FYS thingamabob

Pandora, in a nutshell, is an internet radio site. However, it works a bit differently than other internet radio sites such as Last.fm and Rhapsody. While most internet radio sites categorize songs based on genre, ratings, or “people who listened to this also listen to this,” Pandora does not. Rather, Pandora uses an innovative approach to playing songs on a certain station that you have created. There are actually people who work for Pandora that are experts on music theory. These people analyze the musical structures in the songs you “like” and play songs with similar structures and characteristics.

The birth of Pandora began with 1988 Stanford graduate Tim Westergren. Westergren began his career as a musician performing around the country, and later moved on to compose for movie scores. He developed a process in which he would allow his clients to listen to CDs and then choose songs that best reflected the mood they wanted to convey in their films. In 2000, his initial idea for marketing his approach was to use it as an option for websites to match their music for their customers; then in 2005, he decided to market it as a free internet radio.

Thus, Pandora was born.

The most interesting part of Pandora and what goes on behind the scenes of Pandora is the Music Genome Project. The Music Genome Project is an effort to classify songs using over 400 “genetic markers” that, when applied to a song, create a taxonomy of music.  As stated earlier, the way Pandora “works,” and what also sets it apart from other internet radio websites, is that there are actually people who are experts on music theory who listen to songs and analyze them.  They pay attention to various traits such as composition, arrangement, melody, harmony, rhythm, and lyrics, and that is how their music taxonomy is developed. The Music Genome is not just a single set of traits that the people at Pandora base each song off of. Different types of music require different “genes.” World music would have a much broader range of instruments used than pop. On the other hand, the rap genome would have much more focus and detail on lyrics than pop because the songs are structured around the lyrics, so the characteristics, or the “genes” would be based on rhyme schemes, rhythm, and wording.

The Music Genome consists of over 400 musical attributes that cover the qualities of melody, harmony, rhythm, form, composition, and lyrics. It is based on analyses by actual humans—around 20-30 minutes per four-minute song—over music of 10,000 from the past 100 years.

You start off by creating a station. When you open the Pandora website, the first thing you see is the player. You type in an artist/song in the main field of the player and click “create.” For example, when I type in the artist Owl City, Pandora will analyze the various musical traits for that song and play other songs with similar traits.

When you create a radio station, Pandora pulls up the Genome analysis for a song that fits the characteristics of the artist/song you selected. It runs an algorithm that compares songs in the Genome database to the genetic makeup of that song to find songs with similar traits. A few of the parameters that are looked at when putting together a Pandora playlist include:
· arrangement- the selection and adaptation of a composition or parts of a composition to instruments for which it was not originally designed
· beat- the regular pulse of music
· form- the structure of a composition, the frame upon which it is constructed; based upon repetition, contrast, and variation
· harmony- the concordant (or consonant) combination of notes sounded simultaneously to produce chords
· lyrics- the words of a song
· melody- a succession of tones comprised of mode, rhythm, and pitches so arranged as to achieve musical shape
· orchestration- the art of arranging a composition for performance by an instrumental ensemble
· rhythm- the subdivision of a space of time into a defined, repeated pattern
· syncopation- deliberate upsetting of the meter or pulse of a composition by means of a temporary shifting of the accent to a weak beat or an off-beat
· tempo- the speed of the rhythm of a composition
· vamping- to extemporize the accompaniment to a solo voice or instrument
· voice- the production of sound from the vocal chords, often used in music; falls into six basic categories defined by pitch, ranging, from bottom to top: Bass, Baritone, Tenor, Contralto, Mezzo Soprano, and Soprano

Here is a longer, yet not complete, list of musical parameters used to come up with the “genetic makeup” of a song.

Using our example of Owl City, let’s look at how Pandora would play songs similar to Owl City’s songs. Owl City’s music features electronic influences, subtle use of vocal harmony, extensive vamping, and synth rock arranging, or as I always put it, “a cross between The Postal Service and Deathcab for Cutie.” Pandora will pick an Owl City song at random—for example, “Captains and Cruise Ships.” The next song it plays is The Maine’s “I Must Be Dreaming.” If you click on the “Menu” button and select “Why was this song selected?” it will give you a brief explanation of why it was played—in this case it says, “Based on what you’ve told us so far, we’re playing this track because it features punk influences, a subtle use of vocal harmony, mild rhythmic syncopation, acoustic rhythm piano and intricate melodic phrasing.”

