aminasalihbegovic

[aminasalihbegovic]

Improvisation? Composition? Music Tech? How confident are music teachers in integrating them in classrooms?

The short answer is research would suggest that, sadly, teachers aren’t so confident using these music practices and tools in their music classrooms. This isn’t meant to be a reductionist post by any means, after all, the reasons for a lack of teacher confidence and reluctance to integrate these practices in their teaching are incredibly diverse. When it comes to improvising, it seems the lack of confidence has a higher association with teaching senior secondary students. In one particular study of Music Education majors in New York, the majority also attributed low confidence in their own abilities to improvise. Many seemed to associate improvisation exclusively with jazz and others cited time restraints, indicating that they considered it an addition to the curriculum.  As many hadn’t had formal training in improvisation, they seemed to see it as a vague concept and lacked a clear idea of pedagogical strategies they could adopt. Having explored improvisation extensively in fun and creative activities like groove-based improvisation and uncovering strategies for scaffolding improvisation, improvising certainly feels much less abstract now. Those in the study that did integrate it extensively within their music classrooms indicated that they saw it as a means to synthesise music theory, aural training and performance.

In another survey of music teachers from Indiana, more respondents cited using composition very rarely than using it often (twice in fact!) and it’s interesting to see some potential parallels in the reasons with improvisation. Most that avoided composition argued that there were too many other learning tasks that took precedence - many simply stated they were not comfortable teaching it. Interestingly though, almost 30% attributed it to a lack of resources, especially technology access. Others seemed to believe the diversity of musical learners was an impediment to teaching composition successfully. A Study in the UK found students as young as 5-7 could compose using four-phrase structure and use ideas of repetition, transforming musical ideas, making musical patterns and closing ideas with varying levels of skill.  Like improvising, we’ve looked at how to sequence composition through a range of activities (from making videos of the baby steps to composing) to creating various arrangements in small ensemble groups. These are valuable skills that promote higher order thinking and more importantly, I think, having this outlet for self-expression give students a unique sense of ownership in their music-making.

The lack of technology access point segues into music teachers’ thoughts on incorporating ICT in learning. A study in Queensland on music teachers found a similar lack of confidence in integrating technology in classrooms and the biggest reason seemed to be a deficiency of tech resources available in the classroom. There was a clear correlation between professional development opportunities and confidence in using ICT within music classrooms, but many also cited that professional development with technology like iPads was rendered less effective when they could not access such technology in their classrooms. So much of our tech explorations have been of pretty incredible iPad music apps and without access to such resources to develop professional fluency in these apps, there would undoubtedly be so many learning opportunities missed (for students and teachers alike).

[aminasalihbegovic]

Today’s lecture was all about the concept of informal learning in music. We returned to Lucy Green’s research looking into how rock bands learn music together. There are perhaps some pitfalls to the research – for starters it was conducted in the early 2000s (the pre-social media/Youtube world) which makes it somewhat outdated and it also focuses on a rather narrow demographic and genre (white males playing rock music).

But nonetheless, thinking about Green’s 5 key points about the way musicians in these studies learnt informally offers some important ideas that can carry over into many other genres of music:

1. They learn by playing music of their own choosing and with friends who share their musical tastes 

2. They learn to play by ear 

 3. The learning process is personal and unstructured, as opposed to learning music in a formal learning environment

 4. They learn without guidance or “expert” help 

5. They learn by integrating skills of listening, performing and composing

Have these ideas stood the test of time? Well, we discussed how these principles of informal learning aren’t genre-specific, however, we did also acknowledge that in a post-social media world and especially with the advent of YouTube, nobody today just learns by ear.

We used this idea of informal learning to apply it to an electronic music context, with the almighty task of creating a piece of electronic dance music in 15 minutes (Was James inspired by Rebecca’s talk on intense ‘Boss Levels’ in digital games?)

I took to Soundtrap and found I spent a good deal of time fiddling with copy paste, loop functions (googling to figure out shortcuts) and sifting through synth sounds – so it was more an exploration rather than a polished dance track. If anything, it highlights just how useful YouTube tutorials and the internet is as an informal learning resource.

