| |
 |
The
Key to Creativity: Think like a Kid!
Reprinted
with permission from Michael Colgrass
As
a professional composer I have recently been visiting schools
and working with children on music projects. We composers
rarely go into schools, leaving music education to the teachers.
But I have been noticing with concern that schools have fewer
and fewer music teachers these days. Music programs are being
cut as budget-minded school districts are saving money by
gradually eliminating the “frills” in education. Math, science,
language, civics and history are state-mandated courses—they
can't be cut because they are considered vital to a child's
education. Many education committees see music as entertainment—it's
a nice activity but not basic to educating a child.
Well,
then, what is the best way to educate a child? This question
has been debated for centuries, but one thing few would argue
with: children are motivated to learn when they can be creative,
because creativity is the most natural state for a child.
When Buckminster Fuller was asked at Harvard about the secret
to being creative, he shocked his academic audience by jumping
up and down three times, flapping his arms like a bird, and
saying, “Think like a kid! Think like a kid! Think like a
kid!”
I'd
like to talk for a moment about helping children develop their
creativity in music, and relate this to the idea of music
as a basic school subject.
As
a composer I have found that the best way to teach children
to understand music is to have them create their own. When
they see from firsthand experience how music is made, then
they understand how to analyze it and perform it. They also
learn something about the creative process, which they can
then transfer to learning other subjects.
Isn't
it interesting that creating music is the one thing we don't
do with children in music classes? In art class children draw
and paint, in language class they write, but in music class
they sing or play only other people's music.
Why?
Is it because music is harder to create than a painting or
a poem? Some people may think so, because musical notation
looks strange and they assume those written notes and rhythms
are music. They're not. Those markings are only a language
for writing music down on paper. Music itself is a collection
of sounds, and anybody can make up sounds. Some do it more
imaginatively than others and we call them composers.
So
how can you teach creativity in music? Children are most creative
when they can make a game out of what they are learning. I'd
like to tell you about my experience going into the schools
and working with kids, what I have learned and what some of
the long-range implications of this learning are.
I
use a shorthand method to teach children how to create music.
I simply ask them to think up a sound and then go to the blackboard,
one by one, and draw abstract marks that represent the sound
they are hearing. When their collective sound creation is
finished, I ask them to sing it as a group.
For
instance, let's say you hear a sound like “oooo-wahhHHH” that
goes from the bottom to the top of your voice, and want to
notate that sound in a logical way. You might represent that
sound by drawing a thick line that arcs from the bottom to
the top of the blackboard, just like it sounds. A group of
dots might sound like “deet-deet-deet-deet” on random pitches.
Wavy lines could indicate long uninterrupted tones that slur
up and down in pitch, sounding like “mmm-MA-mmm-MA-mmm-MA.”
A finished composition in graphic notation, which usually
takes about 30 minutes to create, looks like a collection
of lines and dots and shapes that make an interesting abstract
design.
When
the children agree their “soundscape” is finished, I ask them
to perform it. They look puzzled and ask,” How do we do that?”
Continuing the game, I tell them to just think up a way to
get everybody to sing the piece as a group. After a few moments
of thought one of them will usually have an idea and start
to describe what s/he would do. I say, don't tell
us what you would do, do it ! After a self-conscious
moment, and with much urging from me, the child will go to
the blackboard and say something like, “Okay, I'm going to
move my hand slowly across the board and I want each person
who wrote a sound to sing their sound when my hand gets to
it.” And they perform it that way.
Then
I ask if there might be a different way to perform it.
This
suggestion opens yet another door as they begin to realize
there is more than one way to interpret their composition.
I urge them on. Another student will go to the board and divide
the group by gender, asking the girls to sing the upper sounds
and the boys to sing the lower sounds, and they perform it
again, now hearing it differently. One by one I encourage
others to stand before the group and guide it through yet
another way of performing their piece. Meanwhile, I stay in
the back not saying a word.
