Week 7

The topics this week turned to what is somewhat more familiar territory for me.  Many of the administrative tools covered are already familiar to me since I already use many of the Google tools to keep myself organized and on track.  I have used Google Drive for some time to store my compositions in the cloud and to share them with collaborators as well as transmit them to colleagues around the country and the world.  I started using this after Google began restricting the size of files that could be sent as email attachments which made it difficult because score files would often exceed those limits.  I have used Google Calendar also because it syncs directly with my cellphone so that once an item is entered on any of my platforms all notifications come to me wherever I am.

That being said, I did have a little learning curve regarding the presentation and newsletter assignments.  The main reason for that is that I am more familiar with the Microsoft Office programs than these particular Google versions.  I usually work in MS Word and create presentations with PowerPoint.  The Google versions are not that different, but it still is a bit of a challenge when one is used to one procedure to adapt to a slightly different command structure.  In some ways this was a similar challenge to what we experienced in the transition from using Finale to Noteflight or Musescore in earlier assignments.

The creation of a quiz in Forms was an eye opening experience.  I had not been aware of just how easy it was to construct this interactive type of form and the process the grading through Flubaroo.  I did find that the grading in Flubaroo doesn't work as well for short answer type questions as it does for multiple choice or checkbox items.  Short answer still requires more judgement in scoring the questions than the program is able to provide.

I still continue to be amazed at the number of creative apps that we are being made aware of through the PLN.  The value of this tool is becoming more evident all the time and this is definitely something that I will keep up with even after the class is complete.

Week 6

The most interesting concept of this week is the Webquest.  I have had students use the Internet for research before but I have not pushed them to take things to another level through encouraging them to synthesize and apply that new knowledge into a specific problem solving project.  It took a while and several readings of the various materials to get a real grasp on the unique nature of this project as well as the possible benefits to our students of this type of active inquiry.

The "Top 5" format of the discussion prompt this time was an interesting twist on the format.  It was a good way to generate thought not only on what stood out, but also as to why it mattered.  Reading some of the lists compiled by other students caused me to rethink some of the things I had left out.  This type of interaction has also proven valuable through the PLNs where others have helped make me aware of resources that I never would have been able to uncover on my own.

It is also interesting how the content from other courses we have taken previously in this program is starting to cycle back around into these discussions.  For example, we took a full course in Instructional Design last fall which was heavy in the process of backwards design.  This topic came up again in this week's reading section with a similar rationale and explanation.  In addition, issues related to assessment are starting to loop back to the Student Assessment class of last summer.  I suppose it is a good thing that the various pieces are starting to come together for me since I am almost 2/3 of the way through the program.

Week 5

One part of the reading for this week (Bauer, 2014) that really resonated with me was the description of the various ways that human beings intuitively respond to music.  The outlining of Hallam's research into the types of responses to music (p.105) made a lot of sense.  Physiological responses are the very reason that we employ things such as fight songs or stirring national anthems.  Motor responses have been the reason for work songs and dance music.  Intellectual responses explain the continued popularity of Bach's fugues and inventions, while I have an aesthetic response every time I hear Barber's Adagio for Strings or Daniel Barenboim's Chicago Symphony recording of Nimrod.  While I accept that these reactions are culturally conditioned, they are still very real to me and thousands of others.  Part of our responsibility as music educators is to help our students understand why these responses are appropriate in our culture, while also helping expand their awareness of how these same type of responses are generated in different ways by the music of other cultures.

The piece of music software that I ran across and chose to use for the evaluation review (EarMaster Pro 6.1) was one that I had not been aware of previously.  The more that I worked with the free trial copy, the more impressed I became.  In my opinion, it is a tremendous tool to help students with ear training, sight singing, rhythmic and melodic dictation, theory and many other aspects of musicianship.  I definitely plan to purchase and make use of this technology in my classes.

Learning to properly use Diigo was another technical challenge for a "digital immigrant" like myself.  I am starting to get the basics, but I am sure there is a lot more for me to learn in order to be able to make effective use of it.  This does provide another nice addition to my PLN and adds one more way to become acquainted with other resources that can enrich my teaching strategies.


Bauer, W.I., (2014). Music Learning Today: Digital pedagogy for creating, performing and responding to music. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press.