Extrinsic Impediments to Teaching Composition

The interest in teaching composition varies in different countries. In the United States, both the 1994 National Standards¹ in Music and the revised 2014 Music Standards² designate composition to be included in the education of all music students. But that has not necessarily resulted in the widespread adoption of teaching creative music-making in music classes and ensembles. A study of music teachers’ views of the nine 1994 National Standards indicated that teachers felt least able to address the standards of improvisation and composition (Byo, 1999).

Two factors commonly cited by teachers for why composition does not have a more prominent role in the music curriculum are time and money: composing takes too long, and the equipment costs too much (Byo, 1999; Shouldice, 2014). These are extrinsic factors relative to the teacher, and they are beyond the teacher’s control. Time is a precious commodity in education, and music budgets are limited.

Neither of these reasons holds up under scrutiny. Yes, in most cases it takes longer for students to compose a piece than it takes for them to learn to sing or play a piece with scores or by rote. But, so what? Music educators can learn a lesson in this regard from language teachers. It takes longer to teach students to write a sentence or a poem or an essay than it takes to read either of those. However, language teachers use class time to educate students to compose with language, because writing is an essential component of literacy and enables students to express themselves linguistically.

The factor of time is, in reality, a matter of priorities. Many things that students learn in music classes and ensembles take time. Consider the time spent teaching students to read music. Most classroom and ensemble teachers value music reading and invest precious class time teaching it. That time could have been spent teaching one more piece for the next concert. But those teachers value music reading and consider the trade-off to be worth it in terms of educating their students musically.

Regarding the issue of money, many composing techniques can be done with pencil and paper, and can be performed via homemade instruments, inexpensive ukuleles, body percussion, singing, and rapping. In instrumental ensembles, the students already have access to the instruments they would need to perform their small-group or solo compositions. For those teachers interested in using keyboards, computers, and recording technology, the cost is typically less than the per-student expense for woodwind, brass, or string instruments.

In addition to the extrinsic rationales for not teaching composition, time and money, can be added the idea that students in ensembles are there to perform music, not create music. If music teachers were preparing students for careers in professional orchestras and concert bands, that might be a reasonable argument. But since the vast majority of students in school ensembles discontinue their music performance after graduation from high school (Kratus, 2019), it may be worthwhile to provide students with the tools to continue making music in less formal settings, without conductors, scores, and 50 other musicians. A study of 77 high school band students (Randles, 2010) found that high school band students who took advantage of opportunities to compose on GarageBand during band class had a significantly stronger perception of their musical ability than students who did not. Students with a greater perception of their musical ability are more likely to remain musically active.