Reading #1
Rose, L. S., & Countryman, J. (2013). Repositioning "The Elements": How Students Talk about Music. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 12(3): 45–64.
The author of this article did a good job of going into detail about all the things they were talking about. Some of those things though, I did not agree with. There were things though that I did think were good to mention and go into detail about.
Something that I did like about the article was when they talked about how music education isn’t receiving the same sort of light as something like math and science. Music in high school is dropping a lot because the schools don’t want to fund the programs. It isn’t good for all of us who are trying to go into teaching music because soon there will be too many teachers compared to the number of schools with a music program. It definitely sparked my interest when they talked about it because the school I came from didn’t have this problem so I never actually worried about it, but it has been happening everywhere else.
What surprised me was that the author kept using the word “oppressed”. Does the author really believe that was are being oppressed because we chose music and not a mainstream program? Maybe it is just what I associate the word oppressed with but I don’t think that was a very good choice to use it. There may have been a better word that isn’t as harsh as that, because it really isn’t that bad. Yes, at this university we are among the smallest faculty but that means nothing. We were the ones that really know what we want. The author should have chosen a different word.
Speaking of words, what really frustrated me about this article was all the words that apparently students use to describe the music. Yes we will sometimes use a few of these terms, but that is because usually we never want to be so technical all the time. Maybe we also can’t find the right word to describe it and that is what we came up with. It’s really like they were almost making fun of us for describing it that way. That is honestly probably how the teachers would describe it too. Yes I do understand that this was the main idea of the entire article but that is just how we talk about it.
My main question for the author is really, why did you choose to write this and incorporate all of these things? I just want to know because a lot of this honestly for me at least did not tie into what the article was really about. Yes, it did get to the point, but all the extra things around it for me was not needed. Also, who is this article for? Is this something everyone should be reading and be informed of these things? I just want to really know the target audience.
All in all, the article was well written, it just had a few things that I personally thought were a bit off.
Rose, L. S., & Countryman, J. (2013). Repositioning "The Elements": How Students Talk about Music. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 12(3): 45–64.
The author of this article did a good job of going into detail about all the things they were talking about. Some of those things though, I did not agree with. There were things though that I did think were good to mention and go into detail about.
Something that I did like about the article was when they talked about how music education isn’t receiving the same sort of light as something like math and science. Music in high school is dropping a lot because the schools don’t want to fund the programs. It isn’t good for all of us who are trying to go into teaching music because soon there will be too many teachers compared to the number of schools with a music program. It definitely sparked my interest when they talked about it because the school I came from didn’t have this problem so I never actually worried about it, but it has been happening everywhere else.
What surprised me was that the author kept using the word “oppressed”. Does the author really believe that was are being oppressed because we chose music and not a mainstream program? Maybe it is just what I associate the word oppressed with but I don’t think that was a very good choice to use it. There may have been a better word that isn’t as harsh as that, because it really isn’t that bad. Yes, at this university we are among the smallest faculty but that means nothing. We were the ones that really know what we want. The author should have chosen a different word.
Speaking of words, what really frustrated me about this article was all the words that apparently students use to describe the music. Yes we will sometimes use a few of these terms, but that is because usually we never want to be so technical all the time. Maybe we also can’t find the right word to describe it and that is what we came up with. It’s really like they were almost making fun of us for describing it that way. That is honestly probably how the teachers would describe it too. Yes I do understand that this was the main idea of the entire article but that is just how we talk about it.
My main question for the author is really, why did you choose to write this and incorporate all of these things? I just want to know because a lot of this honestly for me at least did not tie into what the article was really about. Yes, it did get to the point, but all the extra things around it for me was not needed. Also, who is this article for? Is this something everyone should be reading and be informed of these things? I just want to really know the target audience.
All in all, the article was well written, it just had a few things that I personally thought were a bit off.
Reading #2
Serres, D. (2014). Think Everything's "Normal?" Then it's Time to Reconsider a New Narrative of Disability. Retrieved September 20, 2017 from https://organizingchange.org/think-everythings-normal-then-its-time-to-reconsider-and-promote-a-new-narrative-of-disability/
This article had a nice intro to it. I actually enjoyed what the author of the article was saying about how we have sort of created a thought that being normal is the only way to live. Once the body section kicked in though, it went downhill for me. I had a very big problem with it. That I will go into more detail about later.
