College Teaching / Studies in Methods of Teaching in the College

by Paul Klapper

Problems in teaching of music in the college

Although the question of purpose, method, and adaptation presents general difficulties of similar character in respect to the college administration of all the fine arts, music is undoubtedly the most embarrassing item in the list. In this department of our colleges there is no common conviction as to methods, no standardized system; but rather a bewildering disagreement in regard to the subjects to be taught, the extent and nature of their recognition, the character of the response to be expected of the student mind, and the kind of gauge by which that response shall be measured by teachers, deans, and registrars. In the matter of literature and the arts of design, where there is likewise an implicit intention of enriching æsthetic appreciation, an agreement is more easily reached, by reason of their closer relationship to outer life, to action, and the more familiar processes of thought. Few would maintain that the purpose of college courses in English literature is to train professional novelists and poets; the college leaves to the special art schools and to private studios the development of painters, sculptors, and architects. What remains to the college is reasonably clear. But in music, on the contrary, the function of the college is by no means so evident as to induce anything like general agreement. Should the musical courses be exclusively cultural, or should they be so shaped as to provide training for professional work in composition or performance? Should they be "practical" (that is, playing and singing), or simply theoretical (harmony, counterpoint, etc.), or entirely confined to musical history and appreciation? Should credits leading to the A.B. degree be given for musical work, and if so, ought they to include performance, or only theory and composition? Should musical degrees be granted, and if so, for what measure of knowledge or proficiency? One or two Western colleges give credit for work done under the direction of private teachers in no way connected with the institution:—is this procedure to be commended, and if so, under what safeguards? Should a college maintain a musical "conservatory" working under a separate administrative and financial system, many or all of whose teachers are not college graduates; or should its musical department be necessarily an organic part of the college of arts and sciences, exactly like the department of Latin or chemistry? If the former, as is the case with many Western institutions, to what extent should the work in the music school be supervised by the college president and general faculty; under what limitations may candidates for the A.B. degree be allowed to take accredited work in the music school? What should be the relation of the college to the university in respect to the musical courses? Is it possible to establish a systematic progress from step to step similar to that which exists in many of the old established lines? What should be the relation between the college and the secondary schools? Should the effort be to establish a continuity of study and promotion, such as that which exists in such subjects as Latin and mathematics? Should the college give entrance credits for musical work? If so, should it be on examination or certificate, for practical or theoretical work, or both? Should the courses in the history and appreciation of music be thrown open to all students, or only to those who have some preliminary technical knowledge?

These are some of the questions that face a college governing board when music is under discussion—questions that are dealt with on widely divergent principles by colleges of equal rank. Some institutions in the West permit to music a freedom and variety in respect to grades, subjects, and methods which they allow to no other subject. The University of Kansas undertakes musical extension work throughout the state. Brown University restricts its musical instruction to lecture courses on the history and appreciation of music. Between these extremes there is every diversity of opinion and procedure that can be conceived. The problem, as I have said, is twofold, and so long as disagreement exists as to the object of collegiate musical work, there can be no uniformity in administration.

In a university the problem is or should be somewhat more simple, just as there is a more general accord concerning the precise object of university training. In place of the confusion of views in regard to ideals and systems and methods which exist in the present-day college, we find in the university a calmness of conviction touching essentials that results from the comparative simplicity of its functions and aims. A conspicuous tendency in our universities is toward specialization; their spirit and methods are largely derived from the professional and graduate schools which give them their tone and prestige. They look toward research and the advancement of learning as their particular raison d'être, and also toward the practical application of knowledge to actual life and the disciplining of special faculties for definite vocational ends.[[97]] Since our universities, unlike those of Europe, consist of a union of graduate and undergraduate departments, any single problem, like that of music, is simplified by the opportunity afforded by the direct passage from undergraduate to graduate work, and the greater encouragement to specialization in the earlier courses. A graduate school which admits music will naturally do so on a vocational basis, and the question is not of the aim to be sought, but the much easier one of the means of its attainment, since there is no more of a puzzle in teaching an embryo composer or music teacher than there is in teaching an incipient physician or engineer.