We then watched a short video from one of James’ MOOCs about electronic music producer Francis Xavier which gave us a really interesting personalised example of informal music learning. Francis’ musical career follows an unconventional trajectory – his first big musical influence as a 12-13 year old being his sister’s DJ boyfriend who exposed him to the world of turntables, synth and drum machines. Francis developed electronic proficiency through paying for a music magazine subscription of music technology and reading audio technological books. Fast forward to his very first gig with Infusion at Big Day Out and it’s clear that what shaped his musical path were the encounters of informal learning as a young kid.

Speaking to friends and peers who are musically fluent in different electronic music-making software, their stories run parallel in many ways – being a self-taught user of Ableton at age 14, making dance tracks as a teenager etc.

After our 15-minute ‘informal learning’ of Soundtrap or whatever software we were using to create our EDM, we heard some of them as a class. We ended by talking about how Lucy Green’s ideas applied to our EDM work – what skills did we have and what were we missing, and we talked about being able to conceptualise ideas but not knowing how to actually execute them and not having the production skills that sets our experiments apart from electronic music made by actual EDM producers.

I guess the growing amount of music being created in this way (electronic music from young ‘bedroom producers’) attests to how big of a resource the internet is for informal learning!

[aminasalihbegovic]

Today we had music educator, researcher and avid video game fan Rebecca Li give a talk on her recently completed Research Masters exploring game-based learning in schools.

We began by playing a rhythm game called Bemuse Ninja on the iPads, which is like an online, web-based version of Guitar Hero. Although, yes, we did play a computer game in class, Rebecca’s talk wasn’t simply about using actual digital games to support musical learning but how the philosophy of video/computer games can transcend the gaming world and make classroom environments more engaging learning spaces. Her research is the culmination of several years of looking at the mechanics of digital games and what makes them so engaging particularly to young people.

Rebecca drew upon Dutch philosopher Huizinga to talk about the Game vs Reality boundary and what defines the game space. Huizinga coined the term ‘The Magic Circle’ to refer to this boundary of the game world, occupied by a community that recognises its rules and isn’t coerced into the experience. This idea of voluntary participation is something that’s really relevant to the school environment and Rebecca talked about how by virtue of school being mandatory, it isn’t always the most engaging space for students.

What I found quite interesting was the idea of unnecessary obstacles being an integral part to many games (using the analogy of Golf- we could just walk to the hole and drop the ball in right?), and how games would be incredibly boring without obstacles as part of the designed experience.

She also spoke about the ability to have infinite ‘do over’ attempts in games as opposed to the schooling environment where there is a finality to not passing an exam or failing an assignment. This ‘one-shot’ or high-stakes mentality can and does demoralise many students.

Rebecca shared with us how digital game mechanics were adopted by a school in New York called Quest to Learn and it’s quite amazing to see that a school like this exists. As the name suggests, the school has innovated learning to be quest-based, in which students complete mini ‘missions’ which  aid them in a greater quest. Just like Mario on his quest to save Princess Peach from Bowser, this school constructed smaller learning tasks that fit into a broader narrative, thus engaging students. Anyone that’s played Super Mario Bros and come face to face with Bowser knows the intensity of the obstacle. Rebecca referred to the idea of ‘Boss’ levels which are the culmination of all the obstacles. Quest to Learn took this idea of Boss levels into the learning narrative to make the final tasks challenging in innovative ways (Rebecca referenced the example of students having to complete a series of calculations within a short amount of time).

Does this mean as music educators, we ought to be incorporating digital music games like Bemuse Ninja in our classrooms? Maybe not, but thinking about gaming concepts might just transform our classrooms.

[aminasalihbegovic]

I wanted to pick up from some of the ideas I mentioned in my last blog about inclusive music education and think about this within the context of music technology. With so much talk about music tech and exploration of different musical apps and programs in our classes, I’ve found myself looking into the benefits of music technology for students with additional learning needs, what specific apps, programs or devices are out there and how they may be used as musical tools that can engage all students within the classroom.