What was very interesting to me that I honestly really didn’t know about was the fact that parents and teachers will try to hide the wheelchair in school photos. I may have not really known about it just because I don’t know too many people that are bound to a wheelchair. One of my very good friends does need a wheelchair if she is walking for a long distance but she can walk without it. Either way, it did peak my interest to read that line.
Speaking of lines, this author definitely crossed the line in my opinion. Once they brought in the race card, I became very surprised. It was not a good surprise. That is something that should not have been talked about in this article. By saying things about race, it almost seemed to me that the author thought the same thing that depending on a person’s race, that they have a higher chance of have a disability of some kind. It did not sit with me well at all.
Something that also really didn’t sit well with me was when the author used that word retarded in a sentence and then later in the article started talking about other words to use than something like the word retarded. I do not care if the author was quoting someone both times. Do not ever use that would negatively. The author was pretty much being a hypocrite when they decided to add of that in to the article. It frustrates me when people want to make a change and are trying to change other people’s views on the world and then the person goes and does the thing that they said not to do. That is when I don’t trust a person.
Also, with this education system things the author talked about is not something that I agree with. Yes, there is a stream for those that don’t learn the same, but it helps them prepare for the real world and be able to live independently and find a job. It does teach them everything that they need know and they do learn the same things that we do, just at a different pace. That is what it is there for. Not to keep them away from everyone else. Do not act like that is the absolute worst part about the education system because it is not. Actually, it is a very good part of it. Focus on something else in the education system since it is so bad.
Honestly the one question I have is why? Why did you feel like you needed to write about this and make it seem like that you dislike people with disabilities? With all the things that he talked about, that is just the vibe that I got. That was probably not what he was going for, but for me I just felt that way and that made me dislike the article a lot.
Serres, D. (2014). Think Everything's "Normal?" Then it's Time to Reconsider a New Narrative of Disability. Retrieved September 20, 2017 from https://organizingchange.org/think-everythings-normal-then-its-time-to-reconsider-and-promote-a-new-narrative-of-disability/
This article had a nice intro to it. I actually enjoyed what the author of the article was saying about how we have sort of created a thought that being normal is the only way to live. Once the body section kicked in though, it went downhill for me. I had a very big problem with it. That I will go into more detail about later.
What was very interesting to me that I honestly really didn’t know about was the fact that parents and teachers will try to hide the wheelchair in school photos. I may have not really known about it just because I don’t know too many people that are bound to a wheelchair. One of my very good friends does need a wheelchair if she is walking for a long distance but she can walk without it. Either way, it did peak my interest to read that line.
Speaking of lines, this author definitely crossed the line in my opinion. Once they brought in the race card, I became very surprised. It was not a good surprise. That is something that should not have been talked about in this article. By saying things about race, it almost seemed to me that the author thought the same thing that depending on a person’s race, that they have a higher chance of have a disability of some kind. It did not sit with me well at all.
Something that also really didn’t sit well with me was when the author used that word retarded in a sentence and then later in the article started talking about other words to use than something like the word retarded. I do not care if the author was quoting someone both times. Do not ever use that would negatively. The author was pretty much being a hypocrite when they decided to add of that in to the article. It frustrates me when people want to make a change and are trying to change other people’s views on the world and then the person goes and does the thing that they said not to do. That is when I don’t trust a person.
Also, with this education system things the author talked about is not something that I agree with. Yes, there is a stream for those that don’t learn the same, but it helps them prepare for the real world and be able to live independently and find a job. It does teach them everything that they need know and they do learn the same things that we do, just at a different pace. That is what it is there for. Not to keep them away from everyone else. Do not act like that is the absolute worst part about the education system because it is not. Actually, it is a very good part of it. Focus on something else in the education system since it is so bad.
Honestly the one question I have is why? Why did you feel like you needed to write about this and make it seem like that you dislike people with disabilities? With all the things that he talked about, that is just the vibe that I got. That was probably not what he was going for, but for me I just felt that way and that made me dislike the article a lot.
Reading #3
Hourigan, R. M. (2009). The Invisible Student: Understanding Social Identity Construction within Performing Ensembles. Music Educators Journal, 34-38
This article does highlight points about students having a harder time with making new friends and I think that is very positive. It also talks about how to maybe always include them and have them meet new people. There were a few things that I think might be a bit overkill with putting them in situations that those students might not want to be a part of but I will get into that later.
