Upper Level Theory

• Moodle
• Zoom/Google Meet
• Panopto
• Google Drive folders
• Personal devices for scanning and uploading hand-written work
• Music notation software (e.g., MuseScore, Sibelius, Finale, etc.)
• Optional: Presentation software (e.g., Google Slides, PowerPoint, Keynote, etc.)

Because this course is actually a fusion of what used to be two separate courses, the first two models simply deliver one half of the course in person and one half of the course online.

Model 1: In this model the course gives priority to aural skills, making certain that precious in-class time is spent developing the skill of singing accurately with regard to pitch, rhythm, and solmization, and that of accurately notating rhythms, melodies, and harmonic progressions performed in class. Conversely, this model puts pressure on faculty to create high quality videos on written theory skills and analysis concepts. Students would be responsible for watching those videos and applying the written skills & concepts in homework assignments and compositions.

Model 2: This is simply the reverse of Model 1, with in-class time being devoted to written skills and guided music analysis, and aural skills delivered via recorded demonstrations.

This separation of the course into two halves, each delivered differently, is a somewhat idealistic approach that would be helpful for instructors, allowing instructors to develop and implement concrete pedagogical goals and standards. For example, if aural skills are delivered online, instructors would press for a competency standard, in which students are simply expected to meet benchmark performance standards that are expressed in clearly written rubrics. Students would work toward being able to demonstrate measurable skills or goals, such as the ability to sing all six permutations of set-class 014 at a given pitch level (an actual skill that is developed in Music 214). Similarly, written skills could also be assessed using detailed rubrics and with measurable skills in mind. One such skill might be to find the normal order, prime form, and interval vector for a given five-note set (again, an actual skill developed in Music 214).

Model 3: Class periods proceed exactly as they did during the days of 100% live and in-person teaching, with a portion of every class period being devoted to aural skills and the rest of the class devoted to written skills. In this model half of the class attends on one day and the other half attends the next day, alternating like this throughout the semester. This model also requires instructors to record the entire class period using Panopto, further requiring that instructors use computers in class (and not the document camera) to present visual aids (scores, graphs, etc.). In considering this option, an external microphone would be necessary, since the mic in a laptop really isn’t up to the task of faithfully capturing all of the voices in the room equally (i.e., both instructor comments and student questions).

The entire class could be switched over to 100% remote instruction, if necessary. Models 1 and 2 are particularly well suited to a mid-semester switch, given that half of the class is already being delivered online.

• As noted above, Models 1 and 2 are particularly flexible.

• All three of the models proposed above lose the flexible, in-the-moment teaching that can be crucial when working with musicians.
• Course standards would have to be adjusted.
• Loss of a chalkboard with staff lines and the need to find a digital alternative and the requisite hardware

• It has been standard practice for theory/aural skills courses to employ students (through the work/study program) to serve as Classroom Assistants. They help with the proctoring of exams, with the grading of assignments, and often lead (optional) after-hours review sessions. It is not clear how this aspect of the normal experience could be replicated.