The Australian Society for Music Education Incorporated (ASME) published an article talking about the strong effects of music on individuals with cognitive, sensory or physical impairments and the idea that with an appropriate medium, children across the broad spectrum of ability/disability (including those with more profound complex needs) can display innate musical skill.

As someone that has had some volunteering experience in music therapy clinics, it’s something I’ve been interested in for a long time. It also looks into the benefits of multisensory musical experiences and how these can unlock expressive abilities believed to be beyond an individual’s capability. Many children with additional needs would I think be able to use most of the iPad apps we’ve looked at in class that use touch-triggered step sequencers, however for some students touchless and motion-responsive apps like Airvox and Soundbeam can be the vehicle for creative expression (they work and sound kind of like a modern day theremin!)

Others do require physical contact with the ‘instrument’- a couple I found interesting were Skoog and Makey Makey (the latter allows you to connect a circuit board to everyday objects that produce sound when touched!) Makey Makey also strikes me as having potential for cross-curricular learning in music classrooms (understanding electric circuits through the vehicle of music perhaps?)

It would be fantastic to see this technology crossing over more from special schools into mainstream school settings - the entry point is accessible and offers immediate rewards, yet the apps are sophisticated and flexible enough to meet the needs of diverse learners.

I’ve linked a video with an assortment of music apps, software and equipment to check out (including some I mentioned above). The video might just feature Dr. James Humberstone himself!

[aminasalihbegovic]

Today we picked up from last week and used ‘Papa was a Rolling Stone’ to discuss the idea of scaffolding improvisation in groove-based music. I think the big question in music educator’s minds is how to create a framework that encourages students to feel more confident in improvising. As a bunch of tertiary-level musicians, we could intuitively figure out ‘safe notes’ and could ascertain what scales we could work with (Bb Dorian or Bb Blues). We were, as James put it, a confident bunch of musicians and had no problem with showcasing our improvisational skills.

When we think about scaffolding improvisation for students however, it would be rather erroneous to assume that the average teen has the same musical confidence or the ability to intuitively figure out safe notes or scales with which to improvise. James made one critical point; ultimately, we don’t want to be prescribing notes to students. Some students may be able to use their ear to figure out notes in the groove and transfer them straight at their instruments, but for many this may be out of their reach. However, if we can get students to sing or hum the chorus, we can help students find the note names on a keyboard and translate them to other instruments from which they can improvise away. Alternatively, after students learn to sing the chorus, what’s to stop students humming or scatting an improvisation instead!

As for the confidence matter, modelling a solo improvisation that’s not musically unattainable is one way to go. We could have everyone improvise at the same time or use technology – but personally I prefer the idea of communal jamming and improvising rather than students working as silos with headphones on.

Although recording using live instruments or midi keyboards in Soundtrap does have the benefit of allowing students to make ‘mistakes’, adjust our improvisations and create multiple attempts.

[aminasalihbegovic]

Today we got our groove on and learnt to play the Temptations’ hit ‘Papa was a Rolling Stone’ all by ear - what a cool experience. With it playing in the backdrop, we grabbed our instruments (electric guitars, trumpets, bass guitars, suspended cymbals) and got to work bringing our parts together. With the instrumentals coming together, we sang along to the chorus (a task which certainly challenged my ability to sing whilst playing syncopated drum rhythms). I loved being able to watch those on zoom use Soundtrap as a group to record their own parts (there was some creative license exercised with an interesting pan flute rendition of the melody).

Our jam proved to be a thought-provoking segue into the idea of groove-based music. James referenced Ethan Hein’s blogs on the distinction between a groove vs a song - grooves feature a single idea or cell that in effect can repeat indefinitely, whereas songs have a hierarchical relationship between smaller ideas or cells and these ideas fill a linear trajectory of beginning, middle and end. I had an exciting revelation when I realised just how much music I listen to that is groove-based (and not just funk, but across a whole range of different musical styles - groovy!)

