Oracy and the Music Classroom

Part 5: More than initiate-respond-evaluate (IRE)

In part 1 I set out the basis for an approach to oracy in the music classroom. It assumed dialogic practice in place of monologic practice. It went beyond the orthodoxy of teacher initiates talk through a question, the pupil responds and the teacher evaluates that response (IRE). While this has its place, it is insufficient to nurture the development of deeper thinking about music which I maintain dialogic practice is able to do. In Part 4 I placed emphasis on the use of talking points whether devised by teacher or pupils and how these can be integrated into the process of music making. I also pointed out that a talking point can also be expressed as an enquiry question. A carefully designed talking point or enquiry question can be used to penetrate a whole sequence of work ensuring structural coherence. Part 4 provided some possible examples.

In chapter 4 of Learning to Teach Music in the Secondary School Chris Philpott specifically addresses student talk and cites Barrett in underlining its significance. [1]

‘Talk arises spontaneously from the creative musical experience. Talk occurs when the child selects and organises information in order to ensure its transmission with clarity and accuracy. The child must assume responsibility by initiating talk while working co-operatively on a music task, by sustaining talk and where necessary, by concluding talk.’ [2]

My interest is in the quality of pupil talk whether arising spontaneously or by design.

In Part 4 I introduced Littleton and Mercer’s ground rules for exploratory talk. These serve to support good talking and need to be internalised by pupils so that they can help each other develop their thinking about music through talk. AND THIS WILL ENABLE PUPILS TO CONTEXTUALISE THE USE OF MUSICAL LANGUAGE AND IMPORTANTLY, BE SPOKEN OF THEIR OWN VOLITION.

Liyttleton and Mercer’s ground rules for exploratory talk [3]

• Everyone offers relevant information
• Everyone’s ideas are treated as worthwhile – but are critically evaluated
• We ask each other questions
• We ask for reasons and give them
• We try to reach agreement
• People trust each other and work as a team

Time for another scenario.

Scenario 6: blending voices exploring vocal range

The year 7 class have decided to form singing triads. In this way they believe they can best improve the quality of their singing and provide each other with feedback. They are working on the Irish folk song Down by the Sally Gardens. The group decide on two talking points/enquiry questions: how do we come to blend our voices so as to sound like one? What is the most effect pitch range for our singing this song?

Much singing ensues interspersed with focused talking addressing their questions. Returning to the whole class there is much to offer vocally and a deepening understanding achieved through whole class discussion.

Notes:

[1] Carolyn Cooke, Keith Evans, Chris Philpott and Gary Spruce (eds) (2016) Learning to teach music in the secondary school: A companion to school experience, 3rd edition. Routledge.

In chapter 4, ‘Language and learning in music’ Chris Philpott deals with the relationship between language and learning in music in comprehensive fashion going beyond my focus on oracy and is highly recommended.

[2] Barrett, M. (1990) Music and language in education, British Journal of Music Education, 7, 1,: 67-73.

[3] Littleton. K. and Mercer. N. (2013) Interrthinking: putting talk to work. Routledge.

Oracy and the Music Classroom

Part 4: Talking Points (or enquiry questions)

It is difficult to imagine a music classroom, unless particularly contrived, where there is no talking, no reason to talk and where the music making, the musical interthinking, and musical skill development has no counterpointing dialogue. Whenever pupils are working with others, whether in a pair, group or whole class, there will be interthinking not only through music but through talk. But how productive is this? Do pupils know how to benefit from ‘exploratory’ talk, for example? The effects of exploratory talk on individual reasoning it is maintained promotes:

* Appropriation – transmission of knowledge and problem-solving

* Co-construction – synergistic construction of new knowledge through discussion

* Transformation – tool for children’s reflection, promoting ‘metacognitive awareness of how they talk and reason together’, leading to internalisation of Exploratory Talk as a model for reasoning

So might we find time to teach pupils what exploratory talk entails, how it can help them to think better and understand more?

In the Appendix below I have set out ways of establishing productive exploratory talk through the use of talking points.

Becky Clarey teaching year 9 to think and make music for film posed the question: Is ‘mickey-mousing’ the lowest form of film music? I don’t know how this question was integrated into the development of musical skills surrounding music for film. It may have been the enquiry question set in place at the outset of study, a question to be continually returned to as skills and understanding develop. The point is that by providing pupils with talking points/thinking points and through their learning to think about music as well as to think in sound, they hopefully engage with and reflect upon their processes of creating music leading to working more intelligently and with questions of their own arising.

Learning to talk well about music, think critically about it and make it more intelligently is a worthy component of progression within a musical education.

