Monday, February 23, 2009
Pop Music
Social psychologists have repeatedly shown that adolescents need to feel self-confident and competent in their ability to operate in the adult world in order to develop a positive self-image. The implication of teenagers wanting their own music separate from adults can have an impact on the inclusion of “pop” music in music education.
Abeles, Hoffer and Klotman (1995) offer three guidelines for the treatment of pop music in the music classroom. First, the authors recommend that teachers do not tread on teenagers’ “turf” by using pop music as the main basis for performing or general music classes. Second, the teacher needs to keep his or her role in perspective and understand that he/she probably wouldn’t be able to teach pop music to the students’ standards, not to mention that authentic performances in the school setting seem unlikely. And third, teachers shouldn’t “trash talk” popular music to students: even though it wasn’t created for an aesthetic purpose, students appreciate teacher tolerance to pop as much as teachers appreciate student tolerance to art music (pp. 168-169).
Some teachers have tried to meet halfway with students by analyzing pop music in the classroom in the same way art music would be analyzed. However, Abeles et al. (1995) point out that some students fear this would “ruin” the piece for them. Instead, the authors suggest finding a balance by pointing out features of pop music that compare to elements of art music, thereby making art music more familiar and accessible to students and increasing the chances of preference. Or, teachers can play the role of social psychologist by showing students how pop music has a role in the larger scheme of society.
Abeles, H. F., Hoffer, C. R., & Klotman, R. H. (1995). Foundations of music education (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomas Higher Education.
Abeles, Hoffer and Klotman (1995) offer three guidelines for the treatment of pop music in the music classroom. First, the authors recommend that teachers do not tread on teenagers’ “turf” by using pop music as the main basis for performing or general music classes. Second, the teacher needs to keep his or her role in perspective and understand that he/she probably wouldn’t be able to teach pop music to the students’ standards, not to mention that authentic performances in the school setting seem unlikely. And third, teachers shouldn’t “trash talk” popular music to students: even though it wasn’t created for an aesthetic purpose, students appreciate teacher tolerance to pop as much as teachers appreciate student tolerance to art music (pp. 168-169).
Some teachers have tried to meet halfway with students by analyzing pop music in the classroom in the same way art music would be analyzed. However, Abeles et al. (1995) point out that some students fear this would “ruin” the piece for them. Instead, the authors suggest finding a balance by pointing out features of pop music that compare to elements of art music, thereby making art music more familiar and accessible to students and increasing the chances of preference. Or, teachers can play the role of social psychologist by showing students how pop music has a role in the larger scheme of society.
Abeles, H. F., Hoffer, C. R., & Klotman, R. H. (1995). Foundations of music education (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomas Higher Education.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment