Unlocking the Potential of Second-Tier Collegiate Concert Bands –Jermie S. Arnold

UNLOCKING THE POTENTIAL OF SECOND-TIER COLLEGIATE CONCERT BANDS

BY JERMIE S. ARNOLD

INTRODUCTION University music programs that have large music student populations often require several performance ensembles. A music school with 150 to 200 band students, for example, likely has two or three concert bands which are often differentiated by experience through an audition process. The audition process separates students into ensembles based on a hierarchy– the premiere/ top-level ensemble, the second-tier/mid-level ensemble, and the third-tier/lowest-level ensemble. Premiere ensembles often commission new works, tour internationally and nationally, and are one of the primary recruiting organizations for a music school. Second and third-tier ensembles rarely enjoy these same opportunities; they serve as training grounds where ensemble members expand and improve their musical skills and develop musical maturity. Over the past decade few studies consider the challenges and opportunities of second-tier collegiate concert bands. This study focuses on the perceptions of directors toward the second-tier concert band along with strategies and techniques used to unlock the musical potential of these ensembles.

Little research exists about secondtier or mid-level collegiate ensembles. Jacob M. Dakon, and Marci L. Major’s 2016 study of the mid-level choir member's perception of conductors strategies to facilitate ensemble identity revealed that ensemble members hold very different opinions regarding the effectiveness of conductors development of ensemble identity. They write that the quality of the ensemble, the quality of the repertoire, providing unique performance opportunities, and developing community among ensemble members are a few of the strategies that students identify as effective in developing a positive mid-level ensemble identity.1 They conclude that conductors who use these strategies encourage singers to make choir a priority in their school schedules. 2

In 2017 Dakon and Major replicated and expanded their original study to survey top-level choir member’s perception of conductor’s strategies to create identity. The purpose of this study was to, “draw conclusions about the similarities and differences between top- and mid-level choristers' perceptions toward directors’ ensemble identity-building strategies and the factors that affect dedication and enrollment.”3 They found that “top-level choristers tended to identify more, feel more dedication to, and want to remain with their current choirs. In contrast, mid-level choristers often enjoyed their choral experience but were more mobile and in greater pursuit of more prestige.”4 Another 2017 study conducted by Marci Major focused on the perspectives of mid-level choral directors. Major asserts that organizational identity contributes to the overall positive or negative perception of a group and has significant implications for group outcomes.5 Major found the need for choral directors to recognize the importance of “mid-level identity phenomenon and the impact identity building efforts can make to facilitate stronger mid-level ensembles.”6

BIOBIOBIOBIOBIOBIOBIOBIOBIOBIOBIOBIO

mid-level collegiate bands found that “Conductors of mid-level or second bands do not perceive themselves or their students as second best.”7 Hedgecoth also revealed that second bands are composed mainly of music education students, and repertoire selection tends to include more popular pieces as opposed to traditional or standard pieces.8 He also concludes that the mission of the school of music is not a significant factor in the overall approach to the ensemble but that ensemble goals center on the music making process.9

Brian Cardany’s broader study of “elite” university band programs considered band member’s attitudes toward repertoire and their overall band experience. Cardany found that student’s attitude toward repertoire and their overall experience did not greatly differ between programs, but that differences within the programs mid-level ensembles did exist.10 He notes that in the top ensembles attitudes are generally positive about repertoire and overall band experience while this positive attitude varies more among mid- and lower- level ensembles.11 These differences are likely a result of the varied types of academic majors in the ensemble and the differing levels of musicianship.12 Cardany’s study sheds light on the overall attitudes of wind band players in various programs but does not, however, consider the conductors' perceptions and attitudes. Perceptions and attitudes among mid-level ensemble members are important factors in the overall experience of the music student; however, only one study addressed the conductors’ perceptions with mid-level ensembles. While the point of view of the conductor of mid-level ensembles can positively or negatively impact the attitudes of the ensemble members, little research exists in this area. Using a qualitative approach, I investigated conductors’ perceptions of the challenges and opportunities for mid-level collegiate concert bands to unlock the musical potential of these groups.

RESEARCH METHOD My Journey As a college music student, I always wanted to perform with the top ensembles. I remember one particular year when I worked extra hard on the placement audition materials. My audition could not have gone better, and I eagerly anticipated a positive result. Before the results were posted my studio teacher called me into the office and informed me that I was being placed in the second orchestra. Even though my teacher encouraged me and tried to help me feel good about this opportunity I was devastated. To be sure, playing in the second orchestra was a great opportunity but that was not my plan, nor did it match my goals. Frankly, I went into the first rehearsal with skepticism and disappointment. While I made the best of the situation and learned a lot, that experience never left me.

