Does School Band Kill Creativity? Embracing New Traditions in Instrumental Music

The Traditional Teaching Trap

There are many good things about keeping traditions. Traditions can connect us to our past and to the future. They can give us the feeling that we are engaged in something bigger than ourselves and meaningful. When performing with or conducting a school band, one can get a sense of those who came before and of those who will continue the ensemble after we have moved on. The tradition of school band also involves it being one of the most visible aspects of schools. Performing at concerts, parades, and school and town functions, bands are usually seen by many more people than are participants in most other classes in school.

However, we must be careful of the trap of teaching in traditional ways. Many of us now conducting school bands performed in them as students. Many see this as a positive, but there are aspects of this experience left unexamined. Teaching is one of the only professions where we “apprentice” for our job (by being students) for sixteen or more years before we assume the role full-time. ⁴ Daniel Isbell, a professor and researcher in music education, suggests that students begin to identify with music teacher roles while still in high school. ⁵ As a result, many students “enter teacher education programs certain there is very little to think about, discuss, or challenge throughout their preservice education.” ⁶ They generally rely on their experience as students in band to inform their understanding of teaching school band and may be resistant to reflection and the idea of changing the way school bands are structured and function. Their experience in band has gone beyond training to conditioning. ⁷ They know what their experience was, so they think they can predict exactly what to expect when they assume the role of teacher. Later, when in the classroom, “teachers typically base their curricula on their own goals and the way they were taught.” ⁸ Furthermore, they may not be able to envision any other way of being in band; alternatives do not occur to them. In short, this is the way band goes.

I am not suggesting that all band directors fall into this trap or that a majority of music teachers willingly embrace this paradigm. However, teachers who wish to escape this trap of teaching in traditional ways may not be able to overcome the obstacles placed in their way. Many districts and schools have hardline curricula in place and may have quantified expectations for all band teachers and students in band. Learning here is seen as controllable and predictable. In this situation, both the teacher and the student are being oppressed: the teacher by the philosophy and superstructures of the district and of the music department in which they may not have any agency and the student by the decisions the teacher is forced to make while working within this structure.

Although this traditional, director-as-autocrat model of band may be becoming less popular as many music teachers embrace student-centered paradigms and look to engage students in creative activities, its shadow still looms over school band, and it may still influence music teachers, either consciously or unconsciously. Therefore, I describe it in detail in the hope that parts of it may resonate with readers and spark discussion.

Traditional Model of Band

The traditional model of band involves a teacher-centered classroom where the band director is in charge and makes all the major decisions. The director creates the seating arrangement for the ensemble, selects the performance literature, decides on musical interpretations, and makes many other decisions unilaterally that affect the ensemble. ⁹ Rehearsals generally include warming up, reading through and correcting sections or pieces planned for the day, and possibly a closing activity. If the school offers small-group lessons, these typically involve playing from method books and possibly correcting some of the more difficult parts of the concert literature.

Often, the director has multiple public concerts each year to prepare, as well as honors bands auditions, performances at school functions, and other musical obligations. The director may meet with the ensemble only once or twice a week and may be lucky to see students for lessons two or three times a month because of tests, assemblies, trips, and other interruptions to class. This may leave little, if any, time for students to engage in creative endeavors, such as improvisation, composition, or other music-making activities. Randall Everett Allsup of Teachers College, Columbia University, refers to this master–apprentice model of music teaching as a closed form and argues that this model is steeped in tradition, is hierarchical and canonical, and privileges a powerful or talented few.

Contrasting with this are open forms, which are flexible, embrace change and creation, involve uncertainty and risk, and are generally student-driven. ¹⁰ In the traditional, closed-form model, leadership, obedience, and products are prized above all else, as is the “spirit of American competitiveness, efficiency, exceptionalism, and means-ends pragmatism.” ¹¹ Add to this the pressure of state- and/or district-mandated standardized testing, which takes up rehearsal time, and it is no wonder that many directors fall, or feel forced, into this trap. Stuck in this structure, many teachers would feel hopeless and unable to engage students in creative activities, and we cannot blame them for feeling this way. Writing about the traditional model of band, Allsup and his research coauthor, Cathy Benedict, ask, with “[f]irst chair winners and last chair losers, numerical ratings, good years and bad years, statewide rankings: where is education in this compendium?” ¹² I would also ask, Where is the creativity?

