage purposeful thinking and doing?
- What can I do to encourage multiple ways of thinking and doing?
- What can I do to constantly open up things that might be closed in ways that are playful, welcoming, and engaging (but not easy)?
- How can I encourage all to explore cognitive dissonance and ambiguity?
- How do I respond if this concern is actually a veiled avoidance of critical thinking and doing?
Teaching is hard. Reflecting is hard. Trying to constantly become a more reflective teacher is so exhausting, but so very worthwhile.

I’ve be having a lot of thoughts regarding not only difference between the history of something and a history of something, but also about what it might mean to have “a history with” something. Perhaps articles and prepositions are problematic as we tend to use them in conceptualizing learning. “The history of” seems to suggested a static and authoritative notion of human experiences that is to be learned by students. “A history with” seems to suggest a living engagement with human experiences, a playful inquiry in which students co-construct an understanding of their possible contextual and historical situatedness.

I don’t think I’d prefer to teach or learn about the history of rock music or the history of the French-American War, but exploring a history with rock music or a history with a French-American War seems fascinating to me. Notice here that my verbs are necessarily changed by my choices of articles and prepositions. We learn/teach about “the….of,” however it is hard to learn/teach about “a…with;” instead a more inquiry-prone verb seems necessary. Honestly, this differentiation of verbs was unconscious, yet unavoidable because “a…with” reframed how I conceptualized a focused “object” (for a lack of a better and less problematic word) of a learning experience. Subtle changes in my discourse elicited changes in my conception and then changes in how I approached acts of living-learning-teaching, three gerunds that Freire might see as completely wrapped up with one another.
​
As a thought experiment, let’s consider what other articles and prepositions might be problematic in living-learning-teaching. How might it mean to learn the theory of music? How might it mean to learn a theory with music? What might it mean to learn about melody? What might it mean to explore melody (no preposition)? What else might you think about? Please share below.

For those of you who responded to the last big twitter discussion using #whatifmusiced, thank you. I think a lot was gained by thinking about what the field could be. Your ideas were beautiful and inspirational, for sure. We can’t forget to ask ourselves, the student with whom we work, and the community in which we are situated this important question reqularly.
​
Let’s have another discussion, one that seems to be growing ever more important day by day. The issue is for this discussion is. . . rationale.
– What is music education for?
– What is the rationale for its placement in the schools?
– What do we contribute to a child’s education that other fields don’t (or don’t to the same extent)?
– Why does music education matter anyway?

It may seem like a silly question because clearly we value it and have invested in it. However, how often do we actually sit down and try to grapple with this? Instead, the rationale is often trumpeted as “music for music’s sake” or “music makes you smarter” (i.e. music makes you do better on tests, which, by the way, most of the research doesn’t really seem to support when you consider demographic factors like SES–see the work of Ken Elpus). Let’s think the big thinks and lets share our big thinks. After we consider our rationales, if might just tell us something about our current practices or even show us ways to address the suggestions from #whatifmusiced.

First, to follow this post, it might be useful for you to read the original new post, so, please see: “BBC plans primary school classical music campaign.”
In years past, I would have read this in the following way:

• Great! Let’s introduce students to the classics
• Wow, now I know what pieces my classes will be focusing on.
• They are sending people out, that rocks. I wish I was in the UK to get this wonderful help.
• A movie, rad! My students will eat up a movie… maybe I can get a copy to leave with subs in the future.
• It is so great that the BBC (like the Doctor Who BBC) is putting money and time into this.
• Catch them while they’re young!
  ​