Years later, as a junior high band director in a program that had four concert bands, I experienced something similar from the director’s point of view. Each year after auditions, my students felt a mixture of emotions–everything from elation to disappointment. I found myself consoling and encouraging some students while congratulating others. Often the students placed in the second ensemble seemed disappointed and lacked motivation to make the best of the opportunity. As a result, the second group was always the most challenging to teach.

After seven years teaching at the junior high level, I assumed a new role as a University Professor where I primarily conducted the Symphonic Band, our second tier ensemble. As I observed the audition process in my first year, I noticed a similar dynamic among students when ensemble placement results were posted–elation and disappointment. I was excited for the students to join my ensemble, but some were less than enthusiastic. During each rehearsal, I worked hard to help these students feel valued and needed, and strived to inspire them to become their best musical self. While I have made great progress helping the students who feel disappointed to be in the second-tier ensemble unlock their potential and fully embrace the musical opportunities of this group over the past eleven years, I recognized that there are many factors that contribute to the challenging nature of second-tier ensembles.

PARTICIPANTS I selected conductors from universities across the nation whose music programs paralleled the size and scope of my institution (see table 1, next page). My institution attracts over 450 students who perform in three concert bands, two orchestras, three choirs, two jazz choirs, and three jazz bands. By selecting conductors from similar-sized institutions, I controlled for context while still acquiring diverse perspectives.

Unlocking the Potential ..., Jermie S. Arnold, cont.

Unlocking the Potential ..., Jermie S. Arnold, cont.

Table 1. Participant Profiles

Participant Years Teaching Title

Professor I

Professor II

Professor III

Professor IV

Professor V

Professor VI 5

6

30

45

6

24 Assoc. Director of Bands Assoc. Director of Bands Assoc. Director of Bands Assoc. Director of Bands Assoc. Director of Bands Assoc. Director of Bands School Size # of Bands Primarily Conducts

50,000 4 2nd Band

31,000 5 2nd Band

44,000

33,000 4

4 2nd Band

2nd Band

33,000

51,000 3

6 2nd Band

2nd Band

Professor VII 16 Director of Bands 40,000 2 1st and 2nd Band

Professor VIII 16 Director of Bands 34,000

I originally planned to interview five conductors at their institutions followed by observing a rehearsal with their second-tier ensembles. I completed three in-person visits prior to COVID-19 disrupting travel in the United States. After examining the data from my first three visits, I recognized that the interviews provided the most information compared to the rehearsal observations. Subsequently, I pivoted to ZOOM to complete the remaining interviews without a rehearsal observation. By shifting to ZOOM, I could expand the study from 5 to 8 conductors who represented 10 different universities. Using a semi-structured interview format, each conductor was interviewed for approximately one hour. I digitally recorded, transcribed, and archived data collected from these interviews. To protect the identities of the conductors, I reference each individual as Professor I, Professor II, etc.

FINDINGS Six categories emerged from the collected data: 1) approach to ensemble rehearsal, 2) selection of repertoire, 3) rehearsal strategies, 4) student accountability, 5) “second band syndrome,” and 6) second-tier ensemble philosophy.

Approach to Ensemble Rehearsal Each participant in this study expressed, in their own way, that their approach to rehearsal with the second-tier ensemble was the same as if they were conducting the toptier ensemble. However, participants clarified that while their musical expectations do not change, some rehearsal techniques are different due to the wide level of musical abilities typically encountered in a second-tier ensemble. 2 1st and 2nd Band

Professor IV said, “I keep the expectations high with a different level of music.” Professor VII noted, ”There is more pedagogical teaching in the second group.” In my observation of Professor I‘s rehearsal I noted their specific focus on music making. There was a macro approach to the piece being rehearsed. When technical issues appeared, they drew attention to them, took a moment to break them down out of context, then put them back into context while maintaining the focus on the music. When asked about this in the interview Professor I said, “Music is always first, I don't worry too much about the technical. I work to let musicians grow musically on their own.” Professor I went on to say that with the second-tier group, “You [have] to teach them. You have to take things apart and then put them back together.” Professor VI said it another way, “my approach is different, not

Unlocking the Potential ..., Jermie S. Arnold, cont.

less than the [top ensemble]. It is appropriately different.”

