Teach Music to Kids!

Teaching musical harmonic functions to kids

Teaching Harmonic functions to 3rd and 4th grade on their first day.

via teachmusictokids.typepad.com

My Favorite CDs for children (birth to 6 or so) -- What are yours?

What Great Music! Giamusic.com - Gordon's classical music selections for babies and young children

Classics for Kids (RCA Victor) Nutcracker, Parade of teh Wooden Soldier, Carnival of the Animals, March of the Toys, Socerer's Apprentice, more. . .Boston Pops, others too - (different mix of selections) 9026-61489-2

Bernstein's Favorites Children's Classics (Sony) - Carnival, Peter and the Wolf, Young Person's Guide

For the Kids - Mix of Artists - Cake, Sarah McLachlan, Tom Waits, etc

Sing Along with Janet - Kids love and I use 3 or 4 of these tunes regularly.

Miss Ella's Playhouse (Fitzgerald)

Putamayo: World Playground, Mali to Memphis, Afro-Latin Party,

Nicky's Jazz for Kids - Nat King Cole, Cab Calloway, Ella Fitzgerald, Fats Waller, need I say more?

Nicky's Jazz Lullabies - Coltrane, NKCole again, Judy Garland, Clifford Brown, need I say more???

Bobby McFerrin and YoYo Ma - Hush - crazy good

Bobby McFerrin - Mouth Music

Smithsonian Folkways - Classic Blues I and II - adults but children too

Dave Brubeck - Time Out - adults but children too

Thelonius Monk Quartet with John Coltrane - At Carnegie Hall - adults but children too

 

WHAT ARE YOURS? 

Naming notes vs. audiation: a conversation over Twitter

Interesting conversation I thought worth sharing. Please respond if you'd like.

[I added additional comments in brackets]

  musicteachstuff robert hylton

Music lesson Plan "Naming Notes" worksheets "If they can't name notes then they can't build scales and chords" #mused goo.gl/UxBbx

[Seeing this tweet prompted me to respond right away—essentially because I hold off teaching theory—such as lines/spaces and durations (quarter/half/whole, etc.)—until I can’t go any further without it. Which is pretty far. Dare I say, sometimes further than many music teachers can go musically. I know I’m a heretic.]

rizzrazz Eric Rasmussen

@musicteachstuff But a 2 y/o child can speak well but can't tell you how to spell. Theory, intervals and note naming is overrated. #musiced

musicteachstuff robert hylton

@rizzrazz I agree that you don't need theory to enjoy and create music but you do need theory to understand it? ;)

@rizzrazz Eric Rasmussen

@musicteachstuff That's exactly what I'm not saying. A very young child doesn't understand the alphabet, but does understand his language.

musicteachstuff robert hylton

@rizzrazz So are you saying that children should not be encouraged learn to speak at a more advanced level that when they were 2 years old?

[ musicteachstuff robert hylton

Oops I just tweeted with the language skills of a (drunk) two year old! Kind of defeated my own argument? Bah! ]

[I didn’t see this tweet until later as I wasn’t mentioned. No, you didn’t defeat your argument, but interesting that you responded this way.]

rizzrazz Eric Rasmussen

@musicteachstuff That would be ridiculous. I'm saying that knowing the alphabet doesn't increase vocabulary or understanding.

craigdab Craig Dabelstein

by musicteachstuff

Understanding theory doesn't help you understand the meaning of music, the Melos. Music theory is important for composers, not listeners.

musicteachstuff robert hylton

@rizzrazz I would tend to disagree but I think that curiosity is way more important than knowledge? Music theory is not "rules" but options?

rizzrazz Eric Rasmussen

@musicteachstuff Music Theory is a way of explaining *in language* what works and doesn't work in music. "Rules" are always broken. Ear>all

musicteachstuff robert hylton

@rizzrazz Music theory is a framework that we can adhere to or disregard at will. It's just a way of helping us to understand if req'd?

rizzrazz Eric Rasmussen

@musicteachstuff The best I can say is through the kids. No theory involved here. http://bit.ly/eWEQyd @craigdab #theoryisgoodtho--atitstime

[This is the same old video many of you have seen. If not, take a look. These 1st and 2nd graders have no theoretical understanding, but they do “name” what they can audiate.]

musicteachstuff robert hylton

@rizzrazz @craigdab Just because good things can happen without theory surely does not mean that good things can only happen without theory?

rizzrazz Eric Rasmussen

@musicteachstuff Totally agree with you, with the caveat that audiation is coupled with it. @craigdab #seethelasthashtag?

musicteachstuff robert hylton

@rizzrazz @craigdab Seems fair to me!:) Goodnight folks!

rizzrazz Eric Rasmussen

@musicteachstuff Goodnight and thanks for the shop talk. Love it.