Personal Experience

It is easy to fall into this trap, and I have fallen in as well. My story may sound familiar to you. I began teaching public school concert band in 2002. Band met twice a week before school. Students were routinely late, and rehearsals ran into or through homeroom, so students very often missed important announcements or information. I did not meet with students nearly as often as I would have liked because of nonmusical school obligations, tests that I was forced to administer or assist, and other school-sanctioned disruptions to learning. I constantly felt pressed for time, and I almost always felt frazzled by the time concert season approached.

Since then, I have taught in districts where band was not a valued part of students’ education. I have taught in districts where band was highly competitive and the district curriculum revolved around the “drill-and-kill” study of method books. Creative activities, such as improvisation, composition, and electronic music-making, were heavily frowned upon. I found myself frustrated working with only method books and concert band literature. I began covertly including composition, improvisation, and electronic music-making into lessons and rehearsals. Eventually, structuring instrumental lessons primarily around these activities, group improvisation became my private rebellion (and later the focus of my dissertation). ¹³

How We Think about Music

How music educators think about education and learning informs what we value about music as well as how we see best to teach music. Although there are multiple paradigms for music learning, many educators agree with researchers, such as Christopher Azzara of the Eastman School of Music, who think of music learning and expression as analogous to language. ¹⁴ In this scenario, beginning instrumental music students first make utterances, then listen to more advanced players and copy what they hear until they themselves are able to speak the language. When looking at school bands through this lens, we can easily see if and where band’s shortcomings are.

Students in traditional band programs might spend the majority, if not the entirety, of their experience reading music that someone else wrote. This is not unlike sitting in English class and reading works by various authors. However, in English class, students are asked to write essays supporting or critiquing ideas, drawing parallels between themes, generating new interpretations of literature, and so on. Students in English class may also be asked to speak extemporaneously or take a stance on a topic being studied in class and offer their opinion. How often, if ever, are band students asked to “write” or “speak extemporaneously” in class? Students are asked to read music but in most cases are never asked to explore what they have read or to transform it into something new. Often there are no opportunities for students to compose or improvise. Playing in a traditional concert band becomes reduced to correctly executing musical interpretations decided on by the band director and successfully navigating a mandated list of lesson books. This autocratic way of teaching is not reflected in any other school subject. ¹⁵ In this relationship, researchers such as Brazilian educator and philosopher Paolo Freire would argue that the students are the oppressed and the teachers the oppressors. ¹⁶ The students have no agency and are merely passive recipients of whatever “knowledge” the teacher imparts upon them. Students here are not active participants in their learning.

Imagining New Paths

In this scenario, whose creativity is killed? Students simply reading and executing music may never get the opportunity to explore and create new music. Teachers forced into the trap of traditional methods of instruction instead of being allowed and encouraged to explore new and exciting ways to engage students in music and develop new understandings of instrumental music education may become frustrated and disillusioned with music teaching. Everyone’s creativity is extinguished. However, instead of giving up, music educators must resist and imagine new ways of teaching and learning. Educational philosopher and author Maxine Greene suggests that it is “an honor and a responsibility to be a teacher in such dark times—and to imagine, and to act on what we imagine, what we believe ought at last to be.” ¹⁷ There must be other ways.

Taking Burnard’s and Robinson’s definitions of creativity as well as our understanding of students’ experience in traditional band settings into consideration, what might a band program structured to promote and value creativity look like? What opportunities might it offer students and teachers? What can music teachers do to act as agents of change in their music department and in the field of instrumental music education? I offer some ideas, but there are many more to imagine.

