 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: george
Date: 2003-12-09 17:57
On a recent thread, "Donnie" from a private school in Memphis received considerable grief from many folks for his plan to have his school furnish instruments to the students. Well, schools at all levels, public and private, spend a fortune on computers for the use of the students, and this is generally hailed as a wonderful thing--the more a school spends on "technology" the better school it is judged to be. There seems to be a nontrivial amount of evidence that music education early in the school years has a very positive effect on the intellectual development of children, while I've heard of no such benefits from the use of computers (Common sense tells me there are none, but perhaps others' common sense speaks to them differently.). Does it not then make sense that schools should be spending a lot more on musical instruments and a lot less on computers?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2003-12-09 18:23
The comparison of computers with clarinets doesn't seem appropriate to me but I do agree that musical education is beneficial for anyone. It's obvious that computer literacy is already an absolute necessity for todays youngsters.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: johnsonfromwisconsin
Date: 2003-12-09 18:46
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does it not then make sense that schools should be spending a lot more on musical instruments and a lot less on computers?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<rant>
Current educational politics seems to be favoring initiatives like what happened in Henrico County: the implementing of a a costly, and IMHO, unessesary laptop computer program only to justify it's existance by giving said program sole credit for improvements that have been an ongoing trend since before the program was even introduced.
The numbers crediting such initiatives for scholastic improvements are at best, inconclusive, and at worst, devicive IMHO.
On the other hand, statistics attributing developing musical ability to increasing performance in other subjects are well founded.
</rant>
-JfW
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2003-12-09 19:14
I don't think you're quite right, george. While there were a few posters who did encourage private ownership, it seemed to me (maybe I'm wrong?) that most were concerned about his intent to outfit middle school students with E11 and R13 Clarinets
Many schools have furnished Clarinets to students in the past, and some still do, although they are now in the minority.
I would prefer not to comment about school expenditures for computers, because I still have a thorn in my side from a zillion-dollar computer extravaganza where I used to teach. What a bizarre tragedy.
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: EEBaum
Date: 2003-12-10 03:44
<rant>
Computers in the classroom are way overrated. It's the latest buzzphrase that politicians and administrators love to throw money at... "No child left behind" and such. In reality, the costs of administering the lab, maintaining equipment, training people to use it, purchasing software, etc. far outweigh any benefits which, frankly, are few. As a computer science major, I've found a good deal of my profession agrees with me on this (except the people selling the computers and software for classrooms).
Computers have their place in schools, but as special labs for projects and technical skills, not in everyday usage like the admins try to push them.
</rant>
-Alex
www.mostlydifferent.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: NiceOldHorns
Date: 2003-12-10 12:32
I think the real issue is the care of community property...
No one has an incentive to perform maintenance, and everyone has motivation to get the most time in usage of the device.
The only thing I noticed in rolling out a new network at my last University gig was in bandwidth demands for Napster downloads.
*Term papers were not measurably better, or more thoughtfully researched.
*Attendance to coursework did not improve, as measured at exams.
*The depth and breadth of hallway conversation did not increase.
It does keep people who are otherwise listless rooted in one spot, good for keeping order in a small building with lots of expensive goodies, anyway.
The IT crew loved the new stuff, if that matters.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2003-12-10 13:54
Let's not let this thread become a "x are better than instruments/ instruments are better than x" thing.
Actually, I'm really not sure what this thread is really trying to discuss ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John O'Janpa
Date: 2003-12-10 17:02
Instruments are good!
Computers are good!
No problem.
The problem is trying to decide where limited funds should be spent for the most benefit.
Most parents have been exposed to computers where they work, bank, etc. and have a desire to have their children become computer literate.
Many parents have been exposed to instrumental music and want their children to become musically literate.
The problem lies in how to best divvy up the funds, and this like any other political argument will be carried out ad infinitum. It is very difficult to get politicians and voters (or parents and administrators in private schools) to agree on the "best" use for funds available.