However, as my life progresses so have my perspectives. Now, when I read this new post critically, here is what I think of it (categorized by themes):
​
1) Canonization: When we make a list that is to represent something like an educational program, what we leave out is nearly more important than what is actually put in. In the BBC’s “Ten Pieces” project, we see ten works work created by Western (Euro-American), Caucasian composers. We do, happily, see a female voice represented here. This particular–if impressive–choice should not come as a surprise. The composer in question, Anna Meredith (whose works I like a great deal), is a composer in residence for the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra. Still, where is the wider diversity of musical backgrounds (even in the classical world)? Also, why were these specific pieces selected? Do they have some specific significance in the current and/or future lives of the students?
In addition, what about the meanings and/or social contexts of these works? Shouldn’t they be questioned? Handel’s “Zadok the Priest” is a coronation piece. Should that be accepted without questioning the very use of the work and the political structure that it represents? To be truthful, if this was in the U.S. and it included the “Star Spangled Banner” or “Battle Hymn of the Republic,” I would still be critical if the pieces were introduced without a discussion and exploration of the cultural meanings and issues associated with those works. However, the news post and the BBC’s website for the project don’t seem to suggest critical discussion of the works, just consumption and “creative response.”

2) Delivery of Content: The BBC’s learning/education branch has developed this curricular program in conjunction with numerous arts advocacy groups including the Association of British Orchestras and some arts education groups (many identified as “hub”). What about the other “stakeholder” groups like community groups of students, families, and/or schools? These are the important stakeholders, after all. To these stakeholders, content (decided from above, drawn from elite tastes) is being delivered because, as a BBC spokesperson notes “While millions of people already enjoy classical music, it’s right that we light the classical music spark as early as possible.”
Also, “Lord Hall said that, while classical music was ‘in good health’, its future popularity was not guaranteed ‘unless children are given the opportunity to learn and experience’ it.”  The content is being delivered to supposedly foster within students a love for classical music, though it reads more as a grab for future consumers and ticket buyers. What if these classical pieces are of no importance to students’ everyday lives and/or uninteresting based on their own sophisticated musical tastes? Exposure to different musical styles is important, but it is also necessary to know when a specific tradition is being prioritized over the lived experiences of students in an educational setting.

3) Advocacy Assumption: In this rhetoric, we see, again, the “music makes you smarter” argument. The article notes: “[a] BBC spokesperson said: ‘Classical music is great for children. Not only is it good for their creativity, it can help with other subjects like maths, and even have a positive impact on behaviour.”‘ Though there may be research grounding some of the possible intellectual “side effects,” so to speak, of music education, I cannot help but call this advocacy angle into question. Can we agree that music is one of the myriad ways that humans understand their world? Is it not another way to perceive, think, and create in the world? Yet, the new post seems sidestep this by, again, suggesting that the importance of music is that it helps students become better students in other curricular areas and makes them better behaved (submissive?) members of society. I know many folks who are great at performing, creating, and/or interpreting music who are terrible at other areas of schooling (not all these skills are easily transferable from music to other subjects). Many of these same musically-slanted (rather than inclined) folks are quite rebellious and subversive. We don’t see math curricula advertised as a way to improve reading scores, so, I find it weak that the BBC is latching on to this the advocacy angle, with all of its assumptions.

4) Creative Development or Classical Consumption?: The BBC program’s rationale notes that: “Ten Pieces aims to open up the world of classical music to children – and inspire them to develop their own creative responses to the pieces through music, dance or digital art. The repertoire will include a range of music from baroque to contemporary.” The website notes that phase 2 of the project hinges upon the idea of having students creatively respond to the works, yet the “leaflet” seems to show more the true interests of the project which do not appear to be the creative development through music of students. This document notes that:

“[t]he pilot of this project . . . showed a dramatic impact on children’s interests in and enjoyment of classical music. Before taking parts, 70% of the primary-aged children had never been to a classical music concert. Afterwards, 78% were keen to go, and there was a 100% increase in the number of children who ‘really liked’ classical music.”

Research issues not withstanding, the leaflet leaves the creative development focus of the rationale by the wayside in favor of promoting interest in classical music. This interest seems to be based upon whether students liked the music and if they would want to go to a concert, both of which seem very consumeristic at heart. Also, the resources provided by the BBC for students and teachers focus around knowing the works and/or performing them, not on creatively responding to the music.