Once
they've performed it, I ask them to comment on the structure
of the piece. Would they change anything? Should it be longer,
shorter, have more activity or less? As they make suggestions,
some of them go to the board and erase or add ideas to improve
it.
They
have fun with all this, laughing, ribbing each other, having
a good time. Their piece might range from the beautiful sounds
of nature to cats crying on the back fence at midnight. Then
I go to the board and say, “This is how I make my living,”
which draws even more laughter. “The only difference between
what you did here and what I do is that I specify exactly
how high or low each of these sounds is, how loud and soft,
how slow and how fast, etc. And for that I use musical notation,
which is simply a set of signs for indicating specific sounds.
Otherwise, what you did just now is basically the same as
what I do when composing music. You start with a sound you
like, then you write another sound, then another. Then you
examine it and re-write it, until you're satisfied that it's
finally finished. All that matters is that the result sounds
interesting, or moving, or humorous, or mysterious to others.
And the more soundscapes you write the better you get at it.
That's what the art of composing music is all about.”
Then
I proceed to draw music staves and clefs over their graphics
and write in pitches and rhythms over the shapes they had
written. And suddenly it looks like music! This
is the “Ah-ha” moment. Now they realize that their lines and
dots and squiggles were actually music in raw form. With musical
notation outlining the marks they had made, their soundscape
suddenly looks like music they're used to seeing in class.
Notation is simply a language for making the details of sound
specific. As I tell the children, “Anybody can learn the language
of music notation, but not everybody can put together
an interesting combination of sounds that people want to hear
over and over again. Those who can are composers.”
I
think teachers would welcome any approach that would make
the study of music notation more attractive to children, especially
since teaching children to compose and arrange music is one
of the 10 required National Standards for Music Education
that many teachers have trouble meeting. By having the children
experience the process of music creativity firsthand,
and invent their own shorthand method for writing it down,
the teacher can more easily explain conventional music notation
by pointing to a graphic equivalent, saying, “You already
did this with your graphics. These pitches and rhythms and
harmonies are just a more detailed way to notate exactly what
you want.”
Consider
for a moment what the children actually do in composing their
own piece of music: they create new sounds; invent a graphic
language to represent these sounds; use this language to create
an original soundscape; combine logic with intuition; complete
a creative project as a group within a designated time frame.
As
individuals, they each devise ways to perform the piece as
leaders in front of the group. To do this they have to negotiate
and mediate conflict (resolve disagreements about procedure),
communicate their wishes clearly (articulate their thoughts
to the group clearly and simply); perform multiple physical
tasks (beat time while cueing individual entrances and adjusting
speed and volume of performance); maintain order and organize
and motivate the group to a common outcome (rapport skills);
and manage time (get the piece performed within a few minutes).
In other words, they do the very same basic things a professional
conductor must do to put together a performance.
Further,
the children cooperate, attend to each other, and become a
social group. They learn something about a subject they thought
they didn't understand, and they discover the underlying process
of musical creativity and performance.
By
going through this creativity-and-performance process firsthand,
the children teach themselves what music is. Thereafter, when
they see others' music they can more easily understand the
composer's intent and better interpret it. The great Italian
educator, Maria Montessori, says children learn best when
they feel ownership of the knowledge, as if they had invented
it, and this feeling of ownership gives them confidence.
Graphic
notation is only one way to teach children to create music.
Improvising with found objects is another, making up sounds
on your instruments by imitating nature and animals is yet
another. Whatever technique is used, the point is to get the
children to invent their own music and have fun in the process.
So
why don't we educate children that way in music? First, of
course, we would have to educate teachers that way. Many teachers
I've spoken with would prefer to teach music creatively instead
of by rote, but they need an organized method by which to
do it, not just a good idea. I recall one teacher's response
after I demonstrated my graphic notation idea at a Music Educators
National Conference in Chicago some time ago: “Your approach
to teaching creativity to children is fine when you're there
to do it. But what do we do when you leave?”