Using a $3000 laptop to download mp3 files doesn't really make someone computer literate, but playing Mary had a LIttle Lamb on a $12000 Selmer bass clarinet, doesn't really make someone musically literate.
Good teachers, who inspire and motivate students to apply a little brain power and elbow grease, are the real answer. The small salaries for teachers in many locations, will continue to be a problem, no matter the abundance or quality of the "teaching supplies".
My $0.02
John
PS When I was a kid we had to walk to school in the snow. Uphill both ways.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: hans
Date: 2003-12-10 18:22
John,
I just wanted to compliment you on your great post. You hit the nail on the head (for me, anyway) when you identified good teachers as the critical ingredient, rather than "the abundance or quality of the 'teaching supplies' ".
Now we need a linear programming model to allocate the scarce resources and optimize the purchase of musical instruments and computers ;-)
Best regards,
Hans
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jbutler ★2017
Date: 2003-12-10 23:02
It's hard to justify instruments or computers when so many districts are cutting teaching jobs to save money. There is another story on CNN today about Washington DC cutting teaching positions to get within budget. It wasn't too long ago I remember that Philadelphia, I believe, was cutting 700 teaching jobs. (I may have not identified the correct city, but I do remember the number and it was on the east coast.) A small district nearby (3A) intends to cut their teaching staff by 14 positions next year. They currently have 62 teachers in the high school and will only have 48 next year. Studies have concluded that there is a correlation with class size and performance. I say let's begin the cuts the top heavy and overpaid administration level and leave the teachers alone. I could go on <rant> about the salaries of CEO's and professional athletes as compared to those teaching the minds of our future citizens, but that might have me typing a much longer response. </rant>
jbutler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2003-12-10 23:23
Americans support entertainment... that's where the bulk of consumer money goes. We also vote with our pocketbooks to keep BigFoot in the Arenas and stay away from Opera in droves.
Schools are considered as a non-essential service, just so soon as most people have their children run through the course.
Given that the vast majority of public schools do reasonably well, given enrollment and the wages offered teachers, we may be over-reacting to the plight of Large Cities (like Filthadelphia) that has problems in keeping teachers in the classroom.
Not everyone should be promoted to Vice President of something.
Anyone with the experience of teaching 10-14 year old kids knows that the pay is not the only reason to keep coming to work.
The real determinant of success with children and their school studies is the involvement and support from their parents.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2003-12-11 00:14
jbutler wrote:
> Studies have
> concluded that there is a correlation with class size and
> performance.
Yes, they have.
I taught high school in Japan on occasion. The classes were close to 45 students and there was no central heating (this is in a well-to-do suburb of Tokyo - it's normal). The young men and women wore gloves and coats in class.
The Japanese students are consistently ranked higher in their studies than children in other countries with much lower class sizes.
Which only proves that studies show what you want them to.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jbutler ★2017
Date: 2003-12-11 23:43
Mark,
I understand you perfectly. I wonder how parents in the US would react if little Johnnie and Susie had to stay and extra hour after school to clean the room after a day of studies (not as a detention, but as a normal course of the day)?
My wife, teacher, had a mother of a child the other day state "I don't want my child to fail". It's not what she said, but the way it was said (threatening manner). This is a child that my wife says has not done enough work to make a passing grade, but yet Mom is "up in arms" because precious little daughter didn't get a good mark on a progress report. I asked my wife why she didn't say to the mother, "Perhaps YOU don't want your daughter to fail, but I think it's up to YOUR CHILD to EARN the grades to pass."
I realize this topic isn't following the original thread, but I hear this and other stories on a daily basis. I say do away with property taxes or other taxes that are associated with "free and appropriate" education and let everyone pay tuition to the school of their choice. Parents would take their child's education a little more seriously.
jbutler
jbutler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JamesE
Date: 2003-12-12 03:18
jbutler,
According to the latest Newsweek, your wife, the school and the school district just might get sued if that "little daughter" doesn't get the grade her mother deserves.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2003-12-12 12:32
Much trouble with music students is also parental. I have had both band and orchestra directors relate to me calls from parents indicating that the lack of an "A" on their childs' report card would result in their withdrawing from the group. In most cases, those children are poor performers who also have behavioral issues.