This idea of “appropriately different” was enlightening and so I asked a few conductors to offer examples of what was “appropriately different” in their approach to their ensembles. While discussing the various musical elements a conductor can focus on like rhythm, articulation, balance, and blend, Professor II said, “I spend more time on tone, and listening. I do everything I can to boost their confidence to improve their performance.” Professor I said they spend more time on directed listening to increase ensemble awareness and emphasized, “I work with them on being more consistent.” Professor VII spent time discussing the need to build ensemble skills in the second-tier ensembles and quoted a former teacher who said, "I used to think my job was to teach my students how to play but I realized my job was really to teach them how to listen."

Considering that many of the students in these ensembles are music education majors, participants also commented that they take special care to point out specific techniques and skills these students may need as future teachers. Professor III said it best when they said they draw attention to rehearsal techniques for Music Education majors because “that is what they will be using in their future teaching.” They then described what this looks like in their ensemble rehearsals,

"I will often stop while we are in the middle of rehearsing and ask them, ‘why did we go back to do that?’ or ‘Music Education majors this is why we are counting out loud’ or I will do more rehearsal techniques that they’re going to use when their teaching. I’ll have trumpet’s buzz a part, everyone sing, or sing the French horn note [then have] horns play the note, those kinds of rehearsal techniques and I’m always talking about them as in things they can be doing. I am always trying to teach that these are rehearsal techniques they can use for all levels of ensembles. I ask students to use their down time in rehearsal wisely, ‘ask yourself why am I choosing to prioritize something over something else, are you hearing what I am hearing?’ I really try to get in there and get them to think that way."

Selection of Repertoire Selecting appropriate music for the second- and third-tier ensembles can be especially changeling. All eight participants emphasized the importance of selecting a wide variety of literature that would both challenge and help ensemble members feel successful. In fact, Professor V said the most important thing was, “first and foremost… the repertoire that I choose.”

In selecting the literature Professor II said that they carefully consider the strengths and weaknesses of the ensemble and then select music that fits those needs. Professor III said, “I try to have a variety of literature at varying grade levels so the Music Education students have an opportunity to learn grade 3 pieces.” Professor V emphasized the importance of repertoire selection when they commented, “I think really really carefully about the repertoire that I select. With a music major ensemble like this it’s really important that they’re playing repertoire of quality; high level repertoire that has opportunities for creating great art and great music, but also has a chance and ability for them to breathe a little bit and an opportunity for them to grow.”

Considering the appropriateness of the level and amount of literature Professor VI said, “It’s not necessarily the challenge of the repertoire, it's the amount. I tackle big repertoire but in smaller doses.”

REHEARSAL STRATEGIES With the wide musical abilities often associated with second-tier ensembles rehearsal strategies are of particular import. Below is a list of rehearsal strategies specifically mentioned by the participants in their rehearsals. This is by no means an exhaustive list of rehearsal strategies used by these conductors, but is significant because these are the strategies they felt important to highlight during the interviews.

Rehearsal schedule given ahead of time (P1,P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P8)

Rehearsal Order • Pieces rehearsed from end, or middle (P3) • Ends with slow piece (P3) • Composers full names on board (P3)

Sectionals (P1, P2, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8)

Rehearsal Recordings (P1, P2, P5, P6) • Benjamin Zander-white sheet rehearsal (P1) • Midterm recording check (P2) • Pre-concert recording check (P2)

Unlocking the Potential ..., Jermie S. Arnold, cont.

• Play example recordings (P5)

Ensemble/Technical Skills (P2, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8) • Singing, scales, chorales, breathing exercise, Remington’s (P4, P5, P6, P7, P8) • Principal players play, others finger along or air only ( P5, P8) • Disguised repetition/Isolation of parts (P4, P5) • Take things in smaller chunks but at tempo (P6)

Professor V offered this insightful comment about rehearsal strategies, “every rehearsal and almost every time I stop [the ensemble], I give them one piece of technical feedback and one piece of musical feedback. This helps to direct my [comments] to them so I feel like I am addressing [what ] the students need.”

Student Accountability Holding students accountable reinforces classroom expectations. Teachers inform students of their expectations in various ways; syllabi, posted classroom rules, and verbal instructions to name a few. Below are some of the expectations and methods of accountability shared by the participants.

Expectations • Students should have their parts prepared before rehearsal (P1-8) • Be able to perform the music on the first day (P2, P6) • Tradition of excellence must be maintained (P3, P8)

Accountability • Verbal reminders (P2, P3, P5, P6,

P8) • “Your job is to be prepared…” • “In the professional world…” • “There is a tradition of excellence…” • Point out specific mistakes then ask how soon can they be addressed » Follow-up with listening deadline • One on one conversations about expectations • Reward Excellence

Written reminders • Rehearsal comments (P6)

Orpheus Music Approach • no conductor (P2)

Listening to individual players • Going down the line (P4, P6, P8)

Sectionals (P1, P2, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8) • Large section work Brass/

Woodwind/Percussion

Record and post rehearsals • Students expected to listen and make notes in music (P6)

Professor VIII had this valuable insight about expectations and accountability, “you also have to know how far you can push them until, "enough is enough." There is a balance to be able to know the groups so you can keep the high standard but not push them away…”

Second Band Syndrome David Hedgecoth says, “second band syndrome is a term that has been loosely used in musical circles when referring to ensembles that are not considered the top auditioned ensemble. In most cases, second band syndrome references the attitudes of ensemble members believing themselves to be secondrate musicians and students.”13 In this study participants were asked if they thought their ensembles felt like second-rate musicians. Of the eight participants five thought, at least to some degree, that their students, at least initially, felt like second-rate musicians. These five participants were then asked what, if anything, they did to help students overcome that feeling.

Professor V said in their first rehearsal they tell the students, “I understand some of you may be disappointed with your placement in this ensemble but you must know that I am going to do everything possible to make you the best musician that I can." In their opinion Professor V believes the second band syndrome feeling goes away very quickly once the students see the level of music that has been selected and the expectation for musical excellence.

Professor I said they hold a “Principal Player Meeting.” They suggested that most of these secondrate feelings exist in the principal players of each section because they missed the top ensemble by one person. I observed this meeting right after Professor I’s rehearsal. In this meeting Professor I encouraged the students to be mentors and provide leadership to their sections. They were given administrative responsibilities including, sectionals, attendance, and music distribution. They were encouraged to take more musical ownership of the rehearsal process by policing for mistakes in their sections. They were also advised to look for section members who were struggling

Unlocking the Potential ..., Jermie S. Arnold, cont.

and then reach out to help them. When I asked Professor I specifically about this meeting he said, “I’m trying to encourage [the principal players] to work together and make it about the music.”

Professor II also felt that a conversation with the entire group at the first rehearsal was important to dispel any ill feelings and to set the expectations high. They said that the first speech might include things like, "Everything is a learning opportunity! Here are the things you will learn and get to do. This group plays as good as many other institution’s top band. You might be disappointed but here are the great things we will get to do. What lens will you choose to look through?” Professor II also mentioned some other things they do to alleviate the second band syndrome including, playing great literature, having the same number of rehearsals as the top band, similar ensemble size to the top band, and performing their own concerts so they are not “second” to any group. Professor II continued saying, “This also helps students see that the groups are ‘different’ (literature) but the ‘same’ (overall expectations).”

Professor VII characterized this as “PAT,” Post Audition Trauma. To help combat PAT, Professor VII spoke to the students and would say, "I know you may be a bit disappointed that you did not make the top band, but you are MY top band, so I'm going to treat you as I would treat the top band." Professor VII felt this went a long way to overcome PAT. When Professor VII was at their first university, teaching the third-tier ensemble, they noticed the second-tier ensemble was always the first to perform; with a performance on the 6th rehearsal. Professor VII said this really pushed those students to help them see their importance in the band program.

Professor VIII said that some students may feel they are secondrate but because Professor VIII has three concert bands, the students are excited to play in the second band. Professor VIII capitalizes on this and said, “I hold them to the same standard as the top group. I make that very clear from day one.” Professor VIII also gave the second band special opportunities the top band did not have. Professor VIII mentioned playing at chapel performances, graduation, and other special events. Professor VIII also said this really alleviates the second band syndrome because the ensemble has been given special assignments to represent the university that the top band did not get.

Second-tier Ensemble Philosophy At the conclusion of the interview, I asked each participant if they had anything else they felt would be important to share. Some participants decided to share some philosophical thoughts about the opportunities and challenges faced by second-tier ensembles.

Professor I said, the level of the ensemble should not matter, their goal is to make the best music regardless of the level. They expect their group to sound like the top group and they are going to keep working on that until they get there. Professor IV offered this insight about their personal attitude and how it can affect the group. "I don’t approach Symphonic Band as the second group. I approach it as our group together. I just want it to be the best it can be. Let me take you from where you are, let me help you step to the next level… that has to be my attitude. If I let my attitude [become negative] it kills the group from the ground up. I try to look at it and recognize that every [student] in the top of the sections that I have ends up in the top groups….maybe I was a part of that process."

Professor V said they absolutely enjoy working with these students.

