"Creative activity" turns me into a pushmi-pullyu

Discussion with colleagues and related readings in my DigPINS course recently focused on issues of scholarship in our respective fields. This got me reflecting about scholarship and creative activity in the field of music and music education. Since I wear a few different hats in my job -- I teach music education courses and work with student teachers, I teach/conduct musical ensembles and prepare them for public performance, and I perform on French horn in ensembles and as a soloist -- my productivity comes about in distinctly different ways. I work to stay active as a performer, a conductor, a clinician, and an adjudicator. At the same time, I stay connected to the music education profession through access to several professional journals (all peer-reviewed) and involvement with music education conferences. This is what makes me feel like the aforementioned pushmi-pullyu, the 2-headed cross between a gazelle and a unicorn in The Story of Dr. Doolittle.

(Ok, the original movie used llamas instead of a gazelle and a unicorn, but that doesn't really matter...)

My identity as a conductor and horn player is quite visible, hard to miss. By comparison, my "academic" identity is a blip on the publication radar at this point. Because of the duality of my job (conductor/performer and music education academic), I am fortunate that my current institution does not weigh equally my activities as a conductor/performer and my publication presence in journals and at conferences.

I feel the itch to get something in print, to be more of a scholarly presence in that regard, but I find so much of my time consumed with studying scores, practicing, and prepping for classes that I teach. Finding the time to conduct what I feel to be relevant research, write drafts, submit for peer-review, and then wait either for acceptance or rejection (accompanied by cold commentary from "Reviewer #2") is pretty impossible at the moment.

The development of open access journals has not yet hit the field of music education, so I don't see myself going down that road anytime soon. We are surrounded by a plethora of peer-reviewed music education journals, and this is such a dichotomy because of the nature of working in the field of music. Music is supposed to reflect life, who we are as individuals and as a society; it is constantly evolving, especially in the areas of "popular" music. Yet I have heard on more than one occasion that musicians (and music teachers) are slow to change. [I fear that I have to agree with that sentiment to a certain degree.] Right now, this would appear to apply also to our journals - not necessarily in terms of content, but how they simply exist and how people can have their voices heard in them. Maybe we as a profession feel complacent content that relevant issues in our field are being adequately presented through the peer-review process and that working music educators dutifully subscribe to whatever journals they need or have adequate access to a library that subscribes on their behalf.

Don't get me wrong - my field is filled with great thinkers and writers, and I actually get a boost when I see a friend or an acquaintance get published in one of our major journals. I think, "Yeah, I've got something like that to contribute; I'll be on that page someday soon." [And then I return to preparing my musical scores.]

But it might be more encouraging for those of us leading double lives in the music field if we were to see the growth of quality open access publications in our area.

In the meantime, I keep exploring the digitalness digitality digital nature of what I do...

Network(s)

So the past week was spent pondering digital networks – their value to me and others, how I choose to represent myself in online networks, and how I see others represented in online networks. Some recent discussions with colleagues brought up concerns about the authenticity of how some people present themselves online, whether in individual posts or in group discussions. Yes, it is possible to be authentic when writing and dialoguing online, despite the fact that for many it is challenging to convey tone and inflection in writing. However, I know I am not alone in expressing my disappointment in seeing a post that reads as unnecessary self-promotion or a post that is unquestionably inflammatory. In both instances, chances are the author is not presenting their true nature - or are they?

I can’t resist the connection to Peter Finch’s outstanding performance in the 1976 movie “Network” (pun intended):

Now, I don’t get angry like that at online misrepresentation, but my frustration with how some choose to engage others online is perhaps what causes me to be reluctant to dive headfirst into the deep end of online engagement. (This is perhaps why I find my initial forays into Twitter awkward and clunky.)

I was intrigued with point/counterpoint presented in the following articles:

WhyAcademics Should NOT Make Time for Social Media, by Gabriel Egan

WhyAcademics Should Make Time for Social Media, by Andy Miah

The naysayer above worries about personal transformation in repeated engagement with social media, fearing that it feeds a craving for others’ approval; he also advocates for weaning students off of social media and helping them “think more ambitiously about how they interact with the wider world.”

The proponent, however, posits that academics need to understand and relate to social media because this is how students are communicating with each other, and that instructors and institutions need to be able to engage with students in these platforms.