As for providing instruments for students, I know of several schools which provide pro model instruments for use by members of their top bands. Funding is usually via their band boosters program. (the wealthiest such programs operate bingo games)
Often, this seems like overkill. Students' care--even of their own personal instruments--is horrifying, and I've seen a $7000 Buffet bass clarinet ruined by parental home repair. Wind instruments are often not even swabbed. And there are, of course, the horrors inflicted on sousaphones and french horns with detachable bells.
I would have a difficult time supporting the governmental purchase of instruments beyond what is actually necessary to operate a school band. I'm associated with students who in many cases get free instruments and free lessons, and their parents will still carp about buying them books. The more you provide, the more you spoil.
It completely blows my mind that a school band with half a million in annual budget still can't play Grade VI music--but I know of MANY such schools. Most students spend less time in personal practice whan their parents do in fundraising activities, yet they are rewarded with trips to premium spots like New York. L.A. or even overseas.
Okay...I feel better, now.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: lyn
Date: 2003-12-18 10:41
I know I am jumping into this thread late. But I have had computer issues for the last week.....grrrr.....
Where I live, there are SO many kids who can't afford a used $50 Bundy from a flea market, let alone an E11 or R13. The school budgets don't include any money for instrument repair of instruments, let alone purchase.
I understand what Allen says about spoiling kids - I taught in a private school in Philly where we provided instruments and lessons to the children, who were from single parent, low income families. And some did get spoiled. But some did not. It is not good to assume children will automatically be spoiled because you Give them something. Some kids are in real need. Those are the kids that Giving should be reserved for.
Some of our students lived in hovels where there were drive-by shootings every week, some moved from hotel to hotel every week, some went home to crack addicts. But they loved their music dearly. Most would stay at the school on weekends (it was boarding, total scholarship for the children) just so they didn't have to go home to a drug haven. And they would practice and practice.
Some of these students have gone on to professional lives in music. One of my former students now has two BS degrees from Northwestern, a Masters in Conducting from JMU, and entered the doctoral program in Comp at Miami. Another majored in recording and is a sound engineer in Chicago. Another is on his way to becoming a professional bassoonist.
Now I am in the rural/suburban area. Some areas in our county have migrant mushroom workers. We have lots of trailer parks. And we have plenty of kids who can't even afford reeds, but would LOVE to play SOMETHING. But the schools don't take care of the horns they own, everything is in disrepair, it's horrible. And the Boosters can't afford to pay for everything the bands do - but they have to.
After several years of watching this, I decided to start a non-profit that gives instruments to children from financially disadvantaged families. If you want to read more about us, you can check out our website, www.instrumentalsolutions.org. It's not the same as VH1 Save The Music, they only give instruments directly to schools, and only those in cities. We give directly to the families, but they are not "given" - they are on loan as long as the children play in the program.
Our success rate is pretty good, we have a Huge Hispanic population (the migrant workers) and the turnover in their schools is about 50%, but that's not bad. I figure if 50% stay, then it's 50% more than would benefit if we didn't do this at all. There will always be turnover, whether you give, rent, or buy a child an instrument.
~Lynn
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2003-12-18 12:07
Even Habitat for Humanity will screen applicants rigorously prior to partnering in a home... the client must demonstrate readiness and prove that they maintain the contract - or HFH will reposses the property.
The visceral response in this thread has come from those of us that have seen grade school kids thrash the very things we longed for in OUR day...
******
I say that leasing is the best way to distribute risk, as schookid damage seems inevitable.
I expect the Alto Sax I sent to my niece for her birthday to have a layer of dust over the dents when I visit in July, and she's a normal kid with involved parents.
Giving something so delicate as a woodwind to an unprepared kid, with no personal incentive for maintenance is a recipe I won't follow.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