Performing Ensembles

Restructuring the school instrumental music program is not a task a music teacher can accomplish quickly. Administrators, students, parents, and other stakeholders in the music program need to be informed and convinced. David A. Williams of the University of South Florida suggests that there are two commonly held beliefs that hold back music education—that schools must include traditional ensembles and that anything else is an “add-on,” “not the serious music-making business found in the band and choir.” ¹⁸ Instead of entirely changing the structure of their programs, I suggest that teachers start by including chamber groups or nontraditional ensembles, like drum circles, garage-band-style groups, or electronic music ensembles. When introducing students to chamber ensembles, teachers could have students research the pieces they are performing and create program notes and oral introductions of the pieces to inform the audience. ¹⁹ Teachers and students can have both traditional and nontraditional ensembles. Students want to play in rock bands and in the wind ensemble. ²⁰ Teachers could offer students a songwriting club and have students compose popular music. This setting requires a fluid student–teacher relationship, since the teacher acts more like a music producer and less like a band director. ²¹

The school instrumental music program structured to promote creativity might grow to include many different performing ensembles. Even within concert band, teachers could help encourage student creativity by asking students to imagine a story line, complete with characters and settings, to accompany their music. ²² Concert band might be one ensemble offered, but there would be chamber groups, electronic music ensembles, brass ensembles, percussion ensembles, popular music ensembles, mixed groups, improvisation ensembles, jazz ensembles, and others. Teachers could look at how their students are using and making music at home and incorporate that into their classrooms. ²³ No single performing ensemble would be the focal point of the program, and students would be encouraged to perform in as many as possible. With less focus and time spent on the concert band, students would be able to devote more attention to different aspects of their playing, experience performing in different types of ensembles, and explore the skills necessary to succeed in each situation.

Lessons

Small-group lesson time could be spent on dialoguing, improvising, composing, and rehearsing, while still retaining time for skill-developing activities. Students could offer various interpretations of their band music, which could be rehearsed and discussed as students move toward a more personal understanding of their music. In addition, teachers could engage students in score study to help them develop a more comprehensive understanding of their music. ²⁴ And, of course, if a student is struggling with a particular skill or idea, teachers should be prepared to offer assistance, specific method-book lines, or exercises that may help.

Students could be asked to create new music. “Preparing ensemble repertoire promotes work toward convergent solutions and an accurate performance, while creating one’s own music requires divergent thinking for which there are multiple answers.” ²⁵ Lesson groups could be asked to improvise. I suggest starting with a prompt, riff, or given set of notes to use as a jumping-off point so that students do not feel overwhelmed. Students may choose to improvise alone or in a group; however, teachers should recognize that students might be working on something personal while also participating within the group. ²⁶ With enough time allowed for experimentation (and an equal amount of trust in the teacher and in each other), spontaneous playing can take shape. Afterward, deconstruct the students’ playing to learn more about what they chose to play and why they made certain musical decisions.

Lessons can also revolve around students composing or remixing music along particular themes or ideas. The teacher could offer ideas, such as a scale, a style, or even a concept like minimalism, and then have students compose using these ideas. Teachers could even compose for students or compose with students, modeling their own creative process. ²⁷ Eventually, the teacher may tie these threads together; for example, the band music involves a prominent ostinato pattern, so students are asked to include an ostinato in their compositions or are given one as a prompt for improvisation. Here, the teacher acts as co-learner and continues to grow and develop alongside students as both student and teacher strengths are shared and appreciated. Students and teachers are each invited to contribute as well as explore. Allsup suggests that this is when teachers are at their best—when they are on the edge of knowing and unknowing, learning and unlearning. ²⁸

Concerts

Concerts could also take a new form and would perhaps resemble, for example, the popular Prism concerts that many schools produce where the focus passes from one type of ensemble to the next throughout the course of the performance. Or perhaps there could be multiple smaller concerts throughout the year, each with a different focus. Teachers could provide a public outlet for student composers and improvisers, either through a dedicated concert or by working student work into existing performances. ²⁹ The new structure of the program would allow ample time for rehearsals as well as offer multiple and varied performance opportunities.

