The promise of music technology as a tool for student engagement has never been greater. Almost seven years after the introduction of the iPad it would seem a school’s ability to augment and enrich student’s experience has never been more varied, customizable, and accessible. Yet the increasing excitement over the creative potential of hardware, software, interactive e-books, and online resources has often failed to materialize in many modern secondary school environments, even in those that have the monetary means to circumvent the often prohibitive costs involved in purchases of hardware. Often these technologies take the forms of computer labs, keyboard labs, classroom (or even school or grade-wide) iPad use, and the integration of a host of online resources that allow the creation, notation, and multimedia exploration of various musical genres. The results of these approaches can be heavily mixed, even after accounting for factors of faculty, facilities, students, and available financial resources. What seems like the attractive potential involved in the incorporation of heavily marketed technology components can often have wildly disparate learning outcomes:
While more teachers say they welcome technology, most gadgets and digital techniques haven’t shown they can boost learning. Many schools have abandoned using iPads, for example, and online learning has yet to live up to its promises.
Wang 2016
Further, the potential for distraction when not directed in a specialized manner is a significant risk for the fragile attention of students:
For many, technology has become a catalyst for distraction and off task behavior with students, tweeting, or prowling through YouTube when they’re supposed to be listening to the teacher or doing classwork promotes a lack of focus.
Porter 2013
Perhaps this is not all because of the tools themselves, but various structural issues inside institutions that can create roadblocks toward effective teacher and student engagement in those mediums. As a teaching artist in various colleges and New York City public high school I engage in these concerns regularly, and have struggled to mitigate these issues so as to give experiences to students that mirror those of actual composers and performers, while easing the troubleshooting headaches that can plague their implementations. I have also seen colleagues who do not have the time resources available to handle the myriad of issues that need to be dealt with in this pursuit, entirely due to a lack of awarness during the planning stages of the process. Below are some of these common but less examined issues of technology that, when addressed before their implementation, can help ease the additional stresses technology can place on an institution.
Networks
The most vital link in a technology chain is usually the school’s network capability. As a presenter once said, it is as important to a school now as its plumbing. This is absolutely the case and should be the first issue addressed. A network that requires arduous logins, service interruptions, dead zones in the building, or becomes easily overwhelmed if 30-500 students are downloading, uploading, or accessing at the same time. If a school’s network was not designed with heavy traffic that accompanies modern approaches to online content in mind, there will be a frustrating a barrier that will prevent the use of a majority of modern music technologies. This has to due not only with access to content, but the ability to upload student materials to a cloud server and save and prolong the limited memory of existing hardware. While alternative solutions such as thumb drives are a practical solution in some cases, the unending amount of resources and interactive content online necessitate a solid connection that can handle the traffic generated by multiple classrooms. Further, many apps available on the iPad and tablets are designed for network accessibility, the connectivity being necessary to activate subscriptions to interactive media that in particular systems, buildings, or rooms could untested and potentially unavailable or unreliable.
Teachers First
If you do not want to waste tens of thousands of dollars on new equipment, put it in the hands of teachers first, before making large purchases. Schools often need to augment their budgets to allow the purchase of computers, smart boards, keyboards, headphones, etc., These technologies and their promise can be a powerful incentive for donors, parents, and outside organizations to donate money, perhaps for the promise of a shiny new media lab. In this excitement and occasional deadlines in which to spend newly acquired funds a cardinal mistake can be made that involves not putting the technology in the hands of teachers first, to determine the use and value, before large purchases are made. This also includes providing access to professional development and training resources that develop an instructor’s ability to maximize how such tools can be used.
Recently a school I work with acquired a large donation that was marked for new laptops that could be used on a cart and taken to various classrooms in the form of a mobile media lab. This seems to be an attractive idea, but was rushed into being because of the need to spend money quickly due to institutional financial deadlines and intersystem politics. This created several issues:
1) Teachers were unfamiliar with the hardware, software, and curriculum involvement. Those faculty used to a PC platform needed at least a semester working with a Mac platform so as to be able to give guidance to all students, especially those more familiar with iOS than the instructor. Rolling out any level of technology slowly is a sensible way to go, and doesn’t overwhelm a teacher or student with the countless variables that arise in an unfamiliar platform. Further, the focus on the tools rather than the content means the fundamental question of what a teacher is going to use a computer for, which can potentially become a secondary consideration. Teachers need to explore hardware and software over time, be exposed to training, and be paid for any extra time resources they spend in developing the needed expertise. If this time is not budgeted (at least a full semester ahead of classroom implementation) there is a very limited chance of success.
2) Teachers do not know what to do with the available tools. A teacher who asks, “What is this for?” or is only half convinced as to the effectiveness is not likely to produce sustained results.
3) Lack of troubleshooting. Simply reading an tablet based and interactive version of a music history textbook (a wonderful first step in the inclusion of tablets) can unexpectedly be a demanding challenge that requires not only the use of the tablet itself, but organizing the purchase or renting of needed chapters, choosing a delivery system (out of the many available), setting up of hardware, network connectivity, evaluation of the student and school’s need, training, and then the ultimate decision as to whether the material is worth it in the first place and not more effectively approached through other means.
