#edwin gordon

[genevieveetguy]

- You are weird. - I am? - Yeah, you are. You look like you walked out of another century. You play baseball like Babe Ruth. You talk like you're from another planet. - Thanks for the compliment.

The Chosen, Jeremy Kagan (1981)

[music-ed-notes-blog]

Gordon Music Learning Theory, Part I

Today I read about Edwin Gordon’s Music Learning Theory (MLT).

I was interested because I want to know more about the sequences of learning music. How do people learn skills. In what order should those skills be presented?

I read about MLT on Wikipedia’s Gordon Music Learning Theory Page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Music_Learning_Theory

The wikipedia page provided an overview of the theory. One of the key components of the theory is the idea of Audiation: The process of hearing and understanding music. The analogy for audiation is that audiation is to music as thinking is to language. Gordon says, “audiation is to music what thought is to speech”. Audiation is an internal process that we use to comprehend, and then design music. In the same way that we would process language, and then think of things to say.

(Or sometimes not think, in my case ;p )

Another concept in MLT is the idea of musical aptitude. As I understand it currently (which may be flawed), musical aptitude is a measure of someone’s initial, innate musical ability. For example, someone who can repeat any rhythm you clap has a high aptitude for rhythm repetition.

I find this concept confusing, and the language potentially damaging. ‘Aptitude’ brings to my mind the idea of ‘talent’. It seems to give undue weight to ‘nature’ over ‘nature’.

The word ‘Aptitude’ disturbs me. Because it seems to suggest that potential can be determined from a test. This seems flawed to me, for several reasons:

a test can be flawed or inaccurate

even if a test can measure innate ‘aptitude’, there are other factors that have more of an effect on learning.

For this second point, I mean factors like desire, support, persistence. Grit. I feel like the term ‘aptitude’ has the potential to obscure these other, more important factors. It gives weight to talent over time. That bothers me.

I’m confused by why the idea of ‘aptitude’ appears in MLT. ‘Aptitude’, as I currently understand it, doesn’t seem to jibe with what Gordon’s overall beliefs and values. He believes in teaching, he believes that people can learn. So I am confused by the emphasis on aptitude.

I suspect that Gordon’s intention is to use aptitude testing to design better, customized training for individuals. If you see that someone has trouble tapping rhythms, you can then focus on working on rhythms with that person. That seems like a reasonable idea to me. I’m hoping that is what he means by aptitude.

I need to read more to understand it. I’m going to look more at the Gordon institute’s ‘about’ document: And from the Gordon Institute’s ‘about’ document: http://giml.org/docs/AboutMLT.pdf

In any case, it is interesting. And I want to find out more.

I also enjoyed this interview, in which Gordon talks about learning from Gene Krupa.

http://www.comechildrensing.com/pdf/other_articles_by_MEP/2_A_Conversation_with_Edwin_Gordon.pdf

This is one of my favorite parts:

I have learned more from you about movement than I have from any movement specialist. How did you become aware of the importance of movement in relation to rhythm development? That goes back to my days with Krupa, when he said to me, “Hey, man, I’m paying to feel you not to hear you—and if you ain’t movin’, I can’t feel you.” [Edwin Gordon spent several years on the road performing as bass player with Gene Krupa, the world-famous drummer. Krupa could not read music.] He opened my mind to a lot of things. I remember one day he took me into a back room during intermission. Totally exasperated with me, he said, “Man, if you ain’t movin’, there’s no way you can understand what you’re doin’, ‘cause there ain’t no way to play just by movin’ your fingers. If you can’t put together your hips with your fingers, man, I hear it; and I don’t like it.” I began experimenting with movement, and I realized what Krupa was saying—that we need to get the body to send information to the brain so the fingers know what to do. The great majority of persons teaching music are trying to teach children to be rhythmical through the brain by counting half notes, whole notes, and beats in the measure. It’s the body, it’s movement that is most important. If you can’t move, you’re not going to have rhythm. And, if you don’t have rhythm, you don’t have anything, because musical expression is essentially rhythm. From: http://www.comechildrensing.com/pdf/other_articles_by_MEP/2_A_Conversation_with_Edwin_Gordon.pdf An interview with Mary Ellen Pinzino, Musicstaff.com, 1998.

[robingiebes]

A little introduction to Music Learning Theory #MLT #edgordon #musedchat #audiation #musiced #edchat