Best music CDs for Children under 5 years old?

Dear all,
Here’s some of what I have. Please add to the list.

Classical:
Bernstein Favorites – Children’s Classics
Classics for Kids – RCA Victor
What Great Music! – GIA publications
Britten: The Young Person’s Guide to the Orchestra; Variations on a Theme of Frank Bridge; Simple Symphony
Bobby McFerrin and Yo-Yo Ma, Hush

Mahler 1; Shubert 8; Beethoven 5; Bach Brand 4; Wagner Walkure; Ives Sym 4; Bartok Conc for orch; Dufay Ecco Primavera
Saint-Saëns The Carnival of Animals, esp XII Fossiles;

World:
World Playground – PUTUMAYO PRESENTS
Animal Playground – PUTUMAYO PRESENTS
World Music for Little Ears

Jazz:
Jazz for Kids (ECO)
Nicky’s Jazz for Kids
Nicky’s Jazz Lullabies
Miss Ella’s Playhouse

I Will Hold Your Tiny Hand: Evening Songs And Lullabies – Steve Rashid
Janet Sclaroff – Sing Along with Janet – has 5 tunes I use regularly
Keb Mo: Big Wide Grin

 

How babies grow up to be musical: Imitation, Type 2 of PreAudiational development

In response to Jessica Tomlinson’s post about Imitation, the second type of preparatory audiation:
http://musicinsight.blogspot.com/2011/04/preparatory-audiation-type-2-imitation.html

Jessica,
Hi again!
I couldn’t get this much on your blog site, so I’m putting it here. Can you tell I’m passionate about this stuff?
See my comments after **.

This type of preparatory audiation generally lasts from age 3 to 4, granted that children have had enough experience with acculturation.

**The age range is misleading, but is helpful to frame for folks with minimal expertise. I’ve had children imitate as young as 1 year old. This is very rare, but still. . . I also have children in full audiation by age 4. Still, many children at age 4 are still in acculturation (a stage that should never end even through adulthood). So the range is widely variable, but the majority of children with a fair amound of acculturation by that age will be between acculturation (Type 1) and assimilation (Type 3 of preparatory audiation).

This time marks the point at which children should begin to receive some structured informal guidance in general music. (Before, in acculturation, children only receive unstructured informal guidance).

**I do structured guidance even earlier only becuase it models for the children the structured learning responses. In my opinion, any guidance prior to the imitation type necessarily has to be unstructured if only because that is where the child is. In other words, the child is still acculturating even if the activities are structured. It’s primarily about the child, not the stage. We don’t actually know that it’s more helpful to do one and not the other at various stages. These are educated guesses and Doc is way educated so I defer to him.
**Musical behaviors are so widely varied among children who sit and do nothing in class, and yet are extremely musical all of a sudden. My philosophy is to keep mixing it up and be responsive to the children, but don’t NOT do imitation activities for children in earlier stages and don’t NOT do absorption activities for children even in assimilation. Mix it up and let the child deal with it at their own levels of musical aptitude. No need to dumb things down, or to push things either. They can handle it all. Some may be more appropriate than others, but I think we start splitting hairs when adapting to children’s individual differences.

Through the reading of this chapter, I have come to better understand the reasoning behind the use of tonal and rhythm patterns. Gordon points out that when children are first learning to talk, they only say one word at a time, or they may join two words together. It is only later that they begin to speak simple sentences. This is why children are encouraged to imitate patterns when learning to communicate musically. In this type, children are encouraged to imitate tonal and rhythm patterns, however, notably, they are not encouraged to imitate songs, according to Gordon.
**Encouraged, yes; expected, no. It HAS to be perfectly fine for a child to say “no thank you.” and then you can say, “I can tell you really listened to that rhythm/those tones. That’s the most important thing anyway. Maybe you’ll try one next time?” Regarding singing songs, parents want them to show off for the teacher. I tell the parents, the quiet ones tend to be more musical down the road. If they sing in class and not at home, that’s a problem. If they sing at home and not in class, that’s wonderful. The children who do not participate in class at the imitation level (as a group) are better musicians (generally) down the road than those who do participate (taken again as a group). In Type 2 imitation, an individual child’s musicality cannot be predicted by their early performances nor by their lack of performance.

However, they are still hearing songs and chants performed for them, just as they are hearing whole language spoken around them. From these, they begin to establish syntax, or to find where the small pieces fit into the larger puzzle. It is important to note that when children perform something different than what they have heard, at least initially, the parent or teacher should imitate what the child has performed. This not only gives validity to what the child has performed, but also causes the child to become more aware of what s/he is performing.
**Yes! This is wonderful. I do this with babies and toddlers with a lot of success. I do NOT wait until 3 years old. Not even 2. I do this when a child can show any atteention at all, sometimes as early as 6 months.