Notice how it says “based on what you’ve told us.” Pandora wants its listeners to give feedback so it can refine the station based on their likes and dislikes. You can either “like” or “dislike” a song—if you “dislike” a song, Pandora will never play that song on your station again and will play songs that are genetically similar to that song much less. If you “like” a song, however, Pandora will play that song more often, and continue to play songs that are genetically similar to that song.

Pandora’s innovative approach to internet radio has not only introduced me to new artists and styles, but it has also introduced me to new ways I could add depth to my music. Pandora, in many ways, helps add diversity to the music I write. Because I discover so many new artists through Pandora, I also discover new sounds and new things I want to incorporate into my own writing. Pandora works through people listening to songs and analyzing them based on various components such as arrangement, lyrics, melody, rhythm, tempo, etc. There are many instances where a song plays on Pandora, and I like it and want to incorporate some of that song’s elements into my own music. With tools like the “Why was this song played?” button, where you can read a brief explanation of why the song was played and how its characteristics are similar to the ones that the listener has responded well to, I can look at those elements are try to work that into my composition and my style, and diversify the music I make. For example, I’m really big on acoustic material, and I recently made a station based off of the song “Maybe” by Ingrid Michaelson.  Her music has traces of folk roots and usually has a major key tonality (basically, it sounds more happy than sad), yet the music I write is a little more on the emotional side. Other songs that play on Pandora, such as Colbie Caillat’s “Magic,” are also some of my influences. So I can include the parts about their music that I like, such as more pop rock qualities of Colbie, and maybe some of the more folk/acoustic roots of Ingrid.  I would just play around with it till I have a song that sounds good to me, and has the influences of music I like and would like to model my music after. Pandora allows me to explore different styles and helps me discover new music from artists I didn’t even know existed, yet make music that I would definitely listen to. And with the discovery of new artists comes new influences for my own music, so I am able to grow as an artist as well.

Basically, I made a rough “map” of the two songs that influenced me on Pandora—“Sway” by The Perishers and “It Stops Today,” by Colbie Caillat. Using the list of genomic traits, I picked out genomic traits I noticed in each of the two songs. Some of the traits included acoustic rhythm guitar, acoustic rhythm piano, lyrical melodies, lyric-centric composition, repetitive song structure, and pop rock qualities. Upon making this list, I composed a song (music and lyrics) that included many of the qualities my “influence” songs had. Then I made another “map,” this time of my own song. I listed genomic traits I noticed in my song, all of which were derived from the genomic trait lists of the two “influence” songs.

Pandora is much more than an internet radio website. In a way, one could say it is a new form of communication—people are able to share their stations and share their own unique musical tastes. Pandora allows its listeners to suggest songs and even submit songs to be played, which contributes to Pandora’s wide variety of music ranging from well-known artists to obscure ones. This is the great thing about Pandora—it is not like commercial radio, where songs must be “radio-friendly,” and meet radio-friendly standards. While it may be true that viewers do have a preconception of what they want to hear (for example if a listener creates a Lady Gaga radio station, he/she probably has more pop-oriented, well-known artists in mind), Pandora does not take obscurity/popularity, or typical connections listeners make with various artists into account—it is solely the song structure. Mcluhan made the statement that “the medium is the message.” The medium is what influences the way people think. Pandora is a medium that has greatly influenced the way I, and other listeners, view internet radio, and music in general. While many listeners are distracted by the content of the medium, in this case the music played, they are not aware that the music being played and the playlists being formed are influenced because of the unique way Pandora works. The Music Genome Project is a great influence on the way composers think as well because of its innovative approach to music listening. It acts not only as a medium, but as a tool to aid composers in writing their own music.

And last but not least, here is the link to my website where I explain more of the Pandora Music Genome Project, how it is a compositional aid, and videos of the songs that influenced me and my original songs, and “maps” of their genomic traits.