Universal Mother - Don Cherry 

Misery Train - Suicide 

Distant Dreams Pt 2 - Throbbing Gristle 

Oslo - Håkon Kornstad

Le Goudron - Brigitte Fontaine

We talked as well about the idea of grooves within songs, which made me think of a few recognisable groove endings (God Only Knows by the Beach Boys, Baba O’Riley by The Who) and we even talked about the concept of dance remixes making grooves out of songs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pxJKpw41h0

Notice how sampling is used in this particular remix of ‘Can’t Touch This’ to lock the opening into a groove. This could be a great Tech-based activity for students to work with the idea of sampling music to create their own grooves!

Final food for thought:

If so much music out there is groove-based, why is traditional harmonic function so deeply entrenched in our music education systems? 

[aminasalihbegovic]

Today we picked up from last week and used ‘Papa was a Rolling Stone’ to discuss the idea of scaffolding improvisation in groove-based music. I think the big question in music educator’s minds is how to create a framework that encourages students to feel more confident in improvising. As a bunch of tertiary-level musicians, we could intuitively figure out ‘safe notes’ and could ascertain what scales we could work with (Bb Dorian or Bb Blues). We were, as James put it, a confident bunch of musicians and had no problem with showcasing our improvisational skills.

When we think about scaffolding improvisation for students however, it would be rather erroneous to assume that the average teen has the same musical confidence or the ability to intuitively figure out safe notes or scales with which to improvise. James made one critical point; ultimately, we don’t want to be prescribing notes to students. Some students may be able to use their ear to figure out notes in the groove and transfer them straight at their instruments, but for many this may be out of their reach. However, if we can get students to sing or hum the chorus, we can help students find the note names on a keyboard and translate them to other instruments from which they can improvise away. Alternatively, after students learn to sing the chorus, what’s to stop students humming or scatting an improvisation instead!

As for the confidence matter, modelling a solo improvisation that’s not musically unattainable is one way to go. We could have everyone improvise at the same time or use technology – but personally I prefer the idea of communal jamming and improvising rather than students working as silos with headphones on.

Although recording using live instruments or midi keyboards in Soundtrap does have the benefit of allowing students to make ‘mistakes’, adjust our improvisations and create multiple attempts.

[aminasalihbegovic]

This blog post is a little different from the usual reflective response to music-making tech explored in class each week. Instead, I wanted to reflect more broadly on the place of technology in music education and my own ideas about modern music education. Over the course of the last 5 or 6 weeks, I’ve had the chance to explore so many different avenues of music making and learning through technology. There’s been a strong focus on exploring step sequencing and drum programming as a musical literacy- and it’s been particularly eye-opening to see just how many iPad apps exist for this purpose! I would say the step sequencer apps we’ve explored in particular have been highly intuitive and yet at the same time incredibly broad in their creative scope. As someone that only ever had contact with Sibelius in stage 6 music and some DAW experience in my tertiary studies, seeing how many musical apps and software programs exist has been an exciting revelation as a prospective music educator. 

These explorations have been new and inspiring, but I’ll admit that it’s taken provoking some of the unconscious biases I had about what music learning in schools should look like. Granted, my high school music education for the most part entailed the teacher handing out copious worksheets and manuscript paper. I still vividly remember having to analyse and write out counterpoint in Bach’s toccata and fugue in d minor and spending the rest of the year making terrible jokes about contrapuntal music with my friends. I also remember the performance slot on our music period being code for ‘Go run off and practise some piano”. Merely integrating more ensemble music-making would have been a welcome breath of fresh air, let alone getting my hands on a microphone, jamming with friends using the Roland session mixer or making my own electronic music in Soundtrap. A large part of my aspiration to become a music educator was to create inspire kids without musical literacy to develop a keen love for music, irrespective of whether they’d go on to take elective or stage 6 music. We’ve spoken in this unit about inclusive music, whether that’s transforming music class environments to be more open and reflective of diverse abilities or designing units that focus on newer musical cultures that more and more young people engage with today. Tech is bridging the gaps for students with musical literacy and those without it and it’s making music writing less intimidating or seemingly complex for young people.

