There has been quite a bit of outrage from Lee Hill’s decision to rename the houses in his school after contemporary activists instead of historical figures. Lee Hill, as a headteacher, is completely within his rights to call the houses whatever he likes (within reason … Continue reading Houses
Sometimes a colleague of mine comes into the music office at our school to spend a bit of time learning music theory. I don’t teach him, he just wants a bit of time to do the theory book and will ask me some questions if … Continue reading Theory Matters
In this fourth instructional video into creating a twenty-four bar multitrack composition, we create an organ part along similar lines to the strings and guitar but also spend a little time on adjusting the volume of each track.
One mistake many children make when mixing is they want to hear their favourite part so often ramp up the distorted guitar part and turn a relatively good composition into something frightening and terrible! A good thing to do in preparation to this is to listen to a few modern pop songs and ask what children hear the loudest. It normally goes as follows – vocals, bass, drums, guitars, keyboards and then backing vocals in that order. So for this project I try to get them to take the guitar and strings part down by about fifty percent. This step is quite important because when you have so many layers of sound it can be difficult to hear the part you are concentrating on.
Creating the organ part is relatively straightforward and shouldn’t be too difficult as it goes along the same lines as the strings and guitar. The end of the video shows mixing the organ part so it is about the same volume as the guitar and strings but lead the drums up high ready for the next part which will be the bass.
This is the third video in the series on creating a multitrack recording in Garage Band for Year 6 students. The aim of this lesson is similar to that of the last and is basically more practice in opening tracks, choosing sounds, choosing good combinations and recording accurately to a click track. The video is 4 minutes long and students should be able to create something decent in about twenty minutes or less.
Here is the second video of the series on the multitrack Garage Band project for Year 6. In this video students will learn how to use the chord functions on Garage Band and create a guitar part that works along side their 24 bar drum pattern.
I am making a scheme of work for Year 6 using Garage Band to create a simple four chord song. It uses quite a few of the functions of Garage Band and requires students to have an iPad with Garage Band connected. I have made some instructional videos that go with the scheme and this is the first on how to lay a simple drum track. The objectives are to make a 24 bar drum track and play with the functions to become familiar with simplicity, complexity, dynamics, percussion instruments, fills and timbre. This lesson should only take about 10 minutes to explain and less than 10 minutes to complete but I also have the following video that students can refer to if they are struggling.
We will be doing this in January so we will see what the results are like in mid-February when we finish this five week unit.
I have written a workbook called “Pentatonic Fun” for Year 3. It is about pentatonic scales and Chinese music. Children have quite a lot of work to complete in the workbook: Learning the words – scale, pentatonic, guzheng, pipa, dizi, erhu, molihua, ostinato, drone, solo, … Continue reading Pentatonic Workbook
A few things before I start this eulogy to Orff-Schulwerk. First, I’m calling it “elemental music” because Orff-Schulwerk has multiple problems in today’s society. It really should be called “Orff-Keetman” if you are going to name it after a person as Gunild Keetman was absolutely vital to its development and spread. Elemental music is not the greatest of terms either, but for want of a better word it’s what I’m going to go with. I’m not suggesting that elemental music is the best way or the only way to teach music well but I will be explaining why it particularly works in primary schools. Finally, I’m not setting myself up as an expert – I have done Orff Level 1 and have desperately been asking to do Level 2 but finding a course at the moment where I am is like gold dust. I am just going to write about some experiences doing this type of teaching and why I think it works well.
People are very confused about what elemental music is. They think it is something to do with playing xylophones and it’s a bit old-fashioned. That was my attitude up to five years ago and so the first thing I will say is that it is a tragedy that we have not been teaching about elemental music in Music teacher training. I heard the term “Orff” but that was as far as it went in the UK. Other countries have different systems and I think North America and Australia are quite successful but in the UK I learned next to nothing about elemental music. Even now, despite many attempts to convince Orff UK, there is still no accredited Level course. I had to go to Kuala Lumpa to get mine. What people call “Orff” can mean very different things but my trainer told me the main premises are singing using solfege, dance (both structured and free), recorder, tuned percussion and turning everyday objects into musical experiences. If I have missed any out please tell me! It is child-centred in that learning experiences are developed by children but there is a framework of teacher authority and explicit guidance. It is more sage on the stage to guide on the side at the beginning of lessons but the sage gradually disappears as the lesson develops. The basic idea is that you take a small idea and develop it, first as a whole class and then into more complex and creative ways individually, in pairs and in small groups. I have always been sceptical about the way we try to teach small group work in music as it is so hard to get right and at its very worse ends in a chaotic classroom. Orff is the only way I have successfully seen youngish children work in groups and this is due to the high level of direct teaching in the initial stages. So it both highly teacher-directed and yet highly child-led as what the children come out with at the end is often very different to each other.
Elemental music can start with any small idea. It could be a short song, a dance move, some words, a musical idea, a rhythm or even a movement using a newspaper. It’s the development of the idea that makes it interesting, creative and musically educational. I have seen so many music lessons where many of these techniques are discussed or taught but I think the reason why they aren’t as effective for younger children is because they often deal in the abstract whereas elemental music certainly starts in the concrete. You would probably not do a lesson on “ostinato” in an Orff-based classroom but you would certainly have ostinato in it. There are learning objectives but in a typical lesson you would be developing so many at the same time it probably would not be beneficial to write them all down. This is one of the criticisms of this type of music lesson, as Orff-Schulwerk is not a curriculum but an approach to teaching music. It certainly does get progressively harder but proving it is quite hard – we can produce detailed lesson plans, intentions and predicted outcomes but when you are starting with a small idea and developing it, it doesn’t always come out the way you might expect or intend. And that is why it is creative and possibly why so many teachers and managers are scared of it in today’s classrooms with insane levels of teacher accountability.
I will try to go through a lesson I did the other day that was successful. I didn’t even teach it that well and mixed up some of the steps but the children still came up with some stunning performances. I used the Nigerian (or possibly Sierre Leone) peace song “Fungai Alafya” and we started off by singing it by rote. When they got the hang of the melody I moved onto a djembe and stopped singing so they were pitching by themselves. We then sang the whole thing using solfege and hand signs (that they are used to) and commented on why the two phrases end differently. I thought of using the words “cadence”, “perfect” and “imperfect” but decided not to – we will do that another time! We then moved onto playing the whole melody on tuned percussion. We are fortunate to have enough instruments for one each so this wasn’t a problem. Some practitioners would possibly have put an additional stage of body percussion in but one of my weaknesses is that I get a bit impatient so dropped this to get to the instruments quicker. We then proceeded to learn a type of drone using two notes, what we call a bordun. We learned three types of bordun where I played the melody and they played the bordun and vice versa. I then split the class into two (by houses as we have a four house system at our school) and had half playing the bordun and half playing the melody. The point of this is to get two parts working simultaneously without teacher assistance. The next step was to make up two ostinati that would fit the melody and bordun. There are two obvious examples and some children put up their hands to suggest them. I then had them in their four houses doing either an ostinato, the melody, the bordun or the other ostinato. Now we had four parts working well together we explored structure and played some different arrangements of the same piece, perhaps starting with the bordun, or repeating parts or having a symmetrical structure. This has all resulted in a very high level of teacher direction almost entirely led from the front. It is only then that I put the children into groups where they had to make their own arrangement of “Fungai Alafya”. Using the Class Dojo group function it immediately put the children into groups of four and they all made their own arrangements. The only new thing I added was that one of the members of the group had to play a djembe drum. All the different performances were all different but used similar material. There were no problems with keeping time with one another, they needed no assistance to play together and they all organised themselves with no teacher assistance. We listened to all the performances and gave praise for all the really good bits of each performance. The children were very encouraging of each other and I just loved how the whole class came together in appreciation of each other. This is community music as far as I am concerned. Next week, we will do the same activity but add improvisation and canon as well as recording and assessing. The task will be to make a longer arrangement of “Fungai Alafya” but it will need to have a new ostinato, a section for improvisation and a surprise. The surprise could be anything but it needs to be surprising!