So I was having a discussion with a friend and somehow the conversation turned to music.  Surprise surprise Anyway, (and this might seem a little silly at first)  he mentioned that some of Coldplay’s older songs, such as Clocks and Speed of Sound make him think of the color blue–or better stated, the color blue comes to mind.  Then he went on to say that Coldplay’s newer music, such as Viva La Vida, brought to mind warmer colors, such as reds and oranges.  I could agree with that–Speed of Sound was a much more mellow song, while Viva La Vida was a faster paced song, so it sort of made sense that a faster song would bring to mind warmer colors, while a more mellow, subdued song brings to mind cooler colors.  When I think of cool colors, I associate that with tranquility and mellowness, whereas when I think of warm colors, I associate that with things that are fast-paced and bold.  Maybe this could be equated to someone thinking of water when he thinks of blue, and fire when he thinks of red or orange? I’m not so sure if this makes sense to everyone, and it very well might not, but it made sense in my head.  I’m not crazy, I swear. In addition to just how fast/slow a song was, the more technical characteristics of a song, such as chords, structure, arrangement, melody, harmony, rhythm, key, etc. also contribute to the way I associate a certain song with a certain color (This ties into my final project as well). There are different elements that make one think of a certain color–for example, Fantasie Impromptu made my friend think of a deeper red–the red because of the faster pace with the darker, richer tone of the song.  This ties into my project because the way Pandora “song analyzers” (if you will) categorize a song is based on so many different elements, including the structure, composition, and arrangement.  These people who listen to and analyze the songs are experts on music theory and spend about 40 minutes analyzing each song.  This sort of analysis and categorization of songs explains why songs by artists such as Owl City or Cute Is What We Aim For come out on my Jason Derulo radio.  So, as I keep plodding away towards finishing my final project, keep thoughts like this in mind.  What songs bring to to mind warm colors or cool colors? Or maybe not colors at all–maybe certain songs bring to mind other things, like patterns or places or…smells? Everybody’s different, and you never know.

Cheers,

Ari xx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILS6ULfhIhI

Sinabi ni TJ mag gawa ng blog sa Tagalog.  My Tagalog grammar/spelling really sucks.  (I said that in English because I’m not sure how to say it in Tagalog. I’m not sure if there is a Tagalog word for sucks. There probably is, and I just don’t know it. I fail.) Nag i’isip ako ng final project ko–gusto ko talaga maggawa ng program ng meron music. (I totally speak Taglish.) Ibig ko magsalita ng ideas ko pero hindi ko maggawa sa Tagalog–kailangan ko talaga mg English kasi my Tagalog is “make-fun-of worthy.” Like seriously, my aunt laughs at me if I use wrong grammar or Tagalog slang. Which I do a lot. Slang is there for a reason. Tagalog slang, in particular.  Ok, pa alam na ako, English na naman sa next blog ko.

Gusto ko lang n’itong canta

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIeY5sWWNgM

Ari xx

Yes, it’s true. My dad, uncle, aunt, and other Filipino adults who are parents of my friends whom I am just obliged to refer to them as uncles/aunts have all added me on Facebook. Which isn’t exactly a problem–the more friends I have the better–but the disadvantage is that I can no longer rant relentlessly, unless I want an angry phone call from my dad.  So, Facebook isn’t the first social networking site–there was MySpace, Friendster, etc.  If Facebook is just another social networking site like MySpace, then why hadn’t my parents joined MySpace? I think social networking sites were more of an adolescent thing back when MySpace was still all the rage–and I think it would have sounded messed up if I said my mom had a MySpace.  But advances in technology and forms of communication have changed the way we view social networking sites–now it’s just a good way to keep up with things.  It’s like social networking on steroids.  There’s a Facebook page for just about anyone/anything.  You can be “friends” with people, and you can also be “friends” with companies.  My friend owns a restaurant back home, and he recently made a Facebook page for the restaurant.  My cousin works with Downtown L.A. Fashion Week, and she created a Facebook page for that.  Having a Facebook page is almost like  a staple in promoting a business.  Facebook has become more than just a social networking site that adolescents join just to be cool.  Facebook is a way to reconnect with friends; my piano teacher has a Facebook (and yes, she added me too. I don’t mind though, she’s cool.) and she was able to reconnect with her old friends from Hungaria–through Facebook.  Facebook is also an effective way for promoting a business (as stated earlier).  On a Facebook page, you can describe your business in many aspects, and when people follow that Facebook page they can keep up with updates and things that happen with the business–which I think is a much more effective way of keeping customers notified, rather than something like email, which I’d normally not open if I saw it was from a company.  I think the changes in social networking sites and the way people view these sites have their advantages and disadvantages, but probably more pros than cons.  And one con about Facebook is Farmville.  But Farmville is a topic for another blog, another day.  For now, we leave it at Facebook, and I am right about ready to check my Facebook updates and not play Farmville. Cheers!