5) For Whose Interest? I have discussed and alluded to this throughout, yet, it bares more unpacking. Whose interests does this project represent? The students? The teachers? The communities? The country’s artistic well-being? Or, are the interests only in the supporting and expanding the consumption of products of classical music industry? I am always leery of education projects developed and completely funded by people with financial gains at stake in the outcome of the project and “Ten Pieces” is no different. It brings back an important question that needs to be discussed: Should education (or even democracy) be left in the hands of businesses?

Conclusion: First of all, I want to make it known that I applaud efforts of supporting arts education and the creative/participatory intent that appears to be at least alluded to in this campaign. I also must make it known that I am not a citizen of the U.K., and thus, do not know the complexities of their arts education structures. That being said, I suggest that we must constantly question projects like this, no matter their direct impact upon us, however benevolent though they may be in nature. We must become more critical of things presented to us and question the assumptions and interests that they serve. I encourage you to do your own critical reading of this concept, let me know what you find, and fill me in (kindly, hopefully) about areas that you feel are misunderstandings. Let’s discuss.

I’ve been wondering a lot about what could be in music education. If we stopped, momentarily, thinking about what is and what logistically can be, what might we imagine for music education. What types of musicking would we put forwards? What new “models,” for lack of a better word, might we develop? How might music education look if we thought beyond the ins and outs of the day-to-day classroom life? This is not to say that what is happening now is not important, far from it. However, the present can often cloud our visions of the future. If we dreamed of music education’s future in new ways we might be able to develop a different trajectory that could have profound impacts upon our classrooms and the students who’s musical lives we interact with every day.
So, with that stated, let’s dream, let’s imagine, let’s share our wonderments about what music education could be. To facilitate this, I’ve started the hashtag #whatifmusiced to help us keep track of the wonderfully brilliant ideas we generate. Some people are already making use of it as a space to imagine. Now it’s your turn. Ready, set, go… dream away.
​
https://twitter.com/search?src=typd&q=%23whatifmusiced

A little preface to this post: This post may be a bit rambling, but I promise that this post includes a lesson/experience idea that can be used in your music class. If you want to get to that, just jump to the end (I won’t be hurt). However, if you want to hear about my journey in coming to this curricular idea, my general excitement about Scratch, and would like to read some basic blog-ish discussion, read on

So, I’m a generally techie type of guy. However, I’m not the build my own motherboard or program my CPU sort of person. Often, if the barriers are high enough on a program or piece of tech, I just ditch it and find something that actually does what I want it to do. Sometimes, I end up getting fairly good a piece of technology to the point that I can bend it to do exactly what I want (Garageband and Audacity are good examples). However, I’m just not patient enough to go through the rigmarole of learning how to use yet another program or device in order to do something I can do on a platform I already know how to use, and use well. So, I guess what I’m saying in a very round about way is that: I love technology but I am generally not very patient (ask me to practice for a concert and you may see this lack of patience in full swing). When I jump into something, I want to figure out the basics quickly and then be able to MAKE something with it (we can unpack the problems of this mentality later, as there are many).
​
With that all stated–now that you have had a little look under the hood of Jesse–I feel the need to talk to you about something that is immediately become a fairly inspirational tool for me. It has pretty low barriers and is completely centered on MAKING new things, but it can be frustrating to learn, at times. Scratch from MIT Media Lab (among many other collaborators) makes me wish I was back in my classroom right now to try it out with the students. Scratch is a web-based programming tool, a Lego-like way for kids (and, clearly, adults) to think and act as computer programmers. The true power of this cross-platform tool is not in the learning to code but is that it is centered on the idea of MAKING things. Kids create new projects (animations, games, music, etc.), collaborate with other via remixes and rebuilds of existing creations, and generally finding ways to make a computer do what you want it to do via code. Okay, it sounds a bit scary, but trusts me, it really isn’t. Here is a kindergartener to teach you some of the basics:

Before you start down the path of “digital natives” (the problematic idea that kids today are born to understand new tech), realize that the kid in this video is doing the same things you do with your word processor (pointing, clicking, dragging, and typing). You can do this and, most importantly, so can the students in your classroom.

