What does this have to do with music?

What does this have to do with music? Up until today, that was the question I hated getting the very most while teaching.

I am a middle school band and general music teacher and just about three weeks ago, I got three brand new groups of students. While I love keeping my band students "full time", it's always nice to get a fresh start with a new general music class. The anticipation and excitement of getting to know a new group of dynamic personalities is something that I think is unique to the education profession. With new starts comes new ideas, which means last semester's not so successful lessons get revised or scrapped altogether. A unit I worked hard on over my winter break was inspired by a teaching tolerance lesson on the Southern Poverty Law Center's website. For teachers that don't know their work, please check out the many free resources they offer and will send you. . .again, for free! Tolerance is high on my list of necessities for schools, yet it's not officially a part of my music standards, nor is it part of any subject's standards, as far as I know. That never stops me though! Students read (with lots of vocab help) a New York Times op-ed that argues informal musical education, or emotional education, as it's referred to, is just as important as formal education. it was during this exercise that a seventh grader asked that title question; "What does this have to do with music?". It wasn't in the tone of, say, "Hey, do you want a coffee?". It was closer to an irritated "what are you doing here?" between two exes that run into each other at a party. I unfortunately got a bit defensive and let that one remark impact the rest of that day. I complained endlessly to my colleagues about how kids these days don't know how to make connections, blah blah blah. I just want students to understand that music absolutely has an impact on everyone, that absolutely everything can be related to the arts in some way, and that it can absolutely change their lives. Is that so much to ask!?

I know I'm over the top a bit about this topic, but it is my life's work. I was discouraged, and then today happened. Back in class again,  we debated, discussed, and finally determined as a class that music is a powerful influence on emotion. We  listened to several songs that included themes of hope and/or spoke of issues in society (John Mayer's "Waiting on the World to Change", Joan Baez's "We Shall Overcome", "Where's the Love" by the Black Eyed Peas, and Imagine by John Lennon, for example). Then we started discussing what are the issues they feel strongly about in their school, community, or world. Their assignment was to take one of those issues and re-write a verse or chorus from one of the songs above to describe the issue. It was amazing. They (mostly) finally got it, and overnight I was able to go from knowing very little about these students to hearing their most pressing concerns for society. As adults, we fixate a lot on issues. We have endless channels devoted to hearing about it 24/7, but we have to realize that our students do too, and they are not just spitting out what they hear. They are hearing, absorbing, analyzing, and making their own interpretation of the messes, violence, rudeness, and chaos we create in the world as adults. But they also hear the good things that happen and are so very hopeful. Today of their own volition, 8th graders wrote about police brutality, discrimination against LGBT youth, fears about intolerance towards immigration, . . .and yes, issues with where they sit at lunch (they are still middle schoolers, after all). These kids are asking questions, coming up with solutions, and putting it to music. I could not have been more impressed and once again, young people exceeded my already high expectations.

Finally it hit me. The young man that asked the question, he was just practicing something I preach all the time- don't automatically believe what people tell you. Ask questions in order to make up your own mind. I am glad he asked and next time someone does (and they surely will), I will have a different reaction.

The Wealth and Generosity Paradox, and What it Means for Schools

As a teacher deeply devoted to the democratic purpose of education, I am dedicated to creating a generation of students that are mindful citizens, creative problem solvers, and intelligent communicators. I love that my public charter school aids this civic mission by requiring a certain number of volunteer hours per student that a parent or guardian must complete to receive admission to the school. Because of this, I became very fascinated with a recent story I heard on NPR's All Things Considered which delved into some interesting research about the impact that wealth has on generosity and citizenship. This UCLA study shows that as wealth increases, generosity and sense of community and obligation decrease. They cite the reason for this decrease being that as one becomes increasingly able to self-sustain via wealth, the reliance on a community or family decreases. 

Now, if all schools were divided pretty much equally in socio-economic terms, this might not be such a big deal. Sure, the statistically stingy wealthy would still be there, but mixed in with those with less capital, and thus still enveloped in a more civic-minded community. In reality though, our schools are far from equal. The Department of Education found that "nearly 60 years after American schools were desegregated by a landmark Supreme Court decision, they are still largely segregated along racial and socio-economic lines" (via thinkprogress.org). Another study from Duke University found that "poor schools are getting poorer, while the rich get richer" (via indyweek.com). This kind of segregation is adding the the incredible civic gap we already have in our education system. Civics already has to compete with growing pressure to conform to rigorous math and ELA standards, now, those with the most are going to be knowing the least when it comes to learning how to be a productive citizen. 

Case and point. Let me take you back to my current school again, the one that requires the volunteer hours. This particular school serves your fairly typical comfortable to wealthy suburban population. My school also allows parents to pay their way out of their volunteer requirement.  I've always thought this was a cop out; what is the purpose of requiring involvement if you can pay $200-300 to get out of it? With this study in mind, I now realize a worse implication from this volunteer loophole - the more parents that pay their way out of volunteering, the smaller and more detached our community becomes. How very sad. 
While I don't know exactly how we could do it, I do believe that our schools need to be more diverse in every way, but especially socio-economically. Districting needs to be mindful of bringing diversity into schools, and schools should stop letting parents pay out of their civic obligations. 