That
question gave me the idea to devise a way to teach educators
how to teach children to compose. Since the graphic approach
to creating music is so simple, my approach is to have the
teachers themselves create a graphic piece to experience how
to do it, and then watch me teach children to do it. That
gives the teachers first the experience of being involved
in doing it, and then the experience of watching it being
done so they can pay more attention to the process. Then I
leave them alone to work with the children for a period of
time. After repeated sessions with the children writing piece
after piece, both teachers and students get very good at it.
I
recently carried out this teacher-training idea at three schools
in Longmeadow, Massachusetts, commissioned by the Longmeadow
Excellence in Education Foundation. Within three months, the
band and orchestra director at the Longmeadow High School,
Michael Mucci, cultivated four student composers who not only
wrote pieces for string orchestra and wind ensemble, they
also conducted the pieces in a public concert.
The
result astonished the audience, who responded heartily with
long applause for the young composers. Granted, those present
were family and friends, but nevertheless they realized that
the children had accomplished something very special and as
well as having learned something entirely new. The composing
of music is often considered a mystery that only a few can
understand, yet here was a handful of teenagers who, within
a few short months, had not only composed works for large
groups, but had taught the works to the ensembles and directed
their own performances. As one audience member commented,
“If they could learn to do this, imagine what else they could
do that they never realized was possible.”
Then
came the shock. After this successful creative venture, I
hear that the town of Longmeadow wants to cut down on its
music classes and make orchestra an after school activity!
This problem of cutbacks in the arts is endemic to American
primary and secondary schools today, in spite of the hundreds
of studies and scientific findings published in the past 20
years, affirming the value of music to a child's overall education.
Here
is a mere smattering of these:
--In
an analysis of U.S Department of Education data on more than
25,000 secondary school students, researchers found that students
with consistently high levels of participation in instrumental
music over the middle and high school years show significantly
higher levels of mathematical proficiency by grade 12, regardless
of socio-economic status. – Catterall, James. S., Richard
Chapleau, and John Iwanaga. “Involvement in the Arts and Human
Development: General Involvement and Intensive Involvement
in Music and Theater Arts.” Los Angeles, CA: The Imagination
Project at UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information
Studies, 1999.
--The
very best engineers and technical designers in the Silicon
Valley industry are nearly without exception practicing musicians.
– Grant Venerable, “The Paradox of the Silicon Savior,”
as reported in “The case for Sequential Music Education in
the Core Curriculum of the Public Schools,” The Center for
the Arts in the Basic Curriculum, New York, 1989.
--Physician
and biologist Lewis Thomas found that 66% of those with a
music major as undergraduates were admitted to medical school,
the highest percentage of any group. 44% of biochemistry majors
were admitted. – As reported in “The Case for Music in
the Schools,” Phi Delta Kappan, February 1994.
--A
Study of 811 high school minority students showed that 36%
described music teachers as their role models, as opposed
to 28% English teachers, 11% elementary teachers, 7% physical
education teachers, 1% principals. – D.L. Hamann and L.M.
Walker, “Music teachers as role Models for African-American
Students.” Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 1993.
--
Kindergarten students in the school district of Kettle
Moraine, Wisconsin, given music instruction scored 48% higher
in spatial-temporal skill tests than those who had received
no music training. – Rauscher, F.H., and Zupan,
M.A. (1999). Classroom keyboard instruction improves kindergarten
children's spatial-temporal performance: A field study. Manuscript
in press, Early Childhood Research Quarterly.
Even
corporate CEOS and army generals agree on the value of music
education. Quoting Business Week, October 1996, from an article
titled, The Changing Workplace is Changing our view of
Education: “The nation's top business executives
agree that arts education programs can help repair weaknesses
in American education and better prepare workers for the 21
st century.” And retired U.S. Army General H. Norman Schwarzkopf
said: “During the Gulf War, the few opportunities I had for
relaxation I have always listened to music, and it brought
to me great peace of mind. I have shared my love of music
with people throughout the world, while listening to the drums
and special instruments of the Far East, Middle East, Africa,
the Caribbean, and the far North—and all of this started with
the music appreciation course that I was taught in the third-grade
elementary class in Princeton, New Jersey. What a tragedy
it would be if we lived in a world where music was not taught
to children.”