Now, you may be wondering what any of this has to do with music or music education. That’s fair and its something that I wondered for a while, myself. A doctoral friend of mine named Isaac Bickmore has become somewhat obsessed with Scratch (sorry to share that with everyone, Isaac). He has created a pretty neat video game as he has learned how to use Scratch (http://scratch.mit.edu/projects/19959856/). He was inspired to use this by his work with Julian Peterson and Ryan Bledsoe (amazing friends and brilliant educators) and an after school project where students hacked and made things. Even with seeing and playing Isaac’s game and hearing Ryan and Julian talk about Scratch, I still failed to see why I should care about it from a music education perspective. I am usually all about finding ways to bring new ideas into music education, but I guess with Scratch, I was being a bit of a stick in the mud. That was until I started to play around with it. In our doctoral seminar class, we were charged to “make something” via a broad spectrum of technologies available. With the help of Emmett O’Leary and Dr. Marg Schmidt, I started to discover the potential of Scratch as a musical tool and doorway to new explorations with sound. And, it all started with a game of “pop the balloon” (http://scratch.mit.edu/projects/10126867/).

So, what did I do? Well, take a look here and see my basic experiment here (go a head, I’ll be here waiting for you when you get back). . .  

I wanted to make my camera become a sound controller. My intent was just that simple. I have played with Soundbeams, AUMI, and AirVox (which are amazing tools that I discuss the blog post “Join the Band“) and I wanted to see if I could make something like those apps. Now, it took me a while to figure out how to get my camera to trigger a sound, but I also looked for help via help sections, videos of proof of concept, and actually looking at/editing the code of other Scratch projects (called “remixing”). Once I got one “sprite” (or image) to trigger a sound (a “meow”) by using the camera, all I had to do was make more sprites and drag the code to the next sprite which, essentially, works as copy and paste for code in Scratch (though, I’m realizing now that I could have just programed one sprite and then duplicated it numerous times). I uploaded some sounds (created in Garageband) and then added a little more code blocks to change the volume of each sound. The end result is something that you can walk/move in front of the computer screen to generate an ever-changing soundscape.

Lesson/Experience Idea
So, what can you do with Scratch in your classroom, other than use what other people have created? There are limitless ways to incorporate this, however, I’m going to highlight one idea I like to call: Scratch + Sound + Movement. The question at the heart of this idea is, “How can I use sound and movement to create an expressive artwork?” In the experience, students would experiment with generating sounds, creating an interactive sound controller via Scratch, and then using expressive movements to triggers their sounds.

Materials: Computer that can run flash, Wi-Fi or some internet connection, sound sources, a web camera, and space to move.

Step 1: Either as individuals or in “design teams,” students create sounds. These could be MIDI sounds, found sounds, instrument recordings, loop, and clips of other songs. It doesn’t really matter, as long as they are recorded as an MP3 or WAV file. Each individual sound needs to be exported as a file (so name them well and know where they export to). I’ve found it useful to create some short sounds, some long sounds, and some files that have a lot of space in them. For an example of the types of sounds I would suggest, take a look at In Bb and it’s instruction.
* It would be very fun to record found sounds into a sampler (like the one found in Garageband iOS) so the students could alter the waveforms and create new sounds.

Step 2: Scratch time. You’ll want to join Scratch (its free and worth it). If not, you can still make things, but saving becomes problematic. Log into, or have students log into the Scratch account on the computer they are using. From here, the students could take two routes to creating a web-camera controller with all their sound files: 1) The students can “remix” an existing project (here is a simplified version of mine to use as a template). Or, 2) you can help the students create their own.
​

• Route 1) Open up a template. Students can edit the sprites and their placements by clicking on them. To change the sounds that are triggered, watch the tutorial video below. Once all sprites are changes, you have functional web camera controller. Rename it and save.