Linking Leisure and Creativity

In a recent NPR interview, Jonah Lehrer spoke of the ingredients that can help foster creative moments. One of the most creative companies is 3M, maker of thousands of versatile products. Their secret? An hour a day of free time for all engineers. They use the time for projects, hobbies, reading, but the point is trust and feeling relaxed. As Lehrer put it; "they don't have to justify it to their boss — all they have to do is promise to share it with their colleagues. This sends an important message early on: we've hired you, we think you're smart, we trust you, we trust you to find solutions, you manage your time in your own way."


I've never been a good planner, but as a teacher, I feel my greatest strength lies in my creativity and ability to teach 'off the cuff', and I often deviate from the plans that I'm forced to write and turn in on a weekly basis. Don't get me wrong, planning is good, but I completely disagree with the "backwards by design" model that's pushed on many novice teachers. The standards movement and to some extent, models like backwards by design have helped force teachers into jobs where there is zero creativity.  What it's doing to children is worse. Where is the trust from administrators? We teachers should be thought of as the engineers of schools (heck, the engineers of our society!) and be given free time, just like the engineers at 3M. Instead, that free time and creative license is nowhere to be found in any school I've ever worked. That hour of planning I get daily is never ever spent on something leisurely. It's grading, meetings, writing lesson plans in a pre-set form, it's clerical, and sometimes even medical (accident reports, band aids, finding ziplocks for freshly-lost teeth). Non-teachers have no idea. Teachers are the hardest working people I know and the most overworked. Our creative potential plummets each time we're asked to conform. 


I would love to encounter a school where the WHOLE SCHOOL participates in a leisure hour. I would love to be able to have 15 minutes to just see what other teachers in my school are doing - to get ideas and share ideas that are awesome. Every day. Instead of (often irrelevant) faculty development or professional development, the time would be much better used to share the things we read, play with, design, or write during this hour. 


I am tired of feeling the need to justify my teaching, to justify my content area. I've often heard the phrase (and I agree, with one important caveat) that teachers should be allowed to close the door and teach. Teach in our own way we must do, but opening the door is essential. Not opening the door to un-trusting administrators looking over our shoulders, but to other colleagues, their inquiry, their ideas. The accountability movement needs to re-consider to what and to whom we're being held accountable. How about a bonus for creativity and innovative schools instead of those slaves to test scores? 

Hearts with Haiti Collaboration 2012, Part I: Possibility and the "us" vs. "them"

Something life-affirming in diversity must be discovered and rediscovered, as what is held in common becomes always more many-faceted-open and inclusive, drawn to untapped possibility.  – Maxine Greene, “The Passions of Pluralism”

I’ve been presented with a wonderful opportunity to deeply understand the meaning of the phrase “music is the universal language”, and to explore this concept with 6^th and 7^th grade students. The idea: to teach the same lessons, same material, and present the same questions to a group of suburban Georgia students and a group of early high school Haitian orphans and to each compose and present a musical work to one another. An unlikely pair, you think?  As the first day of collaborative work reveals, perhaps not. 

Before going into our amazing discoveries though, I want to introduce the key players of this collaborative effort. I am teaming up with two dear friends. Hearts with Haiti, a non-profit organization based in North Carolina is sponsoring the trip.  Geoffrey Hamlyn, Executive Director of Hearts with Haiti and amazing violist is teaching music there along with Clara Lyon, a passionate and accomplished violinist. Both of these Juilliard alums will be living in a Haitian orphanage for the next week, working with students on various music projects. These students have been through a lot, especially the horrific 2010 earthquake that left many injured, sick, and without home and family.

In the coming week, my 6^th and 7^th grade students and their students in Haiti will take part in lessons designed and taught by Clara, Geoffrey, and myself. We aim to ask more questions than we answer, but a few of the discussions we will have include: What is music and how is it used in my community? What messages can music communicate, and how?  How can music be understood as universal?  How can we use music to learn more about ourselves and others?   

Our first lesson really touched upon this last question. Both sets of students listened to George Crumb’s “Black Angel Quartet” Night of the Electric Insects. While listening, they were asked to describe what message or story the composer told. Both students in GA and in Haiti came up with images of fear, death, zombies, etc. What was most interesting though was the response when we posed the question, “What do you think the other students will come up with? Will their responses be similar to yours or different?”.  Overwhelmingly on both ends, students felt the “others” would have a different answer than theirs.  This is a classic assumption and misconception that happens to people of all ages and experience levels every day. We constantly separate “us” from “them”.  As one of my students put it, , “it’s different over here and we have different experiences”.  While that may be true, there is something about the interpretation of art that simply transcends cultural difference, as the interpretation of the Crumb showed so clearly.

So what can be gained from this experience? While I won’t let my own predictions be limited, it’s worth venturing that the debunking of the “us” vs. “them” mentality is a lesson in being a good citizen. Indeed, many in Washington today could use a lesson like this. After all, we may look different, act different, believe different things, and live in vastly different environments but doesn’t it say something that we can hear music and all think as one?  Perhaps music is not the only thing on which we can see eye to eye. . .oh the possibilities!

Stay tuned for the next tale of our collaborative adventure!

Lamenting a Lack of Time: The divorce of theory and practice in the teaching profession

It took a whole week off for Thanksgiving this year for it to hit me. My brain is positively starving for some good academic reading. My Amazon wish list confirms this and I got so excited at filling this list with Ron Berger, Maxine Greene, Larry Cuban, Patricia Hill Collins,  and others that it took a while for the disappointment of reality to set in - there's no way I will ever have time to read any of this stuff unless I'm on a break. Yet, as a teacher this type of reading that is critical to getting a degree, critical to keeping one's teaching fresh, critical to one's continued development, is not deemed critical by policymakers, or so it would seem. And  I know what many will say "just catch up on reading during your summers off". That's not exactly the best scenario though, as it further separates educational theory from practice.

It's been beyond hectic at my school this year, as I'm sure it has for everyone else's schools. If I counted the hours I worked after my official hours ended, well, let's just say it wouldn't be wise for me to do so. So how, with such demands put on teachers, can we possibly have time to read? I know I laugh at the idea of doing so during my planning period. It's all I can do to have time to use the restroom during this time, much less catch up on critical race theory! Why isn't this type of everyday professional development considered more by our leaders? I pose this question to my readers: What is more memorable, something you've read in the past five years about education (whether in the news, a book, magazine, etc) or a professional development session? The answer for me is clearly something I've read, yet professional development remains a constant and costly aspect of our jobs. Don't get me wrong, I've been to some very relevant PD, but it's rare.

What is the solution? I would love to hear suggestions.

What is the Purpose of Schooling?

What is the purpose of schooling? This is a question that every person in this nation should be asking themselves. Yet, even now when education is the hot topic and we hear daily some new debate or scandal in the sector, this question remains unspoken. To be fair, it's not difficult to infer President Obama or Arne Duncan's view of what schooling's purpose is. In "A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act" the word "success" is mentioned over 40 times in the 41 page document. "Reward" is mentioned 34 times, "college" is said a whopping 64 times and "career" 52 times. In contrast,  "critical thinking" is not said at all, nor is "question" , "inquiry", the word "love" or the phrase "love of learning". Independence, at least in the context of describing a student, is not mentioned either. "Equal" is mentioned twice,  "citizen" is mentioned once. In this view, schooling in America for elementary and secondary students is all for the purpose of getting students to more schooling, or to a career. While continuing education is vital to us, it's useless unless students first develop a desire to go further and the love of learning that propels a person through life, despite whether or not they want to pursue a university degree. Higher-order thinking skills are not just for college students, but should be standard in every classroom and achieved with a curriculum where inquiry is encouraged and expected.

And then there's the success. What does that mean? If I decide my career will be to sell drugs or to be a hit man and I make a lot of money and accomplish the tasks of my job, I'm successful with what I'm doing, aren't I? While that's obviously not what President Obama and Mr. Duncan mean, my point is that we must be more specific about what we mean by success and what we expect of the young people of this country; and it must be more than simply getting into college or getting a job. Their purpose is purely an economic one. More students in college or careers = more $$ for the United States and more "success" and equality for our country. Sounds plausible, but I don't buy it. So what if we are making money if we don't know how to treat each other, if we don't enjoy learning, if we don't know the responsibilities and rights of our own citizenship.

Luckily the ESEA (formerly No Child Left Behind) wasn't popular with lawmakers but what is next and how can we, the outraged teachers, citizens, parents, and students do to get our education system back on track? I think it's as simple as starting to ask ourselves, what is the purpose of schooling and is my own school district or teaching style helping to accomplish it?

This question comes up much more rarely than one would expect, even in the places you would most expect it. I never experienced this question during my four years of undergraduate work at NYU, when I was studying to be a teacher. There were plenty of professors asking me why I wanted to teach, or what my philosophy of education was. These questions though, are quite different. The question regarding the purpose of schooling did not get asked until I entered Kay Merseth's class at Harvard's Graduate School of Education. I wasn't alone. It seemed that many of us had never even thought to ask ourselves this same pointed question! It turned out to be one of the most important questions I ever had to answer, and took my education in a direction of purpose and certainty of my own beliefs. Once I was able to articulate what I thought the purpose should be, I was able to see more clearly than ever how our current system of education was not fulfilling it.

I believe the purpose of schooling is to foster independent thinking and socially-just navigators of our democracy. This kind of vision though requires the infusion of inquiry in to the classroom, restructuring of the current education model of  self-contained subjects to a more project-based curriculum, quality arts instruction for all students (not just the wealthy schools), student voice, community voice, and teacher voice welcomed into decision-making, the teaching of government and civics, and teachers who can inspire and motivate students to solve the real problems in our world. This practically goes without saying, but no, this stuff cannot be assessed with a multiple choice test and new measures would need to be created.

The collective brainpower and voice of Americans must be harnessed if the current economic-driven purpose of education is to be made problematic. It will take everyone's imagination to make the changes we envision and it can begin with asking yourself one question: What do you think the purpose of schooling should be?