The Role of Orff Approach to Music Education

Author: Tamás Szalai

DOI: 10.5434/9789634902263/6

 

 

Abstract

The German-born music educator and composer, Carl Orff began to develop his own music education system in the 1920s and 1930s. This paper gives a concise review of the Orff concept from historical, educational theoretical, and methodological aspects based on available literature. Topics include the Orff instrumentation as the defining methodological element of the Orff concept, the internationalization of the Orff concept in America, as well as the training of current Orff educators.

Keywords: Orff Schulwerk, music education, alternative music pedagogy

 

The Orff Schulwerk’s Historical Background

The Orff Schulwerk was developed by Carl Orff (1895-1982) who was a German music teacher and composer. His approach to music education began in Germany in the 1920s 1930s, providing a new direction for thousands of children. Orff is well known as a composer in the classical music scene also, but his name was well-known as developer of an innovative and unique aspects of music education concept, although the Schulwerk was not originally inspired by music education for children (Hudgens, 1987).

The Orff approach as no specifically recorded methodology. The principles of the method can be found in Carl Orff's speeches and writings. Notated improvisations in Orff Schulwerk volumes preserve all the intellectual treasures that make up the whole concept. Orff handles music, speech and dance in a unified way. Children creating their own rhythm-centred music on the percussion instruments of the Orff instruments, giving a prominent role to active participation in improvisation.

The emergence and spread of youth movements and the presence of alternative music pedagogical trends are closely linked. The youth movements of the 1920s included a body-centred mentality that included sport, gymnastics and dance, thus the need for physical activity was increasing among youth (Váradi, 2010). Consequently, a number of schools have been established, largely based on the music education system created by Émile Jacques-Dalcroze (Dalcroze-Eurhythmics). Outstanding personalities of the era contributed to the reform of art education, for example Rudolf Laban who was an exceptional dance teacher and choreographer of his time, and Mary Wigman, a former student of Dalcroze, who developed a new type of expressive dance (Flick, 1967; Szőnyi, 1988). Several alternative music pedagogical concepts developed during the music pedagogical trends of the 19th and 20th centuries which were also inspired Carl Orff. As a result, he began studying music pedagogy approaches mainly focusing on Laban’s and Dalcroze’s works (Szőnyi, 1988).

Carl Orff and Dorothee Günther established their own school in 1924, the institution was named Güntherschule. The goal was the integrated use of gymnastics, dance, movement and music (Morin, 1996). Orff never intended to develop a specific, elaborated methodology. The ars poetica of the Güntherschule faithfully reflects the underlying principle behind the idea: "The way is the goal" (Widmer, 1994). According to Orff, the practice of music teaching was dry and non-effective in the past, and music teachers neglected to use the most important skills of children: spontaneity and creativity (Comeau, 1995). The primary focus of the school was to educate gymnastics and dance teachers based on rhythmic improvisation (Szőnyi, 1988).

Dorothee Günther developed the curriculum of movement material and Orff composed music for Günther’s classes (Morin, 1996). The school's dance group was led by Maja Lex and Gunild Keetman, which played a significant role in demonstrating Güntherschule across Europe through its astonishing and innovative dance choreographies. During the early period of the Güntherschule, they used mostly so-called body percussion to accompany their movements and later made special percussion instruments to allow students to accompany their own movements with their own music. At that time, many dance and gymnastics teachers used percussion with the piano. Percussion was used mostly for creating uncommon sound effects, but Orff composed rhythm accompaniment for movement which was led to the creation of Orff instruments (Szőnyi, 1988; Comeau, 1995). Idiophone and membranophone instruments are also included to this family of instruments: traditionally drums, xylophones, orchestral bells (glockenspiel) and other noise-generating percussion instruments, such as rattlesnake and maracas.

