[1.1] There are many reasons to assign a starring role to music making in the teaching and learning of music theory--that is, to get students learning theory through playing and singing--but also many obstacles standing in the way. Especially in so-called "written" theory, keyboard work stands to make the learning process active, aural, and creative; to pave, for students with aural and kinesthetic learning preferences, paths to success in a subject laden with visual and logical structures; and to draw explicit links between music-theoretical learning and the performance, listening, and compositional activities that it informs. Scholars of music theory pedagogy have made a compelling case for creatively oriented instruction.(1) The principles of backward design and instructional alignment, cornerstones in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, offer a useful algorithm for deciding on intended learning outcomes, determining which kinds of assessments will aid and demonstrate these outcomes, and finally planning teaching and learning activities that develop the associated skills.(2) Taking as a premise the goal that students use what they learn in music theory to make (i.e., perform, compose, improvise, listen to) music, how might a theory curriculum feature music making as a principal means of learning and assessment?[1.2] There are a growing number of resources for teaching music theory through playing and singing. Several pedagogues, especially Peter Schubert, have amassed instructional toolkits of improvisational teaching methods by sketching or demonstrating classroom-tested exercises.(3) In addition, some comprehensive theory textbooks include keyboard, vocal, and sing-and-play exercises, either alongside written and analytical tasks or in separate aural workbooks.(4) Particularly in the case of music making at the keyboard, which is the focus of this article, the recent unearthing of partimenti has granted pedagogues access to fertile teaching methods that integrate composition, theory, performance, and improvisation.(5) In fact, historical methods are exactly what I teach to the few students per semester who work with me in independent studies. They are proficient keyboard players and good musicians, and they are willing to work an hour or two per day, so they master figured bass and the Rule of the Octave, realize partimenti, read and discuss open scores, and improvise over ground basses. These independent studies are privileged situations, however, markedly different from what many of us face in the trenches--namely, large and diverse classes of overcommitted students with little to no comfort at the piano.[1.3] If keyboard activities are to be integrated as central and pervasive elements of an undergraduate theory curriculum, two sizeable barriers must be surmounted: first, finding a way to assign, guide, assess, and integrate them within constraints that are often, as in my case, unchangeable, such as class sizes, teaching spaces, instructional time, course staffing, and students' pianistic (in)ability; and second, gathering compelling evidence that the resultant impact on student learning is positive and substantial enough to justify the expenditure of time and resources. This article aims to clear both of these hurdles, first by charting a technologically assisted route around the logistical and pedagogical obstacles that can stand in the way of incorporating keyboard work into theory instruction, and then by substantiating its effectiveness with qualitative and quantitative data collected during a formal impact study with second-year students at Michigan State University during fall 2013. Results showed dramatic benefits to what, how, and how well students learned in music theory; to their attitudes toward music theory; and to their ability to apply these skills to their musical endeavors outside the course.[1.4] Through trial and error, I have identified four obstacles to keyboard skills in the twenty-first-century music theory class. …
[1]
Robert O. Gjerdingen.
PARTIMENTI WRITTEN TO IMPART A KNOWLEDGE OF COUNTERPOINT AND COMPOSITION
,
2010
.
[2]
S. A. Cohen,et al.
Instructional Alignment: Searching for a Magic Bullet
,
1987
.
[3]
G Sanguinetti,et al.
The Art of Partimento: History, Theory, and Practice
,
2012
.
[4]
Bruce Quaglia,et al.
Planning for Student Variability: Universal Design for Learning in the Music Theory Classroom and Curriculum
,
2015
.
[5]
Gary S. Karpinski.
Aural Skills Acquisition: The Development of Listening, Reading, and Performing Skills in College-Level Musicians
,
2000
.
[6]
Marilla D. Svinicki.
The Goldilocks Principle: “Just Right” and Beyond
,
2015
.
[7]
David Lodewyckx,et al.
Partimento, Waer bestu bleven? Partimento in the European Classroom: Pedagogical Considerations and Perspectives
,
2014
.
[8]
Robert O. Gjerdingen.
Partimento, que me veux-tu?
,
2007
.
[9]
L. Fink,et al.
Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses
,
2003
.
[10]
William Earl Caplin,et al.
Classical Form: A Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven
,
1998
.
[11]
Bryn Hughes,et al.
Hacking the Music Theory Classroom: Standards-Based Grading, Just-in-Time Teaching, and the Inverted Class
,
2015
.