It’s so hard to grade this type of work for each child and it really does not fit with many of today’s assessment systems. Yet children performed, created and responded to so much material in an hour’s lesson. I think the reason it went really well last week was because I just got the balance right between teacher direction and letting go. Too much teacher direction results in too much scaffolding, leading to less opportunities to be creative, Too much group work results in poor performances and lack of direction. And that is why I think elemental music is so powerful – when you get it right you have a balance that is truly creative and educational yet within a boundary enforced from the teacher.
I won’t just teach elemental music in my lessons. Children still need to learn theory, perform music, learn about music from different ages and different places, compose music on their own and use music technology. But in terms of learning, I would argue that what is known as “Orff” is probably the most effective way to bring musical creativity into the classroom for young children.
In the music classroom we regularly ban songs. If there is a single swearword we ban it. Sometimes we will change a word and get away with it, like a couple of years ago when we sang Radiohead’s “Creep” but making sure we used the radio edit version. Some secular schools ban religious songs and some religious schools ban secular songs. You won’t get many church schools singing “Imagine” by John Lennon and you won’t get many secular schools singing “Are you washed in the blood of the lamb”. Gameplan has banned a whole load of songs with racist connections recently and there are websites and Facebook groups telling you which songs are racist and which ones aren’t. Even if a song doesn’t have any words it can be controversial like the BBC’s decision not to sing the lyrics of “Land of Hope and Glory” and “Rule Britannia” at “Last Night of the Proms”. So the first thing I will say is that if any school or institution is being blamed for “banning songs”, this is regular and normal. It’s not weird or woke – it’s standard practice.
So we go onto the argument from authority – who decides which songs get chosen and which get banned? Normally you would say it is the person who chooses the music. This is not always the case. Sometimes it is the class teacher, the headteacher, a director, parents, sometimes children themselves. Sometimes it does not have to be someone who is alive! We had an annual “Last Night of the Proms” concert at my old school in Thailand where the mainly Thai children sang the chorus of “Rule Britannia”, whilst waving Thai and British flags. It did seem a little bit weird to be doing this in Thailand but the authority in this regard is tradition. Tradition can be an authority that transcends living leadership. We can forgo our own authority and defer to that of what has been done before because it has always been done. As soon as the decision to put on “Last Night of the Proms” is enacted then you are faced with tradition as authority because in many people’s eyes if we did not sing those two songs then it would no longer be what it says on the tin. Without “Land of Hope and Glory” and “Rule Britannia” you don’t really have “Last Night of the Proms” because the songs and the event are one in the eyes of the majority of the public. If you decide to question this and ban the songs you will be chastised for being a kill-joy or a party pooper and setting yourself up as a higher authority. Sometimes you will be deemed guilty of arrogance because you have dared to question the authority of a hundred years of tradition. This is often an argument on why we shouldn’t ban songs that have been in the musical canon for centuries – why should we end this tradition, what gives us the right to be the final arbiter?
In almost every school I have worked in the issue of song censorship issue has reared its head. Class teachers are constantly asking music teachers to teach songs which aren’t appropriate that they have heard on Youtube. What a music teacher, a class teacher, headteacher, parent or child think are appropriate can be very different. Song choice is so controversial because our relationship to songs is emotional, can be passionate and because good songs come from the heart. I’ve nearly resigned from one school over Christmas song choice in the past and I have been criticised for certain song inclusion by Agnostics, Atheists, Christians, Jews and Muslims. It is not just about that divisive Christmas festival, should we sing songs for Diwali? Should we not sing at all during Ramadan? I’ve even been criticised for my Bonfire Night song by angry Catholics. (It’s a great song by the way – you can find it here.)
Personally I am just as likely to be uncomfortable and wishing to ban songs as the next person. I was very unhappy about teaching the song “Cell Block Tango” from the musical “Chicago” because it is about murdering men and feeling justified in the endeavour. “Blooming insensitive idea” goes through my brain. None of my female colleagues had any concerns about this song and actually told me that I was a misogynist for worrying about performing it in a secondary school. They used the “see the song in context” to justify its inclusion and I was won over with that explanation. We did “Chicago” and we did it very well and my female colleagues did a great job of changing the script to be a little more appropriate for secondary-aged children. Do I think we should have taught the children this song? I am still unsure – I’m not even sure we should have put the musical on in the first place!
However, my blood starts to boil when it’s the other way round and schools say they will ban “Joseph” because of its religious story. “How can you ban a story that is basically all about dreams and doesn’t mention God?” My head is now pink and my voice has started to go to eleven. “Because you can find it in an ancient religious book” is the reply. “Blooming woke kill-joys” is the murmuring comment of my indignant brain. The reality is that we are all guilty of censorship and our censorship differs because we are different. Some things affect us more than others. For me, it’s when song censorship appears in Early Years that I get most annoyed. Some schools have honestly banned “Baa Baa Black Sheep” (my daughter’s favourite song). She loves changing the colour to “green” or “pink” sheep, and as far as she is concerned it is the funniest and best song ever written. I think it even beats “Baby Shark”. Well I tell you now song-banners, the Black Sheep stays in the repertoire and if you disagree you have my three-year old daughter to deal with. And she’s cute with curly hair.
The list of racist songs that has been circulated recently is pretty incredible and long and you start thinking that every song must be racist as some are so standard in our repertoire. I shook my fist when seeing “Land of the Silver Birch” is now the musical version of “Tintin in the Congo”. Boo hiss. I hung my head at the realisation that “Do your ears hang low” is now the “Mein Kampf” of music education. Noooooooo. Sometimes I think some of these choices are justified – I personally don’t think we should be singing “Eenie Meanie Minie Mo” – I heard the racist version in the 80’s and now when a child sings it to choose someone in the playground my heart always skips a beat until I can breath easier when they use the word “chicken”. Why do I have a problem with this even though the words are changed? It’s simply because I know the racism concerning this song – I wouldn’t teach it even with changed words because in my mind it is too soon. Perhaps when I’m retired they can bring it back.
But I am a total hypocrite. Two of my favourite songs in the school music repertoire have changed lyrics – “John Kanackanacka” and “Jump Jim Joe”. Both of these are now on the banned list because they used to be racist. That is what I think has changed in the last few years. What is new is the idea that because a song used to be racist, in today’s world that makes them racist now even if the lyrics have been changed. However, in yesteryear a song was racist if it had racist lyrics. And despite my uncomfortable reaction to “Eenie Meanie Minie Mo” I think we had it right before – a racist song is simply a song with racist lyrics. I don’t want to live in a world where we can’t play “Jump Jim Joe” but I also don’t want to live in a world where our hearts skip beats with “Eenie Meanie Minie Mo”. Most the time I will just avoid controversial songs or seek out an alternative but I’m still not happy because I simply don’t like banning songs. Banning songs feels extreme and it feels illiberal. I know some people will disagree with me here but I think we have to make a distinction. For me if a song has 100% of people not knowing it was originally racist and it doesn’t have racist lyrics now we can sing it. Let’s call it “Dan’s Law” after me – I’ve always wanted a law named after myself!
In all this politicking we lose the focus of what we should be doing – teaching children to sing well. Let’s not stop children from enjoying songs that may have been racist in the distant past but no longer are. Just like a racist person can change and be rehabilitated into society, a racist song can too.
I’ve scored out the melody of Samba de Janeiro for use in music classrooms. Feel free to print out and use.