School bands in the United States continue to be influenced by over 250 years of band tradition stemming from the military, professional (Gilmore, Goldman, Sousa), and community bands. There was a time in mid- to late-nineteenth- century America when wind band performances were considered popular music and their concert venues would draw huge audiences. The literature played was often an assortment of orchestra transcriptions, original music written for band, marches, and dance music. Every town across the nation strived to have a band. A local band was a status symbol, and town bands were used to attract permanent residents.¹ James Keene wrote, "Almost all towns had bands to perform entertainment."² Bands were formed by anyone who wanted to participate: There were women's bands, family bands, immigrant bands, school bands, school-military bands, stringed- and-fretted instrument bands, and bagpipe bands, among others.³ Band historians call the periods of approximately 1870-1920 the Golden Age of Bands.⁴ So popular were the bands that in 1921, the state of Iowa passed a band law that would allow city taxes to be spent on local municipal bands. This law was copied in thirty-three other states.⁵ Band composer Karl L. King even wrote a march in its honor called the "Iowa Band Law."⁶

The end of the Golden Age coincided with military bandsmen returning to the United States after serving in World War I. Many of these men had served in Navy or Army bands and had been trained by Lieutenant John Phillip Sousa of the Navy or orchestra conductor Walter Damrosch of the New York Symphony Society. Sousa alone had trained nearly 1,500 Navy bandsmen at the Great Lakes Naval Training Station near Chicago, and Damrosch trained bandleaders for the U.S. Army in Europe.⁷

By 1920, public secondary education was beginning to flourish as the Progressive Era came to influence more democratic offerings in America's high schools. This situation offered perfect conditions for the launch of high school music programs.⁸ Some of the original band teachers came from the ranks of military musicians.⁹ These bandsmen established in the school the military traditions of marching and concert bands, along with high expectations for developing outstanding musicianship. Today, we are grateful for their insight in securing a place for the ensembles in the school curriculum. Unfortunately, in many modern classrooms, some of the drill-sergeant behaviors of the military still exist, evoking teacher-centered rehearsals instead of today's more desirable student-centered music education.

With these band traditions that continued to grow throughout the twentieth century comes some seemingly inflexible baggage: standard instrumentation, gender stereotypes, military-like uniforms, accepted and limited types of festivals and assessments, and a whole host of other outdated traditions embedded in our school-band culture. Questioning these traditions is a risky undertaking, but as a music-teacher educator, I strive for balance by encouraging learning about traditions while encouraging progressive change. In 2008, Randall Allsup and Cathy Benedict deconstructed the band tradition in their article "The Problems with Band: An Inquiry into the Future of Instrumental Music Education."¹⁰ They critiqued our embodied traditions, suggesting, for example, that words like "directorship" imply that teacher expertise is a "highly prized commodity, ... and custom" never allowed to be called into question publically or allowed to be negotiated with student decisions or musical tastes.¹¹ Allsup and Benedict questioned for whom the band classroom is "highly passionate, inventive and imaginative."¹² Who operates at the creative level—is it the students, or is it only the director? Allsup and Benedict pointed out that in band rehearsals, "We don't ask our students to think or be vigilant."¹³ They suggested that if the director/teacher is making all the musical decisions and students are simply waiting for the next command for ultimate ensemble efficiency, then we may be using an early twentieth-century factory model for the educational space rather than fostering a motivating, creative-collaborative-decision-making space for student-centered educational experiences.

At one point, Allsup and Benedict go as far to suggest that band directors in teacher-centered classrooms are propagating oppressed-and-oppressor relationships through the use of fear tactics and tight control.¹⁴ Who has the control and power? How does that feel and look in your classroom? Are students even allowed to speak in "your" rehearsals, let alone think for themselves in "their" rehearsals? When are they being asked to be "mindful and critical" in the band classroom? Is your band classroom really an educational, safe, creative space? Shouldn't it be, since we're teaching in schools? Are we curricular- or extra-curricular minded?

David Williams reminded us in his 2011 article "The Elephant in the Room" that large-ensemble participation in schools continues to be on the decline. He provides an example with data from Florida's Department of Education: "16.45 percent of high school students were enrolled in music classes in 1985. The number dropped to 14.9 percent by 1995 and 11.67 percent by 2005. If we were to project a 2015 figured based on these data, enrollment would fall to under 7 percent."¹⁵ He suggests that we are continuing to use an outdated instructional model and that this old model may be why so few students are enrolling. What is happening in your state? Is band participation shrinking? Do we need to all be rethinking our programs to be more inviting to and inclusive of the entire school population?

