Carmel High School Teaching Observation Report

Carmel High School is a large public suburban school in Indiana. With over 5,200 students in attendance, it is the largest high school in Indiana. Consequently, the school also has the largest fine arts program in Indiana, with over 2,000 students involved. The program offers a multitude of courses and subject matters for its participants, including marching band, five concert bands, four jazz ensembles, and percussion ensembles, ten choral music ensembles, two full orchestras and three string orchestras, Beginning, Intermediate and Advanced Piano classes as well as Music Theory, Composition and Electronic Music. Marching Band, The Theatre & Film division offers two levels of Theatre Arts, Advanced Acting and Theatre Production, Technical Theatre, Advanced Theatre Management and Advanced Theatre Design.  International Baccalaureate courses are offered in Music, Theatre, and Film.

              My first observation was of the Camerata (advanced string orchestra). The classroom was set up normally for a chamber string orchestra, with 3-4 players in each section, with the exception of the basses, in which case, there was only one bass player. It appeared as if there was a co-teaching situation, where one teacher instructed the ensemble, and another observed the class and offered their opinions on the rehearsal taking place. Additionally, to aid the main teacher, there was some sort of electronic aid that allowed the conductor to call up pitches and tempos easily to be played through speakers. Also, each stand included electronic tuners that the students took turns using in order for each member of the ensemble to be exactly in tune. The class is 90 minutes long, and to my knowledge, occurs every other day, so approximately 2-3 rehearsals per week. In his rehearsal, the conductor focused mainly on playing in time with the metronome, and making sure all of the overlapping entrances were in line with one another. The teacher’s persona was sort of strict and certainly hard working. He left no room for error. If something didn’t go the way he wanted, he rehearsed it over and over, breaking it down further and further until the desired affect was achieved. In terms of nonverbal communication, the conductor demonstrated frequently what he wanted on his own violin, in addition to playing along with the orchestra when running through excerpts.

              At the end of the lesson, students were able to play more in time, and to a higher degree of being together than when they first began. There were less passages that were rushed. They became more steady and relaxed throughout the course of the lesson. In terms of playing together, the students became more aware of where they were playing alongside other sections of the orchestra, and they became more aware of what was necessary in order to play certain excerpts and entrances with one another, so that overall, the ensemble functioned more cohesively as a group, as opposed to five individual sections that just happen to be playing the same music at the same time. I felt that students felt a lot more confident in their parts by the end of the rehearsal because they had rehearsed the same section over and over again numerous times. Additionally, they were more comfortable with their role in the bigger picture of the music, and were able to play more comfortable, and be able to listen and adjust better because they were no longer as worried about their own part as much as they previously had been.

For my second observation, I observed Wind Symphony I. in the first piece they rehearsed, I noticed a variety of things: the teacher uses a baton in addition to a metronome to conduct the band. At one various points throughout the lesson, the teacher asked first stands and principle players to play the section being rehearsed in order to demonstrate the clarity that should be heard across parts. Once that clarity was established, he asked all players to join, and maintain the clarity. He uses their correct playing as a means to demonstrate to the other students and encourage them to follow and play the same as them. I also noticed, that the teacher relates to students on a more friendly, sarcastic way than the orchestra teacher had addressed his students. During another portion of the lesson, the conductor gave the students a few seconds of personal practice time within the class to work out a particular section on their own before coming together and rehearsing that section as a group. This allowed the students to become familiar with the parts before playing together. This is affective in not wasting rehearsal time due to students’ sight reading. It allows them to play correctly the first time and with confidence. Another thing the conductor did was demonstrate what he wanted to hear by vocalizing it to his students. He did not have an instrument on the podium with him to demonstrate that way, but his method was affective nonetheless. Another teaching technique he uses is rehearsing harder music under tempo and slowly builds up the speed over time.

The conductor made his intentions clear while also addressing poor behavior in class, by a quick statement of what he expects in his classroom. He did not allow this to interrupt the flow of his rehearsal. For example, he raised his baton, noticed some people did not have their eyes, up, and quickly, but firmly said “eyes up,” and when he felt confident that all eyes were on him, he proceeded to give his downbeat. He did not need to repeat the instruction throughout the course of the rest of his rehearsal. A way that he corrected students technically was to call out individual parts while the band continued to play, as opposed to stopping the whole band to fix little things in individual parts. I feel that this was affective in helping the whole band improve, because the rest of the band got to continue playing. The conductor had said, while speaking with him after the rehearsal, that he likes to praise good quality playing, and say what he’d like to hear better. He tries his best not to tell students that they’ve played poorly, and instead encourages improvement while positively enforcing the good that he sees. And example of this was when a student notated something in her music. He praised her for doing so, as opposed to being upset with those who did not do that. By doing this, he encourages others to follow her good behavior, while maintaining the positive tone in the room.

       One thing I found compelling while observing was the teachers’ use of the metronome and tuner technology. I thought it served them well in the classroom setting, and was a good demonstration of how technology can really aid the learning process in the classroom. I think that this specific form of technology is good in moderation. It helps students tune faster and more accurately and also helps them to feel a constant, steady sense of pulse as they play. However, I worry that too much use of this technology is detrimental in the long run. I noticed that many students relied heavily on the use of this technology, as did some of the teachers. I fear that some students will struggle to be able to tune on their own, or that their ears will not be well developed. In music, it is super important to recognize when you are playing in tune or not, and relying on a tuner to tell you that information is more hurtful than helpful. Additionally, I think use of the metronome is good in moderation. It helps with tempos, pulse, and generally staying together, but I fear that if rehearsals are run too frequently with exclusively the metronome, students will become accustomed to not looking at the conductor, and thus not be able to follow the nuances that a live conductor will put into the music. On a moderated basis, I feel that the use of the metronome and the tuner in the classroom is very helpful, and Carmel High School is lucky to have access to such technology, but at the same time, I worry that too much use of it will stagnate the development of students’ ears, and their abilities to properly watch and follow conductors.