<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How not to teach music</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/</link>
	<description>A Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:07:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Harmony: still undefended &#171; Mathemusicality</title>
		<link>http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-103</link>
		<dc:creator>Harmony: still undefended &#171; Mathemusicality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:17:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-103</guid>
		<description>[...] Texas Tech Theory Department noted that Roman numerals are easy to teach. (So are lots of bad theories; the headaches come only [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Texas Tech Theory Department noted that Roman numerals are easy to teach. (So are lots of bad theories; the headaches come only [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Death to triangles! (and life to ultrafilters&#8230;) &#171; Mathemusicality</title>
		<link>http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>Death to triangles! (and life to ultrafilters&#8230;) &#171; Mathemusicality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:31:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-33</guid>
		<description>[...] of certain historians &#8212; particularly historians of mathematics &#8212; and, for that matter, music theorists. It thus seemed as if (not for the first time, alas) a whole field had been founded on a simple [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of certain historians &#8212; particularly historians of mathematics &#8212; and, for that matter, music theorists. It thus seemed as if (not for the first time, alas) a whole field had been founded on a simple [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Ideas of Chomsky&#8230;on music &#171; Mathemusicality</title>
		<link>http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>The Ideas of Chomsky&#8230;on music &#171; Mathemusicality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:39:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-15</guid>
		<description>[...] I am for the moment unable to resist pursuing a certain line of thought intimated in two previous posts. (In the future, once I have built up sizeable archives in both of my main topics [and, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I am for the moment unable to resist pursuing a certain line of thought intimated in two previous posts. (In the future, once I have built up sizeable archives in both of my main topics [and, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Music pedagogy, continued &#171; Mathemusicality</title>
		<link>http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Music pedagogy, continued &#171; Mathemusicality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jul 2007 17:57:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-12</guid>
		<description>[...] pedagogy,&#160;continued  To my delight, the people at Texas Tech theory read my previous post and responded in the comments section. I wrote a reply to be posted there, but as it turned out to be several [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] pedagogy,&nbsp;continued  To my delight, the people at Texas Tech theory read my previous post and responded in the comments section. I wrote a reply to be posted there, but as it turned out to be several [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Texas Tech Theory Department</title>
		<link>http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Texas Tech Theory Department</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 23:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathemusicality.wordpress.com/2007/07/25/how-not-to-teach-music/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>Hi James, and welcome to the blogosphere. Thanks for your interesting post about some of my posts. I&#039;d like to comment on a few of the points you raise.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;First, fear not--Schenker is alive and well in the curriculum at TTU. We use the Musician&#039;s Guide series of textbooks which is one of a new generation of textbooks that are strongly influenced by Schenkerian theory. I&#039;ve also taught an upper-level course in Schenkerian theory, which is now taught by one of my colleagues. The book also draws on the function theory of Hugo Riemann and his cronies, hence my adoption of the T, P, and D labels.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Second, yes, I will mark them wrong if they write a tonic and dominant chord simultaneously, largely because of what you said--they&#039;re not following the directions. But I think there&#039;s a bigger issue that needs to be addressed: the divide between compositional and analytical theory. I consider myself a teacher of analytical theory; others on the faculty teach composition (or theory through composition). Were I teaching composition, I think my approach would be much different.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Many of the students entering our program have never had theory courses; some don&#039;t know how to read bass clef, some don&#039;t know key signatures, most don&#039;t know intervals, triads or seventh chords. By way of analogy, imagine letting students into your undergraduate math program who didn&#039;t know what an integral was, much less had ever heard of Stokes.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Third, I had intended this blog as a resource for students at TTU and elsewhere who are frantically trying to figure out how to complete their homework assignment at 2:00am and turn to Google for answers. There&#039;s quite a lot of garbage on the web and my intent is to offer an easy alternative (which is also part advertisement--&quot;See, theory&#039;s not hard!&quot;).&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Fourth, regarding the two Beethoven analyses: I agree with your reading of the Eroica and disagree with *my* reading of the fifth (I don&#039;t know what I was thinking when I wrote up that post). I agree that the processes at work are delay and anticipation. My analysis here is directed towards undergraduate students who are just learning about these things (and playing them in orchestra) and want to see how they might make use of the new vocabulary.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;As far as your questions about the utility of Roman numerals, that&#039;s another story for another day. In practice they don&#039;t offer terribly much in the way of useful information, but boy are they easy to teach! I think the T, P, and D labels actually convey more important information (and they tend to be used more sparingly across the musical surface).&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Thanks for the great post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi James, and welcome to the blogosphere. Thanks for your interesting post about some of my posts. I&#8217;d like to comment on a few of the points you raise.</p>
<p>First, fear not&#8211;Schenker is alive and well in the curriculum at TTU. We use the Musician&#8217;s Guide series of textbooks which is one of a new generation of textbooks that are strongly influenced by Schenkerian theory. I&#8217;ve also taught an upper-level course in Schenkerian theory, which is now taught by one of my colleagues. The book also draws on the function theory of Hugo Riemann and his cronies, hence my adoption of the T, P, and D labels.</p>
<p>Second, yes, I will mark them wrong if they write a tonic and dominant chord simultaneously, largely because of what you said&#8211;they&#8217;re not following the directions. But I think there&#8217;s a bigger issue that needs to be addressed: the divide between compositional and analytical theory. I consider myself a teacher of analytical theory; others on the faculty teach composition (or theory through composition). Were I teaching composition, I think my approach would be much different.</p>
<p>Many of the students entering our program have never had theory courses; some don&#8217;t know how to read bass clef, some don&#8217;t know key signatures, most don&#8217;t know intervals, triads or seventh chords. By way of analogy, imagine letting students into your undergraduate math program who didn&#8217;t know what an integral was, much less had ever heard of Stokes.</p>
<p>Third, I had intended this blog as a resource for students at TTU and elsewhere who are frantically trying to figure out how to complete their homework assignment at 2:00am and turn to Google for answers. There&#8217;s quite a lot of garbage on the web and my intent is to offer an easy alternative (which is also part advertisement&#8211;&#8221;See, theory&#8217;s not hard!&#8221;).</p>
<p>Fourth, regarding the two Beethoven analyses: I agree with your reading of the Eroica and disagree with *my* reading of the fifth (I don&#8217;t know what I was thinking when I wrote up that post). I agree that the processes at work are delay and anticipation. My analysis here is directed towards undergraduate students who are just learning about these things (and playing them in orchestra) and want to see how they might make use of the new vocabulary.</p>
<p>As far as your questions about the utility of Roman numerals, that&#8217;s another story for another day. In practice they don&#8217;t offer terribly much in the way of useful information, but boy are they easy to teach! I think the T, P, and D labels actually convey more important information (and they tend to be used more sparingly across the musical surface).</p>
<p>Thanks for the great post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