Since the creation of the Güntherschule, more and more people started to get known the Orff’s education system. The new music pedagogical method spread throughout Germany soon, and due to international success, the idea of Orff Schulwerk's adaptation became popular among foreign music educators (Flick 1967; Widmer 1994). The reputation of the approach was also marked in German education policy. In the early 1930s, Leo Kestenberg who was the cultural secretary of the Berlin Ministry of Culture, Eberhard Preussner and Arnold Walter proposed the application of music education by Carl Orff in the Volksschule in Berlin. Subsequently the altered political views were the ending phase for the Orff approach for a while. In 1945, the bombings of the Second World War also overtook the building of Güntherschule, which was lost with all Orff instruments together (Orff, 1963; Velásquez, 1990).

Ensuing after the destruction of the Güntherschule, Carl Orff turned his attention to composing music, but there was an unexpected turn in the composer's life in 1948. The Bavarian Radio request Orff to compose music for children's music programs. Orff entrusted Gunild Keetman with the notating of musical improvisations made during the Güntherschule and also Orff's later works. Thanks to their cooperation, Orff and Keetman's compositions were published between 1950 and 1954 under the title Music for Children in five volumes. These volumes approach musical interactions from a children's perspective. The participants get to the musical experience using imitation, musical means of improvisation and imagination. Orff and Keetman considered that the free music-making methods and processes in the Schulwerk could be adapted to any culture by combining the cultural and musical traditions of each nation.

Demonstrating the success of the Orff Schulwerk volumes, music educators throughout Germany became interested in the audio recordings of the volumes and soon began to adapt to other languages. Schulwerk adaptation by country according to the published volumes: Canada (1956), Sweden (1957), Belgium (1958), England (1958), Argentina (1961), Portugal (1961), Japan (1963), Spain (1965 and 1969), France (1967), Wales (1968), Czechoslovakia (1969), Taiwan (1972), Denmark (1977), Korea and the United States (1977-1982) (Shamrock, 1986). In many countries, the adaptation of Schulwerk volumes has contributed significantly to the revival of local folk traditions, especially with regard to children's repertoires. Thus, it is important to note that in the process of adaptation, individual cultures regain their musical-cultural identities and sources of their musical traditions (Sangiorgio, 2010). Orff and Keetman published the volume named Paralipomena in 1977, which is considered a continuation of the Music for Children.

 

The Orff Schulwerk’s Philosophical Background

Carl Orff gave a lecture at the University of Toronto in 1962, where he presented the characteristics of the Schulwerk volumes in six points. We consider this speech to be guiding and also a primary source for the educational philosophical background of the concept.

  1. „The Schulwerk avoids false simplification, for a child's world is neither primitive nor transitory.
     
  2. The Schulwerk has no ambition to be "modern," for progressing from pentatonic to diatonic modes, it closely corresponds to the development of the child. It is wrong to disregard the growth of music in history and to base instruction on the theory of intervals. The Schulwerk protests against the systematic rationalization ofour elementary music education.
     
  3. The Schulwerk avoids introducing, prematurely, concepts and notions into a child's play-world which are derived from the contemporary level of our mechanical civilization....The world of technology and causality that surrounds us reaches only as far as rationally measureable relationships are concerned; spiritually, artistically it is sterile....The Schulwerk develops the imagination and directs it towards the archetypes in nature and creation; the child is in contact with positive forces that are ordering, relaxing and healing.
     
  4. The pieces it contains are simple, elementary if you will, yet always meaningful, each one baving a "Gestalt" of its own. But they do not add up to a progressive system in the usual sense of the term. It is the treatment of musical elements that set the Schulwerk apart from other systems, which usually start with unison and two-part pieces, proceeding step by step to more difficult pieces in many parts and complicated structures. It is true that the Schulwerk also progresses stepwise--from borduns to parallel chords and chords in dominant relationship; ...The rate of progress, however, depends on a child's receptivity; this takes both music and language into consideration.
     
  5. The Schulwerk does not tamper with traditional texts nor does it invent new ones (except in the case of improvisation).... Our texts are taken from folklore, or else from recognised poets, both lyrical and epic.
     
  6. Schulwerk pieces are not "compositions" in the subjective sense; they do not depend on inspiration (as the term was understood in the 19th century), they do not illustrate a text. They are musical models, typical rather than individual in character.” (Dolloff, 1993:5).

