Music Learning Theory Analysis

8/12/2019 Music Learning Theory Analysis

1/14

Evaluating Edwin Gordon's Music Learning Theory from a Critical Thinking PerspectiveAuthor(s): Paul G. WoodfordSource: Philosophy of Music Education Review, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Fall, 1996), pp. 83-95Published by: Indiana University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40495420.

Accessed: 05/06/2014 03:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Indiana University Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy of

Music Education Review.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iupresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40495420?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40495420?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iupress


2/14


3/14

84 Philosophy fMusic EducationReviewtonalitynd meter.4In otherwords, tudentsshould e able to audiate hetonalitynd meterof a composition.Once that bjective asbeenachievedthey an then earn to audiate othermusical lementsuchas form,tyle, hrasing,dynamics,ndtimbre.5 owever, hesemusicalelements re regarded s additiverather hansequentialn nature. For thisreason,Gordondoes notthinktpractical o stipulateheorderin which hey houldbe taught.Althoughheymustbe taughtn conjunctionwithtonal andrhythmicatterns,t remains or he teacher odecide how and in what ordertheywill berandomlyombinedwith hosepatterns.6While thedevelopmentf musicalunder-standings theprimaryurpose fmusic duca-tion,ultimatelyhe goal is to help childrenachieve n appreciationf musicbasedon thatunderstanding.tudentshould earn ounder-standmusic so that hey an "decidefor hem-selvesthemusicthat hey ppreciatend willlisten o,perform,ndcompose."7Understand-ingthus unctionss both readinessnd ratio-nal basis formusicappreciationunderstanding+ appreciation aesthetic esponse).Onemustunderstand usic n order o respond ppropri-ately.The alternative,tatesGordon,smusicalprejudicei.e.,an emotional esponse aving orational asis).Ironically,onsideringhatppreciationndaestheticesponseepresenthe pexofGordon'stheory,heyhave little ractical alue as far slearnings concerned.Rather,hey re conve-nient yproductsfmusic eachingnd earning.8Althoughone would thinkthatappreciationwould contributeo motivation,t is success,statesGordon,hat s theultimatemotivator.nbehavioristicerms, tudents re motivatedolearnwhen hey re successful twhat hey redoing."With ontinueduccess, tudents illbecontinually otivated."9 ontinueduccess ndmotivation,owever, ependuponthe doptionof nappropriate ethodreadGordon's heory).Indeed,Gordon'smusic earning heoryssynonymous ithsequence and method. Bystructuringearning sequence activities n a

stepwisemanner o that tudentsre virtuallyguaranteeduccess, heteacher an ensure heircontinued otivation. udiation,rthe evelop-ment fa sense oftonalityndmeter,s taughtbymeansof a highly tructurednd sequentialprogramf instructionn whichstudentsearnvarious kills oupledwith ppropriateonal ndrhythmatterns.10neffect,hey re edthroughdifferenttagesof audiationwhile isteningo,reading,writing, erforming,mprovising,rcomposingmusicusingfamiliarnd unfamiliarpatterns.n all,there re sixstagesof audiationoutlining progressionrom nconsciousconicmemoryf seriesofnotesperceived urallynthe mmediateast o conscious stablishmentftonalityndmeterstagethree) nd,finally,tthehighesttage, o the bilityopredict atternsinthenearfutureasedupona sense oftonalityandmetern the mmediateompositionut lsouponpastexperiencewith therworks.11While the above sets out and explainssomethingf the nature nd contenti.e., tonalandrhythmatterns)f Gordon'smusic earningtheory,what remainsto be explained s theactualprocess fmusical earning,hats,thoseintellectualkills thattheoreticallynable thestudentoprogresshroughhestagesofaudia-tion.Thereare two generaltypesof learningskills n Gordon'stheory, hichhe labelsdis-criminationnd nference,oth rganized ierar-chically.Discriminationearningsequivalentorote earning.AccordingoGordon, his houldbe ofprimaryoncern o theteacher ecause tis themeanswherebytudentscquire vocabu-lary f, nd earn odistinguishmong, amiliartonaland rhythmatterns.Students re con-sciousof this ypeof earning ecausethey reaware hatheyrebeing aught ysomeone lsesuchas a parent r teacher. nferenceearning,on theother and, s associatedwith onceptuallearningndthetransferfunderstandingromfamiliaro unfamiliaratterns.t s often ncon-scious n the ense hat tudentsreunaware hatthey reteachinghemselvesy makingonnec-tions, r nferences,mong amiliarndunfamil-iarpatterns.

