Klarinet Archive - Posting 000692.txt from 2001/05

From: rgarrett@-----.edu
Subj: Re: [kl] School Board
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 00:25:14 -0400

At 10:03 PM 05/26/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>I have moved around this country a great deal and have children that have
>been in a number of public schools. None of these shools had general
>music classes beyond the little bit taught in elementary school.

Please define "little bit." Please list the public schools and their
locations. I'm sorry, but your statement is not supported nationally
unless you define further.

>The only students who got any music after elementary school were those who
>signed up for the elective band or chorus. Or do you propose that band or
>chorus be made manadatory for all?

Elective WITHIN THE CURRICULUM. Do you understand the difference Dee?

>My proposals would increase the amount of music that students have
>available and make sure that
>none of them miss basic music education. I did not say nor intend to say
>that band and chorus had to be eliminated or changed to extracurricular.
>These would remain electives as they are now.

Well I'm so happy my children could take three years out of their 12 for
average to below average music classes that are required. Sarcasm intended.

>And despite the fact that you are a professional music educator, your
>opinions are shaped by your personal experiences in the school districts
>that you have taught in just as mine are shaped by the experiences of my
>own schooling and that of my children. Thus they are equally limited in
>universal applicability.

Gee, I thought they were also shaped by my education in three degree
programs at a nationally recognized school.

>As I stated above, I do not propose a system that would diminish what is
>currently available. In the majority of schools, band and chorus are
>electives not required courses. I'm talking about adding required courses
>in music to those schools that don't have them. I am talking about all
>students getting some basics. Band and chorus students would actually get
>more music education than they are now.

I disagree with your conclusions, your statements of fact, and your
hypothesis based on personal experience.

>You say that 3 years out of 12 is not enough. Perhaps true but it is
>better than the 0 out of 12 years that non-band and non-chorus students get.

Well - I just think you have a limited experience Dee. The vast majority
of elementary music require music once per week for all students - grades
K-5. Most of those require music in all years in middle school - either
with general music or the band/choir/orchestra choice. Those that don't do
this are in the minority. On top of that Dee, the students who do sign up
for 8 of the 12 years, there is a vast difference. I'm sorry you feel the
way you do - and I understand your position - but I cannot ethically or
professionally agree with such a limited amount of music study. By the way
- ANYONE can sign up for a music elective.

>A lot of ground can be covered in three years, enough for a student to
>judge whether they may want to know more anyway.

No - it can't. Have you ever taught these students? If you haven't, how
do you propose to teach them to be musically literate with one year out of
5 in the elementary years (BTW, exactly WHICH grade level will that happen
in?), one out of the middle school level (um....which grade level should
that occur in??), and one at the Sr. High level. Should they be
consecutive years or spread out? How to you get continuity from one to
the other? Is there reinforcement of past teaching, or does each level
start over from scratch.....or assume learning? Is there a test that
separates by level? What about ability grouping? I just don't understand
your proposal - and how you expect to get better results with your
system. Sorry! There you have it - you say one thing - I say another. I
guess we are at a crossroads.

>Yes, I used my own experiences to relate a system that could be
>considered. I never said it would be a universal solution. It's something
>that could be built on. A person starts with their own experiences and
>builds on it.

You didn't answer my questions Dee. How do you propose to convince the
current music teachers that they should give up their tenured positions for
such a proposal? How will you sell this to a group of
administrators? What will you do to help the music stores in each city
stay in business when their rental programs dry up? There are a hundred
other examples........have you thought this through carefully??

>And I am all in favor of increasing the number of periods in a school day.

So am I. How do you propose to convince underpaid, unionized teachers to
teach more than 6 periods a day? They will strike if you ask for more with
no extra pay - they might strike anyway. I've walked the picket line
before - and it was for a matter of 180 school days vs. 196, better
benefits, and a higher salary scale. Let's not even talk about extending
the school day by 45 minutes. And lest you think you could do it in
existing time - good luck! Try convincing a social studies, math, or
english teacher that they now have 42 minutes to teach the same curriculum
they taught in 50 minutes. Boy are you in for a rude awakening. Then
there is the extra class or two for which all the "academic" teachers get
to grade additional papers........will you grant them additional prep time
during the day? Will they give up bus duty and hall duty to get that prep
time? Will the districts pay non-teachers to supervise? Lots of questions
unanswered here Dee..........by the way, would you mind answering my
question..........exactly how many periods were in the school day for the
district you described?

>Our school systems are shortchanging our children not only in the dumbing
>down of material but in the limited time they spend teaching it.

I agree. So - make a difference. Run for office, write letters, and get
some concrete evidence out there for people to see. This little missive
you give us does nothing to show how it can work. Prove your convictions
with specifics and hard core evidence. There are lots and lots of books
out there and examples of what "experts" feel are the best musical
curriculums for students in the public schools. I have never seen your
proposal, or anything like it, represented - partially or in full - in any
book or treatise. If you can find it - please present it to us.

>No, I don't expect all teachers to be creative. But basic courses are
>still worthwhile. The few creative teachers just manage to make learning
>more fun.

Well - I DO expect all teachers to be creative Dee. Especially those who
are paid to teach my children music. If they aren't - I contact them and,
if need be, the principal, superintendent, etc. Unless of course, it won't
do any good. I may be passionate but I'm not stupid!

>Now if someone is serious about preventing music from being dropped, the
>place to start is with the state boards of education and the legislatures.

Then do it. This list isn't the state board of education and the
legislatures. How many letters and phone calls have you made recently? I
have a dozen letters regarding the three I wrote to the Tri-Valley School
District here in McLean County this past semester. And I have another
dozen for the ones I wrote to Bloomington Public Schools four years ago,
and I have at least 20 from Longview, WA where I taught grades 6-12 band
and general music. Letters to the editor can be found in each of these
locations. I think I stand up for what I believe in - with words and
action. And it has made a difference.

>They are the ones who define what must be included in the mandatory core
>curricula. They are also the ones who set guidelines as to what should be
>made available as standard electives.

Uh excuse me????? Where do you get that??? Teachers set curriculum Dee -
not the school board, superintendent, or parents. The board approves what
teachers recommend. You need to figure out how this works before you
announce sweeping changes.

>Local school boards have to follow the requirements or risk losing
>accreditation for their schools. Right now local school boards will look
>at program popularity versus budget. If Advanced Basket Weaving is the
>rage among the local parents, it will get support in lieu of band. Note
>I'm using a totally ridiculous example as I don't want to trigger the
>sports versus music discussions/gripes.

Sorry - I disagree with you. Band and choir are in the curriculum because
of the arguments for such a curriculum - in terms of music
learning/literacy. As soon as it becomes extra-curricular as you suggest
it should, then it ceases to have backing at all curricularly - and it is
at the mercy of the budget. I would be interested in seeing you prove a
case for basket weaving - regardless of how popular it is. Such a
statement, even if meant facetiously, puts down music education as a
bonified, curricular event.

>If we want to have musical literacy, it's got to be included in the state
>standards. Fighting the local school boards isn't going to work.

You just said the school boards control it.......that they "define what
must be included in the mandatory core curricula." You also said that
"They are also the ones who set guidelines as to what should be made
available as standard electives." You either fight the local school boards
who DO control, or you make a case for them to notice - which was it you
meant??

Best wishes,
Roger Garrett

Roger Garrett
Clarinet Professor
Director, Symphonic Winds
Illinois Wesleyan University
School of Music
Bloomington, IL 61702-2900
Phone: (309) 556-3268
Fax: (309) 556-3121

"A man never discloses his own character so clearly as when he describes
another's."
Jean Paul Richter (1763-1825)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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