[aminasalihbegovic]

Today’s lesson was a quirky and creative exploration of ScratchJr (which runs as a free app on iPad). It allows kids to create interactive stories by programming sounds for different objects which can be immediately played back through tapping them. It’s primary focus then isn’t to create music per se, but there is absolutely potential for it to be used to create something musical. We got to see this in practice with a live performance by music educator James Humberstone using musical sounds for various farm animals (vocal sounds of different pitches organised in a surprisingly musical way!). We then had the chance to try our hand at it on the iPad - choosing our own backdrop and characters, programming movements for objects and our own digital musical instrument for each object. We could even take pics and insert them into the screen. With our programmed sounds, we were able to then perform to the class our musical creations before discussing the value of the activity and it’s musicality. Whilst we worked individually, you could always have a small group of students work on the one iPad to create sounds together. The point that I found particularly interesting was the idea of challenging the traditional separation of composer-performer-listener roles. There is evidently scope for higher order thinking which comes from being the organiser and performer of sound. 

I think it’s a great activity in its own right for students, but it also can be used to facilitate cross-curricular learning. One thing it’s prompted me to think about is using the full “grown up” version of Scratch to do more complex programming involving creative sound (ie. composing sound effects for games)

[aminasalihbegovic]

taking the idea of collaborative music-making tech further this week with the Roland Session Mixer - it can be used as a rehearsal mixer for instruments or a fun live/recording mixer with drum machine apps.

we got to try out the latter using Flip and Korg’s step sequencer app, Gadget 2 - and by plugging ourselves in to the mixer with headphones, we could isolate our part or adjust the mix to hear the rest of the group. it’s interesting to see how the principle of ensemble music making in schools can evolve with new technologies. i never had the opportunity to engage in music making in this way in high school, but i think it’s a fantastic way to inspire creativity and self-driven learning..especially when bedroom production is becoming an increasingly popular mode to make music for young people.

[aminasalihbegovic]

in today’s class we took a tour of the sample packs on the iOs app Flip and had the chance to record our own whacky samples. what i really like is that you can save your own sample packs and like DM1, it works with ableton link so students can work in groups. it’s complex enough for students that want to explore features like effects and mixers, whilst still being fun and intuitive for those without music theory knowledge and performance experience. they learn how to create their own sounds and structure musical ideas, and in doing so understand beat, rhythm, pitch, harmonies, texture and timbre.

[aminasalihbegovic]

this week we’ve been looking further into drum machines, this time using hardware step sequencers and drum pads (analog and digital) and some that hook up to Ableton Live or IoS apps on iPads. the Novation Launchpad mini is a lot of fun with 64 mini pads including drum and synth loops, single hit instrument samples and sfx samples. it’s probably the most intuitive to use of the four machines, and the retro funk sounds sound groovy.  I found a good video of how younger kids can use it with the iPad app here if they aren’t familiar with Ableton Live.

the Akai MPC element is also a good sampler and drum machine in one - this is a good rundown of how it works. 

the Korg Volca beats analog drum machine is a more tactile option for step sequencers, and lastly, there’s Ableton’s Push 2 instrument pad + step sequencer. this was a little less intuitive for me (maybe because I haven’t used ableton before). there’s definitely a lot more scope for exploring different drum and instrument samples, synth sounds and sfx though.

[aminasalihbegovic]

our very first class introducing drum machine apps (for iPad) as educational tools to use in high school music classes. we had the opportunity to explore making our own 4-beat loops using the DM1 app and demoing them to the class with speakers. what I like especially is the accessibility of the app, the interface is intuitive and easy to explore (even for not so savvy tech peeps like me). it’s a great way to explore ‘composing’ in a fun and interactive way, with students able to get immediate playback and fine-tune sounds and rhythms in live time. roland also offers a free online version of their tr-808 rhythm machine - it takes a little more fiddling around with and only has the one drum pad unlike DM1. it still enables kids without musical backgrounds to learn about rhythm, meter and organising sound in a fun way.

aaaaand...DM1 is supported by ableton link (which is a great way to have one or two students making a drum loop and another creating a synth bass line or melody that they can have play in sync).