The five volumes are based on the most elemental component of music: rhythm. The source of Orff's new musical approach was the term elemental. The word is derived from the Latin elementarius, meaning: elemental, basic, ancient. Orff uses this term in many of his speeches, which originated from the concept of "primitive music" of contemporary comparative musicologists, such as Curt Sachs and Richard Wallaschek. Its source is European music and folk traditions. Elemental is the mixing of various expressive forms into fundamental phenomena. It is an active process of advancement through the internalization, elaboration and invention of musical materials and ideas. The musical approach of Orff, and then the whole Orff-Schulwerk tradition is aimed at a kind of music that can be described as trans-cultural or trans-historical whereas it comes from the momentary musicality of the individual. Body percussion are also referred to as "elemental instruments" in the literature, providing an opportunity for instant musical expression and active musical experience (Sangiorgio, 2010; Shirley, 2010). According to Orff, music cannot exist by itself, but is related to movement, music and speech (Widmer, 1994). Everyone has the right to experience a musical experience, regardless of their musical ability. Music can only be experienced through active musical activity. Listening to music alone is not enough, so that children using the Orff method have an immediate opportunity to create their own music using Orff instruments (Comeau, 1995).

 

Characteristics of the Orff Schulwerk’s Metodology

As we mentioned before, Schulwerk volumes are capable of enrich childrens’s musical experiences through group work through imitation, improvisation and creativity. The musical processes are centred around rhythm, providing a transition from simple rhymes to songs. The minor third as the sol-mi interval is the first to introduce, which can be found among most of the children's songs of folk music cultures as well. This is followed by the la, re and do tones, thus children can discover the pentatonic scale early. German and Austrian folk music is not based on the pentatonic scale, and there is only a few pentatonic melodies among the folk cultures in Europe, so Orff is diverging the essentials of his music from European musical traditions. The tonality is later supplemented by the fa and ti tones, this set is collectively called diatonia. Parallel to the tonality, the basis of the initial rhythmic accompaniment is performed with the aforementioned body percussion, which have no specific pitch, and later the instruments of the Orff instrument are introduced gradually (Morin, 1996). Children's songs in the Schulwerks are based on folk songs from different cultures. Increasingly sophisticated practices are accompanied by melodic instruments in the Orff instrumentation, and there is an opportunity for improvisation within a given vocal set (Flick, 1967; Hegyi, 1996). The tonality of the improvisation stages is mostly based on the pentatonic line, allowing children to enjoy the most natural form of self-expression in a consonant tonal-world. In terms of musical forms, it moves from simple to more complex structures.

At the beginning of the first volume of Music for Children, Orff shares the following thoughts with the book's user, quoting the adaptation of Margaret Murray:

„Music for children has grown out of work with children.
The traditional Nursery Rhymes and Children’s Songs were the obvious starting point for this work. Most of the texts in this book are taken from these sources. The tonality is limited to the pentatonic scale. In this, where the musical limitations correspond to their own mentality, small children will be able to express themselves easily without being in danger of leaning on the strong examples of other music.
The tonality begins woth the two-note call (Cuckoo, Name-calling); then other notes are added. The melodic flow finds its natural accompaniment in Ostinato and Drone (which are diametrically opposed to the use of all cadences of the major scale) the use of which leads quite naturally later to a simple polyphony.” (Murray, 1977)

Orff extends the musical material used in Schulwerk. By this we mean Western musical forms and composing techniques. These include the responsorial composition techniques, canon, ostinato, chaconne, round dance, rondo, qoudlibet, fauxbourdon, recitativo and various dance forms. There are melodic and harmonic examples of Gregorian-style, organum (early polyphonic composition), paraphony (parallel melody with constantly fifth interval) and compositions based on functional harmony. In terms of its rhythmic structure, the monosyllabic composition uses polymetric and polyrhythmic compositions.