Once children can successfully imitate, improvisation is encouraged. When children intentionally perform something different, not only are they creating for themselves, but they are noticing the difference between various examples. Finally, as with any early childhood music setting, it is important to model good singing behavior in a light, high head voice register. Most authors, including Gordon, agree that the young child’s vocal range lies approximately between D and A above Middle C.
**Children can sing much higher; there’s no need to limit the range to A. I go up to C or D and many chidlren reach that easily. They don’t know it’s high.

I’m not sure why Gordon suggests clenching the fists, but I totally agree that a deep breath is in order before beginning to perform.

**I don’t get the fist thing either. I bet he just finds that comfortable. There needs to be movement associated with the breath. The breath is of monumental importance. It should be exaggerated but freely moving.

I’m still having some trouble understanding the idea of “free flowing continuous movement” which is mentioned time and time again. What is this, and how is it different from the way that we move when we keep a steady beat, for example? Why is it superior?

**The beat is either right or wrong, on or off the beat. In free flowing continuous movement, the child is experiencing the more fundatmental elements of movement in this order: Flow, Weight, and Space. Time, especially in the form of beat-keeping, is of far lessor importance, but I don’t believe it should be avoided altogether. A child modeling free flowing continuous movement canNOT be wrong with regard to feeling where the beat is. It’s anywhere his body is at that moment. Later, he or she will refine his movements to include beat keeping, but it’s not important and should not be encouraged early. I especially make a point to parents that they absolutely do NOT manipulate a child’s limbs to help them imitate me or to keep the beat. That has the detrimental effect of having children often tighten up their muscles while moving to music. Let the children be and they’ll be fine. My mantra: children—especially babies up to 5 year olds—know better how to learn than we’ll ever know how to teach them.

 

In response to a blog post on preparatory audiation

First, it’s great to see this post. (See below.) Early childhood music education and the learning theories behind it are relatively new to the music education profession and extremely important to its future.

Having been an early childhood music specialist for 20 years and also having been in class with Dr. Gordon as he was in the process writing the manuscript for “A Music Learning Theory for Newborn and Young Children,” I’d like to respond with some of my thoughts. 

I think Doc would say that absorption, the first stage of Acculturation, begins even before birth—for sure during the last trimester, if not before. Some studies (Sandra Trehub, et. al.) show the fetus responding to music at 5 months in utero. Dozens of mothers I’ve spoken to know their child’s favorite songs prior to their birth and often use that music to comfort the child in the first months and years of life outside the womb.

In response to this blog:

http://musicinsight.blogspot.com/2011/04/preparatory-audiation-type-1.html

Re: songs without words

I believe that different parts of the brain are stimulated when children hear songs and chants without words, and vice versa. If children listen to songs and chants that are always coupled with language, they attend to both and thus (Doc believes) they are “distracted” by language away from more pure attention to the musical qualities. Still, songs with words—think most lullabies—have a significant cultural place in the home and in society. This does not mean they are of more value to the musical development of children. And, in my opinion, nor does it mean they are of lessor value. They are simply different. Both concurrently stimulate various areas of the brain, and in the one case including a portion that processes language and music simultaneously. Perhaps there is decent benefit for language development through music, but I would argue that  language development would occur best when music would not always be coupled with it. So, like Doc, I would tend to take the inverse position as well: music development is probably better when language is not present.

Still, when songs and chants have words associated to them, parents learn them more easily. So, if that means they sing a wider vareity of repertoire throughout the week, that value outweighs the value for children to hear songs without words (ususally for a 45 minute class once a week) simply because it is “more appropriate for their music development.” In EC music classes, aren’t we modelling behaviors we want parents to take home as much as performing for the babies and toddlers? I think we can do some of both. Many parents find songs and chants without words uncomfortable and sometimes just weird. Even still, this is no excuse to avoid them. In the end, I differ with Doc on this in practice, but not in theory

Regarding recordings, I believe them not to be supplementary but indispensible to a child’s music environment. How many live concerts of orchestral music will they see before turning two years old? Modeling musical behaviors in live interactions is key whether one is performing vocally or not. In listening to recorded music, we are modeling movement, but I also accentuate and sing along with the music while I dance. I see no philosophical difference. As to the continous fluid movement Doc purports to be most valuable, I tend to believe him, but again, some parents can find this uncomfortable to do or watch so I do both. I have found a balance between what Gordon believes to be most appropriate for our youngest children and what I am comfortable with in providing while maintaining a strong and vibrant music program for babies and young children. 

