Klarinet Archive - Posting 000137.txt from 2004/03

From: "Forest Aten" <forestaten@------.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Libby Larsen Interview
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 12:58:04 -0500

Here's an interesting interview with Libby Larsen, who believes that
music education is in a "crisis of relevancy."
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20784-2004Mar1.html>

She makes several important, and to me controversial points, which I'm
far from sure are correct:

Music reading should be taught in the 1st grade, along with alphabetical
reading. [YES!!]

Rhythm is taught in subdivisions of the quarter note. This ignores
forms of music that don't use duple structure. [I'm not sure what she
means here. Is it music that doesn't use a regular pattern? that uses
triple patterns? that uses changing patterns (e.g., Bulgarian)? that
depends on repetition rather than patterns (native American and African
drumming)?]

Music is taught primarily in ensembles, which ignores forms that are
done by only one or a few people. [But how can this be taught in
schools? How can we involve everyone other than in ensembles?]

School ensembles don't play music. They practice only a few pieces by
rote, to do well in contests. [Is this true now? It certainly wasn't
when I came up, at least in bands.]

She speaks from an important position with the Library of Congress, and
as a well known composer. How necessary is it to answer her? What
should we say?

Best regards.

Ken Shaw

--------------------------------
Ken,

I believe she's right....

As a matter of fact, I think she understates the crisis. (even here in Texas
"band land") The educational system is failing...and forget this
"accountability" crap. "Accountability" = political and administrative
cover up. It's difficult to hold incompetent teachers accountable. Pay the
educational force and the quality will return. In Texas we pay starting
teachers $4000 above the official poverty line in this country. (thanks
GWBush) Texas ranks in the bottom five states in terms of achieving stated
educational goals. (great job GWBush)(the guy can't complete a sentence with
all the correct parts)(He can't even read a sentence with all the correct
parts...written by a professional speech writer.) The curricular objectives
(music) have been stated wonderfully. It is so unfortunate that the
implementation has become so very poor. Many reasons. This is my soapbox and
I'll post again. No time. Sorry.

Forest Aten

P.S.
"How necessary is it to answer her?"
We need to support her position!
"What should we say?"
We need to burn down the barn! It's time for change!
And

I'm not interested in producing "professional" musicians in these public
school music programs. The objective should be to produce fine your
musicians and to allow these kids to develop via activities that are
accessible to them throughout their lifetime. Goofy marching band does not
qualify. The analogy in sports: let's spend all of our school budget on the
big team activities, i.e. football and cut the budget on lifetime sports
like, swimming, track, golf, tennis, etc....get the idea??? You want
lifetime fitness???? You get kids involved in activities that they can
participate in over the course of their lifetime. Football=couch potato in
later life. Same goes with music. Where are the chamber music programs in
our schools? Marching band??? Where does that lead to later in your musical
life? -0-