This content downloaded from 41.87.6.150 on Thu, 5 Jun 201403:56:15 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


4/14

Paul G, Woodford 85Althoughdiscriminationearninggenerallyprecedes inference earningthe two are by nomeans exclusive. Rather, heyfunction oncur-rently, lthoughone or the otherwill predomi-nate at any given momentdepending on thesituation nd thestudent's evel ofpreparedness.Moreover,as Gordonexplains, ust as discrimi-nation learning implies some limited use ofinferences,nferentialearning ependsuponandmakes use of knowledge acquired through is-crimination nd rote earning.

Discrimination earning. Atthe aural/oralevelofdiscriminationearning, tudents istento andthen perform onal and rhythm atternsusingneutral yllables. Here, theyare taught o hear(aural) and thensing,chant oral) and move totonaland rhythmatterns. n the verbal associa-tion level, students ssociate vocabularynamesandpropernameswith hepatternsearned n theprevious tage. Vocabularynamesare tonal i.e.,tonicsolfa) and rhythmyllables. Propernamesareaspectsoftonalitynd meter uchas functionand quality (e.g., major and minor,duple andtriple,tonic and dominant, nd the like). Thevalue of these verbal associations, explainsGordon, s that hey llow students o categorizeand solidifypatternsn themind,to retain hemin long-termmemory nd to describe nd discussthemwith others.12Because theyhave an inter-nal logic of theirown (e.g., "re" follows "do,"etc.), verbal associations also contributetomusical syntax. In otherwords,they help stu-dentsmakesense of,or mposeorder pon,thosepatterns.Students nter hepartial ynthesisevel oflearningonce theybecome aware of the logicinternal o tonaland rhythm yllablesand to thepatternsssociatedwith hem. Atthis evel,theyalso begin to organizeand synthesizendividualpatterns nto one or more series of patternsthereby changing the way those individualpatternsreperceived, erformed,nd audiated.13This is followed by the symbolic associationlevel atwhich hey earnto associatethenotationforfamiliar atternsearnedpreviouslywith heir

respectivetonal and rhythmic yllables, propernames and musical sounds. It is at this pointthatthey earn to read, write,audiate and per-formfamiliar musical patternsfrom notation.Finally, as far as discrimination s concerned,students earn nthecompositesynthesis evel toread,write, nd audiate seriesoffamiliar atternsfromnotation. They are able to listento, read,write, nd performmusic intelligentlyi.e., withsyntax).InferenceLearning. Inference learning takesplace whenever tudents pply understanding ffamiliar atternso unfamiliar nes. The lowestlevel of inference earning s generalization,ofwhichthere re three ubparts, ural/oral, erbaland symbolic.Attheaural/oral ublevei studentsare required o indicatewhether ets of patternsperformedwithout yllables sound the same ordifferent.They are also asked to echo in solofamiliar nd unfamiliar atterns erformed ytheteacherto neutral yllables. The same kind ofactivity nd procedure s used at thegeneraliza-tion-verbal ublevei. Here, though, tudents reexpectedto use tonal and rhythm yllableswhenresponding to the teacher's performance ofpatterns sing neutralsyllables. They are alsocapable of identifyinghe tonality nd meterofthepatternsn question. Finally, n thegeneral-ization-symbolicevel of learning, heyare ableto read, write, nd audiate familiar nd unfamil-iar patternsusing standardnotation. At thispoint,whensinging rchanting onalandrhythmpatterns,heymaychoose touse eitherneutral rtonal and rhythmyllables.The next hierarchical level of inferencelearning is called creativity-improvisationndhas two subparts, ural/oral nd symbolic. Thefirst ubpart, ural/oral, eed not include verbalassociation. Instead, the teacher and studentsmayengage in a kind of musical dialogue sing-ing familiarand unfamiliarpatternsto neutralsyllables. When verbal association is included,they use tonal and rhythm yllables. Whatdistinguishes his level of learningfrom thoselower n thehierarchys that, ather han choing