4) Process of evaluation. As the evaluation of value described above does not come until the end of the orientation process, putting the material in the hands of a teacher first is vital first step before large financial commitments are made and potentially wasted. Just because the technology is there does not make it the best choice in teaching, and the exploratory phase often uncovers differing and more effective uses for resources. Discussion amongst faculty, the sharing of insights and methods, and honest critiques may uncover strategies for implementation that are contrary to the original concept.
Replacement and Curating
Any level of technology will need a serious and regular schedule of maintenance, upgrade, replacement, and adjustment. If a IT department does not exist in a school this means that the time consuming and arduous task will fall to faculty, the time commitment involved potentially being a significant barrier in the upkeep of equipment. Many installations of software of even simple upgrades need to be done on every machine, a process that can consume many hours (if installing from a disk or if passwords are required). Of course this may also involve budget issues related to the purchase of software or a subscription, and the regular maintenance of keeping such updated. Even at schools with large technology staffs several issues come up which can be problematic. What is the timetable for replacement? Many computers run into serious compatibility issues after 5-8 years due to incompatibility of software or degradation over time. The budget needed to replace equipment, and to do so uniformly so as to not encounter extreme disparities in user experience needs to be predictable and anticipated. Further, machines need to be updated regularly. Online music production tools are often flash-based, and will fail to operate without the latest version of that software. Other platforms such as GarageBand that are memory intensive will require the ability to store large files, at least temporarily, on the local server. If the IT strategy of a particular school is trying to avoid any saving or tampering inside hardware and doesn’t realize that cloud based storage of projects is not always possible then that IT department is at odds with the needs of teachers and students, albeit for sound reasons. An open channel of communication and expectations needs to be established so as to clarify the responsibilities of educators, technicians, and students.
Time and Space
Many new projects will take more time to complete than is expected. This often has to due with the unexpected and at times bizarre troubleshooting that is needed in particular environments to find why something is or is not working. There are also issues of questions that arise that were not anticipated, and in the best cases an overabundance of excitement and want to share the creative output on part of the students. These issues intersect with class length and daily schedules, access to hardware, and the eliminating or streamlining of preexisting elements of curriculum that will be adjusted to make room for new approaches. Additional issues arise with the reevaluation and need for assessment solutions that mirror the changing nature of the tasks involved (Nagel 2013). And of course, there are the obvious issues with equipment storage or providing access to a room and space needed to for keyboards, computers, speakers, etc., is for many schools (especially in New York City) the most daunting challenge.
Access
The unequal access to various tools at home has caused schools to seek classroom solutions that can be available to all students with equity. Whether this is a computer lab or (in the most affluent environments) the distribution of tablets, equal access is still a primary and problematic issue. Is there appropriate access to material for students who do not have hardware at home? Even if they do, do they have the extended access to it or will it be it shared by other family members? Especially relevant, basic, and overlooked for music education, do the students have a pair of properly functioning headphones? These are as necessary as a pencil case, but the budgeting of such for parents and teachers can create long-term issues.
The introduction of any technology will immediately create an atmosphere of inequity between students with and without experience to that platform. This can be a positive scenario for teachers who can effectively create peer-learning environments, but can also create frustration from students who can’t use facilities at school during the times they might be available. Flexibility in this regard, not assuming anything about the student’s resources or experience, and actively engaging in a discovery process with students will help grant the needed time (a subjective number based on the student) to all.
The Future
The great news for teachers is that the marketplace is slowly mitigating many of these issues. Online production tools such as Audiotool, WeVideo, Soundation, Audiosauna (and countless others) as well as notation platforms such as Musescore, Scorecloud and Noteflight are providing online tools that negate the need to purchase extensive software licenses, hardware, and can be accessed from home and school. Still, the necessity for educators to reflect and examine their particular structural environment and trouble shoot many of the less glamorous issues involving technology implementation is the most vital step in beginning to realize the levels of engagement and promise that technology can provide young musicians and their educators.
Robert Sabin is a New York City based jazz bassist, composer, and educator. He is currently on the faculty of City University of New York, Hunter College High School, the Manhattan School of Music Precollege, as well as being a New York Pops Teaching Artist. www.robertsabinbass.com
“AudioSauna – Online Music Software.” N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
“Audiotool – Free Music Software – Make Music Online In Your Browser.” N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
“MuseScore | Free Music Composition and Notation Software.” N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
Nagel, By David, and 06/04/13. “6 Technology Challenges Facing Education -.” THE Journal. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
“Noteflight – Online Music Notation Software.” N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
“SCORECLOUD | Free Music Notation Software – Music Composition & Writing Online.” ScoreCloud. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
“Soundation — Make Music Online.” N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
“The Problem with Technology in Schools.” Washington Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.
Wang, Amy X. “Bill Gates Explains Why Classroom Technology Is Failing Students and Teachers.” Quartz. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.