If Choir is going to be taught using national or state standards, what should the standards be? What are we really teaching in Choir, anyway? What's the most important skill that serves as a foundation for the best -- and most enjoyable -- choral programs? I'm aware that many of these discussions have already taken place, with most standards already in place. That being the case, I'm thinking that we may have to rethink some of those policies if choir -- as many of us know and love it -- is going to thrive.

 

While standards were developed with input from choral educators, it was the political push to "improve our schools" that really fueled the engine -- and it's the political and administrative push for educational accountability that is getting us in trouble. For unfortunately, I believe most politicians and administrators are confused about what choral programs are all about, and their confusion is resulting in policies which have the potential to destroy much of what's greatest about school choirs.

 

I recently responded to a post on another discussion board, in which the OP (a middle school Choir teacher) said that they were going to have to teach to the standards starting next year. The OP continues, "The rub here is that assessing many standards requires a grade based on VOCAL ABILITY.  At the middle school level, I don't believe this is appropriate.  We've all heard the stories of 'My music teacher told me to lip sync and so I never sing anymore.'  Is the new story going to be 'I was below expectations in 7th grade choir on the standard of singing accurately and with a good tone ... so I quit'"??

 

And here's more from the OP:

"The rules:
We cannot give 0s
We cannot give extra credit
We cannot grade on attendance (aside from attendance at the concert)
We cannot grade on behavior
We cannot grade on participation or attitude
We cannot grade on preparedness (having materials)
We cannot downgrade for late work (late work would be a behavior, not a skill)"
************************************************************************************* 

Here's my response (and I'd love to hear what anyone else thinks):

 

I would shift the paradigm. Choral standards should not be centered on vocal or musical skill acquisition, with students "measured" and graded accordingly. Instead, we should analyze what makes successful choirs successful. If we do that, really getting to the heart of what makes a choir a choir and not a voice class, we might just come to the following conclusion:

A successful choir is one in which each student...

A. Creates a safe "team" environment which supports everyone's best work. The individual singer pulls their own weight, and makes choices conducive to their fellow singers' success. Together, all work hard to create the best choir possible.       
       1. all improve their singing on a moment-to-moment basis, taking the teacher's direction and conscientiously applying it
       2. all learn/memorize their music
       3. all grow in confidence and presence vis a vis performance skills
       4. all learn certain measurable skills (such as rhythm notation, key signatures, et cetera)

Since a successful student is one who supports their peers and creates safety, the standard is not "behavior," "attitude," "preparation," or "participation."  Rather, the standard is whether or not a student is creating safety and support -- two critical SKILLS, sometimes known collectively as teamwork. And yes, you can value them, teach them, and grade these skills.

 

So, when we dig beneath the surface, we may realize that things like behavior and attitude are actually a huge part of what's really learnable and teachable in a Choir -- they are a key facet of teamwork, and should be deeply valued as standards to be upheld. And taking them entirely out of the standards -- as will happen next year in the OP's school -- shows a complete lack of understanding of the choral process.

So, don't give in. Don't let the administrators and politicians ruin your program. They have positive intentions but they don't know what the heck  they're doing much of the time -- especially when it comes to the Arts. You can continue what you know to be the standards for a great choral program, and satisfy the "leaders" at the same time -- but you decide which skills are important~!  If you agree that the above four points ought to be considered as standards, they are all easily measurable through vocal assessments, observation (rubrically notated if you must), and written/oral tests.

 

CHOIR AND FOOTBALL

I would be SO curious to learn about your administrators' edict to the PE teacher. When that professional is teaching football, do the administrators suggest they ignore the skills inherent in teamwork? Or ignore "the rules" of football? Do these "school leaders" tell that PE teacher to grade the students on how fast the student runs, how hard they block, and how well they catch the ball? Period?

I can see it now -- chaos on the field and in the huddle. The quarterback can't even call the plays because of the rudeness and distractions of two of the students.... Then they get to the line of scrimmage, and these same two students dash ahead before the ball is snapped, throwing vicious blocks, and cussing at the opposing team as they trip them. Then they run fast and they catch the ball. Sure, the referee threw the penalty flag, and the team was penalized. But so what -- those two kids have some SKILLS!

Do these same well-intentioned but severely misguided leaders suggest these two students get an "A" in the football unit?

And just one more thing: Many choral conductors will tell you that the singers in their choirs don't necessarily have great voices. But (they will add), THAT'S NOT WHAT MAKES A GREAT CHOIR.

A great choir is about working together as a team, with each member carrying their weight and meeting their responsibilities, working together with sensitivity and commitment for the good of the whole. In fact, I would say that teamwork is the PREDOMINANT skill to be taught to Choir students -- with all the other skills I suggested being subsets of that same skill.

True story: At a national convention interest session a few years ago, one of the greatest choral directors around said this about her elite choir, "Some of the singers standing behind me don't have very good voices." What a crack-up moment (!)... but she spoke so much in that one sentence about what Choir is NOT.

 

The purpose of Choir is NOT to develop students' measurable vocal and musical skills. Those things will happen, yes, but the PRIMARY standard driving a great choir is the standard of teamwork, personal responsibility, sensitivity to ones' peers, commitment to something greater than any one singer, of discipline, empathy, social skill development, et cetera. All of which happens through the process of ensemble music-making, which ultimately teaches an even richer lesson about the power and poignancy of choral music.

 

I think we need to remember this, lest we allow the politicians and administrators to diminish (at best) or completely ruin (at worst) the choral experience for untold millions of kids, and thousands of teachers. If we allow state and national standards to be based on what those outsiders assume Choir is all about, then we are doomed to cheapen it, to dehumanize it, and to ultimately run the risk of losing what I believe to be a core standard within the most successful choral programs.

All my best,

Tom

PS: Don't get me wrong, I'm not against all administrators and politicians. Just the unenlightened ones who wield their power like a club ... and treat teachers like ignorant servants rather than skilled professionals. (;-)