APPENDIX

Talking points: some examples

These examples are not necessarily perfect (!), but do give an idea of where ‘exploratory talk’ might co-exist with making in music (teaching and learning contexts). The idea of talking points has primarily been researched and used, so far, in the primary school context but many of us are now beginning to explore their use within a variety of secondary school contexts.The original idea can be traced back to Neil Mercer’s ‘thinking together’ project. First the need for ground rules.

Ground rules for exploratory talk
(Littleton and Mercer 2013)

• Everyone offers relevant information
• Everyone’s ideas are treated as worthwhile – but are critically evaluated
• We ask each other questions
• We ask for reasons and give them
• We try to reach agreement
• People trust each other and work as a team

Ground rules for writing talking points
(Finney and Earl 2013)

• Talking points must be inclusive so that everyone can understand them and find them interesting.
• Talking points need to be constructed so that there are simple answers and more complex ones. This keep groups engaged.
• Talking points need to be ‘enquiry’ based not focussed on developing specific skills.
• Talking points work when pupils don’t want to stop! Building them into a spiral curriculum, to the KS3 curriculum, for exmple, should help pupils develop their own ‘thinking.
• You need to keep groups to time when they do talking points (no more than 5-7 minutes initially) and encourage them to explore as many as they want to/can. Otherwise they just get stuck on the first talking point and never explore any wider or deeper.
• Everyone’s ideas are treated as worthwhile.
• Talking points work best if you pilot them first (e.g. with other adults?) and see which ones in practice promote exploratory talk (Mercer) rather than cumulative or disputational talk. If they work for you they’ll work for your students, usually.
• Talking points need to be contextualised in the lesson at a point where it is ‘natural’ to expand talk for exploring a ‘line of enquiry.’ e.g. just before a group performs their own composition or just after they have sung, They aren’t ‘starters and plenaries.’
• Writing good talking points is a new skill for many of us and it takes time to learn which ones work. Be ruthless in eliminating TP’s which turn out to be about ‘pushing’ an angle of our own or which just ask pupils to ‘comprehend’ what a particular aspect of music is. The teacher needs to be clear what mix (or separation) of making, social practice and/or ‘big questions’ the talking points are directed at.
• Talking points which involve researching something outside the context (making ,social practice, big questions) usually don’t work.
• Talking points work on the principle that the teacher does know, basically, the range of possibilities of what might be discussed. So they are ‘mediating’ the inter-thinking, not just allowing ‘any old thing’ to emerge.
• However the potential for a wide range of ‘pupil owned’ ideas is enormous, so write the talking points in a way which ensures they can work from their own music practice ‘then and there’ rather than speculating about ‘music in general.’
• For use in the classroom (and once you are sure what works), produce high quality powerpoint slides or cards and laminate them/keep the images up to date for re-use It builds an expectation in pupils’ minds that the activity is worth doing.

Sample talking points

A. Making
Composing
1. I can hear what I want the piece to sound like, from the start, in my head.
2. Sometimes I just need to play with sounds alone before ideas begin to work.
3. I don’t know what makes one composition better than another.
4. Composing really interests me. You never know what’s going to come out.
5. I am not sure why we ended up with the piece being this way. I think it might be because we agreed on the ideas but we didn’t know how to…..
6. I’m sure we ended up with this piece being this way because we agreed on the ideas and we did all know how to….

Singing
1. It’s easiest to sing by matching what someone else does.
2. When I sing I hear my voice inside as well as outside (myself).
3. I like it when I sound like other singers in the group.
4. I can increase the number of ‘voices’ I have.
5. If I play with my voice I can make all sorts of differences to the sound.
6. Singing out of tune is fun. Why not?

B. Music as social practice
Minimalism
1. There are only two things to do with a musical idea/motif: repeat it or change it.
2. Minimalist music doesn’t really have an ending.
3. Minimalist music can’t tell a story.
4. There is too much going on in this piece of music. (Steve Reich)
5. This music is ‘easy listening.’ (Philip Glass)
6. In music if you repeat an idea more than twice it is boring.
7. This piece must be difficult to perform. (Reilly’s ‘In C’)

Beat boxing
1. Beat boxing makes you feel as if you are a drum kit.
2. Hip-hop needs beat boxing – beat boxing needs hip-hop – beat-boxing is hip-hop.
3. Beat boxing turns your voice into an instrument.
4. Beat boxing is rhythm and pitch working together.
5. You have to move your whole body when you beat box.
6. Orchestras don’t mix with hip-hop.

Reggae performance
1. Moving to reggae influences the way I perform it
2. The way I move in performing reggae can show what reggae is.
3. Reggae movements feel foreign.
4. The way I move helps our group to perform.
5. Our school reggae performance is different to a Bob Marley reggae performance
6. There are enjoyable aspects to reggae
7. Reggae travels.
8. Why does reggae exist?

