Semester.ly

Johns Hopkins University | PY.530.403

Community Engagement

2.0

credits

Average Course Rating

(4.06)

A laboratory course in which students develop practical skills for sharing music in a variety of contexts. The first semester focuses on basic communication skills necessary for performers and teaching artists and culminates in a presentation of a repertoire piece in a community setting. The second semester focuses on collaborative composition and facilitating active music-making, culminating in a community project with other Peabody students and community participants.

Fall 2012

(4.04)

Fall 2013

(3.82)

Fall 2014

(4.33)

Fall 2012

Professor: Nathan Scott

(4.04)

The best parts of this course were the hands-on design experience and applicable skills learned in other courses. The downsides were the high number of reports to write, which took time away from actual y working on the project. Some students also said there was not enough guidance because there were very few lectures. Suggestions for improvement included having fewer or shorter reports and more lectures to give students some direction on their projects. Students should know that this class is extremely time-consuming, but very rewarding.

Fall 2013

Professor: Nathan Scott

(3.82)

Students thought that the best aspect of this course was getting to work with a client on a project that would address a real-world demand. They liked the freedom the course al owed and appreciated that the professor was always there to provide support. Many students disliked the lack of feedback in the course, because they never knew how well they were doing. Some students disliked the projects they were assigned, while other students believed that there were too few managers involved to get any productive feedback. Suggestions for improvement included halving the number of reports they had to write, increasing the number of TA supervisors for the course and providing feedback to the teams to help them improve their project. Students also thought that the lecture was unhelpful and suggested getting rid of it altogether. Prospective students must be wil ing to put the time and effort into this class to get the ful benefit of the experience.

Fall 2014

Professor: Nathan Scott

(4.33)

Students thought the most beneficial aspects of this course were the hands-on experience it provided and the opportunity to apply knowledge they had gained in prior engineering courses. Students found that the biggest drawback of the course was the substantial workload. In particular, many students thought that the writing assignments were not as useful and could be streamlined. Students believed that the class could be best improved with more detailed guidelines and expectations for assignments. They also thought it was important for future participants to know that the class required a substantial time commitment and workload.