If you are an adult who played or studied an orchestral string instrument at any point in school, chances are that you, like me, encountered a program that looked something like this:
Somewhere around 3rd-5th grade students can sign up for orchestra! Lots of kids join. Some students have had private lessons before this point (largely Suzuki method), some add private lessons sometime after the first year.
Somewhere in Junior High/Middle School, students either go all-in: develop a (semi-regular) practice habit, pick up a quality instrument, maybe start private instruction; OR they quit. Generally students reach a NYSSMA-level 3 (Suzuki Book 3-4) before moving on to high school.
High School Orchestra is largely homogenous because students who struggle have already quit. Students can sight-read, play a wide variety of repertoire, begin a symphony orchestra program (where winds are introduced into the ensemble) and can usually hack at least one challenging (NYSSMA level 5-6) piece per year, along with a variety of lower-level pieces.
Sound familiar? Congratulations! You were lucky enough to attend a school district with a comprehensive, sequential instrumental program! Unfortunately, these kinds of programs have long been in a state of decline, and many have disappeared altogether.
Don't get me wrong, there are problems with this model. The first, and most egregious of which is that we lose approximately 80% of students that initially enroll somewhere in the middle school years. Then we wonder why music education is under-appreciated!
Ironically, many orchestra directors really enjoy their homogenous, high-achieving ensembles, and their teaching schedules would be highly disrupted if more students were enrolled and additional, lower-level ensembles were required. This challenge is one of many that many urban orchestral programs face.
A Bronx Tale
Like most urban schools, the orchestra program I teach in the Bronx is the opposite of homogenous. Some students began a school-based strings program in the 4th grade. Some start in 6th grade with me. Some students come from robust elementary music programs, some have no music training whatsoever. A few have experience with music from a community-based organization or church, but it may not be on the instrument they are studying in orchestra. None of the students are programmed for my class based on their experience, their instrument, or their ability. Instead, they arrive in a hodgepodge of instruments and ability levels. And I have it easy!! Colleagues of mine in NYC teach unusual combinations of instruments which may include orchestral strings with a bit of guitar, some percussion, and maybe a few winds. How about keyboard? Anyone for keyboard?
Because of these unique challenges, many urban music teachers have learned to differentiate for our students' diverse experiences and needs. We have learned to adapt repertoire and change our instructional approach. Because somehow, no matter our students' former training, experience, or ability, no matter whether they come to us in a homogenous or diverse class setting, no matter what challenges our programs face, we have to make it work, make it fun, and make it sound good for ALL our students!! If we can do that, and do it EVERYWHERE, we will begin keeping 80% of our students in our programs rather than losing them.
EDU-SPEAK TRANSLATOR: Differentiation
Differentiation broadly means tailoring instruction to meet the different, individual needs of the students in the classroom.
repertoire choice
For any ensemble director, the ability to differentiate begins with good repertoire choice. If we are to meet the different, individual needs of all or our students, we have to find pieces with multiple entry points AND exit points.
ENTRY POINT refers to how students might first begin learning a piece of music. While sight-reading a piece of music off the page is one way a student might first encounter a piece, it should never be the ONLY starting point. Consider:
Can/should some portion of this piece be learned by ear?
Is there an opportunity for improvisation, arrangement, composition, or some other creative input from the students in the piece?
What is fun, exciting, or engaging about this piece that can be used to hook students and peak their interest?
How can I introduce this piece OTHER than just requiring students to sight-read it?
EXIT POINT refers to what is required of students at the final performance of this piece. It is important to give ALL students the opportunity to feel they contributed positively to the success of the ensemble by performing their part well.
Does the piece hit the Goldilocks test for the middle 75% of the ensemble? We always want just enough challenge that the students have to work for it and learn new things, but not so much that it is frustrating and students give up.
For students who perform well below the median ability of the ensemble, is there some modified part that exists or can easily be created that would hit their Goldilocks level?
Is there an opportunity to provide a challenge for those who perform well above the median ability of the ensemble so they don't get bored?
Can/Should I write parts to meet the individual learning needs of my students? Is this piece worth it?
For concrete examples of what this approach might look like, I recommend Sound Differentiation by Alfred. But one beginning-level book is not enough when we need to continue to differentiate all the way through high school.
More ideas, advice, and examples on how to create differentiated repertoire COMING SOON to this blog!
DIFFERENTIATING INSTRUCTION
Regardless of the subject, educators differentiate in four main areas: Content, Process, Product, and Environment. Below is a description of what each area might look like in the orchestra classroom specifically.
content
In this context, "content" refers to the medium, or resources, students are using in order to meet a learning objective. For example, if the goal is for students to learn to play the D Major scale, students could choose from a menu of options that might include:
Watching a video
Listening to a recording
Following a fingering chart
Reading from the staff
Depending on the student's level of understanding and preferred method of learning, students may be more successful with one medium than another. When more than one resource is offered, students often have a more complete understanding, as well as references that can support independent practice.
It is a mistake to assume that because you demonstrated it from the podium that the students have learned it. After all, "Telling isn't teaching," and neither is demonstration. Giving students resources that they can interact with over and over again (even when you are not there) is important. Of course, that does not mean that you SHOULDN'T demonstrate from the podium!!! Just consider additional resources to support student's learning.
More on differentiated content COMING SOON to this blog!
Process
In this context, "process" refers to the activities students engage in to make sense of what they are learning. In the D Major scale example, students might:
Create their own fingering chart, labeling only the notes of the scale.
Notate the scale on the staff, indicating locations of the half-steps, and using sharps where necessary.
Create a "how-to" video demonstrating to another student how to play the scale.
"Re-mix" the scale by creating their own rhythm or bowing pattern, or putting it to a rhythm track.
Too often, we orchestra teachers rely on "play it, then play it again." If we can mix up the learning activities to engage students who process learning music differently, it will increase the number of students engaged in the learning, and the quality of the learning outcome.
Product
This area of differentiation comes back to repertoire choice. It is the most challenging area any performance-based ensemble. At the end of the day, the final product is always to PERFORM TOGETHER. We can't really change that, nor should we. However, we do need to acknowledge that not every student is ready to perform at the level of the ensemble as a whole. Some students need more challenge than the average, some need much less.
In the D Major scale example, if we are looking for an individual assessment, then it is easy to simply modify the tempo and/or the number of notes required for individual students. Advanced students can do 2- or 3-octaves in 1/16th notes while struggling students can play just the first 5 notes of the scale at whatever tempo they can execute well. But when it comes time for these students to perform on stage together, we need some way to balance these extremes so all students feel successful at whatever level they are.
I frequently compose modified parts for my struggling students. Sometimes I also compose challenging, obbligato-style parts for my rock-stars. If we were to perform the D-Major Scale as if it were a piece of repertoire, consider offering the following parts (in order from most basic to most advanced):
D-drone
Bass line: Root and Dominant only
Scale
Harmony (requires sight-reading, same tempo/rhythm as the scale)
Obbligato part (eighth notes, bowing variations, extended range, etc.)
If we approach repertoire as a yoga instructor, we would encourage our students to begin with Step 1, and if that is enough challenge for them, they can stay there. If they would like more challenge, go to Step 2, and so-forth. In my experience, most students will go for the challenge, and when they find they can't execute, they will practice that part until they can! This approach also offers an informal assessment opportunity for the teacher - it is easy to spot students' comfort level at a glance.
PEDAGOGY SIDEBAR: "Pachelbel's Canon"
Next time you program "Canon in D," consider avoiding an arrangement. Instead, offer students the same unison part with each variation labeled:
Bass Line (4 measures of 8 half-notes)
Theme (half notes - the full theme is 16 half-notes (8 measures) in total, but you can divide this further into 8 repeated half-notes (4 measures each) if needed).
Part A (Quarter notes)
Part B (Eighth notes)
Part C (Sixteenth notes)
OPTIONAL - add other variations commonly found in arrangements, or have students make up their own. Or MASH-UP with another popular tune!! Check out Pachelbel Rant, Axis of Awesome, and Rockelbel's Canon for ideas.
Students will work SO HARD for that sixteenth-note variation! Admittedly, some will only play the first 8 half-notes, but it will sound good! This then gives the opportunity for the students to do some arranging and really make the piece their own.
More on how to differentiate repertoire COMING SOON!
Environment
In this context, "environment" refers to the classroom "feel," not only the physical space and the things in it, but also the routines and habits ingrained in the classroom culture. Orchestra classes often sit in traditional ensemble seating, but this is not always the best option for every learner. Switching it up is often welcome and helps to provide everyone with a new perspective. Consider changing the typical set-up, but definitely put some thought into how often it will be helpful to change the routine. Too much change can have just as much of a negative impact as being stuck in a rut.
Stand up! Students are mostly sitting behind a desk all day - some students really can't learn when they are stuck in one position. Besides, we all play better when we stand! Even cellos have fun with figuring out how to play effectively while standing.
Sectionals - A familiar setting for all musicians. Consider giving students a checklist, rubric, or some "deliverable"product to keep them focused and on-task.
Stand-partner mentors - Group students with one strong and one weak player on each stand so one can help the other.
String Quartets - Group strong players together with one on a part and have them work independently in the back. Put weak players together in the front and give them some extra help. Then see if everyone can play together from their new spot.
Circle of Love - Make one giant circle with stands and chairs (or co-centric circles if space requires). Students must sit next to at least one person who plays a different part than them. This changes the sonic perspective drastically!
Repeat any of these alternate set-ups enough, and they become new, comfortable routines.
CONCLUSION
I would be retired by now if I had a nickel for every adult who said to me, "I used to play the _______ but I quit in the [6th-7th] grade. I really wish I still played." So why did they quit? Of course lots of students and their families have other priorities that take precedence. But I suspect that if the student really wants to continue, Mom & Dad won't say no. So how do we keep students motivated to continue?
I believe many of our students quit out of either frustration (they can't do what we ask of them) or boredom (what we are asking them to do is uninteresting). I propose that if we orchestra teachers can be a little more flexible in how we approach teaching and learning, and if we are willing to tailor the performance outcomes we expect from our students to them as individuals, we might retain more of them in our programs. If we can help every student feel successful in playing the instrument at whatever level is appropriate for them, it will make learning an instrument more fun!
We can not continue to graduate 80% of our high school seniors without high-school music instruction and expect them to support music education and arts organizations when they become adult citizens in our society. I have yet to meet someone who says, "Gee, I'm really glad I gave up that instrument." So let's see how far we can move the needle for the next generation!