5/14


6/14

Paul G. Woodford 87because each domain of experience rsubject rea implies tsown ogic,thereare no generalntellectualkillsorabili-tiesofanyconsequencehat an be prof-itably aughtrtransferred.. inorderobe successfuln thegameofchess, r nanyother orm f activitye.g.,music),students eedonlymaster herules i.e.,logic) andstrategiespecific o that on-text17

Still other educational theoristsbelieve thatcritical thinking s both general and context-specific n nature. That is, generaland context-specificthinking kills worktogether ike handandglove.18Whereas musical skillsand abilitiesexist e.g., theability oaudiatetonalandrhythmpatterns), mplicitto them are certaingeneralthinking kills such as discrimination,ompari-son and contrast, nd inference. It is this atterpositionto whichGordon ascribes.19Now, as was mentioned t the outset,thetrouble with Gordon's and other skills-basedapproachesto music instructions thattheynotonlyignorethepersonaland musical needs anddesires of the individual, but also the socialframework n which musical thinkingtakesplace. Accordingly, heyfail to explainwhat isprobably most important f all educationallyspeaking,that s, why students hould want tothink riticallyn music in the first lace.20 Putanother way, missing from Gordon's musiclearningtheory s an adequate explanation ofwhy (and also how) students should learn tothink for themselves. No doubt success, asGordon would have it, motivates continuedinvolvement in musical experience to someextent. But whatGordon's theory oes not andcannot account for is students'continued, ife-long interest nd involvementn music,often ntheface of adversity nd even outrightailure sfar s school music is concerned. Needed, then,if studentsare to learn to thinkcritically nmusic is a more comprehensiveview of musicinstruction,ne thattakes into accountpersonalas well as social factors influencingmusicalthought nd action and thatexplains how stu-dents can exert at least a modicum of control

over their wn musical thinking nd learning.To my knowledge, only one such concep-tion of criticalthinkingand of criticalthinkinginstruction)n music exists.21Accordingto thisview,critical hinkingnstructionnmusic is lessaboutteachingmusical skills and abilitiesalongthe lines of what Gordon proposes than it isaboutdevelopingin studentswhat is sometimesreferredo as thecritical pirit r a disposition odevelop theirmusical individuality. In otherwords, criticalthinkingn music is essentiallyaboutconsciouslyand purposefully ealizingthemusical self i.e., self-realization).The concept of musical individuality,though, is meaningless except in relation tosocial and culturalnormsof musical thought ndaction.22 This simply means that implicit todeveloping senseofone's musical individualityis a growing wareness of others nd theextentto which one's own views and behaviors coin-cide with them. Critical thinking n music isthusfundamentallyocial in nature. One thinkscritically n music in order to consciously anddeliberately onstructhe musical self relative othemusical groupsthat one encounters ociallyand to the beliefs and practices they espouse.Inevitably,this process results in the criticalthinker hoosing to adopt one or more musicalgroupsand their espectivebeliefs and practicesas herown.23If the critical thinker s to choose themusicalgroupswithwhich she wishes to associ-ate, she will need to know therange of choicesavailable to her. Required as a precondition ocritical hinkingnmusic,then, s knowledgeofthecollectivemusical beliefs,values, and prac-tices i.e.,musicalnorms nd conventions)of themusical groups of which society is composed.However, once having adopted a musical groupand its beliefs and practices as her own, thecritical hinkers not contentmerelyto conformto group norms and expectations, nor is shebound by those collective beliefs and practices.Rather, he is determined o distinguishherselfin musicalthoughtnd actionfrom hecollective(by coming up with and developing her ownmusical ideas) while simultaneously eekingto



7/14


8/14


9/14

90 Philosophy fMusic EducationReviewa growing onsensusamongmusiceducationresearchersndwritershatmusic s a complexandmultifacetedhenomenoni.e., an ill-struc-tured omain)requiring varietyfapproachesandperspectives.30f studentsretomake enseofmusic nd fthey re tobecomeflexible ndgenerativen theirmusical hinkingthats,tobecreativend to comeupwith heir wnmusicalideas and waysof thinking),heyneed an in-structionalrogramn whichmusic s taughtinlots fdifferentays."31nparticular,hey eedto be challenged yreal-life,omplexkinds fmusical problemsthat demand serious andsustainedhought.Formany fthesekinds fproblems,articularlyhose nvolvingonflictsamongmusical beliefsand values,theremaywellbe no rightnswers rwaysofthinking.32If childrenre tothink or hemselves,heywillneedsome basisfromwhich obeginmak-ing informedudgmentsbout thequality nddesirabilityf thatwhich hey ear ndperform.Gordonmaybe right,herefore,henheinsiststhat students equireknowledgeof musicalpatternss a basis formusical thoughtndaction. The question, hough,s whether hekindsof tonal and rhythmatternsncluded nhistaxonomiesre the musicalnorms ndcon-ventionshat,nwesternocietyt east, tudentsneedtoknow.Although illing oconcede hatyounghildren ayprofitromnstructionsingthekinds f atomic atternshatGordondenti-fies, would rgue hat,deally, hildrenhouldconstructusical nowledge hroughbservationof musicalpractice. Accordingly,t is moreimportanthattheybe exposed to larger ndmore ontextuallyeaningful usical hunks nthe order f scales,motives, hrases, eriods,and evenentiremovements,ompositions,ndgenres.33n otherwords, hildren eed to beintroducedo the"real-life"musicof their ul-ture and society as well as to themusic ofculturesther han heir wn).Of course,Gordon, oo,recommendshatchildrenhouldbe exposedto "adult"kinds fmusical hinking.Whereheerrs, owever,s inrestrictinghildrento conventionalmusical

practice. If critical hinkingn music s aboutchoosingwhichmusicalbeliefs, ractices,ndassociatedgroups o adoptas one's own,thenchildrenwl need to knowthe fullrangeofchoices vailable othem,ncludingnesgener-allythoughto be "outside"ofthemainstreammusical culture e.g., rap, reggae, aleatoricmusic).Thus,while hildrenequire nowledgeofconventional usicalpractice s a basis formakingmusical udgments, hey lso requireknowledge funconventional usicalpracticesifthey re to be openmindednd to think orthemselves.Otherwise,here s a danger hatschoolingmayonly erve o ndoctrinatehemoconventional, ainstream usicalpractice.34Moreover,tshouldbe pointed utthat,nadditionto knowledge of musical patterns,children lso requireknowledgeof the wayscomposersrogressivelyhape ndchange hosepatternsvertime. That s,what tudentslsoneed to perceive,know, and understand orthemselves re the conventional nd not soconventionalays omposersmanipulate usicalpatternsnd othermusical lementse.g., style,phrasing,nddynamics) or xpressive rotherpurposes. Indeed, f there s one lesson thatstudentshould earn from hestudy f musichistorynd theoryt is thatcomposers ftendistinguishhemselves rom thers e.g., theirteachers nd other omposers) yfirstearningand then tretching,r evenbreaking,musicalrules ndconventions.Anotheronsideration and his s a seriousomissionon Gordon's part is knowledge fperformanceracticewithin communityndculture. That is, in addition o propositionalmusicalknowledge, r knowledge f musicalpatterns,s wellas processual nowledgefhowmusical soundschangeand evolve overtime,students illalso need toknowhow thosepat-ternsreusually erformed.notherwords, heconcept fmusicalnorms ndconventionseedsto be expanded o nclude erformanceracticesand standards i.e., proceduralknowledge).Thus,for xample,when tudyinghekeyboardmusicofJ.S. Bach, highschoolstudents ill



