Bob Harrison tunes in to the debate about music education and the advances offered by technology
"Put your hands up if you think music education is just about playing an instrument," said David Price, project leader for Musical Futures. No hands went up. Our politicians' view of what music in schools is about was given the thumbs down by the audience at the recent Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) "Music Technology in Schools" conference.
Enough said about the politicians’ view – secretary of state for education Michael Gove MP is due to publish his music plan in November.
Quoting John Paynter, one of the most influential and creative music educators who died last year – “Music is getting excited about sound” – the think piece circulated for the day set the scene for the debate. And with the synergy and tension between technology and music creating intriguing challenges for schools, policy makers, teachers, the music industry and academics, it is fitting that the event was held in Manchester, home of the Halle symphony orchestra (the fourth oldest in the world) and the late computer scientist, Alan Turing.
Many educators believe that the combination of Paynter's words and the advances in digital and mobile technologies, not to mention the digital expectations of pupils, schools need to think afresh about what this means for the music curriculum. Technology can vastly increase the range of sounds, timbres and rhythms available for learning and teaching.
Described as “a bit isolated” by one of it’s own members, there is a polarisation of views in the music education community. At one end of the spectrum is the primary school teacher who believes there is no place for technology in music - “Children have too much exposure to technology; I want them to learn how to play the recorder when they are in school.” While at the opposite end are those who happily incorporate sound generating devices and mobile devices, including smart-phones, as an integral part of a child’s musical development.
“We are getting mixed messages from the Government”, said one music adviser. “On the one hand pupils are carrying powerful musical devices around in their bags and pockets, and on the other hand ministers are saying mobile phones should be banned in schools. It doesn’t make sense!”
Despite these divisions and range of views, music educators have what is probably the most useful and dynamic web community of any subject association – Teaching Music, an online community that offers rich support for music teaching and learning.
There was no doubt at Music Technology in Schools, of the consensus that Government thinking is from another era. There was also common ground that music education should contain the musical processes of understanding (listening) expression (performance) and creation (composing). The only thing lacking was widespread understanding about how technology could be used as the catalyst to achieve this.
Is the government policy context hampering progress?
In his comprehensive overview, “Music Technology in Schools – a consideration of the issues, the opportunities and possible ways forward", music education consultant and ex-BECTA adviser David Ashworth, made a bold attempt to summarise the context and challenges the advances in digital technology present to music education. But some in the audience were concerned about the overall policy context which was undermining the efforts of many teachers.
“It is difficult to generate enthusiasm among teachers of music when they have seen their budgets cut, the local authority music service decimated and the government obsession with academic subjects, such as the Ebacc and PISA tables”, said one leading music educator.
In addition to this, there was the shadow of the National Curriculum Review which is seen by many as the most significant threat to a comprehensive music education for all pupils. The review, which reports back to the Department for Education early next year, is thought to be considering a slimmed down National Curriculum.
Jonathan Savage, reader in education at the Institute of Education, Manchester Metropolitan University, says he is worried: “Should music disappear from the National Curriculum, it could spell the end of a systematic and developmental music education in the lives of most of our children. What we would see is a privatisation of music education services delivered to schools rather than being integral and located within schools.”
Despite obvious uncertainty about its own future, the TDA was anxious to keep the mood music positive and the focus on moving forward – and all the delegates complied – but there was a tangible undercurrent of frustration, especially among the teachers in the room.
It is no secret, and according to some music specialists, an extremely narrow view of what constitutes a music education, that the schools minister’s view of music education is that it should provide “the opportunity for all children to learn an instrument or sing”. Little space then for the creativity and innovative use of digital technologies that were highlighted in discussions throughout the day.
And with only one major player (Associated Boards of the Royal School of Music) in the music education arena taking part in the conference, this under-representation of the music technology industry had the audience wondering if this was a buy-in of the minister's vision of music education.
So what happens now?
Being part of a wider consultation about the place of music in the curriculum (the technology element will form an Annexe to the National Plan for Music Education - a 'plan within a plan'), this separation of technology from the wider plan itself stirred some unrest.
“If digital technologies are so embedded in the everyday lives of children, surely we just need a plan for the learning and teaching of music, and having a “plan within a plan” just perpetuates the divide”, one delegate observed.