One thing that I did find interesting about this article was all the little tips and tricks to help teachers include everyone in and have them all feel welcomed. What also was interesting was that some teachers probably didn’t think about using these techniques and just leaving those students to be isolated from everyone else. That they don’t care enough about this and just leave them to be alone. That is something I do not want to do to a student.
What surprised me really was the case study about the boy named Jason. I have never really known or seen anyone in my bands like that or at least to that severity. Especially considering my teachers will make sure that we all know each other right in the beginning so we can meet everyone and start to get to know them. That makes them feel included. Also on trips we always have to have a buddy system and if someone asks to join the group we have to say yes because no one is allowed to be found alone. This was probably why I had never really noticed the one kid that was sort of out of the way because I was always in an open environment where we all got to know each other.
One thing that really frustrated me about this article was when they talked about having the student that is a bit quieter doing something that would probably make them feel very much in the spotlight. Like as the author was saying about if they are more advanced that they should do a duet with another student. That would not make them feel better. It would probably make them feel like they were being called out. This is especially so if the student isn’t as advanced as the others, don’t make them go into a practice room with someone else. That would make them feel isolated from everyone else because they would be the only one asked if they could do that. It won’t make them want to get to know the person at all. Ease them into something more group friendly, not just one on one. Group settings might help them a little bit more.
A question I have for the author is, what was your reasoning to write this article? You say that you are a teacher so did you see this sort of thing in your class room? Did you take any of these tips and tricks to try and help them? Did they work in any way? I just want to know really for future reference.
Hourigan, R. M. (2009). The Invisible Student: Understanding Social Identity Construction within Performing Ensembles. Music Educators Journal, 34-38
This article does highlight points about students having a harder time with making new friends and I think that is very positive. It also talks about how to maybe always include them and have them meet new people. There were a few things that I think might be a bit overkill with putting them in situations that those students might not want to be a part of but I will get into that later.
One thing that I did find interesting about this article was all the little tips and tricks to help teachers include everyone in and have them all feel welcomed. What also was interesting was that some teachers probably didn’t think about using these techniques and just leaving those students to be isolated from everyone else. That they don’t care enough about this and just leave them to be alone. That is something I do not want to do to a student.
What surprised me really was the case study about the boy named Jason. I have never really known or seen anyone in my bands like that or at least to that severity. Especially considering my teachers will make sure that we all know each other right in the beginning so we can meet everyone and start to get to know them. That makes them feel included. Also on trips we always have to have a buddy system and if someone asks to join the group we have to say yes because no one is allowed to be found alone. This was probably why I had never really noticed the one kid that was sort of out of the way because I was always in an open environment where we all got to know each other.
One thing that really frustrated me about this article was when they talked about having the student that is a bit quieter doing something that would probably make them feel very much in the spotlight. Like as the author was saying about if they are more advanced that they should do a duet with another student. That would not make them feel better. It would probably make them feel like they were being called out. This is especially so if the student isn’t as advanced as the others, don’t make them go into a practice room with someone else. That would make them feel isolated from everyone else because they would be the only one asked if they could do that. It won’t make them want to get to know the person at all. Ease them into something more group friendly, not just one on one. Group settings might help them a little bit more.
A question I have for the author is, what was your reasoning to write this article? You say that you are a teacher so did you see this sort of thing in your class room? Did you take any of these tips and tricks to try and help them? Did they work in any way? I just want to know really for future reference.
Reading #4
Dawe, L. (2016). Fumbling Towards Vulnerability: Moving Out of the Familiar for Music Education’s Sake, Canadian Music Educator, (57)2, pp. 22-24
I personally quite enjoyed this article. The author was very insightful when she talked about her stories as a young music student. I enjoyed her style of writing where she didn’t use large or odd words that I would have had to look up to know what she was trying to say.
What I found interesting about this article was her childhood stories. The main one that I focused a lot on was the one where she was auditioning to get into the Senior Jazz band and was not able to improvise on the 12 bar blues. I guess for myself personally my teacher taught how to do that and would tell us less is more. So when we played the riffs were not insane but they had a good melody to them. Especially because the author was saying that she always practiced on her instrument so I would have believed that she would have gone over that sort of thing. That is part of being in the jazz band, so to me it is an ordinary day to improvise over it. It is understandable because she did say that there wasn’t a lot of freedom in what she played.
