"Rhythm Masters" Blank Theory Pages:
Part 1: “Counting” / Written Analysis, or Not?
The real question is do you feel the time worked on counting analysis will pay more significant dividends than exploring other resources you might presently be using. The critical factor, of course, is “TIME!” Two things I truly believe about gaining the best results with ANY counting system used are:
1.) Invest in more than one approach to counting. I have discussed “learning differentiation” and multiple “learning styles” before and gave you my arguments. Hopefully, through a series of articles published by NAfME, I will lay out and explain to you the best “single” system I have found that compliments “numeric” counting.
2.) The length of time spent on a counting curriculum is not nearly as important as doing something with it daily. During the first half of my years as a band director, you could definitely label me as a “rhythm jock.” It was not uncommon for me to go 10 – 15 minutes in a class period working on just counting. It was the old “play it until you get it right” philosophy (what a fool!) That is when I began working on the “Rhythm Masters” project. My goal was to create a successful rhythm curriculum of only three to five minutes daily. It was crazy, but the less time I seemed to spend on counting, the more the students learned. I later figured out several reasons for that happening, but at least lessons learned. I also feel it is important to “map out” a curriculum to fit the specific needs of each of your ensembles. Make a plan and work the plan. The “Rhythm Vocabulary List” I created for “Rhythm Masters” might help keep track of specifics, which I will make available to you later on in this series.
Another successful strategy I found is always to be a level ahead with counting, then the level your students are playing at or where they are in your method book. With a daily curriculum, this is easy to do. While playing quarters, half, and whole notes, you eventually introduce 8th notes. When playing 8ths, you are working on counting 16th notes, etc.
When the next level of counting is introduced, your students are not just learning it for the first time but are actually “reviewing” those rhythms. “Spiraling” is an excellent teaching strategy when one can apply it. Another massive benefit of this approach is how it helps lower students’ “processing levels.” “Processing Level” assessment is a new topic by itself, but basically, it is the “processing memory” students must apply to accomplish the multiple tasks needed to perform music proficiently.
Now about these “blank” counting theory sheets attached… If “written analysis” is part of your rhythm curriculum plan, I might be able to save you a lot of time and work. What you target each day for 3 to 5 minutes can constantly change, where “writing out counting below” is just a part of the whole. The “Rhythm Masters” books are divided into thirty “rhythm vocabulary” units, and I will present them to you ten units at a time. The first ten units I consider a good goal for middle school band programs. I would also go one or two 6/8 and “cut time” units from book #2, but what you cover and the order you cover them in is entirely up to you. Most units of “counting theory” have examples where you write in the counting system you want your students to use, then copy the sheets as needed for class. You or the students can complete a series of exercises, which sometimes continues to a second page. It is totally up to you if you want to use the 2nd page or not. If interested, “Rhythm Masters” uses a hybrid “cumulative” counting system, and you can find this and other helpful materials on the website www.rhythmmasters.org. ALL materials are free and downloadable. Please feel free to contact me if you are having trouble locating anything.
Sincerely,
Rich Moon
Part 2: Blank Theory Pages cont. / Book #2 and Beyond:
I have already made available the blank “Theory Pages” (for counting) from unit numbers 1 – 10 from the first book of the “Rhythm Masters” series. Book two takes us away from “common” meters and introduces rhythms in “triple meters,” “cut-time,” “irregular meters,” as well as “triplets” and “doublets.” Each vocabulary unit is designed to introduce a specific “family” of rhythms, typically about 8 or 10. In the same way, we learned spelling in elementary school; each rhythm unit has a common “link” or similarity. In the student exercises (that follow your handwritten examples), I try to use rhythms that have the most in common or contrast to expose students to combinations that might be the most exposed to error. Sometimes, the actual rhythm vocabulary list for that unit is listed on the second page, sometimes not. The second page was also included if there were additional student exercises, as presented in the book series. Use these other pages your students need until comprehension is confirmed, then move on.
Another observation I have made about most middle school programs is; that each starts with using a method book in their beginner program. In the following years, only a few programs used parts of the second and third books, if they used them at all. I believe the reason is the short time made available to music classes each week, which forces them to build their curriculum primarily around their chosen repertoire. I have witnessed very few that have the organization and discipline to finish their second and third method book and still cover all of the additional materials needed to keep their programs running successfully. Not using the different method book’s resources makes creating and using a consistent rhythm or counting curriculum even more crucial.
In future articles/letters, I will discuss some of the benefits of teaching “multiple” counting systems. Even in earlier letters, where I have discussed the “differentiation” of student needs, in ALL CASES, I do not underestimate the importance of one of the essential rules in music education; “If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it!” A lot of my recent work has focused on, once a student “hits that brick wall,” what do you do next? I have experimented with a variety of methods and written a large number of resources to address these issues. Also, in the cases of students I have worked with, I have taken the time to discover and accommodate each student’s individual “learning style(s)” to create these additional materials. In the final installment of the “Rhythm Masters” blank theory pages, we will “boldly go where few students have gone before.” In “Unit 21,” we will start with “irregular meters,” where I have found a superior method of teaching the younger end of the musician spectrum using “thumb counting.” After that, things get Really CRAZY! I will offer additional units and materials to challenge the best of the “advanced,” even students at the college level. I will get back to you soon.
Sincerely,
Rich Moon
Part 3: “Processing Levels” and “Operational Memory”
Before I get into the last ten units of the “Blank Theory Pages” series, let me take a moment to address the subjects in the title above. “Processing Levels” is an abstract concept but key in the successful study of music. Each music student has a set number of tasks they can “process” simultaneously. The study and performance of music is almost the ultimate form of multi-tasking, which is why this concept is so important. Each task performed requires a certain amount of “operational memory,” which the brain needs to complete successfully. In music, “processing levels” are mixed or combined to acquire the desired outcome; we may complete all tasks but may not. “Operational Memory” usage (like RAM in a computer) is compounded until our brain (literally) “runs out.” It is an “all or nothing proposition.” Although a student’s “processing number” is imaginary, I think of each task a student is asked to perform (at the same time) as being full or ½ of a processing point. I determine the “points” accessed by how prepared or proficient a musician is for each task required. Sometimes, it can be an actual “0” if tasks are memorized, or certain patterns can be performed using “muscle memory.” As students mature, their processing ability and operational memory will gradually increase. However, to deal with music tasks needed immediately, a teacher must work to get a level “1” task down to “1/2” or, if possible, a “1/2” down to a “0.” By lowering the required processing number, we free up operational memory that we can use for the task deficient in memory resources.
Students can be very smart or excellent musicians but still have to deal with issues involving how much operational memory is needed when combining tasks. A way I use to help myself predict processing levels is to visualize a graphic chart. I envision three categories; rhythm/counting, notes/fingerings, and “other.” If a student(s) is having difficulties, I determine the number of tasks used in each of the three categories. Hypothetically (although un-realistically), let us say that each area requires approximately three tasks or processes. That gives us a total number of “9” total points. I feel that most method books gradually lose students due to this over-processing conundrum. For example, books introduce new concepts in all three areas on each page. If page one has one task or process for each category, our total processing number is “3”. On the second page, if one new concept is introduced into each category, our processing number now could be a “6.” It would be great if (after each page) we could get all of the processing levels initially introduced down to “0”, but that just isn’t going to happen. It would be best to spread your “reps” on specific areas over time. The strategy of “spiraling” can be critical for the long-range mastering of tasks in music. So, on each method book page, you might proceed from 3 to 6, to 9, to 12, increasing the processing points exponentially. At first, there were no problems; most of us start with a good amount of operational memory. However, if we do not take steps to accommodate the issue, students (at any given time) will exceed their operational memory limits. What I find interesting about the brain is once a child reaches their operational memory limit, they tend not to deteriorate in performance gradually, but “nose-dive” or CRASH! Becoming more “outspoken” in class or pretending to “not care” are some possible signs of students exceeding their memory limit happening.
With “Rhythm Masters,” my approach to avoid this issue was to adjust the processing points as needed. Taking points from one area and giving it to another, always being mindful of the total processing points I was requiring. An example of band directors instinctively doing this is when our ensemble runs into a difficult passage, we ask them to ignore dynamics and articulations until they get control of the notes and rhythms. Then, add back what we extracted when the ensemble is ready. Since in “Rhythm Masters,” my focus was on counting, I would lower the number required in the “notes” and “other” categories in order to “bump up” the rhythm and counting aspects. In Unit #1, I start only with two notes, gradually expanding to three and then four, over several units each. In the “other” category, I avoided all dynamic and articulation markings in the “Play Drills” and “Power Grids.” Instead, I gradually brought them into play in the “Sight Reading Etude” studies, as done in the “Habits” series. I believe it is imperative to require some degree of note and fingering identification since we want to develop each student’s multi-tasking abilities. I used to religiously do “single line” rhythm drills (on one note) but noticed a decrease in performance every time multiple “notes” were required. I still think you should present changing notes and fingerings in rhythm exercises but keep that category at a relatively low processing level.
Processing Levels and a student’s operational memory capacity are seldom discussed in music education. Having a clear picture of how it all works and considering this issue when planning our lessons and setting up curriculum may help us accomplish needed tasks in our ensembles preparation. Our goal is to be as efficient as possible with our instructional time while trying to predict (as best we can) problems we may need to deal with before they occur. Although I have presented an “over-simplification” of the issue, it has helped me keep my perspective and, as a result, write an enormous amount of material regarding this particular subject matter.
Sincerely,
Rich Moon
Part 4: “Blank Theory Pages” / “Now the Fun REALLY Begins”
Teaching and executing counting is not necessarily “uni-lateral.” Ways in which we might help accommodate different student learning styles might be to bring other “modalities” into play. Some examples might be verbal, tactile, or visual, each bringing its own new “twist” into our overall decoding strategies. Quite some time ago (as an educator), I attended a music symposium at Converse College in Spartanburg, S.C. Part of the presenter’s talk included a system of “touching” and “verbalizing” as a way to help delineate pulse and the differentiation of 8th and 16th note subdivisions. “Down” (both hands slapping thighs) was the down-beat, and “Clap” (clapping both hands) was the upbeat 8th note. For the sixteenth notes, “Down” (fingertips touching both thighs), “touch” (both fingertips touching the thighs again), and “Up” (both sets of fingertips touching each other in a clapping motion), and “touch” (fingertips touching a second time. For “written analysis” and teaching purposes, they were identified (in order) as “D,” “C,” and “D,” “t,” “U,” and “t.” Capital letters for 8th note locations and “t” filling in the “non” down or upbeat 16th notes. The “Down,” “Clap,” and “Touch” method is an excellent way of teaching basic pulse and subdivision to young musicians for the first time. With some minor adaptations (see the example “Unit 21- irregular meters” sheet), I expanded the concept using a “D, t, t” motion and vocalization for triple meter elements. Note: If using a metronome to work with irregular meters, always set the “click” to the 8th note tempo.
That brings me to the last installment of my “Blank Theory Page” presentation; “And Now the Fun REALLY Begins.” In other words, most of the rhythms we rarely see in our current music repertoire. I am talking about Unit 21 in length to make a point about learning differentiation in music and keeping an eye out for new opportunities to use it. I later adapted this approach to teaching pulse and subdivision in both duple and triple meters (and their various derivations) using “Thumb Counting” (see the example attached). In this case, the verbal and tactile differentiation was still in use, but it also added a powerful “visual” component (the “hand motion” being right in front of the student’s face.) Adding four distinct timeline symbols that can combine into “pictographs” finally takes us to the topic of “Time Line Dimensional Transfers.” I will introduce this concept in a future article in one of the NAfME journals this August. For even the most robust counters, initially learning to count advanced rhythms using visual, verbal, and tactile aids can help make things easier.
Here are other reasons why I have suggested using a secondary counting system to complement “numerical” counting. First is the advantage of “verbalization” over “clapping” rhythms. The “Clapping” hand motion is part of “numerical” counting’s delivery system since you are still saying the counting out loud along with it. Doing this doubles the operational memory needed to perform rhythms correctly, and we have not even added playing the instrument yet. Verbalization is a single operation (no clapping along with it) where the brain has the opportunity to also listen to the sound as it is being performed. Now the brain can start sorting and filing rhythm sound bites into its “library” of sorts. I refer to this as our brain’s “tape recorder” memory. In the earlier approaches mentioned, “touching” is not used as part of the “answer” but as an aid to help facilitate each rhythm’s performance. Any individual sense modality can either help to decode sound or perform sound but not do both. Although our brain is designed to multi-task, it is near impossible to run the brain in both directions (“right to left” AND “left to right”) at the same time.
Another factor to consider is “macro” and “micro” rhythms. Macro rhythms focus on counting within and between measures, and micro rhythms focus on counting within a single beat. Numerical counting is the ONLY way you can count macro rhythms; however, if a passage of music is primarily a variety of different “subdivisions,” micro rhythm counting will almost always serve you better. With “micro” rhythm counting situations, there are no differences between “1 e & a 2 e & a” and “Down e Up a Down e UP a.” By not worrying about which specific “count number” we are on, we have already lowered the total operational memory required.
Regarding different “decoding formats” students use in counting, I have tried to find the most opposite approach to using “numbers” I could. This way, you cover almost the entire range of possible learning styles with one “main” and one “supplemental” system. Numerical counting uses an “analytical” decoding approach, and with symbols (or pictographs), you are “reacting” to one or more sensory stimuli. The latter is “cumulative” in concept, so you are choosing between using a division or an addition math function when counting. Which do you think would be easiest for middle school kids? Even when students have matured and reached a processing proficiency where numerical counting is the primary system for decoding, knowledge of an alternative counting approach will most certainly enhance and “speed up” a student’s decoding ability. Even musicians at the college level can revert to “sensory stimulus” to initially decode complex rhythms and then translate the outcome into a numeric format. For rhythms, such as those I have presented to you in these last ten “Rhythm Masters” units (see attached), having options certainly will not hurt! In education, when teachers can offer students optional ways to solve problems, almost always, EVERYBODY WINS!
Last Minute “Add On’s”:
I am attaching an “overview” of the Rhythm Vocabulary lists as sequenced in the “Rhythm Masters” series, Units 1 – 28. In this “at a glance” supplement, teachers should be able to quickly find specific rhythms (or groups of rhythms) you are targeting for a particular lesson. Although irregular meters are ALWAYS “8th note = 8th note” in their “interpretation,” with more advanced music, there sometimes are two possible counting interpretations for the same written rhythms. If this differentiation is needed, the indication should be in the top left corner of the music page. See the “Comparing Meter Interpretations” sheet (Attached) for a complete breakdown of how this works. Finally (“for the fun of it”), I include the instrument transpositions for “Power Grid” #30, the last unit in “Rhythm Masters.” Note that there is no new rhythm vocabulary list presented in this chapter. Playing “doublets” in triple meter and “triplets” in duple meter, along with a lot of “traditional” meters constantly changing, is enough of a challenge on its own. If you got students who think they got this “rhythm thing” locked, let them wrap their minds around a few of these exercises. It might be fun and offer possible opportunities for “teachable moments” in the “process” of decoding rhythms when counting. Enjoy.
Sincerely,
Rich Moon
Part 5: “Irregular Meter Counting and ‘Thumb’ Drills”
In my last correspondence, I mentioned using your “thumb” as an added verbal, tactile, and visual sensory mode. I also explained how it made things easier for teaching when introducing “irregular meters” to musicians for the first time. However, I never gave specific examples of how you might present it to your students. It follows the imperative qualification for a successful “rhythm” vocalization system, “What you ‘see’ is what you ‘say.’” The follow-up to that then is; “what you ‘say’ is what you ‘play.’” “Down,” “up,” “1”, “2”, and “3” are all “single syllable” words, so each 8th note “click” of the metronome you are saying one them (in sequence) as each position of the written timeline is being presented to you. The fact that “duple” and “triple” meter (when combined) each have their own symbol sound for each specific “timeline” point location helps the brain lock into the entirely different feel of these two different rhythm timelines. I can guarantee you that using the “thumb” to delineate your “duple” and “triple” meter changes is a far better usage of your student’s hands than simultaneously clapping and internalizing ALL aspects of irregular meter counting.
The purpose of this drill sheet is to get students (first without any music notation) used to their thumb defining meter transitions as you vocalize them. Additional “manuscript” exercises can be added and performed later. When notating “rests,” I have stolen the way I have seen many drum instructors do it using “slash” notation. Usually, if the counting is already written out (and I wish to highlight where the “silence” occurs), I will put the “slash” on top of the appropriate written symbol. Suppose I ask students (with a degree of experience) to write/analyze the counting below music for the first time. In that case, I will suggest writing just the slash and teaching them to internalize the verbalization of the symbol that would be there if saying the counting. You can write and say the counting for irregular meters in many ways. I have tried many derivations, but the one mentioned above (for me) seems to work best.
Sincerely,
Rich Moon