Ari xx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Eyj8viFmf4

listen to this one too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBXjQF8QDjk

Well, it’s not really a bad habit. It’s good.  Some people just find it weird. To each his own.

So my habit is that everytime I read something, I tend to look for rhetorical devices, mostly satire, but other things too. Why? Because of the books I had to read during high school.  I mean, Dickens’s Oliver Twist reeked with satire, and I loved it, and these essays I used to read by a guy called Cohen also were extremely satirical. I love satire. It beats exaggerating, and all that flowery speech–the satire just does it all.  My brain is just wired to look for satire. And I know this isn’t English class, but we’re still required to read, and therefore, I still look out for rhetorical devices. I can’t help it.

So this whole thing about how my brain is “wired” to look for satire just makes me think of more McLuhan thinking, and his point that the media influences the way we think.  I didn’t look at it this way till reading McLuhan’s essay.  Why do I look for satire (which I did a lot when we first started reading for FYS), even when it’s not there?  Because the books I read–Dickens, Fitzgerald, Cohen, etc. have all had satire and other rhetorical devices, and so when I read something new, the books I have already read have shaped the way I think, which is that the new book I read may be filled with awesome rhetorical devices. And then it turns out that it’s not. Sad day. Haha. But still–because of the books I have read, I tend to look for elements similar to what are in those other books. This form of media (books) has influenced the way I think and approach other things.

McLuhan is crazy. And right.

Ari xx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw_X5fpKwr4

For those of you who use Zunes….just stop. Haha, I’m totally kidding. I won’t judge. Well, maybe.

*awkward pause.*

Ok so, I wanted to talk more about the way media influences the way we think, and I want to incorporate music into this.

Anyway, I was thinking back on the days when I had my CD player, with the shock protection, so I could run with it, and we all thought that was so high tech at the time. And when I’d travel I had that case with a place for my CDs, so I could switch CDs.  Yea, I’m so glad I have my iPod.  I can hit shuffle and have all my songs shuffled, I can organize playlists, listen to only certain artists or a certain genre, put some cute album art, put the lyrics on the screen, if I have the genuis playlist I can have playlists created for me based on songs that go well together, which is something I’d definitely love.  I’m talking about all these features in an iPod in such a nonchalant way, as if it was something completely normal–which it is, but back when there were no iPods, it would not have been normal.  It would have been like, some profound futuristic crap, or something like that.  But the way I can talk about an iPod and the way I go about obtaining my music and listening to music has changed so much, and that only reiterates McLuhan’s statement that the medium influences the way we think.  Back when I had my CD player, if I wanted a certain song, I had to buy the whole CD.  But with the release of the iPod, the way we view listening to music and and obtaining music has changed so much.  Instead of saying, “Oh did you hear that new single by FOB? I gotta buy their CD!” (Ok honestly, who says that these days?) Anyway, usually people say something like, “I love that new song by FOB, gotta download it off of _________ (insert downloading program or iTunes here).” The way we think when it comes to listening and getting new music is so different.  And new things like Pandora have totally spoiled me.  I love discovering new artists in styles I like.  Youtube Deathcab for Cutie, The Rocket Summer, Cartel, and Daphne Loves Derby.

Anyway, results of new media such as Pandora and Youtube have led me to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEjwR2Jl9sY

Ari xx

McLuhan is brilliant. He’s crazy smart! Anyway, I find his writing and his ideas to be really complex.  It’s one of those things that won’t make sense right off the bat, but rather, takes time to break down, figure out what he means, and think about how it applies to you.  It’s quite a lot of thinking, but it’s good. And once it makes sense, it’s easy to find different examples of his idea that media influences the way we think.  I talked to Dr. Campbell today and he helped me better understand what McLuhan was trying to say.  The medium is indeed the message, but there is more to that.  How is the medium the message?  Because the medium is what influences what we do and the way we think.  When McLuhan wrote the essay, there was no TiVo or DVR, so he made the statement (when comparing different media) that if one wanted to watch a certain part of a movie, one had to watch the whole movie again.  When I first read that, I thought, “What? I can totally pause and rewind it!”  Which is a perfect example of McLuhan’s point.  Media influences the way we think.  Say you’re watching Oprah, but for some reason you have to leave the room. You don’t need to miss the show; you can pause it using DVR, you can record it using TiVo, or better yet, you can download it or watch it online.  We don’t think for a second that using any of these programs is a medium that influences how we think or how we do things, for we are too distracted by Oprah tearing down Chris Brown, or listing her favorite things that her live audience will actually get, while we sit at home and not get free stuff.  Using TiVo or YouTube is something so commonplace, yet if we were in the 90s and watching Oprah and had the sudden urge to clog our arteries, we’d have to wait till the end of the show, or at least commercial break.  Having something like TiVo allows us more flexibility in our schedule if we want to catch a certain show.  We don’t need to schedule our whole day around that hour of Desperate Housewives–we can TiVo it and watch it when we want to.

