| Analysis & Reflection: Video Segment #2 |
 |
Martha Nelson Portfolio - May 2005
| Philosophy | Analysis & Reflection | Academic Development | Additional Materials | The Future |
Analysis & Reflection: Video Segment #2
- Video segment #2: "Marriage of Figaro" (General Music)
LEARNING OBJECTIVE: To recognize the musical elements inherent to "Marriage of Figaro: Non Piu Andrai".
NYS STANDARD(S):
ARTS 3: Responding to and Analyzing Works of Art.
OPENING MUSIC: "Marriage of Figaro: Non Piu Andrai" by Mozart
MOTIVATION: Play music.
CONTENT:
Introduce name and composer of piece
Have students read plot of opera aloud.
Discuss/review elements of music (opera, etc.)
Make connection to persuasive writing
Listening points:
How would you describe the music?
What instruments do you hear?
Was the music persuasive?
Discuss their reactions to the music and answer above questions.
SUMMARY/ASSESSMENT/CONCLUSION:
Compare and contrast with "Gayane Suite: Sabre Dance"
This lesson took place during the second half of the period for lesson #1. Because the students were beginning to get a bit restless, their focus began to drift a tiny bit and I noted that one student in particular started to call out comments and answers. It may have been beneficial to reiterate the rules regarding raising your hand to speak with that student immediately, in order to re-establish order.
However, despite the fact that it was Friday afternoon last period and there were several interruptions in the flow of the lesson (phone/school bell ringing, students coming to the door, etc.) I think I maintained good control and focus for the duration of the lesson. Most of the students who were seen talking on the video were at least talking about the subject matter, so while their chatter may have been distracting to others and to me, they were actually engaged in the lesson, so I can’t complain.
One change I would make is to include a bit more background information on Mozart. I neglected to mention what country he was from, which is a great tie in to the subject matter the other music teacher has been covering with them. I consider that a missed opportunity. However, I did do a good job of making the connection between the persuasive writing assignments they have been working on in literacy with the musical selection. It would have been a smoother transition if I had passed out the worksheets earlier in the lesson. This was a bit of improvisation on my part. Normally I would hand those out at the beginning and we would read aloud the story of “Marriage of Figaro.” Since I had neglected to pass them out at the beginning, I made the impromptu decision to forego the sheets and just tell the story. But then I realized that in order to ask them the question “was he persuasive?” I needed for them to be able to read the English translation of the selection so I had to hand them out anyway. That’s why that portion of the lesson may seem a bit rough. Unfortunately, handing out the papers served to be yet another distraction from the listening process.
I liked the compare and contrast at the end of the two lessons, which made for a good opportunity to reinforce what we'd learned as well as assess their level of understanding of the material. Also, I noticed that my voice is loud and clear enough that I am easily understood by the students. That is something I have probably taken for granted in the past.
As with lesson #1, I would ideally like to have the opportunity to play a piece several times and spend more time on activities related to the music. It is unfortunate that the time constraint of the contest makes that difficult. Still, I feel that the students were engaged in the lesson and enjoyed the music. Because this is one of the few vocal selections in the contest it is more readily recognizable and therefore didn’t need as much time spent on it as other pieces might in order for the students to be able to identify it with ease.
The first thing that struck me about this lesson was the way Ms. Nelson immediately made connections between the language of the piece and the children’s own background. With material this complex, it is always important to make connections with the kids before their minds start to wander. She was also able to do this by making jokes like saying “Oprah” instead of “opera” and bringing in interesting facts such as that Mozart was the same age as the children when he wrote the piece. This fact, along with several other examples shows what a good grasp Ms. Nelson has of her teaching material.
The students seemed to make eager attempts to answer questions, make comments and generally get involved in the discussion. Other points I found important included her excellent use of time when she realized that time was running short, also her ability to make the characters of “Figaro” seem more “human” to the children and her overall control of the class throughout the lesson.
I also commend her for the use of the stamp merit system and the way that she was able to draw comparisons between both lessons taught that day. I think one of the things I was most impressed with in this lesson, though, was her own ability to listen to the music and the effort that she was making to set an example for the kids to follow in regard to learning and practicing good listening skills. This is something that is difficult to do at any age.
In general, I found these first two lessons to be informative, upbeat, engaging and yet structured in a way that made the material accessible and simple to understand.