Although I had "success" receiving superior ratings at festival each year I taught middle school band in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, I began doubting my teaching ability when I heard one of my top students proclaim in "my" class, "I love coming to band class because I don't have to think."¹⁶ I immediately realized that I was simply training the best musical robots to follow my creative decision-making, and they dutifully responded. I had squelched all of their decision-making and realized they were receiving a marginalized music education. They certainly weren't asked to be creative, only responsive to my baton and direction, and I was doing most of the connecting to other subjects for them. I needed a new version of band teaching, but where would I start?

Band education does have a history of trying to foster educational change, but the field is slow to respond due to the embodied nature of our traditions. In 1965, the Comprehensive Musicianship movement emerged after a symposium at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois.¹⁷ Ensemble teachers were asked to expand their teaching to include more than learning the performance skills to execute literature; they were called upon to expand their teaching to be "interdisciplinary" and "intradisciplinary"—to make connections to language arts, history, social studies, science, math, music theory, composition, history, theoretical frameworks, and social justice issues. I remember loving hearing the stories from my director about the composer's intent of a piece or the composer's life history. I still remember them today. However, I was never asked to research and discover any of the informational depth of the music, create my own interpretation of the music, or collaborate with my peers to make our decisions about a section feature or soli.

In 1976, Robert Garofalo published his landmark book Blueprint for Band, which offered a play-by-play prescription for deeply analyzing compositions aimed at guiding band teachers in their in-depth work prior to rehearsing.¹⁸ As a high school student, I could have shared in that responsibility and would have enjoyed digging deeper into the piece with my peers. In 1992, Garofalo and Battisti published Guide to Band Masterworks. In 1994, MENC (now the National Association for Music Education) published nine national music standards that were to be adopted for all music classrooms. Many ensemble directors began reimagining how to include singing, composition, and improvisation in their ensemble rehearsals, and perhaps even today many of us are still striving for these outcomes.¹⁹ In 1997, the first book of the series Teaching Music through Performance in Band was created to facilitate ensemble teachers more comprehensive musical instruction. These books encouraged a plethora of new musical outcomes for students and directors, and those in ensemble education are grateful for these books.²⁰

Fast-forward to 2016, where we have new Core Arts Music Standards and Model Cornerstone Assessments for most music classrooms.²¹ Ensemble teachers are encouraged to include and assess four artistic processes in their classrooms: Creating, Performing, Responding, and Connecting. Students and band teachers are given space to imagine how these music processes could unfold with their students. Additionally, in a recent issue of Music Educators Journal, Tobias, Campbell and Greco suggest that ensemble classrooms include and encourage project-based learning to "transform a music program by offering genuine student-centered learning."²² They explain that this idea of project learning comes from a "cognitive revolution . . . and the revitalized thinking about skills for the twenty-first century, standards that emphasize critical thinking, and inquiry-based learning."²³

One such project many band teachers already use is solo and small-ensemble activities. Teachers could augment this experience with student solo and small-ensemble classroom days. With your guidance, you could help students form groups, select music, and guide the type of accompaniment options, use of technology, rehearsal styles, reflections, and assessments. In her dissertation, Danelle Larson studied high school students who were assigned to form chamber ensembles several days a week for fourteen weeks, instead of always being in band rehearsals.²⁴ She left the chamber music students alone to rehearse, but guided the students with a few rehearsal check sheets and a list of questions to help them assess their work each day. She found that the chamber-music students' motivation and attitudes toward band class improved over that of the students who remained in the teacher-led band class. Additionally, for the lowest-performing students in the chamber-music groups, their attitudes improved more than those of other students who had been assigned to chamber-music groups. This is one example of the aforementioned project-based learning where students get to engage during ensemble class in collaborative music-making and creative decision-making. Think about how the use of technology could enhance chamber-ensemble groups by adding an instrument or students accompanying themselves. More projects could be incorporated into your teaching with creative discussions among you and your students. It's possible that their attitudes and motivation could greatly improve.

