Bridget Sweet’s lecture aimed to understand the core developmental process that adolescents go through: puberty. Sweet demonstrated the implications of this biological process on young adults’ singing voices; adolescents’ voices are constantly changing, creating notable difficulties for choir directors. She believes that most music educators address these difficulties through a restrictive and close-minded approach. Overall, this paradigm does not allow students to flourish into well-rounded musicians — that are — professionals that possess confidence. Sweet also provides alternatives to tackling this complex issue.
The first hour of the lecture was dedicated to the comprehension of basic human anatomy and how the brain develops. Most importantly, whether adolescents are in the process of puberty or not, their brain is constantly developing. This presents difficulty for teachers when they are trying to teach songs to children. The two components of singing — pitch and syllabic rhythm/lyric content — are sometimes difficult for adolescents to execute simultaneously. To overcome this challenge, Sweet recommends isolating these two components before combining them. This was fascinating to me, as I have used this strategy while working with my church choir and it was very effective; the choir learned the song quicker. For teaching music to others, this indicates students require more than one learning method, as opposed to one distinct one. This is because students have contrasting learning styles; hence, a sole approach may not be ideal.
The presentation continues with a discussion about how puberty can cause major fluctuations with adolescents’ voices, creating problems in a choir setting. Teenagers’ voices are constantly subject to change; thus, choir directors cannot treat their students’ current voice type as the role they are destined to fulfill for the remainder of their musical career. As students will feel restricted to their assigned role, this approach is not conducive to an environment that allows students to explore their potential as musicians. Similar to Sweet’s suggestions, teachers should frequently check in on their students’ vocal development and make organizational adjustments if necessary. More specifically, this is achieved through an examination of their students’ voice timbre and tessitura before every concert rotation. This model is certainly more tailored to the needs of adolescents. Ultimately, this more personal approach has the potential to increase student engagement.
The lecture also illustrates the importance of utilizing the nuances of students’ voices in a positive manner instead of seeing them as a weakness. For instance, a vocalist within the audience shared a story about her choir director forcing her into an alto position because her voice was too loud and vibrato-heavy. She felt there was something wrong with her voice; this had a detrimental effect on her confidence. This personally resonated with me because I feel teachers must find a balanced approach that prioritizes both the sound of the choir and the wellbeing of their students. To a certain degree, sacrificing the ensemble’s sound for students’ personal and musical development is not a poor choice. The music classroom can teach many transferable skills outside the scope of music production! Educators must take advantage of this instead of being solely concerned about the health of the choir.
References
*Please check "Works Cited" on the menu bar to access the citation for this post*