This brings us to what surprised me. What really did surprise me was the amount of freedom she didn’t have when playing things. There was no creativity for her really. She had no say in what she did. I always thought that schools would have students create things in music class. At the elementary school I went to I had to create a song on the saxophone. This was when I was in grade 7 so I just assume now that everyone does that too. This happened all throughout high school as well, so it’s new for me to hear this.
There really weren’t anything that frustrated me about this article. I really did enjoy it. Maybe the one thing that bothered me about this article was that I wanted her to go more into depth about things that she would talk about. Especially her stories, which I found very interesting (as I said earlier). Other than that there wasn’t anything that I wanted to say that I didn’t like.
I only have one question for her. It is; now that you have written this article, have you received mail back from other teachers saying that they learned from this and are trying to change their ways too? I just wanted to know because I found it insightful and I am not even a teacher.
Dawe, L. (2016). Fumbling Towards Vulnerability: Moving Out of the Familiar for Music Education’s Sake, Canadian Music Educator, (57)2, pp. 22-24
I personally quite enjoyed this article. The author was very insightful when she talked about her stories as a young music student. I enjoyed her style of writing where she didn’t use large or odd words that I would have had to look up to know what she was trying to say.
What I found interesting about this article was her childhood stories. The main one that I focused a lot on was the one where she was auditioning to get into the Senior Jazz band and was not able to improvise on the 12 bar blues. I guess for myself personally my teacher taught how to do that and would tell us less is more. So when we played the riffs were not insane but they had a good melody to them. Especially because the author was saying that she always practiced on her instrument so I would have believed that she would have gone over that sort of thing. That is part of being in the jazz band, so to me it is an ordinary day to improvise over it. It is understandable because she did say that there wasn’t a lot of freedom in what she played.
This brings us to what surprised me. What really did surprise me was the amount of freedom she didn’t have when playing things. There was no creativity for her really. She had no say in what she did. I always thought that schools would have students create things in music class. At the elementary school I went to I had to create a song on the saxophone. This was when I was in grade 7 so I just assume now that everyone does that too. This happened all throughout high school as well, so it’s new for me to hear this.
There really weren’t anything that frustrated me about this article. I really did enjoy it. Maybe the one thing that bothered me about this article was that I wanted her to go more into depth about things that she would talk about. Especially her stories, which I found very interesting (as I said earlier). Other than that there wasn’t anything that I wanted to say that I didn’t like.
I only have one question for her. It is; now that you have written this article, have you received mail back from other teachers saying that they learned from this and are trying to change their ways too? I just wanted to know because I found it insightful and I am not even a teacher.
Reading #5
Bradley, D. (2006) “Music education, multiculturalism, and anti-racism: ‘Can we talk?” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 5/2:http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/Bradley5_2.pdf
This article was a long one. It did cover a lot of topics on the issue though, which was great. There are some high points and some low points in my opinion within the article.
What I liked about this article was the fact that there were students interviewed for it and they gave their honest answers which did shed light on how they felt about certain things. The one that stood out for me the most was Kate. Her answer to the question was amazing because people don’t realize what they are saying when they call people by their ethnicity, even if they aren’t living in that place they are still know as that. For her, she just wanted to be seen as a Canadian and people would call her the “Indian Girl” because that was the colour of her skin. It didn’t matter where she was she was just known at that. I liked the fact that she spoke up about that and now I hope she is known as Canadian the way she wants to be.
` What surprised within the article was the fact that one of the people said that they were scared to teach the blues to their students because they thought they would get the facts wrong. I feel if they were worried about that then they should do even more research on the topic and how it all started. I understand that they don’t want to get the facts wrong and/or mess any of that up but that shouldn’t be something that they worry about. It surprised me only because they shouldn’t have those kinds of fears, if they really wanted to teach that then they should do a tonne of research so they can be confident enough and not mess anything up.
What I disliked about this article was the fact that they covered many things and I feel like they could have been split into different articles all together. Yes, I do like the fact that they went into a lot of detail about the topic, but at a certain point it becomes too much. By the end there was so much info thrown at the reader that they probably won’t retain it all. I just feel like they could have stuck with a couple topics instead of having it so broad and trying to cover everything at once.
My question for the author would be, since this was written a couple of years ago, what would be different about this article now? What I mean by this is how would it be different, would there be things that you would take out? Things that you would add? Anything like that.
