? regarding music education....

[n3wman918]

Hello, I have a few questions regarding a continuing education in music. At the end of this semester I will be receiving my associates degree in liberal arts and would like to move on and get my bachelor's in music education. The difference between a degree in music and music education is just that there are education classes as well as music courses? Also, I have taken music courses in high school and college but I'm mostly self-tought in theory. I just started piano lessons 4 months ago and I'm picking it up pretty fast so my teacher says. My concern is that i won't be able to get into any program because I can only really learn to play pop songs(video game and movie scores etc) Basically, arpeggiated I-IV-V-1 chords. I don't think I can use this kind of music to audition to get into the programs and stuff. My talent in music(I think, anyway) Is composition. Here's some of my work just so you get an idea:

https://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=1036369

If I'm not making sense or if my thought seem scattered, i apologize I'm just really stressed with the whole situation. Thank you.

[lostinidlewonder]

Don't be worried, not all musical program at universities are "classical" piano based. The best bet is to go to the university and ask for their music programs most reputable ones will have a "contemporary/jazz" option and you can get a better feel for what you will have to learn.

[n3wman918]

thanks for the quick reply! I'll do some more research then. Thanks you for letting me know. I was really working myself up over this.

[Bob]

Yeah, there are different type of schools for music.  If you have some background, someone will want you (If you can pay, there's someone who will teach you something or sell you a degree.).

Music ed can be split into tracks.  If you're on piano, you might be in the choir/general music track at some places.  Though you could probably take more music ed classes once you're in -- The degree you walk out with might be "music education" and not band, choir, or general music.

Music ed has some methods courses for your area -- band/orchestra/instrumental, choir, or general music.  You can learn about the instruments -- hands on learning, instrument technique classes -- if you're in on the band track or if you can get in from being on the voice side.  Conducting classes too, but geared toward your track -- band, choir, orchestral. 

There are the generic education classes you have to take.  History of education, foundations of education, etc. etc. etc.  A lot on political correctness. 

You don't necessarily even have to set foot in an actual classroom for a long time.  A flaw in the system.  There is student teaching later but it's at the end and you've already gone through everything by that time.


And music courses of course.  Music theory, ear training, music history.  If you've got piano background, that's good because those classes just plough through material.  The people I saw who were really good at it were already really good at it before they started.  But everyone improves.  Some people are really lost if they don't know the clefs or a keyboard.  Or their scales and triads.  There are keyboarding classes too.  Those are geared toward people without any piano background, but they also teach improv and transposition which traditional piano lessons don't always cover.

It's an education degree, so you have to meet whatever the requirements are for the state you're in in order to be certified as a teacher.

Probably a requirement to be an an ensemble or some type of performing group.

And there's jazz, world music, computers, composition, etc. 

Some actual teaching experience is nice too.  With jazz and teaching experience, you should have something extra -- Everyone's graduating with the same basic requirements. 

From what I've heard the degree is a five year degree, but places make it four on paper -- People who go (pay) to the places who offer the degree in less time.  No one's going to say they take longer than everyone else. 

And from what I've heard too (although I'm not sure), but everyone I know did half gen ed classes and half music classes the whole time -- for four years (at least).  It wasn't a situation where you could do all your gen eds and then do all the music classes.

And beyond that, there's the actual teaching environment which is nothing like college.  For those who make it up to their first year of teaching, half quit during their first year.  By the end of the first five years, 75% have quit.  I think there's only something like 10% left after 10 years.  I think college is just a business.  As long as people are willing to pay, they will teach -- Whether they teach things that allow people to be successful, I'm not sure.  I haven't seen many places looking at their graduates much to see how their teaching affected them.  Which sounds nuts -- Like a chef who cooks food and never looks at it after it's out of the oven.  Colleges are very focused on recruiting more people -- More to teach, more money to exist on. 

If you end up teaching in the schools, public or private, it's its own world.  You have "the masses" of kids and parents.  Administrators who don't always care about music or art to deal with (Music being a higher priority than art now because of No Child Left Behind -- Music is requires someone who actually knows something about music.  "Art" requirements can be met by the general classroom teacher who really doesn't know anything about art but is comfortable doing macroni pictures.  There's only maybe... Think about the student body in general, "the masses."  There's about 10% who are intelligent and disciplined and will do what you ask.  2% maybe who have a real interest in music.  Maybe 25% on the bottom who have trouble with everything -- can't read, can't read a clock, can't tie their shoes.  And the middle majority.  You teach mostly to that middle -- And that means you're teaching people who don't have a strong interest in music and don't put much time or effort into it.  It can still work nicely, but you're not always going to be making a high level of music -- If a 5th grade knows what a quarter note is you might be doing good.  If you're high school ensemble can play basic music you might be doing good.  *If* you have a school (it's the community really) who have some understanding of music and support it.  You might not have any tools to teach with -- That's something they don't mention in college.  The more successful teachers I have seen enjoy being around kids and enjoy teaching in general -- not really anything music-wise, more people and teaching oriented. 

As far as skills go -- I'd go with the people and basic teaching (almost like a priest in that way) skills go over any content knowledge.  Performance skills mean squat in a school environment.  No one cares and teachers who had no trouble learning things can be shocked (and quit) when they have to teach kids who don't get things right away (or at all).  I can think of one guy in college who was more of a beginner and weaker on his instrument who is still teaching today.  He has more people skills and a laid back, nice personality compared to a lot I saw in the program.  And actually for content, I think someone could teach music without really knowing much about it -- Just by being encouraging and *appearing* confident in what they say (as opposed to actually knowing what they're doing and knowing the right answers).  There are plenty of music teachers out there who are teaching in areas outside of their expertise and are screwing kids up -- But if the kids are happy, the parents are happy, the admin is happy... people think everything's going ok.  And it is if all they want is a taste of music.  That doesn't take much.  But it's not the same as building students up with the potential to become musicians later.  I really don't think the system is set up that way though.

There's private teaching too but you don't have to be certified -- not with a state certified music ed degree -- to teach that.  If someone pays you, you can teach.  You can do that right now.  Anyone can do that.  Some organization like the Music Teachers National Association offer certificates (something like that) if you fulfill their requirements which is something a little more to make you stand out, at least in terms of paperwork credentials.  For piano, if you want to teach, you could get a doctorate and teach at the college level -- no certification required. 

So for your situation, yes it sounds possible.  You're going to have to convince everyone that you really want to teach though.  And that you value classical music -- Movie music and moreso video game music is probably looked down upon in general in academia.  Jazz is accepted now, but how long did that take?  You would have to convince the college people that you really want to teach.  And then do all the coursework -- I'm still thinking that's going to take four years.  I knew one person who did it in three but they only did bare bones coursework.  And are still today today too though.  You can always pick up more later, but it will be harder to do if you have a full-time job (and family, haha).  Impossible in some situations from what I've heard.

I suppose too another aspect they don't tell you in college is the family impact.  For high school music teachers, you're basically married to the job -- *A lot* have marriage problems.  Mr. Holland's Opus had that angle right.  I recently heard some music teachers who were dividing other music teachers up into categories -- Those with broken marriages and those "who were single and would probably always be single." 

So for teaching, you really have to enjoy being around people and kids -- working with people -- kids, parents, admin, community.  And being very visible in the community -- an icon/pillar of the community, always in the spotlight no matter when or where you are.  Unless you get one of those high school jobs where they have several ensembles and you get the top one, the quality of music making probably isn't going to be on your level (It shouldn't be if you've gone through college and all that.). 

I would imagine you can get in, maybe even moreso with the economy -- If you can pay, someone will take you.  If you can play pop stuff, you can play some basic classical stuff and get in that way.  Or add a little jazz improv (it can hide things). 

A lot of people switch majors and things, so if you did do college in six years total, I don't think that's unusual.  There are all kinds of situations in college.

And you would have a nice selling angle -- You decided to go into music teaching and knew it so much that you went back after one degree to get that teaching degree.  Principals would love that.

Oh... dang.  I see another potential problem -- Those gen ed classes.  Depending on where you go, for teacher certification in that state, they might not count all of the existing gen eds for your previous degree.  It's probably very smart to compete the 2-year degree so it's finished and final.  I remember hearing about some ticked off people who had to retake essentailly the same coursework because the credits wouldn't transfer over -- X-class at X-school doesn't count at this other school.  That would definitely be something to watch for. 

Good luck.  Persistence and dedication count.  To a point. Some is just dumb luck too I think.

[Bob]

Your teacher's nearly always going to say you're doing well -- You're their income.  You're the result of their teaching -- If you do poorly, that might mean they're doing poorly as a teacher.  For public impression -- They're students are doing well.  Otherwise, they'll look bad.  That's one reason for the ratings systems and competitions. 

I would just take what your teacher says with a grain of salt.  If you're working, of course you're going to progress.

[n3wman918]

Thanks for the incredibly detailed replay Bob. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question so thoroughly. Luckily, I work at a pre-school so working with kids isn't exactly new to me. I have friends who quit teaching as well because of having to "deal" with children. I have a lot to think about now.  figured being a music teacher would be my best bet because I love music and I already have experience teaching children in some form or another. I would get a degree in 'just' music but there's not much i can do with that to sustain a living.

[Bob]

You should be fine for teaching young kids.  You really don't even have to know how to play the piano to do that.  You should sing with them though. 

And if you're a guy, that won't hurt.  "Children need a positive male role model in their lives."  You'll have that working for you.  Realistically, if you're an ethnic minority, you'd really be gold, unless the admin thinks the community would be afraid of you.  It's a little off, but that's what I've seen -- Most teachers for young children are female.  Male teacher are a lot harder to find.  They won't say it -- can't say it -- but admin are always looking to diversify their employees.

If you want to work with young kids, there's more than just the school systems.  You could get trained and certifed in other areas, like Kodaly, Orff, Suzuki, etc.  There are separate programs for that outside of the school system, although they're probably not full-time.

If you can play I IV V on piano, you're probably already fine.  Plenty of people teach early music without much for piano skills.

[pianisten1989]

You should be fine for teaching young kids.  You really don't even have to know how to play the piano to do that.

Eh..? I hope you're not serious..? That's the thing that ruins it for so many kids. I had a piano teacher who was a violinist, and only could read notes, but not play the piano. I somehow made it anyway but if I'd had a Real pianist as a teacher I would probably be way better by. so if you want to teach kids, you Really have to know how to play the piano...


If you don't get accepted at a university this year, just apply next year.. It's not worse than that..

[Bob]

That's a big debate among music teachers -- Should you play the piano while the kids sing or not?  Some say it prevents the kids from learning to sing independently if there's a piano all the time. 

And there are recordings.  I'm talking about early music, general music.  Young kids.  There are many, many music teachers out there who can't play the piano very well but are doing fine for teaching.  Sing and dance along with the kids, no piano necessary.  They're not teaching them piano -- It's just music exploration.  If they show the kids the piano and everyone makes some kind of sound on it, that's fine.  They've been exposed to piano.

And an early music who sits and plays the piano isn't going to do very well.  The teacher needs to up and moving around sometimes with the kids.  A high level of piano proficiency isn't going to do much good.  Even for concerts -- You could get/hire an accompanist and then the teacher is free to conduct/coach the kids.  If the teacher plays the piano themself, then it can make the kids less comfortable as a group since they don't have their familiar teacher in front of them.  But that's if they do a concert.  Young kids really don't need to.

[Bob]

On the piano teaching side, there are so many people out there teaching piano who don't really play the piano themselves, that I would say, sure why not?  Anyone can teach piano if someone is willing to pay or take lessons.  And there are so many who aren't really even a pianist that someone who is a pianist, even at a lower level, I would think would be better than a non-pianist.

That still really annoys me.  I still remember when I first found out some guys I knew were giving piano lessons and "got an A in Piano 101."  They still got teaching experience though and people were stupid enough to take lessons from them.  And pay them too.  Haha. 

[oxy60]

To anyone who is looking at credentialed public school teaching, I would suggest that they have another subject specialty other than the arts. The arts are always spoken about  as frills (but all of us here know differently) and when the reading and math scores fall the arts programs are the first to be cut. Do you notice it's never football?

[pianisten1989]

And an early music who sits and plays the piano isn't going to do very well.  The teacher needs to up and moving around sometimes with the kids.  A high level of piano proficiency isn't going to do much good.  Even for concerts -- You could get/hire an accompanist and then the teacher is free to conduct/coach the kids.  If the teacher plays the piano themself, then it can make the kids less comfortable as a group since they don't have their familiar teacher in front of them.  But that's if they do a concert.  Young kids really don't need to.

Ofc, I don't mean the to be a "Look how fast I can play. Now you do it!". Though, the method is up to the teacher and the student, if they develop more if they only sit down and play, that's fine. But I mean, none should have to have a teacher who says "Oh come on! It's just pressing down notes", with no technical ability what-so-ever. That'll ruin all chances of becoming a good pianist.

[Bob]

The early music classes I mean aren't training musicians or pianist.  Just exposing kids to music.  Kind of like Seasame Street or Barney.

I was suprised haring music teachers being so upset about a general music teacher playing the piano while kids sing, but they have a point too.  It didn't change much of what I do though.  I'm already set.