I definitely think the educational climate has changed, and the impact upon our scheduling and ability to retain students in our programs is a challenge – it is constant work with our administration and guidance councilors, a lot of advocacy to parents, and good, sensible PR with the students.  That being said, I think educators are starting to look at their large ensembles differently, with an eye and ear (appropriately) towards how they can continue to make their elective ensemble a viable and interesting offering among the school curriculum.

Over the past few years, SBO Magazine and MENC have featured a number of stories about educators who have developed successful and attractive non-traditional ensembles within the school day that are engaging to students (If you visit Owen Bradley and read through his blog archive, you get a great snapshot on how to do this!). My good friend and colleague, Joe Pisano at Mustech.net has reviewed and written about so many great, user-friendly ways to incorporate technology into existing classes, or how to structure a new offering.  I think these kinds of offerings have their place and if the schedule, facilities, and teacher load can handle it, should be offered to students alongside the traditional big three of (band, chorus, orchestra).  Having said all that, I do think we should be examining the structure of the big three so that we can make it more relevant in the lives of our students who enroll (VanZandt, 2001).

I think chamber music of varying styles and difficulty levels can provide one avenue for directors (educators) to break up the predictability of the everyday schedule, and to place more ownership for music making where it needs to be – on the minds and in the hands of the students.  We often talk about music as stimulating creativity – is it really?  How often do we as directors (educators) challenge our students to give us interpretation on shaping a melody, or discussing where the climax of a music phrase is?  I am as guilty as anyone in not engaging them enough to make musical decisions independent of me, and then asking them to analyze what they have done and why it did or did not work.  Putting students into chamber groups so they make musical decision and interpret the music makes for some good, revealing discussions.  Kevin Tutt wrote a great article that appeared in the MEJ a couple of years ago that points towards asking better questions of our ensembles, and certainly they are applicable to the small group setting as well (Tutt, 2007).

Obviously scheduling and facilities can impact a director’s (educator’s) ability to start working on chamber music.  In my wind ensemble, I have 30 winds and 5 percussionists.  We have 2 practice rooms that can accommodate 5 students, and one that can accommodate 7.  During a typical chamber music session during our regular scheduled rehearsal time, I will pre-assign times to meet with students in the rehearsal room and then assign time for the smaller groups to be in the practice rooms.  We are fortunate to have a large-group instruction room across the hall that is often not in use during our wind ensemble period, and at times have even used the stage (also across the hall from the band room).  As the percussionists need time to use the equipment in the rehearsal hall, I often will float between the practice rooms, rehearsal hall, and stage listening to the winds to let the percussion maximize their time working with the equipment.  During a 43 minute class period I can usually see 4 groups for eight minutes at a time.  A director (educator) must have established a level of trust and respect with their students for this to work effectively, and as my students do not know when exactly I may be standing outside a door listening they generally stay on task and work diligently.

During my time listening to a small section of their music, I often try to ask questions that encourage them to make decisions regarding musical expression or ask them to analyze why a section of the music was not rhythmically together.  In the large ensemble, there is always room to “hide” if a student is not completely secure on their part.  In the chamber ensemble, they must be able to hold their part and contribute for their group to succeed.  In essence, to revisit some great thoughts by Reimer, we create an atmosphere of trust (“depending on others who are depending on us”), competence (“to attain it there is work to be done”), cooperation (“working towards a mutual goal, person to person and even person to the medium to bring about its full musical potential”), respect (“a sense of one’s worth/esteem within their creative musical role”), and courage (“our ability to make a decision without guarantee of success and ability to grow into what we have not yet become”) (Reimer, 2003).  It is more pressure to develop executive skills, to help their musicianship to mature, and develop their ethics as a person and a person – but like I have told Tim Loest before “No pressure – no diamonds”.

The literature varies from year to year with the chamber ensemble work.  We have used arrangements and settings of folk music, jazz music, orchestral transcriptions, and percussion ensemble music.  We have played Sousa, Mancini, Bach, Mozart, and Tchaikovsky.  Nothing is out of bounds necessarily with this chamber music in terms of style and composer – I am looking at each piece to gauge whether or not it will provide a good musical experience for each student, whether it will stretch their musical skills to the edge of their ability, and whether it will engage their group in good musical discussions and development.   I would enjoy hearing from any of you who work on chamber ensemble pieces or put your ensemble into chamber groups throughout the year and how it has been of benefit to your program and changed your teaching.

Reimer, B. (2003). A philosophy of music education: Advancing the vision (3^rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Tutt, K. (2007). Using questions to teach the national standards in rehearsal. Music Educators Journal 93(5), 38-43.

VanZandt, K. (2001). Is it curtains for traditional ensembles? Teaching Music 8 (5), 24-29.

Pick your artist and they have skeletons in their closet – I am not sure there is a musician alive who can say they are completely clean, honest, and devoid of some sort of crutch – except maybe Brittney Spears…just checking to make sure you are still reading.  Thinking about Mozart, who definitely died too young – was his personal life a detriment to others? Perhaps to his family, but to others I would guess no.  What about Liszt? My recent work at Kent State (which has been burying me lately – sorry for the long stretches with no new blogging) has involved a lot of reading about Beethoven.  The one side of him that I never really connected with him is how he elevated the expectation levels for the performers, the music being created, and the audience.  He elevated his position to that of being the “superstar” of his day and probably had to endure some unkind public critiques at one point of his career.  We know he had a temper, but what was his conduct like when nobody was watching him?

But another side of Beethoven was the advancement that music can have strong ethical content.  Once that concept was accepted, then the world owed the composer a living.  The composer would create a serious and intellectually respected masterpiece that would outlive its day and the impetus which led to its creation (Longyear, 1988).  But did it mean it created more ethical musicians who created it?

One part of Reimer’s 3^rd Edition of his Philosophy of Music Education was his open questioning “should it be claimed that the point and purpose of music education is to create more ethical human beings?”.  He outlines 5 dimensions that are clearly part of our responsibility as music educators to impart to our students.  By doing so in the unique way that music can, these values – which so many of us can extol – make the musical experience a life changing one.

Read on in Chapter 4 and you won’t be sorry.  The value of trust, competence, cooperation, respect, and courage cannot be measured in our programs by trophies and plaques, but the people that move forward and contribute positively to society – no matter what their profession.  Another day we will discuss those five dimensions and the attitudes that can be cultivated from using the musical experience to not only make great musicians, but also make great people.

Longyear, R. M. (1988). Nineteenth Century Romanticism in Music (3^rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Reimer, B. (2003). A philosophy of music education: Advancing the vision (3^rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.<–>