Klarinet Archive - Posting 000015.txt from 1995/07

From: Lisa Gartrell Yeo <ux403@-----.CA>
Subj: Re: conservatories/universities?
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 1995 20:16:38 -0400

Lynn,

Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is a BS degree? (I know what it sounds
like!!:> ) Is it a music education degree? In Canada it's called a BME
or BMus Ed. If this is what you are talking about, I heartily agree with you.
I took a BME degree, even though I was pretty sure that I wanted to
be in performance. I went on to a Master's and Doctorate in performance,
which is still in progress. Where I did my Bachelor's, I was able to
take full advantage of the performing opportunites given a performance
major, yet fit in an education degree as well. The experience, though I
admit I loathed it at the time, has opened doors for me. When I
took a year off from my studies before starting a doctorate, I did
a stint of substitute teaching. (for good $$!) I also got a
Graduate Teaching assistantship at my present university. Finally,
I now intend to find a university post upon graduation, something I hadn't
contemplated all those years ago in undergrad days!
So, if you can fit in both, go for it because you just never know!

Lisa Gartrell Yeo
Victoria, BC

>I don't think the guy who originally posted the message re: applied
>music meant to compare conservatories vs universities. I think he was
>speaking of the B.M. degree itself, and that the B.M. does not
>necessarily get you a job when you graduate...that is why he didn't think
>it was worth anything. I deleted the original posting or I'd have copied
>his paragraph here for reference, so I'm trying to go on what I remember.
>
>He does have a point. If you get a B.S., at least you can teach, even if
>you don't want to, while you get your Master's in Performance. From what
>I see (and I was considering getting a B.M. instead of a B.S. for a
>while), the undergrad curriculum differs only in that you have teaching
>methods courses (for B.S) and theory/history courses (for B.M.), plus the
>B.M. doubles the lesson time. "Gives you something to fall back on," as
>my Dad would say...
>
>Now, if a B.S. candidate practices the same amount as a B.M. candidate,
>even if they don't add on more lessons, technically they could learn as
>much as the applied music major. You can give a full recital, if you
>want, as an education major. You can *play* as much as you want,
>period. Performance is the basis for the B.M. I think that, for
>reality's sake, we should consider that with only a B.M. you can't really
>"go anywhere" anyway, you need a Master's in Performance - so why not give
>yourself a broader background, get the B.S., and then get the Master's in
>Performance?
>
>If it's lessons you want, add the time to your schedule. You can get the
>best of both worlds that way. BTW, I started my Masters (in
>performance), and the first class I took I snoozed my way
>through...aesthetics...there oughta be a law that the aesthetics of an
>aesthetics course should encourage one to stay awake! Needless to say, I
>never finished it, because the whole curriculum structure of this
>particular master's program was a snooze in itself.
>
>The thing that bothers me the most is the way that education departments
>(and the dreaded marching band) are killing the applied departments in a
>lot of universities. This is a whole other can of worms we can open if
>y'all want to...
>
>I really think, however, that the B.M. vs. B.S. was what he was talking
>about. I don't think it was based on conservatories and universities.
>Could someone repost that paragraph if they still have it, please?
>
>Thanks --
>
>Lynn
>
>

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org