Please share your questions. I love the dialogue and am happy to hear anyone’s thoughts. Let's keep sharing. Thanks.

---

Here is the post I responded to.

Preparatory Audiation Type 1: Acculturation

Acculturation is the first type of preparatory audiation in Gordon’s Music Learning Theory.  It begins at birth.  The primary characteristic is that infants and toddlers are becoming accustomed to the musical culture which surrounds them, in much the same manner as they grow accustomed to language.  One of the hallmarks of the three stages of acculturation is that children should hear a great variety of songs and chants without words performed live by a parent or a teacher.  I needed some time to think this over, since I have fond memories of hearing music withwords as a young child.  In fact, I can’t recall ever hearing music without words performed for me.  According to Gordon, the purest musical development occurs when language is not present at the time, which gives me pause.  Does this also mean that the inverse is true?  Does the purest language development occur when no music is present?  What if we consider the development of the whole child. What is the right balance among music and language, and other stimuli for developing a healthy balance of musicality, language readiness, and countless other mental and physical necessities?  Should music and language always be separated for infants?  This seems to be what Gordon is asserting, and I’m not so sure that I agree. However, I do appreciate the importance of performing without words at times for infants, and exposing them to a variety of meters, modalities and styles.  I also agree with Gordon that recordings should be viewed as supplementary to live, face-to-face interactions.  Gordon also states that one should move continuously while performing songs and chants without words.  P

Here are the three stages within Acculturation according to Gordon’s text:

Absorbtion:  In this stage, the infant or child is listening and absorbing the musical environment, even if s/he does not appear to be attentive at the moment. 

Random Response:  This is commonly referred to as music babble.  This is where the child responds, but the responses aren’t necessarily coordinated to what is occurring in the environment.  Though these responses may not have all of the musical context that we as adults recognize, they carry some meaning for the child, and should be encouraged.

Perposeful response:  The only difference that I could gleen between this stage and the last, is that the child is responding intentionally to the environment rather than by chance.  The above principle still holds true, regarding the nature of the responses.  articularly when children are in stage 3, there are times when the tonal and rhythmic aspects of music ought to be separated for the child, with the chanting and singing of rhythm and tonal patterns so that the child may more readily attend to each.  Use a neutral syllable such as Bah or Bum when doing this. 

The above summary is from Chapter 5 of:

Gordon, E. E., (1990) A Music Learning Theory for Newborn and Young Children.Chicago. GIA. 

This is not intended to be a comprehensive summary of all material contained in this chapter, simply a brief overview.  If I have misinterpreted any of the information within it, please feel free to correct me.  Afterall, one of the aims of this means of communication is to compare and share ideas.  

 

Audiation - a response to the #musedchat Twitter chat

Background:

I studied for several years with Dr. Gordon, the man who coined the term audiation. His ideas about how we learn to be musical handily refuted my undergraduate training in music education. It also profoundly affected my musicianship as I learned how much I did not audiate. This was at once confronting and exhilerating. To this day, I still grapple with how children best learn music. My continuing professional development is almost entirely due to the distinctions in music development and Gordon’s sequence of music learning I began digesting over 20 years ago. 

This blog post is probably longer than any should be (7 pages?). Who said, “Had I had more time, I would have made it shorter.”? If you can’t make it to the end or you’d like to skip it, you can learn about audiation from a podcast, go here: http://bit.ly/d2Cydi

Also see a short video of audiation in action here: http://bit.ly/f2dpIe

What follows is a transcript of the #musedchat with my comments inserted.

Paragraphs with NO ** are where I copied and pasted the transcript.

**Paragraphs that start with ** are my comments.

**Your comments and questions are most welcome. I love professional disagreement. It’s helpful to me to continually reconsider any position I’ve taken. My Twitter and email are at the end.

The #musedchat transcript begins here:

- - - - - -

What is Audiation?

The #MusEdChat participants started the chat by defining and describing what is audiation. Audiation is a complex subject that has many definitions. Most musicians and music teachers define audiation by saying it is inner hearing. 

**Inner hearing was insufficient to Gordon’s thinking when describing the process of audiation. Hearing is physical. Audiation is not physically hearing. In fact, it can occur without any external stimulus at all. I believe that Kodaly used the term “inner hearing” to describe what audiation has evolved to be. It was a bold first step in the psychology of music understanding. Gordon expounded on this idea using an extraordinary amount of research, both observational and experimental. 

The #MusEdChat participants disagreed and said that definition of audiation is not specific enough. 

**The definition of music audiation is defined by the man who coined the term, Dr. Edwin E. Gordon, in his seminal book titled, “Learning Sequences in Music.”

