Research Catalogue

research expositions

• What's in a name? - The relation between pitch notation, note names and sight singing in different forms of pitch notation and in different ways of approaching pitch notation (2015) author(s): Suzanne Konings published in: Research Catalogue
  Sight singing is a part of almost every music theory curriculum in conservatoires. But one might ask oneself why lessons in sight singing are needed for students who can already read music notation? The answer usually is: to develop the aural imagination in relation to music notation. The way students have learned to read music notation in the first place did not develop this skill well enough then? Experiences in teaching made me think that we need functional note names (unique sound names) to be able to aurally understand pitch in staff notation, and that the absolute note names (unique pitch names) may be an instrumentally useful, but less effective step ‘in between’ in the process of aural imagination. From existing literature and recorded tests with students performing special designed scores I hope to learn more about connecting the inner hearing world to music notation in the most effective way.
  open exposition comments (0)
• To understand staff notation aurally (2014) author(s): Suzanne Konings published in: KC Research Portal
  Name: Suzanne Konings Main subject: Master of Music Theory Research coach: Lázsló Nemes Title of research: What's in a name? The relation between pitch notation, note names and sight singing in different forms of pitch notation and in different ways of approaching pitch notation Research questions: Are absolute note names necessary in sight singing, when reading pitch notation on the stave relatively? Mental process: one sees ‘do’ (a name that indicates a function) and thinks ‘F’ (indicating a pitch). Are relative note names necessary in sight singing, when reading pitch notation on the stave ‘absolute’? Mental process: one sees ‘F’ (a name that indicates a pitch) and thinks ‘do’ (indicating a function). Abstract: Sight singing is a part of almost every music theory curriculum in conservatoires. But one might ask oneself why lessons in sight singing are needed for students who can already read music notation? The answer usually is: to develop the aural imagination in relation to music notation. The way students have learned to read music notation in the first place did not develop this skill well enough then? Experiences in teaching made me think that we need functional note names (unique sound names) to be able to aurally understand pitch in staff notation, and that the absolute note names (unique pitch names) may be an instrumentally useful, but less effective step ‘in between’ in aural imagination. From existing literature and recorded tests with students performing special designed scores I hoped to learn more about connecting the inner hearing world to music notation in the most effective way. Biography Suzanne Konings studied music theory and musicology and has been the head of the music theory department in the Royal Conservatoire The Hague since 2004. From 2009 she has been specialising in teaching music according to the Kodály concept. Together with colleagues in and outside the conservatoire she is organising training programmes for teachers and musicians in elementary schools, music schools and higher music education. She teaches musicianship classes for students in the Royal Conservatoire and the National Youth Choir of the Netherlands.
  open exposition comments (0)
• Theory in Practice – Analysing Music Theory (last edited: 2020) author(s): Suzanne Konings, Jasper Grijpink, Patricia Wisse, Santo Militello This exposition is in progress and its share status is: visible to all.
  Most conservatoire students would agree that music theory is a valuable element in their professional music education. However, in many conservatoires worldwide, both students and faculty alike often feel a long-lived desire to better align music theory subjects to the world of the instrumental and vocal students. In 2012, the music theory curriculum for bachelor students in classical music was radically changed in order to achieve just that. The changes were supported by experiences from within the theory department, discussions with students, and the influence of teachers specializing in Kodály-based musicianship training, or improvisation. This research project looks back at these changes to reflect on what happened, at what is still happening, and aims to explain the underlying principles of the new music theory curriculum. The major shift that took place has replaced analysis at the centre of music theory education by aural skills development. The reasoning behind this was that, within a practice-based music theory approach, sound could be seen as the connecting element between theory and the practical musical reality of a conservatoire student. The compulsory theory subjects changed from Analysis, Harmony and Solfege, to Aural Skills & Analysis, Aural Skills & Improvisation, and Keyboard Skills & Harmony – deliberately putting an emphasis on the development of skills rather than approaching topics from a more theoretical starting point. A few years into this new curriculum we felt the need to find a more thorough theoretical underpinning for this development. The main aim was to get a better understanding of which processes concerning the development of musical literacy actually take place in a music theory lesson – or any music lesson for that matter. With our own live-size case study as a starting point, would it be possible to find supporting data in existing literature? Or would we find mostly arguments that would invalidate our ideas? In works by Mainwaring and De Vree, as well as in articles by (a.o.) McPherson and Graybill we found models that we recognized as being a fundament for our approach. These can be connected to our model, which can be used to show connections between ‘musical elements’ – or ‘entrances’ into musical situations and phenomena. This research project does not mean to give a final solution for the position of music theory subjects in a music curriculum. What it does provide is a model that can be used in several ways: as a framework for teachers to develop and evaluate lessons or the content of complete subjects; in communication with students explaining the relevance of certain ‘theoretical’ activities; by students, to keep track of their own development, and in communication with management and non-theory faculty, to be able to show the place of music theory in the big picture.
  open exposition comments (0)