Orff believed that musical development began with experiencing music through kinesthetic sensory. Musical experiences experienced by parents and teachers in a positive environment initially are replaced by the intellectual conceptions of music. Through performance, improvisation and music, the child makes conscious musical decisions based on developing musical understanding. Development ranges from simple to complex (Calantropio, 2010). Progressive musical skills and concepts are added to children's acquired knowledge during the developmental process (Dolloff, 1993). The pedagogical elements of the Orff Schulwerk are based on the principles of music education, which lead the way to the understanding of more advanced and complex music through classical music. Dolloff (1993) notes that Orff, when examining the pedagogical structure of the method, spends too much time on musical forms characterized by limitations such as pentatonic or rondo form. However, he points out that this was not Orff's intention: "This is a nonsense of the course, since it is both impossible and undesirable to shut off the child from all other musical influences" (Orff, 1962: 7, quoted in Dolloff, 1993: 15).

The practice of playing music as an ensemble is clearly reflected throughout the Orff approach. This is supported by the fact that the repertoire contains practically no solo pieces. Playing music is a community activity, hence Orff Schulwerk includes a capability of community-building through improvisation, playing music and singing, which evokes the musical practices of the elemental, ancient cultures mentioned above. This principle of the idea is embodied in Orff ensembles. The approach is based on gamelan musical practices and traditions, which both influenced the development of the Orff instruments.

Orff Schulwerk opened up new possibilities in music therapy, which was first pioneered by the guiding thoughts of Gertrud Orff: The Orff Music Therapy, written in 1994. Many music therapists have Orff instruments in their toolbars. During therapies, they help patients develop emotional contacts and manifestations through shared music practice. Active music therapy relieve healing through body movement and vibration of sound, therefore the Orff approach can be used not only for treating psychiatric and neurological disorders, but is also useful for treating people with disabilities (Szőnyi, 1988, Varvasovszky, 1996).

 

The Orff Instruments

It has already been mentioned that during the early period of the Güntherschule, body perucssion were mainly used to accompany movement. Traditionally, there are four body percussion, each representing four different tones, which are able to sound deeper or higher.

The approach to quasi-symphonic orchestral sounding is well reflected in the sounds of different body instruments. The most basic body percussion tone is striking the thigh with the hands. According to Widmer, the clap tone is the most difficult to play, which plays an important role in developing hand coordination skills. Finger snapping can be difficult even for older people. There is no separate methodology for practicing, children usually learn by themselves. Stomp is the bass of body percussion tones, and can easily be combined with other hand-tones (Widmer, 1994).

The construction of the percussion instruments is associated with the name of Karl Maendler (1872-1958) who was a piano maker originally. Curt Sachs also worked on the instruments, the two of them designed the Orff instruments based on traditional Indonesian gamelan instruments. Maendler built the first Orff xylophone in 1925, the bars are made of Brazilian rosewood. The structure of the instrument was keyboard-based, although unlike the piano keyboard, the bars were arranged in a single row for easier gameplay. The melody instruments of the percussion group require much more complex physical coordination to play on, especially for children. The movement occurs in a much larger space than the drums, as they are usually should be hit at a single point, while in the case of melody instruments, the movements occur both vertically and horizontally. The quality of the Orff instruments developed rapidly, therefore Maendler's work became more and more recognized, but during the II World War the instrument factory was destroyed. Later Klaus Becker-Ehmck continued Maendler’s work, and in 1949 he founded Studio 49, which still operates today (Velásquez, 1990). The Orff instruments is structured as a symphony orchestra, the melodic instruments cover every register from deep to high. The palette is coloured with a variety of membranophone instruments: timpani, drums, cymbals and gongs, and sometimes other instrument like cello and viola da gamba is also in use to enhance the bass register. After 1963, folk instruments and flutes were added to Orff's instruments (Szőnyi, 1988). In the recommendation of the first volume of the Music for Children, tuned glasses appear as melody instruments, and for rhythm playing, cymbals, tambourines, castanets, and large drums are included in the list of musical instruments provided. Nowadays, most classical musical instruments are used in Orff bands, from guitar to bassoon.

