Klarinet Archive - Posting 000584.txt from 1998/04

From: Rich & Tani Miller <musicians@-----.net>
Subj: Re: Smart people and Music (was Music and Science)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 05:01:56 -0400

Not just secondary educators agree. The most crucial time for a child's
musical development is from birth up to age 9. Music learning theory
research bears out the fact that music aptitude which deals mainly with
aural skills, is pretty much set by this age. Students can still learn
music after this age certainly but their aptitude pretty much stays the
same.

It also isn't a just a causal relationship. Current brain research is
showing many positive benefits of music study and physiological effects
that music can have upon brain development. It has really become a very
large field of research. The important key, though, is that students have
the opportunity to have QUALITY musical experiences at a very early
age--singing, moving, listening, playing instruments, . . .There are
certainly positive effects of studying music but research is beginning to
bear out so much more.

If anyone is interested in this subject and related subjects, some names to
use as a starting point on the internet include Dr. Edwin Gordon(music
learning theory research, audiation), Dr. Frances Rauscher(research linking
spatial reasoning and piano instruction in disadvantaged preschoolers), and
Howard Gardner (Project Zero, multiple intelligence theory). There's
another researcher who worked with Dr. Rauscher--I forget the name on this
sunny Easter day.

My school district has used this and other research as a basis for
justifying music, art, theatre, and dance study as being equally important
as all, yes ALL, other subject areas. Students are required to take all
fine arts areas through the tenth grade. I'm really curious to see what
kind of effect we'll have on things like standardized test scores although
that certainly isn't the most important reason for music!

Tani Miller
Carter & MacRae Elementary School
School District of Lancaster
Lancaster, PA

Kevin Fay wrote:

>
>
> I think the real link is the true value of music education in our
> schools. If you want a rough approximation of who the top 10% of
> students are in any high school, you don't need a test--just stroll down
> to the band room. (OK, choir and orchestra too.)
>
> It could be a causal relationship--learning to practice certainly taught
> ME how to study--and the immediate feedback of hard work certainly helps
> a student's focus. On the other hand, it could merely be an effect
> (i.e., the better students tend to stick with the instrument). Either
> way, it is an incredibly valuable part of the education process for the
> more advanced students in secondary education, and (forgive the heat) a
> goddamned crime that it is among the first things to get cut by
> brain-dead adminsistrators finding a way to keep the funding for the
> football team.
>
> My wife is a middle school band director. One of the sales pitches she
> makes to parents is the value that music education has other than in the
> band room--band students simply do better in school. Oodles of
> statistics bear this out. I'm sure the secondary educators on this list
> will agree, and have a huge amount of anecdotal evidence as well. All I
> can say to them is keep up the good work!
>
> kjf
>
> --Original Message Follows----
> Reply-To: "Scott Morrow" <sdm@-----.edu>
> From: "Scott Morrow" <sdm@-----.edu>
> To: <klarinet@-----.us>
> Subject: Re: Music and Science
> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 11:09:47 -0400
> Reply-To: klarinet@-----.us
>
> I have a BS in Chemistry and have been working in Biochemistry for
> the
> last 16 years. I, also, have been playing the clarinet routinely since
> 4th
> grade. I believe one of the skills that helps scientific people relate
> to
> music is an ability to deal with abstract concepts (you can't "see" a
> molecule, and try explaining musical interpretation to someone who has
> to
> touch or see something to understand it!). Also, music IS very
> mathematical - it is not difficult to see (especially from some of our
> more
> technical posts) that music is mostly a scientific field molded by
> creativity. (Actually, most of the more important scientific
> advancements
> were discovered by creative scientists, not technicians!)
> I am also a writer (plays and humourous articles) - also sort of
> abstract! One of the reasons I never went on to a PhD in science is
> that I
> DON'T want to give up my "creative" activities!
>
> -Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: C E Field <CEField@-----.com>
> To: klarinet@-----.us>
> Date: Friday, April 10, 1998 10:03 AM
> Subject: Re: Music and Science
>
> >This is a fascinating topic.
> >
> >I am a Ph.D. (food & resource chemistry and chemical engineering) by
> education
> >and a computer journalist by trade (with 500 or so published articles
> in
> the
> >past 15 years). I also worked in medical research and teaching.
> >
> >BUT clarinets always have been and remain my first love. I started
> playing
> in
> >fourth grade...nearly 40 years ago (ugh).
> >
> >Cindy
>
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com