There are 8 types of audiation which include 

1) listening to, 

2) reading, and

3) writing music (both familiar or unfamiliar music)

4) recalling and performing music from memory (necessarily familiar music)

5) recalling and writing music from memory (necessarily familiar)

6, 7 and 8 consist of creating and improvising music while performing, reading, and writing (all necessarily unfamiliar music).

**Gordon describes 6 stages of audiation. These are theoretical and thus cannot be proven. Rather, they are detailed descriptions of the possibile psychological processes that occur when one audiates music.

**The stages go from momentarily retaining an “after sound,” through making sense of the essential tones/beats, then comparing these to a reservoir of patterns stored in your “musical memory” or past experiences, to the eventual prediction (in audiation) of what will occur next in the music. These stages cycle through as one engages in audiation. Sometimes, only the first or second stage is attained (as perhaps the first time I listened to Balinese gamelon). At other times, one could predict quite accurately and cycle quickly through the 1st through 6th stages frequently and easily. Take a second and audiate “Twinkle, Twinkle.”  Hopefully, that comes easily. Now, audiate “Twinkle” in minor and moving in 7/8. Ah ha. If you stopped to try to count out the rhythm, that’s is music theory, and not audiation. If you had to run to the piano to play it in minor, that is theory or imitation or something else, but it is not audiation. Perhaps the reason I like jazz and Stravisnky is that my predictions don’t always match what comes next in the music. I like the feeling of being tricked some of the time. I don’t enjoy the tonal aspects of dodecaphonic music as my predictions fail all too often.

**Analogies can be helpful if you don’t have time to read and digest the first chapter in “Learning Sequences.” Here are two:

1) Thinking is to language what audiation is to music.

If you do not understand the language you are listening to, reading or writing, you are not thinking in that language, or if you are, it may only be at a cursory level.

2) Visualization is to the eye what audiation is to the ear. If I asked you to visualize a purple dog, your power to take that image from your mind and render it on canvas would represent your depth of visual understanding or power to visualize. I would bet that Monet’s purple dog is more vivid, or has more depth of understanding of the elements of art—line, form, perspective, contrast, color, etc.—than the purple dog most of us visualized. 

**Of course, at some level, analogies fail and music or art can become a matter of what one likes or not. Gordon’s point about audiation relative to music appreciation is that without audiation, appreciation has less depth and is probably all but superficial. 

**A child who reads a story and only sounds out the words does not understand the story. An artist who visualizes before she draws or paints is matching her mind’s artistic eye to what she is about to create.

**When you listen to a foreign language that is unfamiliar to you, you cannot think in that language. Eventually, you retain some sounds, or even words, and later phrases. Later, you begin to give meaning to some of what you heard in the past (distant or immediate). Audiation works the same way in music.

@michellek107 said “In order to be true audiation that inner hearing must have some meaning attached to it.” 

**The power to give meaning to music is an excellent short hand definition of audiation. 

@Zweib7 agreed saying that context and meaning is a big concept that many overlook when attempting to define audiation. A great way to better understand audiation is by comparing it to art. @richardmccready said “In art, visualization is being able to see in your mind and in music audiation is being able to hear music in your head without hearing it out loud first.” 

Richard’s statement is correct regarding types 2 and 3. Additionally though, one can be audiating music just physically heard (type 1).

@lovedrummin said “To me audiation is when you can look at music and hear and understand it before even putting out any sound.”

**Another good example. This is type 2.

 @DrTimony said “Audiation is a just a name given to what students already do. 

**I have to disagree. Many students do NOT already do this. Many do, but children who play out of tune are not audiating tonally or harmonically. They probably don’t understand the tonal and harmonic contexts inside which they are performing.

What we are talking about here is calibrating what they already do.”

**Some are only imitating.  Worse, some are pushing buttons and blowing air. If they are not audiating, we need to be bringing them through the stage of music development they are in. Some children (and adults) are still in music babble or a stage of pre-audiational development (See “A Music Learning Theory for Newborn and Young Children.”). They don’t know that they’re not in tune, or not on the beat. They are not aware of what tonality or meter they are in. 

The Gordon definition of audiation seems to encompass all of the qualities of audiation that the #MusEdChat participants suggested. The Gordon definition of audiation says “Audiation takes place only when we hear, comprehend, and internalize music for which the sound is no longer or may never have been present.”

**This is Gordon’s succinct definition. The implications of it laid the foundation for a working definition of music aptitude and also for Music Learning Theory, especially skill learning sequence.

Audiation in Relationship to Sight Reading and Solfeggio

Next the chat shifted to discussing how audiation is related to sight reading and solfeggio. Most of the chat participants agreed that audiation and sight reading are not correlated. 

