Richard Laprise

Reaction paper to V2020 Chapter 4

As an educator, what are my goals for my students? I believe we should be
developing individuals who can be happy and productive members of society. As a
music educator, I have always believed that one of my goals is for students to
continue to actively enjoy music through adulthood. Jellison offers extensive
evidence about how this is not the case for many students, but also offers some
direction that might lead to more success.
The low percentages of people who continue with music into adulthood as
reported in this paper are, of course, depressing, but also motivating. I believe I can
do my part as an educator to increase transfer. My values seem to be similar with
the views expressed in Jellison's paper, but I am wondering if developing students
who continue to be involved in meaningful music participation should be the only
motivating factor for school music education. If we follow every aspect of her
advice, would we start to lose other parts of music education that we value?
Deciding what should be eliminated from a curriculum to benefit transfer should be
examined for possible consequences. Is it best to base our students' education on
what we want their relationship with music to be in adulthood, or should it be based
on what we want their relationship with music to be currently? Are they the same? I
think, with some creativity, they could be.
Planning curriculum based on what skills and knowledge students need as
adults has changed my ideas of basing a curriculum on the skills and knowledge
needed by the end of 12th grade. Applying the transition principles to curriculum
reinforces the likelihood of students continuing to make music as adults. When

considering the first principle addressed by Jellison, I am reminded of the students

who ask, "what am I going to use this for in real life." I think that we should not only
seek out school music experiences that are similar to those in adult life, but make it
obvious to the students that they are similar. This way, when they are adults, they
are already aware that they have experienced something similar. In my personal
experience, people seem to be wary of the unknown- so lets make it known!
Ultimately, the greater amount of transfer from the transition between school
contexts to all other contexts can only improve the position of music in the schools.
If people value music as adults, they will value music for their children. As Jellison
said, It is difficult for most adults to define particular music knowledge and skills as
high priorities when there are few obvious negative consequences for lacking the
knowledge and skills. Our job is to decide which knowledge and skills will be
viewed as high priority for the future adults we teach.
An example of teaching using the transition principles is having a karaokestyle performance using songs learned throughout the year in a general music
class. Connected to the first principle, this performance is similar to a karaoke
performance as an adult, allowing for an opportunity of transfer. For another
example, rather than just rehearsing the same music over multiple weeks for a
concert, having daily sight-reading will align with principle #2, giving students more
opportunities to practice a skill (reading/performing music) using varied examples.
When telling a 5th grade trumpet player why sitting with good posture is important,
having him/her hear the difference in tone between good and bad posture, and
watching a video of a professional trumpet player playing with good posture relates
to principle #4 by making the principle of posture more meaningful to the learner.

Jellison presented an important problem with viable solutions in this paper. I

fear that not enough educators are aware of the problems and the possible
solutions, or if some of them even care. Are the music educators that build their
curriculum around competitions willing to teach for transference? Likely not. Will I?
You bet.