It seems to me that the opportunity before the university has been stated in a very clear and suggestive manner by Professor Albert A. Stanley of the University of Michigan: "If in the future the line of demarcation between the college and the university shall cease to be as sinuous and shadowy as at present, the university will offer well-defined courses in research, in creative work, possibly in interpretation—by which I do not mean criticism, but rather that which is criticized. [Professor Stanley evidently refers to musical performance.] The college courses will then be so broadened that the preparatory work will of necessity be relegated to the secondary schools. This will impose on the colleges and universities still another duty—the fitting of competent teachers. Logically music will then be placed on the list of entrance studies, and the circle will be complete. The fitting of teachers who can satisfy the conditions of such work as will then be demanded will be by no means the least function of the higher institutions. There will be more and more demand for the broadly trained teacher, and there will be an even greater demand for the specialist. By this I mean the specialist who has been developed in a normal manner, and who appreciates the greater relations of knowledge and life."[[98]]

Problems in teaching of music in secondary schools are intelligently attacked

There is no question that the future of music in the colleges will greatly depend upon the developments in the secondary schools. If the time ever comes when the administrators of our public school system accept and act upon the assertion of Dr. Claxton, United States Commissioner of Education, that "after the beginnings of reading, writing, and mathematics music has greater practical value than any other subject taught in the schools," the college will find its determination of musical courses an easier matter than it is now. Students will in that event come prepared to take advantage of the more advanced instruction offered by the college, as they do at present in the standard subjects, and the musical pathway through the college, and then through the university, will be direct and unimpeded. Although such a prospect may seem to many only a roseate dream, it is a safer prophecy than it would have appeared a half-dozen years ago. The number of grammar and high schools is rapidly increasing in which the pupils are given solid instruction in chorus singing, ensemble playing, musical theory, and the history and appreciation of music; and in many places pupils are also permitted to carry on private study in vocal and instrumental music at the hands of approved teachers, and school credit given therefor. So apparent is the need of this latter privilege, and so full of fine possibilities, that the question of licensing private teachers with a view to an official recognition of the fittest has begun to receive the attention of state associations and legislatures. It is impossible that the colleges should remain indifferent to these tendencies in the preparatory schools, for their duty and their advantage are found in coöperating with them. The opportunity has been most clearly seen by those colleges which have established departments for the training of supervisors of public school music. Such service comes eminently within the rôle of the college, for a disciplined understanding, a liberal culture, an acquaintance with subjects once unrecognized as related to music teaching, are coming to be demanded in the music supervisor. The day of the old country-school singing master transferred to the public school is past; the day of the trained supervisor, who measures up to the intellectual stature of his colleagues, is at hand. So clearly is this perceived that college courses in public school music, which at first occupied one year at the most, are being extended to two years and three years, and in at least one or two instances occupying four years. And the benefit is not confined to the schoolroom, for an educated man, conscious of his peculiar powers, will see and use opportunities afforded him not merely as a salaried preceptor but also as a citizen.

Vital function of music in college curriculum is emotional and æsthetic

To revert to the difficulties which the college faces in adjusting musical courses to the general scheme of academic instruction: it is clear that these difficulties lie partly in the very nature of musical art. For music is not only an art but a science. It is the product of constructive ingenuity as well as of "inspiration"; its technique is of exquisite refinement and appalling difficulty; it appeals to the intellect as well as to the emotion. And yet the intellectual element is but tributary, and if the consciousness willfully shuts its gates against the tide of rapture rushing to flood the sense and the emotion, then in reality music is not, for its spirit is dead. What shall be done with an agency so fierce and absorbing as this? Can it be tamed and fettered by the old conceptions of mental discipline and scholastic routine? Only by falsifying its nature and denying its essential appeal. Some colleges attempt so to evade the difficulty, and lend favor, so far at least as credit is concerned, only to the theoretical studies in which the training is as severe, and almost as unimaginative, as it is in mathematics. But to many this appears too much like a reversion to the viewpoint of the mediæval convent schools which classed music in the quadrivium along with arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy. Neither the creative power nor the æsthetic receptivity is considered in such courses as these, and the spirit of music revolts against this confinement and gives its pedantic jailers no peace.

The practical course as disciplinary as the theoretical