10/14

Paul G. Woodford 91needto learn spectsofhiscompositionaltyleas representedythe ctualnotes ndthewaysthey re structuredrelativeoprevious,ontem-porary,ndsubsequentompositionalractice).Theywill also need to knowwhatconstitutesappropriate erformancetyle. Without hisknowledgeheywillhaveno basis forudgingthe qualityand degree of originalityf hiscompositions nd of performancesf thoseworks.35 t the ametime, owever,ndpartic-ularlyf studentsre to remain penmindedndto becomemorecreative,heywill needto beintroducedomore hallengingi.e., essconven-tional) nterpretationsndperformancesf thoseworkse.g.,recordingsfthekeyboard orks fBach as performedyGlennGould).When it comes to getting ounger ndmusically nexperiencedhildren o think orthemselves,erhaps hebest trategyhat each-ers can employ s to have studentspproachmusic s if twerebothwell- nd ll-structured.That is, rather han overwhelmingoungerstudentsn the eginningtages f nstructionyfocusing nly on the complexities f music,teachershould seapproachesuch sGordon'salongwithKodly,Orff,nd othermethodolo-gies, ohelp tudents aster asicmusical killsand knowledge hat re prerequisiteso moreindependentindsof thinking.At the sametime, nd in order o counteractherigidityfthinkinghat omeswith hosemethodologies,teachershould lso introducetudentsothe ullrangeof "real-life" indsof musicalthinkingincludingess conventional,nd evenatypical,musicalpractices.Conclusion

In theend,whatchildrenequiremost sdepthndbreadthfexperienceinging,laying,andespecially,isteningo theactualmusicoftheirocietyndculture.36n otherwords, heyrequire nowledgefcurrent usical racticenall of its variouspermutations. kills-basedprogramsuch as Gordon'sare probably oonarrownd imitednscopetoprovide tudentsaccessto thediversityfmusical elief ystems,

practices,nd groups hat xists.37Such pro-grams lso discourageritical hinkingyover-simplifyingusic ndbyexertingressureponindividual tudents o conformo conventionalmusical houghtnd behavior. Although hil-drenrequire nowledge fmusicalnorms ndconventionss preconditionsocritical hinkinginmusic, nless hey indwaysto be creativenmusical thought nd deed, and, thereby, odistinguishhemselves rom hecollective, heirmusical fforts illbe culturallyedundant.notherwords, heywill notthink riticallynddevelop heirmusicalndividualityoany ignifi-cantextent. One of themistakes, hen, hatGordon's nd imilarmethodologicalpproaches(e.g.,SuzukiTalentEducation) omusiceduca-tionmake is in treatingonventionalmusicalpatternsnd modes of musicalthinkingi.e.,skills ndabilities) s ends n themselvesatherthan smeans oanend i.e.,thedevelopmentfeach student'smusical ndividuality).Havingtaughthildrenonventional usicpractice,heyfail to explain o them hat hepoint s nottomindlessly eplicatewhat othershave done(although certain mount fthis s necessary),butratheroput heir wn"slant" nthingsnd,thereby,o findtheirown musical answers.Oftentimes,his requiresthattheychallengeconventional usical houghtnd wisdom.Perhapsmorethan nythinglse, Gordonshould e credited ith ealizing highly evel-oped beliefsystem boutthenature f musicteaching nd learningbut also a technology(method)forputting is ideas into practice.However, rospectivemusicteachersn partic-ular shouldrealize thatbecause it is highlyprescriptivend proscriptiveo students ndteacherslike,Gordon's heorymaybe inimicaltothedevelopmentf ndividualitynthem oth.Justas his approachto music teachingandlearningmay serveto indoctrinatetudentsoone modeof musicalthinking,tmaywork oindoctrinateeachersohiswayofthinkingboutmusiceducationpractice Research nto thesociology fbelief uggests hat ll belief ys-tems ndgroups re to someextentnormativeandconservativen nature."Self-styledroph-



11/14

92 Philosophy f Music EducationReviewets" and eaders uch as Gordon xacerbate hisproblem y insisting hattheyalone are thearbitersftruth.38