• Route 2) Help students build their own unique and meaningful controller. This takes some time but is very meaningful and allows students to make use of 21st century skills, like coding and systemic thinking, to create an artistic work. Watch this tutorial for the basics of how to set up a web camera triggered sprite:
  

Step 3: Now that the sounds are created, the controller is made, lets create some movements to trigger the sounds. Students could choreograph a dance to perform in front of their controller and see what happens. Or, they could interact with the sounds as they are triggered, changing their movements to fit the sounds but also knowing how to make a specific move to trigger a specific sound. The design team/student may realize that they need to reorganize the sprites to allow for specific sounds to be triggered by a certain move. Excellent! That’s real-world revision and editing in action.|

Step 4: Share. The students should share their works, share their controllers, and explain their design decisions. What are the next steps? How can design teams use this a pilot effort? The sharing and discussing is an integral portion. Imagine if you had an interactive sound installation night where parents, teachers, and community members came to play with the sound controllers. The students could explain their process and when help the other inter-actors make their own.
​
Assessments: To assess the learning in an experience like this, lets think about what the students may have learned (or what I hoped they did).

• Create interesting sounds
• Understand and apply ideas of building sound controllers
• Developing multi-facets artworks that are inherently interactive
• Pilot an art experience and reflect/revise
  
  

With these objectives, of sorts, the students can begin to assess their own learning. They can ask: “How did I create my sounds?” “How did I create my own controller?” “How did my controller work and does it need to be fixed?”

Also, in this experience you might be able to see the kernels of developing understanding in the musical dimension of timbre, texture, dynamics, articulation, rhythm (at least duration), and form. The students thought up sounds and organized those sounds via the creation of the controller and their movements. They would act as composers and improvisors… as well as performers of their own work. They might begin to understand artworks from a more systemic view and see how the final “piece” is often an intensely collaborative product (think about artists like Skrillex’s and Daft Punk’s most recent albums as examples of the collaborative process). The assessments here are both performance-based and discussion-based. They are assessments for and as learning as they help the teachers know how to proceed (for) and help the students reflect upon their experiences and generate their own path forward (as).*

* for a longer discussion of assessment of, for, and as learning, see Sheila J. Scott’s 2012 MEJ article entitled “Rethinking the Role of Assessment in Music Education”


Questions to Ponder:

• What could this experience mean to the students?
• What could this experience mean to you and your classroom?
• How could designing interactive sound installations help students develop as musicians and musical beings in an ever-changing musical atmosphere?
• How can students become interactive artwork design teams in your classroom?
• What becomes your role in a “design-based” music classroom?

Peter Gabriel, one of my absolute favorite musicians/songwriters/composers, always seems to be allowing his music to become what it wants to become. Not that the music has a mind of its own, but Gabriel plays with sounds and allows the music to unfold, molding it when needed, to create something new. This led him to his hybrid style of composing and performing adding rock instruments, non-western instruments, and the newest technology available together in search for a sound that resonated with him. In recording “Security,” Gabriel let his music be something broader than what we sometimes allow our music to be.

• What will you allow your music to be?
• What will you allow your students’ music to be?
• Who makes the decision about what music is allowed to be in your classroom?

Since my last post, life has happened to me in a big way, but not in a life-threatening manner. Instead, mental life has happened to me. I’m here thinking “big thoughts” and saying “big words.” Before I came to do my Ph.D. work, I thought that this time would be a time of discovering the world, learning how to help music teachers and student to have better class experiences. But, in fact, it has actually been the most challenging period of introspection I’ve yet experienced, and I know so much more is to come. I was warned that this would be hard, but I thought it would be “school” hard with lots of papers and reading and work. While it is that, the real challenge is dealing with my own shifting sense of self. Who am I? What do I want? What do I value? I spend days in constant states of reflection with only my wife, friends, and Netflix there to pull back into the real world. Now, please don’t get me wrong, I am actually growing to love this, but I love it the way a runner loves the race. I love it because it is painful, but the pain accompanies the sense of accomplishing something great. Now, I apologize that this post is more confessional and less “educational,” but perhaps it can get us thinking about our own lives and the lives of our students.
I am, in all seriousness, the definition of an anal-retentive overachiever. I was the kid who wanted to get A++++’s in every class. I am the curve breaker. I am that kid that asked, “Can I read the next chapter too?” Yup, you probably hated people like me being in your class, or still do. But, I’ve always felt that I needed to produce high-quality products in every aspect of my life. Now, don’t get me wrong, this drive has gotten me to doctoral work in music education. It has allowed me to stay focused on the goal of becoming a college professor since I was 18. But, why did I do it? Why do I feel the need to do better.

Part of it is has to do with my own competitiveness. I never did well in sports, but boy could I “beat you” in science projects or research papers. However, I’ve been realizing that such competitiveness requires me to measure my own worth based on the worth of others. This is not the best way to be motivated. It means that when others who I might not see as “winning” as much as I get praise and I don’t, I feel jealous, I feel wronged. My self worth and sense of self is contingent upon how well you are doing in relation to me. If I’m doing better, I win. Do you see the problem here? I do and I’m taking steps to deal with it. The problem is that I rarely do work for myself. I rarely do things because they make me feel good, they help me develop as a person. Now, I’m beginning to wonder how much I’ve “inspired” my students to live for themselves or to live in opposition of others. Have I helped to develop agents or just competitors?

The other part of my motivation has to do with the reward. I’m always stretching for the carrot. When I get that carrot, the grade or the reward, I find a new carrot to run after. So, I’m amassed quite a collection of carrots, but those are only external things that appear of my transcripts, in newspapers, and clutter shelves. Rewards can be a good thing, but they can also be problematic when all one does is try to be rewarded. In high school, I worked towards getting straight A’s and being a valedictorian. In undergraduate, I worked toward straight A’s (which I didn’t quite achieve), to be distinguished as a music educator, and to become a university honors recipient (bronze tablet at UIUC). In my master’s degree, I still worked toward straight A’s and to be able to show that I was smart enough to get into a great Ph.D. program. I achieved all of these things, and I’ve remained driven, but what have I missed by staying so focused on external things? My varsity jacket of life is covered in patches and brass stars, but what lays underneath? When did I do things for me and not so other people would recognize me as being a great person? Grades have helped me stay driven, but do they signify that I have learned? What does an A or an S mean, anyway?

When I’ve done intrinsically rewarding things, I don’t really need the grades or the applause. I think back on creating an 80’s rock concert with my 4th and 5th graders. I could have seriously not even been at the concert to have felt the entire venture was rewarding. Kids sang solos and playing instruments to songs they picked and worked out. Dancers danced their own dances in front of a screen that displayed student animations and scripted comedy routines. What we did was fun and what we did was for us. The concert may have been an initial motivator, but it really didn’t matter because the experiences carried more weight for myself and my students (at least it seems so). Also, when I write song, I really don’t care if others like them, they are for me. But, in some ways, when I do things that feel good and are not as clearly connected to an extrinsic reward, I feel selfish and dirty. Why is that?

Why do I feel bad when I’m intrinsically motivated and feel awesome and focused when there is something out there to win? Am I alone? How did I get here? Is there some way to balance these impulses? How can I get my students to realize that it is okay to do something for themselves, something that makes they feel internally valuable. That doesn’t mean we should teach our students to be withdrawn and hedonistic. But, how can we help them see the intrinsic rewards of being driven and doing good? I felt intrinsically good when I helped a friend move recently. I did it because it made me feel good and I knew it helped someone I cared about. I didn’t do it for the pizza (which was delicious and unexpected) and I didn’t do it so he would thank me; I did it for me. But, how can we foster this type of motivation in our classrooms? Self-worth and internal growth is very hard to measure in any quantifiable sense. So, how valuable are grades anyway?

Instead of starting on a tirade about grading practices (as I know there are positives and negatives wrapped up in this realistic issue), I’ll just leave you with these wonderments:

• What motivates learners?
• How do learners measure their own worth?
• Where do grades fit in?
•  What do we report on report cards?
• What motivates you?
• How do you measure your own worth?
• What does that mean for your life and for your teaching?