The xylophone, which is the first instrument and also the basis of the Orff band, is slightly different from today's xylophones. Like the strings of the zither, the bars rest on a resonant woodbox that can play a diatonic scale up to several octaves, depending on the size of the instrument. Bars of the xylophone are made of wood and players regularly hit them with wooden or felt headed mallets. Registers distinguish between soprano, alt and bass xylophones. In terms of their musical function, they are suitable for both melody and chord playing. A similar melodic instrument group includes chimes, which are mainly used for melody. In terms of structure, the bars are also located on a resonant woodbox, although they are made of metal, and the head of the beaters are made of metal. We distinguish between alto and soprano. In addition to xylophone and chime, the group of melody players uses a metallophone, which is a quasi-xylophone of deeper metal vocals, soprano, alto and bass.

Another important component of the band is the pitched drums, these instruments called timpani or kettle drums in classical music nowadays, which is a larger drum that can be tuned with a pedal. A skin (often called head) with a frame lies on the top of the drum. The pitch of the instrument can be adjusted by tensioning and loosening the screws which are in connection with the foot pedal and the frame also. In addition to the drum, there are also double bass and guitar in the volumes of Music for Children, which are played in the simplest way possible, usually by playing on the empty string.

In our previous interview research in Hungary, which we surveyed the application of the Orff concept, we came to the conclusion that the purchase of Orff instrument instruments often has financing problems and is replaced in many other ways, such as buckets, toy balls or shawls that are used for various creative ways of making music. There is also an example in the international literature that discuss about the lack of Orff instruments and in article there is a recommendation to the application of Orff Schulwerk without instruments (Perlmutter, 2009). Although out of the reach of scientific sources, it is worth mentioning teachers' online recommendations for music educators in connection with applicating Orff approach without Orff instruments.

 

The Orff Schulwerk in America

In the mid-1950s, many music educators began questioning the validity and effectiveness of music education practices in that period in both the United States and Canada. At that time, these educational practices were largely characterized by mechanical, vocal based education and a teacher-centred approach, which was based on learning theoretical knowledge for children. For this reason, music educators have turned their attention to educational methods and philosophies that have mainly focused on a child-centred approach. In the US and Canada, the curriculum in use at the time contained pedestrian songs that did not necessarily focus on children's musical abilities, psychological or musical development. Thus, in the 1950s, the introduction of Orff Schulwerk, promising innovative opportunities, was an alternative to the reform of the existing superficial curriculum in music education (Sanborn, 2005).

Orff Schulwerk was first applicated within the University of Toronto, thanks to the efforts of Arnold Walter, former director of the University of Toronto's Music Faculty, who was in direct contact with Carl Orff. Walter visited the Günterschule in 1930 and spread the philosophy of Orff Schulwerk in his home country. Walter's goal was for the University of Toronto to be a leading position in introducing Orff Schulwerk's approach to North America in the hope that it would greatly enhance the university's reputation for music education. In 1954, Walter commissioned Doreen Hall, who was a graduate student from the University of Toronto to study Carl Orff and Gunild Keetman’s work in Salzburg, and then return to Canada as an Orff Schulwerk educator to introduce Orff's music education concept to the University of Toronto. Walter also wanted to establish localization of the Orff approach as a fundamental element of the Canadian school music curriculum (Walter, 1959; Taranto, 2010).

Doreen Hall, in a contract with the Royal Conservatory of Toronto, has appointed her as the primary instructor of the Orff Approach, which marks the beginning of the application of Orff Schulwerk to the University of Toronto in the history of North America. Walter and Hall's ongoing efforts led to the expansion of Orff Schulwerk in Canada through summer courses. As a result, University of Toronto became the centre of education for Orff Schulwerk music educators, which eventually led to the development of the Orff Schulwerk teacher training system. Further expansion of the Canadian Orff Schulwerk was the result of the Orff Conference of July 26-28, 1962, at which Carl Orff and Gunild Keetman gave lectures. This conference made the University of Toronto the primary institution for studying Orff Schulwerk, which set the standard for Orff Schulwerk teacher education (or courses). Many music educators in the United States who attended the University of Toronto summer courses played a decisive role in introducing and disseminating Orff Schulwerk's concept and practice to the United States (Walter, 1959; Taranto, 2010).