NOTES1. Among ests ngineeredyEdwinGordon rethePrimaryMeasures of Music Audiation Chicago:GIA, 1979), the Intermediate easuresofMusicAudiationChicago: GIA, 1982), and the MusicalAptitude rofile (Chicago: RiversidePublishing,1988). Accordingo onewriter,ordon's pproachto music earning as beenadopted y many ublicschool music departments.ScottC. Shuler, ACritical xaminationf theContributionsfEdwinGordon's Music LearningTheoryto the MusicEducationProfession," he Quarterly ournal fMusic Teachingand Learning2 (Spring/Summer1991): 37-58. Otherwriters, owever, ontend hatthere s continuedresistance o Gordon's ideas,particularlymonggeneralmusic eachers.MauriceEltonByrd, Gordon'sSequentialMusic Learningand tsApplicabilityo GeneralMusic,"TheQuar-terlyJournalof Music Teaching nd Learning(Spring/Summer991): 59-62.2. Gordon nd David G. Woods,JumpRightn: TheMusic CurriculumChicago:GIA, 1986); Gordon

and Richard . Grunow, ump ightn: The nstru-mental eries Chicago:GIA, 1989). One commer-cially uccessfulnstrumentalusic eries hat eliesheavily nGordon'smusic earningheorys JamesFroseth's ndividualizednstructorChicago:GIA,1981).3. Gordon, earning equences nMusic: Skill,Con-tent,ndPatternsChicago:GIA, 1989),9-10.4. Ibid.,11.5. Ibid.,22.6. Ibid., 47-48. Gordon's differentiationetweensyntactici.e.,tonal ndrhythmatterns)nd "addi-tive" musical elements i.e., form, tyle, tc.) isreminiscentf Leonard B. Meyer's syntacticndstatisticalmusical parameters. For more aboutsyntacticnd statistical arametersee LeonardB.Meyer,Towarda Theory fStyle,"n B. Lang, d,The Conceptof Style Philadelphia:UniversityfPennsylvaniaress, 979). See also DavidJ.Elliott,"StructurendFeelingnJazz:Rethinkinghilosoph-ical Foundations," ulletin f the CouncilofRe-search n MusicEducation 5 (Winter 987): 13-38.7. Gordon, earning equences, 2.8. Shuler, n "A Critical Examination f Gordon's

Contributions,"5, observesthatotherprominentmusic ducatorsnd authors oncur hat ppreciationis a "by-productfunderstanding."t seems afe osaythatGordons a formalistNowheres thismoreevident han n his definition f varioustypes fmeaningnmusic. To him,fundamental" eaningis intrinsico music, hat s, it is based uponthelistener's ense of tonality nd meter. Gordon,Learning equences, 2-83.9. Ibid, 209. RichardColwell and FrankAbrahamsaccuse Gordon fbeing behaviorist While amreluctantogo that ar, here s no denyinghat istheory has decidedly behaviorist overtones.Althoughordon iewshimselfs a cognitivecien-tist atherhan s a behaviorist,nreality, e has afootn eachcamp. See 'TEdwin ordon'sContribu-tion:AnAppraisal," heQuarterly ournal fMusicTeachingndLearning (Spring/Summer991):19-36.10. Tonal and rhythmatternsre taughteparatelynlearning sequence activities althoughthey arecombinedn class activities). In theory,he moreexperience tudents ave doingthis i.e., learningpatternsn isolation), he better hey hould be atcombininghem ntheirwn nclassroom ctivities.However, Shuler, n "A CriticalExamination fGordon's ontributions,"6,questions hetherkillsacquired hrougheparatenstructionn tonalandrhythmatterns illnecessarilyransfero real ifecontexts.11. When earningonditionsre deal, tudentsroceedthroughhesix stagesof audiation n hierarchicalorder.Whenconditionsre less than deal,one ormore fthe tagesofaudiationmaybe omitted.nthose ases, t s unlikelyhat he tages f audiationwilloccur n hierarchicalrder. Oncethefirsttageof audiation as been nitiated,owever,ndpresu-ming hat earningonditionsre satisfactory,ny-where romwo to sixstagesmayoccur oncurrent-ly. Gordon, earning equences, 3.12. Somewhatncrediblym myview,Gordonbelievesthatwords re thebasic units fthoughtTo him,one mustpossess a wide vocabulary f words norder o think eyond very imitedapacity. t sfor his eason hatheinsists nusing yllables nd