Other researchers have tried innovative teaching ideas for band and discovered their positive impact on learning in band classrooms. Jason Caslor fostered group improvisation in the full ensemble rehearsal, and Amy Spears asked all the top ensemble students to use a different type of music literacy to learn a band piece for performance. The students were given a Grade 2 piece, no music—only a part recording, and were asked to learn the part to the piece by ear. Comments from the researcher, ensemble teacher, and students included improved ensemble cohesion, performance responsiveness, and appreciating learning via a new musical literacy: These comments were truly inspiring. The students who seemed to be most involved appreciated their new way of thinking, learning, and collaborating.²⁵

So, in 2016, I challenge you to sincerely consider: Which version of band are you teaching? The following versions, 1.0-6.0, are hypothetical examples of band teaching that I created as a way to start your thinking and discussions. These versions could unfold in a variety of ways and perhaps you have personal versions. Think about how your teaching career has morphed through different versions of teaching:

• Version 1.0 — Teacher-centered, military discipline and strict regulations align with tradition in rehearsal participation by students following the instructions of the teacher to develop musical skills and knowledge.
• Version 2.0 — Teacher imparts comprehensive musicianship information where students learn from the teacher about the history, theory, and compositional construction of the piece during the group rehearsal.
• Version 3.0 — Band teachers add some aspects of the 1994 National Music Standards in their classrooms, which includes aspects of connecting with other disciplines in the school. Students share in knowledge discovery about their pieces performed. Students form traditional small ensembles and learn solos with piano accompaniment.²⁶
• Version 4.0 — Students lead warm-ups in large-group rehearsals and get to participate in some curricular and/or rehearsals decision-making that aligns with the 1994 national standards.²⁷ Students form nontraditional ensembles and explore student-centered rehearsing.
• Version 5.0 — As a teacher, you embrace the idea of student-centered learning and encourage your students to help make decisions within rehearsals, and with administrative choice so they feel empowered and a part of a community of artistic decision-makers. You ask deep meaningful questions and challenge their thinking.²⁸ You assign homework that connects school music to their personal music life.²⁹ They start learning to assess their musical preferences, their peers, and themselves. You assign projects for students to discover information.³⁰ They form nontraditional ensembles using digital media to create parts and accompaniments.
• Version 6.0 — You and your students structure your public performances around music projects and performances you've facilitated with the students.³¹ Your rehearsal time is spent facilitating learning with students working on real-life music problem-solving: arranging a cover song, folk song, or composed melody for a small ensemble of any instrumentation, everyone respects and works with their musical preferences, and we encourage the students to learn and perform at times without music, by ear. You help them create concerts that share their work in small-groups and large groups. You ask your students how to assess their project outcomes, and they decide and will help by evaluating themselves and their peers.³² They accompany themselves with digital media of their choosing and styles of music. In their ensemble groups they create missing ensemble parts from digital sources or record themselves playing the others parts. They perform live with digital accompaniments or play their recorded performances for audiences. They share their performances with peers using a class sharing software program such as Google Drive or Blackboard.

Let's shake off the baggage of the past traditions and start anew. Adopt a new version of your teaching this year through experimenting with student-centered engagement and discovery. It's okay—really—to put the students in charge of their learning. You might think or feel like you're not "teaching" if you're not in the front of the room disseminating knowledge, but remember, teaching isn't telling. Let go of the control of their learning, and provide them a seemingly messy space to informally learn on their own; you and your students decide the project idea and the administration of the project, then step away from the students and see what they create.³³

Providing the space for your students to discover and work together on solving real-life musical projects allows you to free yourself from the oppression of thinking that teaching is only being in front-and-center and "in control" of the classroom. Take a risk and use your ensemble space differently this year-at least for one project and see what kinds of truly creative outcomes the students will produce. Guide and challenge your students' thinking about creative artistic processes and for at least one unit or project, release yourself from training the behavioral technique of playing and learn to ask deep, thought-provoking questions.³⁴

To begin the process creating your new version of band or ensemble teaching, think through the questions in Figure 1. Perhaps do this exercise with a colleague and share your responses and challenge each other to grow into 21st Century ensemble teachers.³⁵ I hope something in this article might spark a bit of change in your band classroom this year:

Figure 1. Questions to ask yourself. Strive for a new version of band or ensemble teaching in a way that inspires you and your students. Ask yourself "Why?" or "Why not?" after each question.
Endnotes:

---

Jill Sullivan is an Associate Professor of Instrumental Music Education at Arizona State University where she teaches undergraduate instrumental methods and graduate courses in instrumental literature and pedagogy, research methods, assessment and measurement, and psychology of music. Her research agenda includes history of bands and assessment practices. In 2011, she published the book Bands of Sisters: Women's Military Bands during WW II. She is completing her new book Women's Bands in America, which will be published by Rowman & Littlefield late this year. Prior to her fifteen-years at ASU, she served on the music faculties of the University of Oklahoma and Augustana College. She taught middle school band in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma.