Taming the Beast: learning and teaching in music technology
| Date: | 21 Jun 04 |
| Venue: | De Montfort University |
| Host institution: | De Montfort University |
Music Technology has emerged as a distinct discipline at all levels in education, with a huge impact on the HE sector. By its very nature, Music Technology is a magnet for the widest spectrum of music-making, from the most radical experimental musical iconoclasm, to the entertainment industry and the processes of disseminating music as a consumer product.
This one-day conference aimed to throw some light on the way educators are constructing coherent paths through this complex and exciting shift in context for music education.
Music Production at Leeds College of Music: a case study in course development and review
(Leeds College of Music)
Andrew Bates and Ben Burrows
Andrew detailed the new course in Music Production that had been set up two years ago at Leeds College of Music. The rationale for the course was explained - it included a clear three strand approach and heavy involvement from industry, together with the expectations on the students, at entry and during the course.
Ben discussed the review undertaken this year and the revised structure of the course which has been implemented as a result (including a complex multi-strand approach, the re-introduction of teaching of techniques/technology, and the removal of the industry input).
Questions focused on the industry involvement, the narrowing of the focus of some modules, the re-introduction of teaching of techniques/technology, the dropping of the entry requirement for Grade V theory, the progression routes, and broad vs deep aspects.
Documents
Teaching Collaborative Creativity within a music technology context
(Leigh Landy De Montfort University)
DMU runs an optional module where music students can work with dance or drama students, in groups, devising a piece of work or undertaking a similarly collaborative creative project. This is not a joint course - and the marks the students get count towards their subject degree.
Other issues discussed were: the levels of student learning, contract and assessment negotiation (a group may choose to have one collective mark or to have individual marks).
The presentation focused on the ways in which the tutors guide the students into the work, which is then heavily self-directed.
Documents
Sybil: Synthesis by Interactive Learning
(Michael Clarke University of Huddersfield)
Michael Clarke provided a demonstration of Sybil - his new software for teaching/learning sound synthesis. The content paradigm comes from his Synthia program of 1994 and the open-source learning paradigm from his CALMA project of 2000.
Documents
Teaching Creative Video to Music Technology students: our
(Deigo Garro Keele University)
Diego Garro presented the course he teaches which gets music technology people to do music/video work culminating in a music/video project. He presented the rationale behind the idea and showed some extracts of student pieces.
Questions focused on the rationale and the teaching support, and on the issues involved in teaching outside of people's main area of previous learning/experience. (What are the benefits of getting people with no fine arts training (or expertise, or talent) to make visual art?)
The benefits of preparing students for cross-discipline working were re-examined.
Documents
Identification, capture and development of compositional
(Nick Sargent Bath Spa University College)
All music technology is equal, except some is more equal
(Andy Keep Bath Spa University College)
Nick and Andy considered some key questions such as:
- What is the 'musicianship' of Music Technology?
- Where do scientific and musical perspectives on our discipline meet, and how does that influence teaching and curricular content?
- How does Music Technology shape models of creativity and how is creativity supported in a curriculum?
- How do we respond to new and emergent technologies within an undergraduate framework?
They focused on issues around what we teach and why we teach it, and on what we think we teach and what the students actually learn.
Questions rattled around - about all of the issues, about what prior knowledge and experience students bring, about how we cope with students doing work that their tutors could not, and yet not having the skills and knowledge that they enrolled to learn, and that the tutors are endeavoring to teach them, about whether we teach the technology instead of the techniques or the creativity, and if so how we avoid instant out datedness and/or slavery to market upgrading, etc. There is a real sense that it is not always easy to assess whether a student actually has got a deep understanding of the underlying principles if you only mark the work they produce. Logs, diaries, written work, etc., are not necessarily appropriate even if they were to be reliable ways of measuring it.
Documents
Discussion
In a short plenary to close the event, delegates raised further questions, including:
- Musicianship/musical skills - how do we handle these when working within a 'musical' framework?
- In what way does music technology fulfil the needs of key skills?
- Cross-disciplinary issues- the idea of technological 'convergence' means that digital arts do not limit people to working with audio or image, for example. Interactivity can integrate all media in the digital domain. What are the implications of this for the artistic vision that informs our teaching? How does it impact on the 'musicality' of music technology?
- Influence of popular music - is there a danger that music technology in a popular context leads to a form of 'second hand' music-making, i.e. music which in structure could be (better) realized through traditional instrumental means?
- In what ways does electroacoustic music integrate within curricula? It is central to the research dimensions of many programmes, but how does it inform undergraduate studies?
- How are contextual studies integrated into curricula? It seems that music technology students have difficulty in general with this aspect of programmes. What range of solutions exists for this problem?
- Where does teaching creativity and technology converge/diverge? Are we aware enough of the way we teach musical technique within the technological frame? Are inherently technological and inherently musical issues made clear enough? How much difference does it make to the student experience and 'graduateness' to develop technological tools?
- Because of the practical creative dimensions of many programmes, are we aware enough to the distinction between 'professional' and 'student' standards?
- The 'license to explore' is common to both students and researchers: how is this handled in delivery of programmes, learning outcomes, progression, etc?
- What is the 'canon' that informs the discipline?