making the simple more complex?
I’m starting to think we should teach theory by performance practice. pieces by bach, beethoven, and handel can be so different that without context these pieces can be incompressible to most students.
pedagogically most theory
textbooks are organized by teaching students the skills to analyze basic
harmony in a sequential manner. first we teach students how to identify and create the fundamentals; scales, intervals, chords, and non-harmonic tones, and then things get pretty tricky when many books start to wade into the deeper waters of
counterpoint (via 4-part writing which has major pedagogical limitations and is a whole other post) and harmonic analysis in which we get to the crux of some major problems.
after the fundamentals are mastered, treating harmonic analysis and part writing as
music theory are like treating phonics and sentence structure as reading. further separating the
elements of music into different classes (like form and analysis and orchestration) make it pretty hard to give the students the big picture needed to make sense of the music they are playing (and later teaching and conducting)
after the fundamentals are mastered, another option would be to focus on teaching full works, which brings up even more problems like how do you give your students enough skills so they can open a score and understand the western canon of
art music?
i’m also not going to say all the music theory textbooks are bad, but i think we are doing are students a huge disservice by using mostly short excerpts as primary our source material. even with the best if intentions the main strategy of each chapter use brief musical example with easily identifiable answers of the concepts being taught which leads to the students inability to make sense of the same concept when it presented in a full score (especially if it isn’t as clearly delineated) .
for the past couple of years this has been my struggle while teaching lower division theory. i have looked at lots of textbooks, read
michael rodgers great book on the subject; and had some pretty interesting conversations with other composers/teachers who share my frustration and are trying something new.
i guess right now i’m struggling with the ‘bigger picture’ questions like:
- is it possible to learn it all? (western canon of art music)
- if not what should we study?
- the ‘best’ pieces?
- the most commonly performed? and what do we leave out?
no matter which pieces we decide to study i really think the sooner we can start looking at music from the it’s elements (form, melody, harmony, rhythm, timbre) the more relevant our teaching will be of the skills needed to decode and perform music.
at the end of the day we need to find better ways to make the complex more simple instead of the simple more complex
Be the first to like.
[
?]
Related posts:
- the trees without the forest
- "now " and "then"
- status quo?
- getting back to things
- quandry
This entry was posted on Thursday, May 6th, 2010 at 8:09 am. It is filed under blog and tagged with counterpoint, higher education, music theory, pedagogy, performance practice, Textbook.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.