Klarinet Archive - Posting 001316.txt from 2000/10

From: Bilwright@-----.net (William Wright)
Subj: Re: [kl] A curricular issue
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:27:23 -0400

Roger, as background to my answers, keep in mind that I attended
college but not a music school of any sort. When they kicked me out of
chorus in first or second grade, I gave up on organized musical
schooling. Truthfully, I doubt that a music school or conservatory of
any sort would accept me.

<><> Roger Garrett wrote:
You use the term or word, "explore" in an interesting way. Is that what
the music major is doing when he is required to elect an ensemble?

Obviously many music majors want the classes that are required. I
suppose that some students would rather be doing something else. Some
music majors come to school with more breadth of experience than others
do. For all of these reasons, we can't assign a single motive to all
students.
But certainly the requirement is there in order that all students
will see the full dimensions of music, if they haven't already.
I'm not ignoring the other aspects of a course requirement, such as
the fact that the school is endorsing the student's qualifications to
some extent when the school finally awards a diploma.
But to say it again, yes, exploring the full dimensions of music
is part of the education. How could it not be?
Should exploration be denied to non-music-majors? Only when there
aren't sufficient resources and somebody must be denied.

<><> I suppose if he is not a declared music major [small snip]
would he be a walk-on?

I was using the word 'walk-on' because you used it. If I have
misunderstood this word, then it's my mistake. I thought that
'walk-on' meant anyone who is not a declared music major in the
instrument under discussion.

<><> Here is a liberal arts university director of bands'
philosophy (no, it isn't me - and it is anonymous). What do you think of
it? Anonymous DoB Philosophy:
<><> "I believe every university student should have the
opportunity to play in a band organization. This means that each student
can audition and be placed in an ensemble regardless of their major.
This does not mean that the student can "pick and choose" what ensemble
that they prefer to play in."

Yes, I agree, but with the obvious proviso that they can play well
enough to avoid ruining the experience for everyone else. However,
this discussion is about students who can play well enough to fit in
somewhere, isn't it?

<><> "I would hope that the students we select for our School of
Music should be of the caliber that would allow them to participate in
one of the concert ensembles. This does not mean, however, that the
student is given carte blanche"

Yes, I agree that there should be minimum standards. If the
student can't meet them, then the school should be straightforward about
it and inform the student.

<><> If I am reading you correctly, you are saying that even
though the walk-on is better and more correctly suited for the ensemble
by virtue of his work, he should always come in second to the declared
music major who marginally passes the audition for the ensemble?

You've omitted a key detail. Perhaps it's so obvious that it
doesn't need to be stated explicitly. I believe that the walk-on (if
we're using this term the same way) comes second ONLY WHEN THERE'S NO
ROOM FOR BOTH STUDENTS.
At some point, if the school is turning down too many walk-ons,
then they need to evaluate their staffing and other resources. Or
perhaps the word will spread and students will search for other schools
to attend.
Once again, the issue that I was raising is the confusion between
'making a promise' and 'doing what's best for the student body'. These
two things are not always identical. I hear a tendency to say, "The
school's brochure may have bragged a little bit, but this in the best
interest of the student body, and the other way of doing things isn't
practical right now..."
A promise is a promise. It's absolutely necessary to examine what
the school promised. To use an extreme example, if an auto body shop
promises to paint your car bright yellow, you expect it to be bright
yellow. You won't accept the body shop telling you, "I thought your car
would be less of a safety hazard if we painted it a gentle beige
instead, and besides, there isn't room in our storage shed to inventory
all the color possibilities."

<><> Assume the student is a music education student and will
eventually have to be certified by the university to teach, and, in
doing so, the university is vesting it's reputation in that student.
Does that change the interpretation of "a promise to offer a complete
education" if the student ends up being deficient?

No, certainly not. But I don't understand what this last
question leads to? In one of my paragraphs above, I've already
mentioned the endorsement aspect of a diploma.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org