**One can be sight-reading and audiating. In fact, they should be. Unfortunately, most are not. We instead are deciphering the code, much like the child who sounds out the letters or words and thus misses the story.

Your students can be a great sight reader, but still not be audiating in their head. 

**I’d say, good imitator or perhaps good being relative to others. Either that or you’re short changing yourself as you were actually audiating, or partially audiating what you were reading.

@brandtschneider said “some students can sight read very well, but they have no idea about what they are singing. Instead of knowing what they are singing they are just doing the mechanics.” 

**I call these individuals technicians, not musicians. Harsh, I know. This is how I was trained through college. To my mind, it’s shameful.

@lovedrummin said “I was a fantastic sight reader when I was growing-up, but never truly audiated until after I started teaching.”  

**You and the rest of us probably have an above average to high level of music aptitude. Because of that, we taught ourselves how to audiate. This happened despite the traditional theoretical approach to music instruction most of us received.

Next the chat shifted to discussing audiation in correlation to solfeggio. Kodaly, Orff, and Dalcroze all claim that solfeggio facilitates the inner ear which would lead to solfeggio helping with audiation. @Dianawinds456 agreed saying “Teaching solfeggio and sight reading by example with help improve the performance of our students. Solfeggio and sight reading is all about singing before you play, which I believe is a big part of audiation.” The majority of the #MusEdChat participants believe that solfeggio does not help with audiation and that it may actually hinder developing the skills of auditation. Most of the chat participants said that they have never used solfeggio and that has never been a hinderance in reading or audiation. @richardmccready said “I learned how to audiate by having good sight reading skills and from singing the notes on the page. I could never hack solfeggio, but I am still able to audiate.” @DrTimony ended this portion of the chat by saying “I am not a fan of using solfeggio for reading or audiation. Solfeggio can be good for warmups and intervals, but it does not help to build audiation skills.”

Oh boy. I’m gonna get in some hot water now. I am going to challenge Richard and DrT now. Solfeggio (or I call it Solfege and I have no idea what the difference is, if any) ABSOLUTELY helps in teaching children to audiate, but it is a technique used at the 2nd level of Skill Learning Sequence. Let me break it down.

Once a student is audiating, we should increase the size of his tonal and rhythm vocabularies. Agreed? Later, we should help his understanding of tonal and rhythm contexts, and to differentiate among these tonalities and meters. The first level of Learning Sequence is the Aural/Oral level. Basically, listen first and perform back. This level should begin only after a child has emerged from music babble and it is accomplished by singing tonal patterns on a neutral syllable, preferably “bum” or rhythm patterns chanted on a neutral syllable, preferably “bah” and asking a child to perform them back. Once a large number of patterns are accurately performed back in solo by most of the children, you are ready to move to the next level of Skill Learning Sequence called Verbal Association. This is when you put tonal syllables and rhythm syllables (solfege) to the patterns that the children have already learned to audiate. Why do such a thing? ALL of the psychology papers suggest that, just as in language, you will not be able to remember as many “things” if you don’t have it attached to some type of verbal associate. All or most of the things you see around you have names in language. Without those names, you could never remember as many things. When you add verbal associates to tonal patterns or to rhythm patterns, you are making it easier for children (adults and music teachers alike) to expand their vocabularies even further and to make connections in language (and draw inferences if they can) about the patterns they know how to audiate. They are then able to not only increase their tonal and rhythm vocabularies even further, but also name tonalities and functions. Bringing language into the fold after having taught a sufficient number of patterns at the Aural/Oral level of learning, cements what it is students have learned to audiate at the previous level. 

**Ok, kill me if you want. I’m ready for it. Bring it on. 

(You’re brave if you got this far. It’s better than reading the book I’ll tell ya.)

How to Teach Audiation

Next the chat participants shared ideas on how we can teach audiation to our students. One way is by using Conversational Solfeggio created by Feierbend who studied under Gordon. Conversational solfege is a watered down version of Gordon’s Music Learning Theory. Conversational solfege helps students become independent musical thinkers **[Audiators]** by using an ear-before-eye approach to music literacy. The goal of conversational solfege is to create fully engaged, indpendent musicians who can hear, understand, read, write, compose, and improvise. Many of the chat participants who have used conversational solfege said they have found a huge difference in the musicality of their students because they are audiating. Another way to teach audiation is to emphasize active listening. @michellek107 said “Listening needs to begin in Kindergarten even if it is not in the curriculum. I believe that there never can be enough emphasis placed on listening.” 

**Listening begins in the last trimester before birth. By 3 years old, the importance of the acculturation a child receives cannot be overstated.

