Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

In asurvey of 2,212 classical musicians, 40% re-ported that anxiety interfered with their perfor-mances (Kirchner, Bloom, & Skutnick–Henley,

, see Kenny (2005) andMcGinnis and Milling (2005

Few studies have investigated whether a cog-nitive intervention can reduce anxiety and en-hance performance in musicians (Lehrer, 1987;Steptoe & Fidler, 1987)

Music inexperience, changed pattern of practice and performance anxiety are associated with playing-related problems in child instrumentalists and are therefore important issues for music education.

Research on adult musicians has adopted these models and identified individual intrinsic factors such as age and gender, music performance anxiety and enjoyment, extrinsic factors such as music practice habits and type of instrument played and intrinsic–extrinsic interaction factors such as playing posture, technique and student–teacher interaction which influence the development of PRMP.

The aim of this study was to describe the music practice of child instrumentalists and determine their associations with playing-related musculoskeletal problems (PRMP), accounting for gender and age

The concept of “flow”, describing the subjective psychological state in which a person is completely immersed and fully concentrated in an activity which is enjoyable and rewarding, is often associated with optimal functioning

Anxiety is generally regarded as having an antithetical relationship with flow

The term authenticity has been applied to music in various ways. It might be used to describe a piece of music (recorded, notated, performed); the process by which the music is taught and learned ( through recordings, live models, notation); or the manner in which it is performed (venue, dress, behaviors).

In other words, authenticity lies within the perceptions of the individual.

Anthony Palmer, who teaches music education at Boston University, has said that music with "absolute authenticity" is performed (a) by and for members of the culture; (b) in a typical setting, as determined by the members of the culture; (c) with instruments specified by the creator(s) of the music; and (d) in its original language.[ 8] Inarguably, and as Palmer recognizes, attaining this level of authenticity is impossible in a school music program (unless we consider "school music" residing within a unique culture of its own). In school, music is separated from its primary source many times over. Music is passed from its primary source (composer, grandmother) to an intermediary (arranger, performer, notation, recording) and channeled through a publisher or presenter to the teacher and finally to students. To confound matters, there are variants of melodies, lyrics, dances, games, and performance styles.

The idea of wanting to be true to the music of a culture, to the people of that culture, and to one's students in teaching is at the heart of the discussion of authenticity.

However, teaching music without attention to its cultural context is a problem in several respects: it risks misrepresenting the musical practice being studied, it fails to take advantage of the potential benefits of culturally infused music teaching, and it promotes a conception of music as isolated sonic events rather than meaningful human practices.2 Discussion about this struggle to balance accurate performance practice with accessibility has focused on the concept of authenticity

The definitions of authenticity represented in the music education literature fall into four models: the continuum model; the twofold historical/personal model; the threefold reproduction, reality, and relevance model; and the moving-beyond-authenticity model.

personalized instruction is getting renewed attention as schools in the northeast consider calling their experiments in the instructional model a failure.

most of us would like to ascribe authority to sites and authors who support our conclusions and deny authority to publications that disagree with our worldview

Wikipedia’s guidelines for determining the reliability of publications. These guidelines were developed to help people with diametrically opposed positions argue in rational ways about the reliability of sources using common criteria.

defined by process, aim, and expertise.

We should be very careful in thinking about whether we’re working on the right problems. If we don’t, that ties into the problem that we don’t have experimental evidence that could move us forward. We're trying to develop theories that we use to find out which are good experiments to make, and these are the experiments that we build.   We build particle detectors and try to find dark matter; we build larger colliders in the hope of producing new particles; we shoot satellites into orbit and try to look back into the early universe, and we do that because we hope there’s something new to find there. We think there is because we have some idea from the theories that we’ve been working on that this would be something good to probe. If we are working with the wrong theories, we are making the wrong extrapolations, we have the wrong expectations, we make the wrong experiments, and then we don’t get any new data. We have no guidance to develop these theories. So, it’s a chicken and egg problem. We have to break the cycle. I don’t have a miracle cure to these problems. These are hard problems. It’s not clear what a good theory is to develop. I’m not any wiser than all the other 20,000 people in the field.

I’m still asking myself the same question that I asked myself ten years ago: "What is going on in my community?" I work in the foundations of physics, and I see a lot of strange things happening there. When I look at the papers that are being published, many of them seem to be produced simply because papers have to be produced. They don’t move us forward in any significant way. I get the impression that people are working on them not so much because it’s what they’re interested in but because they have to produce outcomes in a short amount of time. They sit on short-term positions and have short-term contracts, and papers must be produced.

The field that I mostly work in is the foundations of physics, which is, roughly speaking, composed of cosmology, the foundations of quantum mechanics, high-energy particle physics, and quantum gravity. It’s a peculiar field because there hasn’t been new data for almost four decades, since we established the Standard Model of particle physics. There has been, of course, the Higgs particle that was discovered at the LHC in 2012, and there have been some additions to the Standard Model, but there has not been a great new paradigm change, as Kuhn would have put it. We’re still using the same techniques, and we’re still working with the same theories as we did in the 1970s.