How much should you plan at once?
With my school group I try to plan the whole year at once, if not further. We actually start the 'year' in September, so most of my repertoire has already been set for some time. I have been using the last few weeks to slot final pieces into place. The advantages of planning a year in advance are the same as those for teachers planning any other curriculum. You need to be able to plan a course sequential learning.
I have just returned from the Midwest Clinic where I heard a great presentation given by Richard Miles, editor of the "Teaching Music Through Performance" series at GIA, whose topic was "The Score is the Curriculum". I have always had long range planning in my sights, in the back of my mind, but he provided a great framework for making it happen. In actual fact he presented and compared and contrasted a whole variety of 'hybrid cycles' of programming that have been proposed over the years, some of which are in the books.
The main points that really resonated were:
1. Plan over a four year cycle.
It doesn't matter what year in the cycle kids enter the ensemble, as throughout their time they will be exposed to all of it. I know this is almost the opposite to what I was saying about sequential learning, but keep reading.
2. Use the cycle to simultaneously teach periods/styles and about the elements of music
Now these systems have been designed for use in the US, where Band or Orchestra is a class, and 'Classroom Music' as we know it in Australia often does not exist. In the absence of such a class, all aspects of musicianship - history, performance, theory etc. must be taught IN ENSEMBLE.
Whilst you may think this is not necessary in an Australian co-curricular ensemble, think about how many of your students do classroom music all the way up to year 12. Now think about how much content they miss out on for each year they are not doing it beyond the compulsory years. I think we owe it to not only the students, but also the music we are performing (read composers!) to give them a grounding in the music history and theory behind what we are playing. This only serves to give them more insight into, and by extension more enjoyment of the music.
The way he structured it was:
Year 1: Mediaeval/Renaissance/Baroque - focus on melody
Year 2: Classical/Romantic - focus on harmony
Year 3: Contemporary 1 - focus on rhythm
Year 4: Contemporary 2 - focus on timbre
This really makes sense to me. Very broadly, it's highlighting the major developments of music history through repertoire selection. However, you wouldn't want to spend the whole year just playing music from one period (well, you might!)...so he advocates using the repertoire as follows:
(Presuming four major concerts/year)
Concert 1: One Period piece
Concert 2: A piece from the core repertoire (any era)
Concert 3: One Period piece
Concert 4: A piece from the core repertoire (any era)
It's not all-consuming. Just two pieces throughout the year. But it gives a thread that weaves through your whole year of teaching, you can refer back to things discussed earlier in the year, helping the students make connections. Having the core repertoire also means you don't neglect these important Masterworks. I like the idea of having things that tie all your teaching together and in a way that you are not missing anything out. The structure keeps you on task. I am going to try to begin with this plan this year....I will let you know how I go!
How do you plan?
I want to combine the historical/core repertoire teaching of the Richard Miles model with my musical goals for the students.
Assessment - looking at past and present
Firstly, in order to come up with these goals I spend a lot of time reviewing where the ensemble is at currently and what they have achieved in the past. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the ensemble? What are the strengths and weaknesses of individual players? What is holding the group back musically? What challenges do they need next? This assessment is constant and ongoing - at each rehearsal, weekly, monthly, in performance. It might also be guided by other people's comments about the group, adjudicator notes etc. How successful have they been in achieving the previous set of goals?
Vision - looking forward
What is next for the group? I usually start at the end of the period being planned - I envision what I would like the ensemble to achieve by the end of the year. This might be a set of particular musical aptitudes - ie. I want them to be able to confidently play syncopated semiquaver rhythms at sight, to independently shape a solo or phrase - or it might be a specific piece. Usually if I have a specific piece in mind it is because subconsciously it is ticking a whole lot of musical boxes of what I want them to accomplish. The more specific these goals are the better.
The repertoire choice is wholly determined by what I want the students to get out of it musically.
Then, based on these end goals I find what repertoire I would like them to be playing at the end of the year. After this it is just a matter of working backwards to build up to the final point. Ie. If I want to program Redline Tango by John Mackey for our final concert I know the band will need to be able to:
- perform complex semiquaver-based rhythms incl. syncopations in mixed meters
- maintain a fast pulse through mixed compound & simple meters
- have technical dexterity in certain keys
- have a certain secure range with good intonation on their instrument
- certain players will need to perform convincing, expressive solos
And I know that currently:
- they have technical dexterity in certain keys, but not at that tempo
- may have a slightly narrower range on their instrument with good intonation
- can play quaver based rhythms & syncopations in mixed meters
- can play semiquaver based rhythms & syncopations in simple meters at moderate tempo
- some players are reluctant when playing solos
So knowing where we are and where we need to get to I work backwards finding pieces that will work us towards the final skills needed.
The repertoire is the test of whether they have mastered the skills I am trying to teach. If they get to the first reading of ie. Redline Tango and have lots of problems and we have to keep stopping and starting then I haven't done my job properly. The idea is that by the time that arrives on their stands they are really ready to tackle it so there isn't too much time spent on technical drilling and we can actually make music. This means that my teaching always has to be ahead of the repertoire - making sure we cover the necessary skill development through warm ups in particular.
That said, there are a whole lot of other constraints to consider:
- Instrumentation
- Performances - venue, duration, audience
- Appeal to audience & students
- Contrasting styles
- Covering a wide variety of genres, styles, composers, sound-worlds
Tim Reynish explains it well (from timreynish.com):
"Would I, as a solo player, want to work on this music, does it satisfy me in terms of emotional content, melody, harmony, form, orchestration?"
If you can answer this question with a confident yes, you are on the right path.
Anyway, those are just my thoughts. What informs how YOU choose repertoire?
No comments:
Post a Comment