Teaching improvisation is another great way to help students improve their audiation skills. @brandtschneider said “In my ensembles we do a lot of silent band performances as students sing and play. I hold out one hand for out loud and the other hand for in head.” 

**Improvisation (and creativity) is the next to last inference level of learning in Gordon’s Learning Sequence. The last leve is music theory, something that Gordon says should be avoided so that the thinking and analytical brain (outside of audiation) can stay our of the way of children’s ability to audiate. Improvisation (and creativity) is the hallmarks of the best music education. We improvise in language all the time, why not in music as much? Probably because we lack enough vocabulary as a readiness to improvise.

Audiation can also be taught in classes such as music technology by using a sequencer window. @lovedrummin said “When teaching audiation it is important to keep it simple and practical. Too often audiation is so technical and students don’t get anything out of it.” In order to help our students get better at audiation we need experience, experimentation, calibration, and regular practice.

**Teaching audiation is a function of understanding Skill and Content Learning Sequence and if you don’t follow it’s general prescription, you are likely making it more difficult for children who do not have a high level of music aptitude. You can, as I do, jump among levels of learning sequence, but It’s important to spiral back to the level which has not yet been mastered to give everyone—despite their level of music aptitude —the opportunity to succeed at the skill level you jumped away from.

Importance of Audiation

The #MusEdChat participants ended the chat by discussing the importance of auditation. Audiation is an important skill for students to learn in order to become more musical. @lovedrummin said “I have become a much better musician over the past three years since I began audiating.” It is especially important that we start teaching audiation in the primary grades. Instrumental students usually make less mistakes when they audiate and hear the music before they try playing. It is vital that we teach our students to hear first. It is also important for us to teach them to hear the whole ensemble sound not just their individual note. @brandtschneider summed up the chat by saying “As music teachers our mantra about auditation should be think, hear, breather, and then play.

**I’d say, if you’re not teaching children how to audiate, you are not teaching them to be musical. It is like teaching a language without teaching thinking. It is like teaching about a Cezanne painting without using your eyes. To me, it is that critical to music education and yet, I was never trained in it until I stumbled upon Dr. Gordon in my graduate studies. Then I was seriously bad at it for the years I tried to use it in the classroom. I only got better as I taught it for the last 22 years. I consider myself somewhat competent now and still make plenty of errors. In the end, the children’s musical achievement speaks for itself.

Also see a short video of audiation in action here: http://bit.ly/f2dpIe

You can learn more about audiation from my podcast here: http://bit.ly/d2Cydi

@rizzrazz on Twitter

drrizzrazz@gmail.com

 

What instrument can a young child start and when?

Piano, cello, and violin are the typical instruments for kids to start on at the young ages, even as early as 3 years old.  Other instruments such as trumpet, clarinet, flute and saxophone can be started at age 6 at the very earliest, but more typically at 7 or 8. Trombone, tenor saxophone, string bass, and other bigger instruments (requiring more wind or a bigger reach) can also start about then, around 8 years old. In public schools, most band or orchestra programs now start in the 5th grade. Forty years ago, most instrumental programs started a grade earlier, in the 4th grade.

"El Sistema" programs in the United States, modeled after the one in Venezuela (where Gustavo Dudamel, artistic director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic came from [see episode on 60 Minutes]) start children very early on these typical orchestral instruments. I actually teach for one of these programs in Baltimore. We have a Kindergarten child on baritone! This is highly unusual and he's a little guy too. He does get a steady sound, but he can't hold it very long. Still, he loves it, and that's the key. Starting early if the child doesn't like it is a bad mix. In fact, there are several factors that should be considered when considering when to start a young child on an instrument:

1) musical readiness - Can the child sing in tune and move rhythmically? Any instrument is, after all, only an extension of the child's own musicianship. Without this musicianship already in place, any music lessons will teach a child only to be a technician. That is, the child will be able only to pluck out notes and will not be able to be musical—certainly not initially, and perhaps not for a several years. Here's an analogy: This is not unlike a child who can sound out the letters in words but does not understand the meaning of what he or she is saying.

2) psychological readiness - Is the child ready—even eager—to take correction from a teacher regarding the right notes, rhythms, posture, hand positions, fingerings, technique, etc.?

3) physical readiness - Is the child big enough for the instrument? (Stringed instruments are sized for smaller children.) For wind instruments, is he or she able to blow enough air? Does the child have enough small motor coordination skills to have enough early success that can help maintain initial enthusiasm.)

4) intrinsic motivation - This is probably the most crucial factor. At any early age especially, a child needs to have the inner desire to take lessons. This factor can trump all the other factors combined. That is, if there's enough "want to," that's all you need. Everything else will work out in time. 