According to the TDA, the future direction could involve seven stages: A coherent plan; Identification and sharing best practice; Affordable CPD; Authentic music technologies; Live performances; Dissemination; Implementation. While this outline received almost universal nods and approval from the delegates, some believed it had the feel of an industrial mindset being applied to a digital age.
“Students are regularly making music outside of school on their iPhones and iPods and yet, in most cases, the music-making devices they most identify with are banned in their music classrooms," said James Cross, consultant and music teacher. "Similarly, they are also learning to play instruments by watching YouTube videos – yet YouTube is blocked in music departments across the country. This is causing a disconnect between students’ musical lives and identities and their music education.
"Technology has completely transformed the way in which music is created, shared and enjoyed in the ‘real’ world. With instant streaming, online video, social networks and music making apps, real world music is becoming more connected, instant and democratised. The argument isn’t that we should lock away the percussion trolley and swap the tubas for iPhones. Rather, it’s a case of focusing on the musical learning, and looking at ways that technology can make it more relevant, engaging and credible for the young people in our classrooms.”
More information
David Price blog
Dr Jonathan Savage
John Paynter
ICT in Music curriculum (BECTA Archive)
Teaching Music website
Henley review
David Ashworth on Teaching Music
www.davidashworth.org.uk/
NUMU www.numu.org.uk/
Next Brit Thing
TDA
Vital
James Cross
More on music and technology on the Futurelab website:
"Digital music: the waves of change"
"Music for all' teacher hits the right notes"
Bob Harrison is an education consultant who works with the National College for Leadership of Schools and Children's Services and Toshiba UK. He runs Support for Education and Training.
What do you think?
Even considering wider opportunities, I would also contend that most instrumental learning operates around schools and not in schools as part of the child's curriculum and that our two music workforces (music service instrumental staff and classroom music teachers) largely operate independently of each other. Musical Futures and ourselves, have proven that it is possible, and that as a result of learning an instrument children are stimulated to have much greater active engagement in music, with students choosing to progress in a subject they otherwise would not have considered at school, as well as often choosing to pay so that they can study ever more deeply.
Technology and music should have no tension. Music technology was an IT subject before we starting thinking about it, with sequencing and desktop recording years ahead of any mainstream IT applications in the school curriculum. The problem has been that we have all too aften seen music technology as an alternative to teaching music and that musical students learn an instrument, buying in their lessons from the peri service and the music technology group are largely non-musicians who like and are interested in music.
I have no doubt there are occasions where music technology is more technology with some music, but in an age where we can develop curriculum personalised to students' strengths it is far from beyond the wit of man to find great musicians who articulate their creativity through a great and demonstrably skillfull use of technology.
Technology itself is an empowering tool which we all use for our consumption, production and sharing of music. Listening to Spotify, adding music to a family video, sharing a YouTube video with some embed code... none of this is genuinely revolutionary and, quite frankly, kids do not see this as technology as it happened after they were born and is intuitive. What could be revolutionary is using technology to help increase our young people's involvement in music learning, creation and music making. None of this contradicts any sense of quality music learning that scares traditionalists, it simply utilises the tools available to us today – something man has done throughout time.
Technology, as anybody who has been involved in understanding how it helps us, is largely about scale, reach and access. It offers no threats, when used appropriately (which applies to anything) and offers us a genuine opportunity to provide every child with a meaningful and engaging music education. Technology can go well beyond YouTube's simple transfer of knowledge and can be genuinely interactive, provide continual, formative and summative assessment, as well as allow students to work at their own pace individually and in groups in a noise-controlled environment.
On the subject of the National Plan for Music, recommendation 33 of the Henley Review talks about a technology plan. Where is that and who has been involved in its creation? The government does not seem all that concerned with technology in general, but I wouldn't worry unduly, as everything changes, including governments, and policy and technology is here to stay and will only grow in its use. (As I write I am working from my office at home after just coming out of a video Skype call with my developer. I could easily be sharing my thoughts, in response to this widely distributed and shared article, from my 'phone on the bus).
ICT in schools is not just about music; these issues apply around the whole school and across the curriculum. The opportunity for greater access and more music making through the use of technology is enormous. With less money about, our teachers can do more if we use technology smartly.