As already mentioned in the 1950s, it has become very demanding for music educators in the United States to renew their practice in music education. Orff Schulwerk played a major role in the emergence and application of music education in the United States by three important events. Yale Seminar on Music Education, Tanglewood Symposium and Title III sponsorship projects have helped Orff Schulwerk spread in American music education.

The Yale Seminar was held June 17-28, 1963, the first federation-sponsored development conference in the arts education sector. In the 1960s, a number of concerns about the quality of music education in the United States led to the Yale seminar. Improvements in the repertoire of performing organizations have been raised in terms of audience education; providing more theoretical and historical courses in music teacher education programs; and developing new approaches to music education for elementary education. The seminar was criticized and its credibility questioned because of the conference's freedom, although many claimed that the improvement in music education in the United States was due to the impact of the Yale Seminary. Many have indicated that the majority of participants in the Yale seminar were not part of music education, but were well-known and respected musicians (composers, conductors, performers). The seminar's central reform aspirations and its statements on music education reforms were closely aligned with Orff Schulwerk's concept and practice of music education because of its versatility (speech, vocals, movement, instrument integration, and drama) and its key elements being improvisation and active music participation. Thus, in the 1960s, the goals of music education reform efforts were surprisingly well suited to Orff Schulwerk (Palisca, 1964).

The Tanglewood Symposium was established from July 23 to August 2, 1967, with the sponsorship of the Music Educators National Conference (MENC) in Tanglewood, Massachusetts. The aim of the project was to help music educators at all levels and levels of education, and to explore and fully exploit the potential of music education. Other objectives of the Tanglewood Symposium were to clarify and clarify the social and educational aspects of music and to produce written documents to demonstrate the positives of music education (Choate, 1967). The Yale seminar highlighted problems with the future of music education, and the Tanglewood Symposium encouraged music educators to take massive action. A declaration was created, followed in 1969 by the "Goals and Objektives" (GO) project, which defined the future tasks and criteria of the music education career. At the symposium, efforts to revolutionize music education approach were once again featured with alternative music pedagogy concepts: in the mid-20th century, the Orff and Kodály concepts, which were key to school reform, were spreading rapidly in American schools. A committee at the Tanglewood Symposium dealt with music curricula. The committee was working on a new music curriculum that focused on gaining musical experience. Its contents included for example guided listening to music, singing music, playing on instruments or do moving exercises, which are also found in Orff Schulwerk's principles (Palisca, 1964). Thus the ideas of applying alternative music education concepts and renewing music education have all contributed greatly to the spread of Orff Schulwerk in the United States.

The results of the Yale Seminar and the Tanglewood Symposium promoted the transformation of music education and the further spread of Orff Schulwerk through the “Title III” grants of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, which was one of the federal government's it has been a major effort to promote primary and secondary education. These grants provided a kind of additional education centres aimed at creating and presenting exemplary educational programs. Many educational programs have applied the principles of the Orff concept to one- and two-year projects. Examples of such projects are the Bellflower Project (1966-1968), the Elk Grove Project (1967-1969), the Memphis Project (1968), the Madera County Schools Project (1968) (Lehman, 1968; Taranto, 2010). The first studies and theoretical summaries of the possibilities of implementing Orff Schulwerk were published in the 1980s. During the same period, an increasing number of Canadian and US music educators dealt with Orff Schulwerk in his doctoral evaluation (Taranto, 2010).

The American Orff Schulwerk Association also contributed significantly to the spread of the concept, which was established on May 11, 1968 in Muncie, Indiana. The association was created by ten committed music educators who acknowledged and highly appreciated the Orff Schulwerk doctrines as the values and opportunities that combine music and movement education. AOSA's goals included the further dissemination of Schulwerk and its integration into American music education. In the first year of AOSA, the number of members increased from 10 to 332, and the initial seven local organizations have expanded to more than 96 in recent years, and currently have about 3,300 members (AOSA, n.d.).

