This is Clark's part of a module focused on video conference based music theory teaching at the Syllabus Conference on July 20. 2003 in San José and the Internet. The paper was presented together with Philip Donner and Matti Ruippo. This segment of the paper starts after Donner's introductory remarks on work objectives and methodology.
The experiences and lessons learned in teaching music theory with Matti and Philip were exciting and compelling. It became abundantly clear that cultural, musical, pedagogical, technological, and logistical issues are inextricably intertwined. Each of these areas demands thoughtful consideration and further research. Those elements, which had the greatest impact on the teaching/learning experience from the joint Syllabus effort, are described below.
Cultural differences were manifest on several levels. Well-known melodies from American television and movies or common Southern folk songs were unknown to the Finnish students. While this presented some minor difficulties in the speed with which lesson plans could progress, it was not overly restrictive. More problematic was the fact that the Georgia Tech instructor and students had no practical knowledge of the Finnish language. Were it not for the fact that the Finnish students and faculty possessed outstanding English skills, the sessions would not have been possible. When points of confusion occurred during my teaching sessions, I was unable to assist the Finnish students with native tongue explanations. Fortunately, the Finnish faculty provided immediate assistance.
Basic music terminology, names of scale degrees, meter designations, and harmonic identification vary between the two cultures. Recognizing this, lesson plan topics were designed to focus on common or easily acquired musical elements: solfège, Kodály hand signs, melody, and basic harmonic structures. Notation was restricted to whole, quarter, and eighth notes and melodic structures were primarily pentatonic. Clearly, all the participants had more extensive training than the sessions utilized, but sufficient "new" elements (hand signs, exercises, combining listening, composing, and performing skills) kept the sessions challenging. Future collaborations intended to address higher-level concepts would require terminology development on both sides.
Pedagogically, it was apparent that teaching and learning paradigms need to be carefully considered in video-based music theory teaching. While many standard classroom teaching techniques translate well to the videoconference format, some require special attention. Musical examples and class materials need to be prepared in advance for computer display or electronic distribution. Physical considerations such as turning one's back to the camera while writing on a board or lacking the capacity for a camera to zoom in on hand written notes can create temporary instructional lulls and/or missed opportunities.
Having sufficient monitors to send and receive student and faculty reaction/feedback is essential. Three cameras and video displays worked well in facilitating comprehensive aural/visual communication on the Georgia Tech end but not all facilities have the luxury of dedicated control rooms. Finding stand-alone or single operator solutions for video teaching remains an area for development. Lastly, exercises or activities requiring/emphasizing movement must be carefully considered based on the design/size of the space available, camera range, and audio capacity.
Technologically, audio was the most significant issue to be addressed. Feedback loops, maintaining appropriate levels, mono-only broadcast capability, and latency issues were particularly noticeable limitations at various points in our sessions. While moving to a genuine Internet 2 bandwidth and utilizing MPEG 2 standards will solve some of these issues, feedback and latency are areas requiring serious future attention. Visually, chromakey (green screen) tools and techniques can also be very effective in creating multiple points of information. However, these tools must be carefully designed and implemented for maximum benefit.
Time difference, studio access, and physical distance were the most significant logistical issues. While the sessions conveniently took place mid-day at Georgia Tech, it was late afternoon or early evening for the Finnish students and faculty. Travel time, weather conditions, and fatigue can have a dramatic impact students and faculty.
Fortunately, the sessions took place during the summer when studio access was not a factor. However, during fall and spring semesters, studio availability, particularly during peak instructional hours, can be severely limited. It became clear that it would be ideal to have all the necessary hardware, software, fiber transceivers, and codecs controlled "in house," by music faculty and staff. Finally, it took several sessions to accurately assess student capabilities and interests. It would be extremely helpful to have "pre-sessions" intended to facilitate communication, create a sense of community, and provide opportunities for individual assessment.
The content for our sessions was developed specifically for the Georgia Tech students and Mikko in Kuhmo. Further insight into our teaching/learning experiences can be gained from the detailed lesson plans and teaching materials employed. Please refer to the links below which document our activities and intended outcomes. Video clips have been included to amplify specific elements.
There is no question that the benefits of the teaching sessions were manifold. All who participated experienced an expansion of cultural, musical, technological, and pedagogical awareness. It was also clear that the challenges posed by language, audio quality, and latency are opportunities for growth and development. It was a pleasure to be involved with this project and I look forward to future collaborations.
After this exposé presented by Frank Clark Matti Ruippo makes his remarks on pedagogical aspects of the cooperation.