Where do I stand? Yes, I am dismayed at how some people are obsessed with maintaining their online connections with other people, that they have a hard time going 60 minutes without checking for a post or a message; I see that craving for recognition and approval that Egan laments, and I am mystified. But I also see that, while there can be richer ways to “interact with the wider world”, there are also an ever-growing number of ways for people to interact and function online – and this functionality is not going to go away. We as academics must be compelled to understand both the benefits and the drawbacks of these new platforms. I believe that my challenge—as an instructor—is to educate myself as to the ways that my students are functioning and need to be functioning online and attempt to meet them where they are – without sacrificing who I am. I believe that the challenge facing my students—my music education students, in particular—is to transform themselves somewhat as they grow into their teacher identities. How will they continue to represent themselves online and will that be the best representation of themselves as leaders in the classroom?  

Band Directors Group - FTW

In the course of the classes I teach, I find myself regularly reminding my music education students that they are now part of a very large network of teachers and that they should never feel isolated as they inch closer to running their own music programs. So this often leads to discussions regarding how you can be connected both on- and offline. One of the best concepts of networking online that I have encountered is a group on Facebook called the Band Directors Group. It is a closed group, dedicated to being a place where band directors at all levels can seek answers to problems and help each other out; it’s also a place where directors vent their frustrations and celebrate their successes. I see a wide range of highly relevant topics, and I see responses that are consistently respectful,  supportive, and authentic. The group is administered very well, and the administrators are quick to step in if they feel that someone is close to crossing a line. There is even a file repository set up for people to post resources that they want to freely share with others. College music majors are allowed to join this group, but they are requested not to post any comments until they are actually working in the field.

The existence of the Band Directors Group is one of the strongest reasons I can think of NOT to wean students off social media. It is a think tank, a brain trust, a community of people seeking to do the right thing. To me, it is a wonderful example of professionals connecting in the best possible way and for all the right reasons – outstanding professional growth. That is what I seek in any sort of network: the chance to represent my true self and contribute to the conversation and to come away with something to inform my own work. 

Brave New World

Teaching: to impart knowledge or skill; to give instruction.

Musicing: any activity involving or related to music performance, such as performing, listening, rehearsing, or composing; a term coined by musicologist Christopher Small.

Brave New World – first blog, first post

Implications? I ultimately want this blog to be a thoughtful discussion of issues pertaining to music, music education, and my ongoing interaction with pedagogy and performance. To that end, I find myself constantly considering the digital natives Visitors & Residents with whom I work and contemplating the effectiveness of my interaction with them: Am I doing enough to be able to meet my students and ensemble members where they are in order to best help them move forward as scholars and musicians? And in working to meet them where they are, am I accurately and sufficiently presenting myself, whether it be in person or online?

In order for me to move this particular platform forward, I have to consider very carefully how I want to present myself in this digital world. To that I end, I will be reflecting these next few weeks on issues brought forth in the ongoing DigPINS (Digital Pedagogy/Identity/Networking/Scholarship) course at St. Norbert College in which I am currently involved.

As you can see from my initial assessment of my digital Visitor/Resident status, I don’t necessarily feel that I currently have a significant Resident status in any particular area - perhaps through email and somewhat through sharing Google Docs. I don’t see the need to air all my opinions and perspectives online in any format, so to that end, I am comfortable keeping my cards close to my vest and not showing my whole hand. (Thanks, Scott, for the poker analogy.)

How timely that I recently encountered these words from the Irish poet and philosopher John O’Donohue:

Each one of us is the custodian of an inner world that we carry around with us. Now, other people can glimpse it from [its outer expressions]. But no one but you knows what your inner world is actually like, and no one can force you to reveal it until you actually tell them about it. That’s the whole mystery of writing and language and expression — that when you do say it, what others hear and what you intend and know are often totally different kinds of things. [from Walking in the Pastures of Wonder: John O’Donohue in Conversation with John Quinn]

I think the last statement perfectly encapsulates the dilemma we constantly face, whether it is in person or online. Since I view my digital presence primarily as a tool for work and communication, I am well aware that my true self will never be fully present online. And that’s ok – as long as I can feel that I have done my best to present my thoughts and ideas as clearly as what I know them to be.

Cautiously, strategically, thoughtfully I move forward…