"I feel I really resonate with these students. I get to implement a lot of motivational ideas and marry that with high level music making. I think we are all at our best musically when we can share our love of what we are doing with them. It is super rewarding to have a successful concert and see them smiling and see them enjoying what they did."

Professor VII said,

"My philosophy throughout my whole experience has been, the students will meet your expectations or at least attempt to meet your expectations so, if you lower them because they are not the flagship ensemble, then that is on you as the … conductor, that's not on them. So, if you set a low standard because they are the second ensemble … then they will probably get to where your tolerance level is or your expectations."

Professor VIII said, “the most important thing is that they feel honored and respected” and Professor

Unlocking the Potential ..., Jermie S. Arnold, cont.

VI simply said that conducting the second-tier ensemble is, “different, not less.”

CONCLUSION Different, not less is the perfect way to describe the second- and third-tier ensembles. Certainly, the comments made by all eight participants reflect this principle. To be certain there are challenges with these ensembles namely, PAT, varied musical abilities and experience, and varied majors to name a few, but the ultimate goal of each of these conductors is to inspire high-level music making in their ensembles. To attain that goal these participants carefully consider repertoire, approach to rehearsal, rehearsal strategies, student accountability, and ways to build a positive ensemble culture that minimizes the second band syndrome. In every instance these conductors chose to create a musical culture in the second-tier ensemble that is equal to not different or less than the top ensemble. Any conductor who has felt that their second- or third-tier ensembles are plagued with the “second band syndrome” need only to consider the strategies and techniques used by these eight participants to unlock their ensembles true musical potential.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cardany, Brian M. "Attitudes Toward Repertoire and the Band Experience among Participants in Elite University Wind Band Programs." Order No. 3210109, Arizona State University, 2006. http://csulb.idm. oclc.org\ login?url=https://www.proquest com/dissertations-theses/attitudes- toward-repertoire-band-experience-among/ docview/305356082/se-2?accountid=10351. Dakon, Jacob M. and Marci L. Major. “Chorister Perceptions of Collegiate Top Level Choral Experiences: Replication and Extension.” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, no. 212(2017): 27–55. https://doi.org/10.5406/ bulcouresmusedu.212.0027. Dakon, Jacob M. and Marci L. Major. “Singer Perceptions of Collegiate Mid-Level Choral Experiences: A Descriptive Study.”

Journal of Research in Music Education 64, no. 1 (2016): 108–27. http://www.jstor.org/ stable/43900329. Hedgecoth, David McKinley. "Factors Influencing the Programming Practices of Conductors of Mid-Level Collegiate Ensembles." Order No. 3528014, The Ohio State University, 2012. http://csulb. idm.oclc.org/login?url=https:/www.proquest. com/dissertations-theses/factors influencing-programming-practices/ docview/1080532787/se-2?accountid=10351. Major, Marci L. “Building Identity in Collegiate Midlevel Choral Ensembles: The Director’s Perspective.” Journal of Research in Music Education 64, no. 4 (2017): 435–53. http:// www.jstor.org/stable/44631465.

END NOTES

1Dakon, Jacob M. and Marci L. Major, “Singer Perceptions of Collegiate Mid-Level Choral Experiences: A Descriptive Study,” Journal of Research in Music Education 64, no. 1 (2016): 108–27, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43900329, 120. 2 Ibid., 124. 3Dakon, Jacob M. and Marci L. Major, “Chorister Perceptions of Collegiate Top-Level Choral Experiences: Replication and Extension,” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, no. 212 (2017): 27–55, https://doi. org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.212.0027, 42-43. 4Ibid., 49. 5Major, Marci L., “Building Identity in Collegiate Midlevel Choral Ensembles: The Director’s Perspective,” Journal of Research in Music Education 64, no. 4 (2017): 435–53, http://www. jstor.org/stable/44631465, 436. 6Ibid., 453. 7Hedgecoth, David McKinley, "Factors Influencing the Programming Practices of Conductors of Mid-Level Collegiate Ensembles," Order No. 3528014, The Ohio State University, 2012, http://csulb.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https:// www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/factors -influencing-programming-practices/ docview/1080532787/se-2?accountid=10351, 158. 8Ibid., 158. 9Ibid., 159. 10Cardany, Brian M., "Attitudes Toward Repertoire and the Band Experience among Participants in Elite University Wind Band Programs," Order No. 3210109, Arizona State University, 2006, http://csulb.idm. oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest. com/dissertations-theses/attitudes-towardrepertoire-band-experience-among/ docview/305356082/se-2?accountid=10351, 223. 11Ibid., 208-2011. 12Ibid., 209, 216. 13Hedgecoth, "Factors Influencing,” 74-75.