This reimagined program would offer students many opportunities that they may not have in a traditional program and may help reframe music learning for them. Students’ understanding of music playing and learning could be changed. Students would be encouraged to think critically about the music they perform and their role in their respective ensembles. Instead of viewing themselves as only a “third clarinet player,” they may view themselves as taking on myriad musical roles—simultaneously a clarinet player in concert band, an improviser, a woodwind quintet member, and the clarinet player/vocalist in a rock band. Rather than passively receiving information, feedback, and direction from a teacher, students would be able to discuss ideas with their classmates and make decisions about their playing and about the direction their ensembles take in rehearsing and performing literature. This could help them develop a deeper understanding of the music, their creativity, and themselves as musicians.

Teacher Roles

Teachers would also have new opportunities and roles in this setting. While managing many small ensembles in addition to a larger concert band may sound like much more work, teachers could choose to relinquish much of their decision-making power to students by having students help select music, asking them to compose small pieces for their ensembles, and encouraging them to improvise and spontaneously make new music. For example, a teacher may select ten to twelve pieces for an ensemble and have students rehearse each of them for a few weeks. During this time, the students could be actively involved in discussing the pieces, their possible interpretations, and their relevance to the ensemble and the other pieces rehearsed. Lori Custodero of Teachers College, Columbia University, suggests that music teachers “who ask why a student may be performing in a certain way will be developing tools for their own understanding of what it means to musically educate.” ³⁰ Through thoughtful discussions with students, a final short list of pieces could be selected. Here, the decision making is shared. However, teachers should be open to students bringing in music or making suggestions for rehearsal and performance.

When engaging students in creative activities, teachers would need to include space for silence as ideas germinate and develop, and then allow students to explore their musicality, have discussions, and get frustrated. Many teachers, myself included, have been told that silence in a classroom is bad. Students may get unruly or lose focus, so rehearsals and lessons should be programmed as tightly as possible. However, it is during the silences when ideas develop or deepen. After asking a question, teachers should allow ample time for students to answer, especially if asking thoughtful, meaningful, or provocative questions (playing devil’s advocate). For example, if rehearsing Robert W. Smith’s “The Great Locomotive Chase,” a teacher may ask a percussion class, “What can we do to make the snare drum really sound like a moving train?” The teacher should then allow space for silence as students consider options and let them try out different sticking patterns or accents without comment.

Becoming comfortable with classroom silence allows students space to think or experiment without the feeling of needing to answer immediately. The role of the teacher shifts from the all-powerful band director and holder of all knowledge to the wise music teacher, coach, and guru who is responsive to students’ learning needs and who can help students develop a more comprehensive understanding of music and themselves as musicians. Teachers can move between Allsup’s open and closed forms in the classroom—directing when necessary and also providing space for exploration—and blend old and new ways of teaching. ³¹

Final Thoughts

Some music teachers may read this article and vehemently disagree with me or think I am being needlessly provocative. ³² However, I believe that music education has become disconnected from the prevailing culture and that too many teachers try to turn schools into museums by desperately trying to protect the things they love. ³³ Teachers looking to escape the trap of teaching in traditional ways and help their students have a more comprehensive musical experience can take action. Look into successful programs and examples, such as Laura Sindberg’s (of the University of Minnesota) Comprehensive Musicianship through Performance and David Williams’s iPad ensemble at the University of South Florida. ³⁴ Read more research about creativity, imagination, and music learning.

My suggestion would be to start with people like Pamela Burnard, Maxine Greene, and Keith Sawyer. Get on curriculum-writing committees. Weave creative practices into the fabric of both your curriculum and your practice. Present your ideas for change to your administration and boards of education. Escape from the trap, and explore what others are doing and what else can be done. Start small and gradually increase space for whatever you and your students can imagine. Some music teachers may read this and already work within this type of program. I encourage you to get out and spread the word about what you do. Write about your experience, present at local conferences, and help colleagues who are looking to try something new. And check out the “Resources for Further Reading on Creativity” at the end of this article.

Traditions can be wonderful things, but blindly following traditions and traditional ways without question can lead to stagnation, boredom, and ultimately inferior musical experiences for teachers and students. Imagine a new way. Try something different. Embrace new traditions.