C. Big questions
1. Is some music better than other music? Why? Why not?
2. Music is the best possible way to show a feeling or understand an idea.
3. Why does music exist?
4. Why do some sounds interest more than others?

Bibliography:

Alexander, R. (2005) Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. York: Dialogos.
Bakhtin, M. (1981) The dialogic imagination. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.
Bakhtin, M. (1986) Speech genres and other late essays. Austin,Texas: University of Texas Press.
Biesta, G. (2005) Against learning: Reclaiming a language for education in an age of learning. Nordisk Pedogik 25: 52-66.
Dewey, J. (1966) Democracy and education. New York: The Free Press.
Dillon, T. (2004) ‘’’It’s in the mix baby’’: exploring how meaning is created within music technology collaborations’, in D. Miell and K. Littleton (eds), Collaborative Creativity: contemporary perspectives, London: Free Association Press.
Freire, P. (2000) Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Littleton, K. and Mercer, N. (2012) ‘Communication, collaboration and creativity: how musicians negotiate a collective sound’, in D. Hargreaves, D. Miell and R. McDonald (eds), Musical Imaginations: multidisciplinary perspectives on creativity, performance and perception, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Littleton, K. and Mercer, N. (2013) Interthinking: putting talk to work. London: Routledge.
Major, A. (2007) Talking about composing in secondary school music lessons. British Journal of Music Education, 24 (2), 167-178.
Plumb, J (2005) Practising democracy in a Cambridgeshire Village College. NAME Magazine 15: 3-6.
Seddon, F. (2004) ‘Empathic creativity: the product of empathic attunement.’ In D. Miell and K. Littleton (eds), Collaborative Creativity: contemporary perspectives, London: Free Association Books.
Seddon, F. (2005) Modes of communicating during jazz improvisation’, British Journal of Music Education, 22 (1), 47-61.
Sennett, R. (2012) Together: The rituals, pleasure and politics of cooperation, London: Allen Lane.
Spruce, G. (2012) Musical knowledge, critical consciousness and critical thinking, in C.Philpott and G. Spruce (eds) Debates in music teaching. London: Routledge.
Wegerif, R. (2011) Towards a dialogic theory of how children learn to think, Thinking Skills and Creativity 6: 179-190.

Oracy in the music classroom

Part 3: Two more scenarios

Before I say more about the use of talking points in the development of oracy in the music classroom, I owe my readers two more scenarios. Music teacher Josh from Birmingham has generously offered:

Scenario 4: Muslim heritage and music

The pupil is preparing to perform a piece of music for the class. They have brought in a daf drum. The teacher wants to know more and this leads to a discussion about the pupil’s Muslim heritage and surrounding beliefs.

Responding to Josh’s suggestion we might frame this with the question ‘what is meant by the term ‘musical heritage’?

A big question perhaps opening up discussion about the idea of ‘mixed musical heritage’ and the question: surely music can be separated from fixed cultural associations?

Wait a minute you will be thinking – do we really want music lessons to become talking shops?

No, beware of the lure of such a thing. If our talking doesn’t enhance our making, our beliefs and values and wider musical understanding, such talk will be counterproductive, a birth-strangled babe.

Perhaps think in terms of talking episodes, mostly short, integrated into the making process, and just occasionally more sustained.

Josh offers another possible scenario.

Scenario 5: Authenticity and the music industry

In a Sixth Form lesson, a pupil asks an off-topic question and wants to know whether the teacher watches Britains Got Talent. The teacher says they don’t like it. This leads to a discussion about the commodification of music and authenticity in the music industry.

One pupil then starts giving examples of music that feels ‘plastic’ to them. The teacher asks what music feels authentic to them. This leads to a lively discussion about Ella Fitzgerald and Rag’n’Bone Man.

The teacher introduces them to Adorno’s thinking on popular music. Most pupils can see the examples of ‘standardisation’ but don’t agree that makes the music not authentic. Some pupils ask for an Adorno reading at the end of the lesson.

In these scenarios we see pupils reaching into ‘why music?’ and the exploration of meaning and value in music. And we should note that the search for meaning has become a recognised category in both the Model Music Curriculum and the recent Ofsted Research Review.

Enough of Part 3. Part 4 will get into the role of talking points in the development of oracy in the music classroom.

But don’t forget: oracy thought of as a short episodic feature of classrrom practice, best integrated into making processes and just occasionally more sustained (perhaps as home work through social media).

And part of the claim that music is a subject of substance, thoughts and ideas contribution to ‘the conversation of mankind’ (as the distinguished educational traditionalist Michael Oakshott put it).