Some
have questioned the idea that music actually makes people
smarter, saying that maybe smart people are simply attracted
to music. To me, that's all the more reason to make music
a required course of study. If music appeals to intelligent
people, there must a reason for it. Why not imitate the behavior
of smart people? That's a basic tenet of education after all,
to model our learning on what works. At the very least, experience
with music broadens our scope as human beings, which helps
us achieve success in life and work, not to mention increasing
our enjoyment of living.
If
we do value our children, and if music can in fact help build
the whole human being, then I think it may be time to ask
a larger question: Why is music not mandated at the state
or provincial level as a required course, immune from cutbacks,
like math, science and language? Who decides what should and
should not be required learning for our children, and what
criteria and evidence are they using? What would it take to
communicate with these decision-making authorities and direct
their minds to the tremendous multi-level benefits music can
have on the development of the brain, the emotions and overall
learning, as numerous scientists, doctors and researchers
have been telling us for over two decades?
It
seems to me that basic training in the creation and performance
of music would benefit anyone preparing for any profession.
Music is not just an entertainment, though entertaining it
is. It's not just a recreational activity, though it has all
the benefits of recreation. It is a fundamental need for
the full development of a human being, as we know from early
Greeks' use of the arts as the basis of their education.
But
since the Industrial Revolution of the late 19 th century,
education has been designed to train people primarily for
jobs in industry, not for living and growing. Today's mega
corporate globalism has amplified this pragmatism to the point
where we are slowly but surely cutting music and the arts
out of our children's general education.
Now
the tides are shifting. The age of industry, technology, and
even information, is giving way to the age of the creative
entrepreneur, and it requires new criteria for educating our
children. As Richard Florida has told us in his ground-breaking
book, The Rise of the Creative Class , we are in
a new age where the primary element in our development is
creativity, where ideas and original approaches to problems
in all professions is the key to success. The core
of this new class includes scientists and engineers, university
professors, writers, artists, entertainers, designers and
architects, media and information professionals, as well as
editors, cultural figures, think-tank researchers, analysts
and other opinion makers. Florida tells us that the creative
class also includes “creative professionals” who work in high-tech
sectors, financial services, legal and health-care professions,
and business management. “These people engage in creative
problem-solving,
drawing on complex bodies of knowledge to solve specific problems,”
says Florida. They are required “to think on their own” and
“apply or combine standard approaches in unique ways to fit
the situation, exercise a great deal of judgment, perhaps
trying something radically new from time to time.” He says
these people want to live in places with a thriving music
and arts scene, ethnic and cultural diversity, outdoor recreation
and great nightlife, places more tolerant, diverse, open to
creativity. This new class comprises 30% of today's workforce
with an average salary of nearly $50,000 per year. The need
for creative thinking is on the rise and it's time for our
education system to shake the dust off and play catch-up.
The
arts play a central role in the education needed for this
new age, because they are all about creativity. The earlier
we start children in music and the more we integrate music
into the overall fabric of our schools, the better we will
prepare our young for a successful and satisfying life. And
we will all benefit, regardless of age, because we will be
creating a richer, and safer, society.
Art
is a metaphor for human creativity, and building a human being
is the biggest creation of all. That's what our education
system should be all about.
Read
more...
OLD
CHURCHES, NEW AUDIENCES
BANDQUEST
PIECE BY COLGRASS RECOMMENDED BY PEPPER
Reprinted
with permission from the September/October 2003 issue of
Sounding Board.
Longmeadow
Commissioning Project
After
Michael Colgrass composed Old Churches,
he was invited to participate in a residency and composition
workshop with the students in Longmeadow, Mass.
Recent
Developments in Band Repertoire
With Recommended Literature for All Grade Levels
by Robert J. Ambrose
Reprinted
with permission, Georgia Music News , Vol. 63, Number
3, Spring, 2003, pp.49-52
Back
to the News
|
|