Gunild Keetman Assistance Fund was established in 1976, which provides scholarships for music educators for professional development or creative projects in the topic of Orff Schulwerk. The Shields-Gillespie Scholarship Fund was created in 1991 to provide financial support for teacher training, equipment acquisition and special creative projects to promote children's music education. AOSA published the first guidelines for Orff Schulwerk teacher training in the United States in 1976 and also published a list of qualified courses in 1982. Today, in the United States, AOSA-controlled teacher training courses are available nationwide for interested music educators (AOSA, n.d.).

The association's quarterly publication called The Orff Echo, first appeared in November 1968 as a four-page issue. Since then, it has grown into a journal and has reached its current format, containing content of scientific research articles. The Association's quarterly newsletter called Reverberations, first appeared in 1995. Originally this newsletter was part of The Orff Echo, tought in 2001, Reverberations received a separate publication, and from 2011 onwards will be distributed as an online newsletter to the AOSA members. Since 1995, AOSA has maintained its own website (www.aosa.org) where members can find information on Orff Schulwerk: music education advocacy, applying for scholarships and grants, registering for national conferences, joining local organizations. Interested music educators will find information about approved teacher training courses and may donate to the organization. The AOSA Professional Development Conference is held in November each year in another city in US. The conference was first organized in 1969 at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana, with approximately 170 Orff educators from 21 states and Canada. Nowadays approximately 1500 educators from the United States and other countries around the world attend the conference. AOSA is affiliated to MENC, the National Association for Music Education and has been a member of the Orff Schulwerk Forum in Salzburg since 1990 (AOSA, n.d.).

So far in this chapter, we have introduced the Orff Schulwerk music education approach to North America, which was later brought to the United States by Arnold Walter and Doreen Hall, thanks to faculty from the University of Toronto, and the role and work of the American Orff Schulwerk Association. In the next section of our review, we will go over the specifics of the Orff teacher education system in the United States.

Orff Schulwerk instructor training is delivered through the Orff Schulwerk Teacher Training Courses. For the first time in the United States, Orff Schulwerk was first educated at the University of Toronto in the 1950s and 1960s. Approximately a decade later, Orff teacher training began in the United States: at Ohio State University in 1958 and at Ball State University in 1963. These institutions played a decisive role in the subsequent development of Orff's teacher education. Since the founding of the American Orff Schulwerk Association in 1968, teacher education has become a central issue in many of its forums. The work of the AOSA Standing Committee on Higher Education has had a major impact on the undermining of current Orff Schulwerk teacher training courses. Curriculum standards for teacher education are nowadays based on Guidelines for Orff Schulwerk Teacher Training Courses established by the Standing Committee on Higher Education in the 1980s and adopted and issued by the American Orff Schulwerk Association (Taranto, 2010).

The courses usually involve two weeks of intensive preparation. Some music teacher training institutions support Orff Schulwerk, and music teachers often receive a certificate of proficiency that is not equivalent to a certificate approved by the American Orff Schulwerk Association. Instructors can take three different levels of training, each of which requires a minimum of 60 hours to complete each course. The first level focuses on experiential learning and active participation, which involves the acquisition of methodological elements such as movement, speech, singing, and instrumental play. The second level focuses more on conceptualization, which includes reflection, performance and, through existing ideas for music creation, the way it is performed. In the third level, pedagogy comes into view, with elements of observation, organization, planning and teaching. All three levels are interwoven with discovery, improvisation and creation. According to Taranto, the first level focuses primarily on the “what” and “how” questions, while the second and third levels also help Orff educators to understand the “why” (AOSA, 1997).

Thus, Orff Schulwerk courses play a decisive role in the education of Orff Schulwerk teachers. The music educators are introduced to the complex approach of rhythmic speech, vocals, instrument play, improvisation, movement and dance, which can be learned by three potential teachers on three levels.