Note: Having said all that, there is actually NO such thing as starting too early. What?! What about all those readiness factors? Well, the above information applies to "formal" music instruction. The importance of "informal" music instruction in early music development, much like language development, cannot be overstated and needs to start much earlier than 3 years old—even before birth! Children can start absorbing music and sound in the last trimester in utero. A child's musical potential is a product of nature and nurture. The role that nurture plays in the earliest months and years of life is undeniably important should we want children to grow up to enjoy and participate in music.

Early Childhood Music - How to teach it!

This is a response to a new early childhood music teacher who had a lot of questions and thinks starting early makes the most difference.

First off, just sing and chants tons and tons of repertoire. Find out what they really like and do a bunch of it. Play great great music. Use CDs of the Masters (classics, jazz, blues, all styles are great to expose young ones to—just have to find the right content). Dance to it and be expressive. GO crazy over the top in modeling your enjoyment of what you do. Don't talk much "about" anything. On the other hand, I do tell children when they're not using their singing voices, at age 3 or so. At 4 or 5, I tell them they are singing different tones than me if they're not in tune. I distinguish tones from rhythm by having them show me their singing voices for tones and their talking voices for rhythms. I do a wide mix of individual patterns—diatonic and arpeggiated patterns—with a mix of sounds and syllables. This is especially so in 2-3 year olds. I find that singing ooo-ooo, say on D to A above middle C in the key of D helps children use their singing voices. Then I use the syllable BUM when they're ready—very infrequently before 4 years old. You have to keep listening and learning from the children. They'll demonstrate for you what their needs are if you are challenging them appropriately. Sometimes I stretch too far, other times not far enough. That's why I like EC sooo much. Yes! I'm with you that this will make the most difference in the long run.

Teaching Harmonic functions to 3rd and 4th grade on their first day.

Teaching Harmonic functions to 3rd and 4th grade on their first day.

I've posted this kind of thing before, but it's worth posting again with a sequence of how I taught them.

I sang Mary Had a Little Lamb using the appropriate I and V7 accompaniment, but I stopped on the penultimate chord (the V7, fleece was white as. . .) and asked, "Can I end there?" Most said, "No!" right away. After playing the tonic (I), I asked, "How about there?" Yes. I then taught them that there are two functions that go underneath the melody to Mary Had A Little Lamb. Listen to when they change. Sing them with me. "Yes Yes, No, Yes." Again. "Yes Yes, No Yes." We then did the same thing with London Bridge. Hey, they have the same functions at the same time!

After successfully testing a handful of individuals to tell me whether I was playing NO or YES, I then played I V7 I V7 I V7 I V7 I V7 I V7 I V7 back and forth for 20 seconds or so. I said to listen carefully. Is this YES, NO, or something else. Then I played a IV chord. Uh-Oh, that's not NO or YES. It's something different Remember we sang On Top of Spaghetti? Listen. Here are the functions to that song. I (on top of spa-) IV (ghetti) - I - V7 - I , IV - I - V7 - I. Then we sang UH-OH, YES, NO YES a bunch of times. Afterwards, I tested a few more individuals. Most of them could hear all three functions. We did this on the first day of class with no previous instruction and did it in less than 15 minutes. I even played a V/V7 chord for them to hear. Yes, there's gonna be more and I'll help you learn them over the next couple of weeks.

My older kids already hear functions I couldn't do even after playing Dixieland Jazz for years. They "feel" these functions V/vi, vi, V/ii, ii, and this circle of 5ths sequence in the key of C: C E7 A7 D7, G7 C. Those are the changes to 5 Foot Two, Eyes of Blue. Can you hear the song and the functions in your mind? My 2nd year 3rd and 4th graders can. I'm astonished at what they can learn when taught through their ears. I wish we could get away from the theory a bit. It never helped my musicianship much. Teaching these functions to the children has helped my improvisation with the dixieland jazz band tremendously. I win. The students win. I feel good. [James Brown just ran through in my head.] I've got to figure out the changes to that tune now. Oh my! I just did it in my mind. Isn't it just a blues? I think so. You see, I couldn't do that before I started teaching this way. I'm modeling the learning which may be the best way to teach. Model the learning YOU are doing. 

I've since done Muffin Man and Take Me Out to the Ballgame. They've learned:

Do you know the muffin man? The [I - I]

muffin man the muffin man, Do you know  [ii - V7/V - V - I]

 

And:

V/ii - ii - V7/V - V7 -I  [Buy me some peanuts and cracker jack, I don't care if I ever get back for it's root, root, root for the]

 

And they're getting this in 2nd grade now, not just 3rd on up. One is a first-year child. Never had her in previous years.