12/14

Paul G. Woodford 93proper ames. Unless necanput name omusicalpatterns,unctions,rqualities,twillbedifficultorecognize nd discriminatemong hem. Gordon,Learning equences, 3.13. Althought s temptingosuppose hatGordonmaybe referringo intuitivewarenessof whole-partrelationshipslong he inesof what s suggested yGestaltpsychology, is atomistic, ottom-up p-proach omusicearnings antitheticalothatchoolofthoughtGestalt sychologistsereopposed o"atomistic,ottom-up,rpurelymolecularnalysis;theyfavored view of perceptualrganizationnwhich hewaytheparts re seen s determinedythe configurationf the whole,rather han viceversa."HowardGardner,heMind'sNew Science:A History ftheCognitive evolutionNew York:BasicBooks,1987),112.14. Gordon, n Learning equences n Music 35-37,claims hat Music earningheorys not ntendedoserve s anexplanationf howstudents ake nfer-ences" ince how tudentseach hemselvesomakeinferences.. is notknown."Whilethatmaybetrue,heres a vast iteratureneducationalsychol-ogyconcernedwith hatvery ssue. Much of thatliterature aybe found nder he rubricftransferof earning.For more bout ransferf earningsit pplies omusic, ee Thomas unks,TheTransferofMusicLearning,"n Handbook fResearch nMusicTeaching ndLearning,d. Richard olwell(NewYork:Schirmer,992),437-447.15. Gordon, earning equences, 11.16. CarolP. RichardsonndNancy . Whitaker,Criti-cal Thinkingnd MusicEducation,"n Handbook fResearchon Music Teaching nd Learning, d.Colwell,546.17. Paul Woodford,DevelopingCriticalThinkers nMusic,"MusicEducators ournal2 (July996):27-32.18. Carl D. Brell,"Critical hinkings Transfer heReconstructionfOtherwiseiscretenterpretationsof Experience," ducationalTheory40 (Winter1990): 53-68.19. Consideringhatmusical hinkingnd learning,sGordon efineshem,nvolve eneralhinkingkills,it s paradoxical,o saythe east, hatmusical pti-tude ndgeneralntelligenceas measuredytradi-tional ntelligenceests) houldbe onlymarginallyrelated.Possibly,he owcorrelationbtained as todo withthefactthat raditionalntelligenceestshavebeen oonarrowlyonceivedi.e.,dominatedymathematicalnd inguisticinds fknowledgendabilities). Howard Gardnergreesthat raditionalintelligenceestseave much obedesired. ormoreaboutGardner'sviews withrespect o traditionalintelligenceests ee his bookCreatingMinds:An

Anatomy f CreativityNew York: Basic Books,1993), 19-20. For Gordon's explanation f therelationetweenmusic ptitudend ntelligence,eeThe Psychology f Music Teaching (EnglewoodCliffs, J:Prentice all, 1971),31.20. Gordon s in good company ere. Cognitive sy-chologistsnterestedn criticalthinking ypicallyresortoatomic,elf-containedroblemshatmayberesolved efinitively.sually,hose roblemsre etin a technological, athematical,rscientificrame-work n which ffectivessues and componentsfthoughtrecompletelygnored.Robert .Sternberg,"CriticalThinking:ts Nature,Measurement,ndImprovement,"n Essayson the ntellect,d. F. R.Link Alexandria, A: Association orSupervisorsandCurriculumevelopment,985),46.21 I amreferringere omy wnmusic earningheorywhich s indebted o JohnDewey's conception freflective,rcritical,hinking.eweywas a founderofthemodernriticalhinking ovementAmongotherphilosophersnd theoristswho have beeninfluentialn mythinkingre Donald Schon,JohnMcPeck, Carl Brell, David Perkinsand GavrielSalomon,Richard aul,Bennett eimer,ndDavidElliott. SociologistsJamesBorhek and RichardCurtis,with heir ookA SociologyofBelief NewYork:JohnWiley& Son, 1975),have been nstru-mentaln establishing sociologicalframeworkormytheory.For a more n-depthxplanationfmytheory,eeWoodford,Developmentf a Theory fTransfern MusicalThinkingndLearning ased onJohnDewey's Conception fReflective hinking"(Ph.D. dissertation,orthwesternniversity,994).See also "DevelopingCriticalThinkers n Music"and"Critical hinkingn Music: What s It?"Cana-dianMusic Educator 7 (Fall 1995): 36-40.22. Leonard . Meyer,tylend Music:Theory,istory,and deologyPhiladelphia: niversityfPennsylva-niaPress, 989),344. AsMeyer oints ut, lthoughcertainontemporaryomposersuch as John ageandMilton abbitt laim o eschew tylisticonven-tions, ndividual xpressions impossiblewithoutreferenceo somecultural orm.23. Althoughtmaynot be possiblefor ndividuals fonecultureofully nderstandhemusic fanother,nevertheless,he riticalhinkers free ochoosethegroupsfmusicians,nterestedmateurs,r ficiona-dos withwhich she wishes to associate. Whiledifferentusical ulturesmaybe incommensurable,one can always acquire ncreasedknowledge ndunderstandingf thatwhich s foreign,hat s, solong as one is so inclined. For a reviewof the"universalist" ersus "particularismebate, seeBennettReimer, Can We UnderstandMusic ofForeignCultures?' n Musical Connections: radi-



13/14


14/14

Paul G. Woodford 95critically,he dea is for eacherso ntroducehemto bothconventionalndunconventionalractices.The aim here is to broadenchildren'smusicalhorizonsrather than reinforce ociocentric ndethnocentricusical eliefs ndwaysofthinking.35. David J. Elliott uggests hatperformers' usicalinterpretationsunctionnalogously o beliefs ex-pressed ropositionally. ust s beliefs ssert omeknowledgenpropositionse.g., anguage), erform-ers' musical interpretationsssertknowledgeorintent ith especto"how hingsre"musically.tis for hisreason hat heperformer'sorkmaybetreated s a distinctompositionn itself. Perfor-mance, tself,s viewed as a processof realizingmusical ideals (i.e., cognitive epresentationsfmusical compositions). "Music as Knowledge,"JournalfAestheticducation5 Fall 1991):21-40.36. In this agreewithBennett eimer.Whileperfor-mancemay be the mostpotent orm f musicalactivity,t can lead to a restricted usical dietReimer,Avoiding xtremesfTheorynd Practicein Music TeacherEducation,"Journalof MusicTeacherEducation (Fall 1993): 12-22. Moreover,it s importantorealize hat erformanceeed notcontribute,s Elliott uggests,o the onstructionfthe self i.e., self-knowledge).verythingependsonwhether,r towhat xtent,ne s critical. erfor-mance s nomore r ess criticalnnaturehan nyother orm f musical ctivity,ncludingistening.When t comestoconstructinghemusical elf, ndregardlessf themusical ctivitynquestion,whatmatters ost s that nethinksritically.37. Reimer also believesthat kills-basedmusicpro-grams re toonarrowlyonceived.As he explains,"A curriculumasedon this inglebehavior o theexclusion f others,imits hemusical xperiencesand nvolvementsfstudentso severelys to bothrestrict ossibilities or aesthetic xperience ndcontain reativityithin henarrowestonfines."PhilosophyfMusic EducationEnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice all, 1989),150.38. Possibly,thismay be an occupational azard ofespousing nd proselytizingtrong iews. Peopletend o mbue heireaders, articularlytrongnes,withreligious ualities. Significantly,ordonhasbeen described s a "self-styledrophet . . whoexhortedhemothermusic ducators]orepentndsee histruth. . Gordon aced he lassicproblemfany prophet eeking cceptancen his own land."No doubtpartof the problem s far as criticalthinkings concerneds thatGordon was anythingbut entative"nthewayheproselytizedistheory.Shuler,A Critical xaminationfGordon'sMusicLearning heory,"8.

Music Learning Theory Analysis

Documents

Transcript of Music Learning Theory Analysis