 

References

  • Abril, C. (n.d.): Critical Issues in Orff Schulwerk.
    https://www.academia.edu/7745728/Critical_Issues_in_Orff_Schulwerk
  • American Orff Schulwerk Association. (1997). Guidelines for Orff Schulwerk teacher training courses levels I, II, III.
  • Calantropio, S. (2010): Merging and Emerging: The Path of Orff Schulwerk. Orff Echo, 43, 1, 14-18.
  • Choate, R. A. (1967): Music in American Society the MENC Tanglewood Symposium Project. Music Educators Journal, 53, 7, 38-40.
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3391019.pdf
  • Comeau, G. (1995): Comparing Dalcroze, Orff and Kodály: Choosing your approach to teaching music. Centre franco-ontarien de ressources pédagogiques, Ottawa.
  • Dolloff, L. A. (1993): Das Schulwerk. Canadian Music Education Research Centre, Toronto.
  • Flick, L. L. (1967): An Analysis Of The Orff Schulwerk Approach To Teaching Music. Dissertation. Ohio State University, Colombus.
    https://etd.ohiolink.edu/rws_etd/document/get/osu1125079434/inline
  • Hegyi, I. (1996): Az Orff Schulwerk alapelvei és tartalma [Principles and Content of the Orff Schulwerk]. Parlando, 38, 4, 18-31.
  • Hudgens, C.  K.  K. (1987): A Study Of The Kodaly Approach To Music Teaching And An Investigation Of Four Approaches To The Teaching Of Selected Skills In First Grade Music Classes. Dissertation. North Texas State University, Denton.
    http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc331823/m2/1/high_res_d/1002715504-Hudgens.pdf
  • Kelly-McHale, J. (2011): The Relationship between Children's Musical Identities and Music Teacher Beliefs and Practices in an Elementaly General Music Classroom. Dissertation. Northwestern University, Evanston.
  • Lehman, P. R. (1968): Federal Programs in Support of Music. Music Educators Journal, 55, 1, 51-120.
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3392292.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Aa5e4b0853d120eeb36eae0406b8352e9
  • Morin, F. (1996): The Orff Schulwerk Movement: A Case Study in Music Education Reform. Dissertation. University of Manitoba, Winnipeg. (2017. 01. 13.)
    http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED420608.pdf
  • Orff, C. (1963): The Schulwerk: Its Origin and Aims. Music Educators Journal, 49, 69-74.
  • Palisca, C. V. (1964): Music in Our schools: A search for improvement. US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, 28.
    https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED544146.pdf
  • Sangiorgio, A. (2010): Orff Schulwerk as Anthropology of Music.
    https://www.academia.edu/28394712/Sangiorgio_2010_Orff Schulwerk_as_Anthropology_of_Music
  • Shamrock, M. (1986): Orff Schulwerk: An Intergrated Foundation. Music Educators Journal, 72, 6, 51-55.
  • Shirley, S. (2010): Inclusion and Orff Schulwerk. Musicworks, 15, 1, 27-33.
  • Szőnyi Erzsébet (1988): Zenei nevelési irányzatok a XX. században [Trends in Music Education in the 20th Century]. Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest.
  • Taranto, A. S. (2010): Orff Schulwerk Levels Course Instructors and Their Teachers: Determining Pedagogical Lineages and Influences. Dissertation. University of Mississippi, Oxford.
  • Varvasovszkyné Velsz Dóra (2005): Zeneterápia és gyógypedagógia súlyosan és halmozottan sérültek intézményeiben [Music Therapy and Special Education in Severely and Cumulatively Injured Institutions]. Piremon Nyomda, Debrecen.
  • Váradi, J. (2010): How to educate and audience to acquire a teste for classical music?. Doctoral Dissertation.
    https://jyx.jyu.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/24968/9789513938987.pdf?sequence=1
  • Velásquez, V. (1990): Tuned Idiophones in the Music Education of Children: The History of Orff Instruments. Journal of Historical Research in Music Education, 11, 2, 93-109.
  • Walter, A. (1959): Carl Orff’s Music for Children. The Instrumentalist 13, Jan, 38-39.
  • Widmer, M. (1994): Orff Schulwerk – Az elemi zene- és mozgásnevelés koncepciója [Orff Schulwerk – The Concept of Elementary Music and Movement Education]. Parlando, 36, 4, 19-26.
Legutóbbi frissítés: 2022. 08. 11. 09:52