A growing number of music teachers are interested in taking advantage of some of the capabilities technology has to offer. Unfortunately, cost can still be a hurdle when budgeted money must be spread throughout the program. In such cases, technology will probably not be high on the priority list, especially considering the inherently speedy obsolescence of both hardware and software.

In addition to searching the World Wide Web for useful freeware and software, teachers can look at ways to use the software they already own. While music tutorial and drill programs can be worthwhile purchases, the resourceful teacher can get a great deal of mileage from something as basic as a notation or sequencing application, available for virtually any generation of microcomputer still in use by schools.

The purpose of this paper is to document a university summer camp for 7th- to 12th-grade students, the focus of which was music composition using computers. We will discuss the following:

The camp was held at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, a 2,600 acre campus about 30 miles from St. Louis, Missouri. The university has an approximate enrollment of 12,000 students, primarily from Illinois and Missouri.

The computer lab for the camp is considered an open university lab for use by any student on campus. However, its primary function is to serve fine arts students, and the computers contain writing, art, and music software. Its multiplicity of use notwithstanding, the lab is geared toward musical applications, and is the only MIDI lab on campus open to all students. Its history as one of the country's earliest microcomputer labs for music education is a source of pride for the music department.

The lab comprises 16 Macintosh workstations, five of which are Power Macs. The workstations are connected through an AppleTalk network to a server, and to the internet through a high speed connection. Each is connected to a MIDI keyboard, or to a velocity-sensitive keyboard controller and MIDI sound module. The lab is also outfitted with two laser printers, a video-disc player, VCR, computer projection system, and a high quality sound system. It is maintained and operated by the Academic Computing department of the university, which also oversees the lab assistants.

The main goal of the camp was to provide students with a meaningful and creative musical experience. Other goals included honing their critical music listening skills, introducing them to musical resources on the internet, and guiding them to a basic understanding of MIDI capability. All of these goals are intended to lead to greater musical understanding. The operative definition for musical understanding comes from Foundations and Principles of Music Education, by Leonhard and House (1972).

The non-residential camp was in session for a duration of five days, meeting from 8:30 am to 3:00 pm. Participants were not screened prior to the camp and came from a variety of musical, educational, and socio-economic backgrounds, ranging in age from 13- to 17-years. To allow each student access to a computer workstation, participation in the camp was limited to 15 (the number of stations in the lab). Coincidentally, all of the participants were fairly proficient music readers.

In order to provide continuity for the students, a daily schedule was adopted that allowed the youths to settle into a familar routine. By following the schedule closely while allowing some flexibility, they were able to predict what would happen next, and looked forward to each session of the day. Employing a mnemonic device, the schedule was the first thing they learned. It is explained in detail in the next section.

Each session of the day was given a rhyming code name: NEWS, SHOES, CRUISE, BLUES, CHEWS, MORE BLUES, MORE CRUISE, YOU CHOOSE. NEWS consisted primarily of advance organizers to the day’s actvities. SHOES referred to the time spent in recreational activities (i.e., bowling, swimming, soccer, etc.) led by a member of the campus recreational center staff. CRUISE referred to time available for searching the World Wide Web. The morning CRUISE time was a guided search for web pages on specific musical topics that were presented each day, and which related to the students’ compositional activities for each day. At the end of this time, students shared their finds with the group. BLUES was the time for composing music, and CHEWS was, of course, lunchtime.

The afternoon’s MORE CRUISE was more flexible than the morning version and the students were allowed to access non-musical websites. All internet activities were carried out under the watchful eye of the instructor. The last session of each day was YOU CHOOSE. During this time, students could choose composing, exploring other music programs on the computers (such as sequencing software), or more time on the World Wide Web. Students almost always chose to work on their compositions during this time.

During the first BLUES, or composing session, the instructor presented a short lesson on basic compositional concepts and techniques. On the first day of the camp, this consisted primarily of helping the students learn to use the notation software. We began using iconic representation, but quickly moved into standard notation as students felt comfortable doing so. For the most part, students wanted to move to notation quickly. During the BLUES time, the instructor provided constant individual feedback, moving from station to station with headphones, listening to each composition at every stage and offering guidance and encouragement. This type of feedback was crucial to the success of the camp.

Finally, each day ended with a "performance" of each student’s work, regardless of its stage of completion. Students were encouraged to comment on each others’ music. This type of peer evaluation proved to be extremely meaningful to the participants. Similarly, students spontaneously sought the musical feedback of each other throughout the day. It is especially interesting that the younger students often asked the older students to listen to their compositions, while the older students tended to consult each other.

Participants spent more time composing than on any other activity during the camp. Once their compositions began to take real form, they frequently asked permission to leave the internet activities early in order to work on their music. One of the key factors in this was the constant feedback and encouragement they received from the instructor and the other participants. Since I considered it important that the students' compositions be entirely theirs, I kept my feedback comments limited to encouragement, suggestions for voice direction, and questioning.

The feedback at the close of each day was also highly valued by the students. An unexpected plus occured as parents began to arrive a few minutes early to hear their child's composition. In fact, students often gave private demonstrations of the software to their parents. The typical overheard parental comment was, "You really wrote that yourself?!"

Crucial to the success of the camp was the presence of the chief lab assistant, Randy Smith. When computers froze or students had software questions, he was able to be a consistently reliable troubleshooter, thereby freeing the instructor for supervision and musical feedback. If a computer began experiencing major difficulties, Randy was able to help a participant save work to the server and relocate to a different machine while he examined the malfunction. His attendance also ensured the presence of two adults in the room at all times.

It is difficult to isolate something that didn't work, since I constantly surveyed the situation and avoided potential problems. The participants were not particularly interested in the recreational time and most considered it an invasion of their work. However, since the break time is important, we will need to determine what types of recreational activities they will find most attractive.

By the end of the week, the students had spent more than 20 hours composing, and each had at least one complete composition. They became quite adept at discarding what they didn't like and starting from scratch. They worked tirelessly to refine and perfect their works to their personal satisfaction. All of the final compositions were saved as MIDI files and uploaded to the SIUE music department web site (http://www.siue.edu/MUSIC/) from which they are accessible for public perusal.

Plans for the 1998 camp include a listening session for compositions of other young composers, as well as spending some time exploring and producing experimental music. By 1999 I hope to expand the camp to include another week long session for more advanced participants. Ideally, the advanced camp would be residential.

The students became engrossed in their compositional activities, learned to establish a rapport with the other group members, and became proficient at providing critical analysis for not only the other composers' works, but for their own works as well. Some of the students continued to frequent the lab in following weeks to work on more composing.

Group and individual photos were taken for a camp web site, which, along with the compositions, helped to instill a sense of accomplishment in the participants and pride in their parents. A useful by-product of the page is that it works as positive public relations for the university and advertising for the next year's camp. Prior to the 1997 camp, the university news service initiated a press release which was carried by several local newspapers. Two of those papers arranged interviews with the instructor, one of which resulted in a Sunday feature article.