When we want to.

It’s convenient to do things when you want to.  But if you had asked someone who lived like, in the 1800s, convenience wouldn’t have been something that had entered his mind.  So why is convenience such a good thing for us? Because technological advances such as the ones I mentioned above have made us used to the convenience. Which futher reiterates McLuhan’s point that media influence the way people think.  We are so used to having things tailored to our lives and our needs and that’s why we like convenience and why we keep coming out with more technological innovations that make our lives even more easy.  As Robert Heinlein puts it, “Progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things.”

Let’s go back to the “watch TV when you want to.”  It’s great to not have to rush home to catch an episode of Ugly Betty.  This brings me to the statement McLuhan made, saying that although “electric light and power are separate from their uses[,] they eliminate time and space factors in human association exactly as do radio, telegraph, telephone, and TV.”  How do all these media eliminate time and space factors?  Second Life is a good example of this.  When we held class in Second Life, Dr. C was all the way in Spain, while the rest of the class was all around campus, in the dorms, etc., yet we were still able to converse and talk as if we were all in the same room.  Second Life eliminated the space barrier–we were all able to communicate effectively despite the fact that we were all in different places.  Another example–electric light, which is the example used in McLuhan’s essay.  What can we do in electric light? Just about anything. We can read, write, draw, paint, play sports, cook, or perform surgery in electric light.  Because of electric light, we don’t need to wait till there’s broad daylight to read a book; we can read perfectly fine at night because electric light provides us with the light we need.  In addition, electric light can be taken with you–flashlights are portable, so you can “bring” the light with you.  Or, if you’re like me and you use your cell phone to see in the dark, that too is small and compact, and that can be brought around as well. Electric light eliminates both the time and space barriers.  Technological advances have made communication, particularly over various places that are far from each other and in different time zones, much much easier and more effective, and have influenced the way we think about communication. Things that are mundane to us were not mundane to McLuhan, yet his assertions stand correct to this day.  So kudos to McLuhan.

Ari xx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx1piLQopUc

Here are just some thoughts as I read McLuhan’s essay.  I think his assertion that “the medium is the message” is quite brilliant.  “The medium is the message” is basically saying that the medium influences how the message is perceived.  Too often, people only pay attention to the obvious, which is the content of the message, but not the medium itself.  However, it is important that we do shift our focus of study to the media itself because it affects society, not only through the content of the medium but through the characteristics of the medium itself.

McLuhan uses “medium” in a broad sense.  He uses electric light as an example of his assertion that “the medium is the message.”  Electric light is a medium without a message. It does not have content in the way that a newspaper has articles or a television has programs.  Rather, electric light is a medium that has a social effect.  The “content” of electric light could be the activities one does using the electric light, such as if it were being used for brain surgery or night baseball.  The “message” of any medium is the effect it has.  For example, think of the creation of the railway.  The construction of the railway did not introduce us to movement or transportation; rather, it augemented what we already knew about those concepts.  It created new kinds of jobs and work and leisure.  The medium had an impact on society.  It “shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and interaction.”  McLuhan believes that the content of a medium blinds us to the character of the medium.  He uses companies like IBM, General Electric, and AT&T as examples.  Although those companies are completely different and make completely different products, they are, in a sense, the same medium–all their products move information in some way.  However, because we are so focused on the products themselves–the “content”–we don’t realize that all these media are related much more closely than we think.

I like how McLuhan uses lines from Shakespeare and other anonymous writers to explain different media, particularly the anonymous excerpt that reads, “Describes the scratch but not the itch.” This excerpt explains the increasing awareness to the medium rather than just the content alone.  I think it means that anything is meaningless without first understanding the medium, because the content of a medium is just another medium.  We pay so much attention to the content, but not the source of the content.

So….I recently became a fan of Jack’s Mannequin because it came up on my Pandora radio (thank you Pandora).

Speaking of Pandora, it can actually be thought of as a medium too. Does it not move information? It plays songs from different artists based on the artist/genre/something you specify. It didn’t introduce us to radio or music; it added to what we already knew, and it changed the way many people listen to music.  I never use iTunes anymore (sorry Eric); I just listen to Pandora. I’m glad I do, I love Jack’s Mannequin, Owl City, and Playradioplay! . All of whom I’ve never listened to before Pandora.  It’s introduced me to many new artists, it’s created jobs, for now people with a background in music theory are qualified to work for Pandora, and it’s revolutionized internet radio in general.  Pandora really is something I find truly fascinating.

As a result of Pandora radio, I’ve attached another lovely link to a song I’m starting to put on replay quite a bit.  Hope you enjoy as much as I did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnRfw-Bmlrw

Ari xx

I love laughing my ankles off I am currently laughing my ankles off. Hahahahaha. FYS class, you guys are so cute.   So today I’m going to talk about censorship.  This topic came to my mind today during FYS class, when I tweeted that I was “laughing my ankles off.” In addition, the class right before FYS, which is FDM 1303, is pretty closely related to what we talk about in class–well, certain topics.  It’s easy to relate what we talk about in the two classes.  In FDM, we talk about different forms of mass communication, including Internet and other advances in technology that have made communication much easier.  One of our topics in FDM was censorship.  Censorship is used so much–it’s used in movies, music, even books, sometimes (which really makes me mad).  So why is censorship used? I’ve always wondered that, and today in FYS class when we used the word “ankles,” the topic came to my mind again.  For example, when you use “F___,” we already know what it means, so why block it? Is it because you don’t want to read the word? Or because you find it offensive? Whether you find it offensive or not, the word is still there and you know it’s there, and you probably will “read” it anyway, so what’s the point? For some reason, I just have always had a big problem with censorship; I feel like it’s a barrier to learning.  When something is censored, whether it’s nudity in art or profanity in a song or a book, it just makes it seem like the person doing the censoring is letting us see only what he wants us to see, but not the whole thing.  I think that if we’re going to be showed something, if it has “censor-worthy” material, we should be exposed to it anyway. I mean, it’s just a part of the piece of work.  And besides, we’re 18. Well most of us, at least, and if some y’all are still 17…well, I’m sure it’s nothing you haven’t heard (or said) anyway. Just kidding. And I’ve heard the whole, “my 13-year-old likes to listen to Eminem (or some explicit rapper) but I don’t want him to hear Eminem’s profanity” argument. Like, ok soccer mom, I’m pretty sure your son has already heard and used Eminem’s profanity because he is a pre-pubescent kid who thinks swearing makes him cool like that.  And anyway, if you don’t want your child or whatever to be exposed to profanity, then don’t let him listen to artists who use it.  (Honestly, if you want him to listen to some “good, clean music,” give him some Switchfoot.)  Even though they have “clean” versions of their song, you still know what their songs are about, and you know what the “bleep” is covering up.  What makes a word profane? I think, personally, any word can be “profane” if you use it in a context that makes it profane.  It’s all really gray area type stuff, and the word “profane” to begin with is pretty subjective.  So before labeling certain words as profane, it’s important to stipulate a precise definition for what a profane word really is and in what way is it used that makes it profane.  It’s one of those disputed topics, but if any of you guys have any comments or anything to add to this, please let me know in the comments section!

Ari xx

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhjsFWPXG2o

Today in class, Dr. Campbell asked me if I’d ever play music for the class. Dr. Campbell, I’d be delighted to. So that explains my title. Come on, I like little clever, creating, catchy titles. A title is part of my blog, and my blogs are an extension of myself.  So I like to keep my title rather quirky.

Today we talked about Nelson’s view on schools, which led us to talk about the way the standardized school system is limiting us.  I agree. I think having the standardized tests, such as TAKS, has changed the way we approach teaching.  Teachers must follow a certain curriculum that is concurrent with the TAKS, so it’s almost like the test limits what you learn. Instead of going beyond the content of TAKS, students are limited to that and spend so much time “preparing” for it. I’m sorry, but I have a big problem with TAKS. I mean, why would you spend the whole year focusing on that? It’s a minimal skills test, not brain surgery. When I was in junior high we focused on it so much, so high school was a nice change because the teachers didn’t limit their curriculum to TAKS material.  I think that was beneficial for the students because we were able to broaden our knowledge and think beyond the questions asked on that test.  The things you learn outside of TAKS material is so much more interesting and useful and beneficial, that I do find it a real shame when teachers are only limited to teaching TAKS material, and students are limited to learning that material.

So how can computers supplement and extend the traditional forms of teaching? Well, the first thing that came to my mind when I read that question were programs like Blackboard, CourseCompass, and the UT Homework system, which my old Calculus teacher used.  I also have a big problem with Blackboard and the UT Homework system.  It does make things easier–Blackboard’s not so bad, but the UT Homework system–man, it’s glitchy. When I’d use it for calculus, I’d get an answer, but it would be marked wrong because the correct answer on the system was the same answer in a different form.  But I see why teachers use these programs. It’s like a school facebook. On facebook, we constantly check it for updates, and update them ourselves. On Blackboard, teachers post things and keep us updated, and we have to constantly check for updates. So then…..why can’t we just use facebook? Haha.

Something that also caught my attention–Independent Study: kind of like my Engineering Design and Development class.  It was basically a research and development class. We were required to think of a problem (that other people thought to be a problem too) and find a solution to it.  Although we had a teacher for that class, I think his job was more to guide us, rather than to teach us.  I think the real teachers were the students. We actually did the brainstorming and the research behind our projects–we had to think of a problem to something, research existing solutions and think of why they weren’t the best solutions, and concoct a new solution that surpasses these previous solutions, based on our research and observations.  Our EDD teacher didn’t do all this for us–he merely gave us suggestions and guided us on how to present our solutions and go about the research.  I think that that form of teaching is beneficial to an extent.  For a research project, it’s something you can’t learn from a teacher, because it’s more like you’re teaching yourself, and you’re making all these discoveries and observations yourself. FYS sort of reminds me of this form of teaching. In class, we have discussions of various topics, but Dr. Campbell guides us to where he wants us to get.  My old art teacher was the same way. He didn’t “teach” us what to draw or paint or sculpt, because then it wouldn’t be our artwork–it’d be his. Rather, he would guide us and show us different techniques to produce quality artwork–the content and composition was completely up to us.

However, there are some downsides to this form of teaching, but that depends on the subject being taught. If it’s a class like art, where it’s more abstract, you can’t really teach that because the art is subjective–you can’t be taught what you want to create, and art should be like an extension of yourself.  It’s inspired by feelings, thoughts, anything, and different people find inspiration in different things.  In a more concrete subject like math, however (and I don’t care if people think math is abstract–it’s not), that sort of thing has to be taught.  You need to be taught the basics and the rules, because all the other types of math are based upon those principles.  Math doesn’t come from feelings–I guess in a sense it does come from inspiration…I feel like I’m contradicting myself.  Ok, so then I suppose that in anything, you have to teach yourself, only to some extent, but you also need someone to guide you. I mean, you have to study and do the assignments yourself, with the guidance provided by your teacher.

“If you’re prepared to learn, school can be anywhere. If you’re not prepared to learn, school is nowehere.” I agree with this. Thank you, Dr. Campbell. I don’t want to use myself as an example; that’ll just make me seem full of myself.  But I think it’s true that you need to want to learn in order to learn.  And I didn’t share this with the class, but for piano, I did have formal lessons. Which explains why I’m strictly a classical pianist. I know a lot of “self-taught” musicians who are completely against a formal, classical music education. It’s understandable, I mean, music can’t exactly be taught, because it’s just like art. It comes from you, and not a teacher.  But, a teacher teaches you the techniques used to play music. I think I was really lucky to have the piano teacher that I’ve had because the way she taught required me to incorporate my feelings into my playing.  There was a point, however, when I seriously considered quitting piano. I stuck to it though, and I think what made me stay was because I wanted to be like the more advanced students who played all the hard songs. Which brings me back to the point that in order to learn, you need to be motivated. And to all those musicians who have a problem with classical training–don’t. No need to be such haters.  I think classical technique helped me a lot in my songwriting.

So I think that about sums up everything I wanted to say.  Now, time to put it all in song. Just kidding.

Ari xx

Oh, and here’s me on youtube, since I can’t delicious for some reason Sorry–I was sick that day, but I never miss Java Night, so I sang anyway

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4awj1yHEZvk