Bradley, D. (2006) “Music education, multiculturalism, and anti-racism: ‘Can we talk?” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 5/2:http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/Bradley5_2.pdf
This article was a long one. It did cover a lot of topics on the issue though, which was great. There are some high points and some low points in my opinion within the article.
What I liked about this article was the fact that there were students interviewed for it and they gave their honest answers which did shed light on how they felt about certain things. The one that stood out for me the most was Kate. Her answer to the question was amazing because people don’t realize what they are saying when they call people by their ethnicity, even if they aren’t living in that place they are still know as that. For her, she just wanted to be seen as a Canadian and people would call her the “Indian Girl” because that was the colour of her skin. It didn’t matter where she was she was just known at that. I liked the fact that she spoke up about that and now I hope she is known as Canadian the way she wants to be.
` What surprised within the article was the fact that one of the people said that they were scared to teach the blues to their students because they thought they would get the facts wrong. I feel if they were worried about that then they should do even more research on the topic and how it all started. I understand that they don’t want to get the facts wrong and/or mess any of that up but that shouldn’t be something that they worry about. It surprised me only because they shouldn’t have those kinds of fears, if they really wanted to teach that then they should do a tonne of research so they can be confident enough and not mess anything up.
What I disliked about this article was the fact that they covered many things and I feel like they could have been split into different articles all together. Yes, I do like the fact that they went into a lot of detail about the topic, but at a certain point it becomes too much. By the end there was so much info thrown at the reader that they probably won’t retain it all. I just feel like they could have stuck with a couple topics instead of having it so broad and trying to cover everything at once.
My question for the author would be, since this was written a couple of years ago, what would be different about this article now? What I mean by this is how would it be different, would there be things that you would take out? Things that you would add? Anything like that.
Reading #6
Williams, D. A. (2014). Another Perspective The iPad Is a REAL Musical Instrument. Music Educators Journal, 101(1), 93-98.
I did not particularly enjoy this article. Yes there were some good points in the text, but most of it was not worthwhile to read. I understand that sounds a bit harsh, but that is just how I felt about this article.
What I liked about this article was the passion that the author had behind the words that they wrote. He is very passionate about what he and his ensemble do. It is not something that people hear or talk about a lot so it’s nice to see people try new things that seem to work. It’s not something that I would enjoy necessarily but there are people who would.
What surprised me in this article was the fact that he compared an iPad to an oboe. I was not surprised really in good way. I don’t think comparing an iPad to an oboe is a good thing. They are not close to the same thing. The person does not technically make the music on an iPad, the algorithms in the computer’s system does. There is no correlation between the two things. I personally don’t think that was a good point to make. It surprised me because he seemed so serious about it and actually thought that they were in the same league.
There were a couple of things that I disliked about this article. The first thing was even though I said earlier how it’s great that he is passionate about this, but honestly to me it is also a bad thing. Throughout the article I was questioning if he was actually serious about what he was writing. It almost seemed like too out of the ordinary for me to comprehend. Something else that really got to me, was when he said that they were “Ipadists”. IPads are not a musical instrument, they aren’t like an instrument you would see in an ensemble. I don’t know why they think that though, it didn’t make any sense to me whatsoever. I honestly don’t believe someone would ever be able to be considered a musician if they play the iPad. There is no way, you don’t need any musical background to play the iPad. I just don’t understand where he is coming from with all of this.
One question I have is, why? Why did you ever think of this? It just confused me so much with what he was saying.
Williams, D. A. (2014). Another Perspective The iPad Is a REAL Musical Instrument. Music Educators Journal, 101(1), 93-98.
I did not particularly enjoy this article. Yes there were some good points in the text, but most of it was not worthwhile to read. I understand that sounds a bit harsh, but that is just how I felt about this article.
What I liked about this article was the passion that the author had behind the words that they wrote. He is very passionate about what he and his ensemble do. It is not something that people hear or talk about a lot so it’s nice to see people try new things that seem to work. It’s not something that I would enjoy necessarily but there are people who would.
What surprised me in this article was the fact that he compared an iPad to an oboe. I was not surprised really in good way. I don’t think comparing an iPad to an oboe is a good thing. They are not close to the same thing. The person does not technically make the music on an iPad, the algorithms in the computer’s system does. There is no correlation between the two things. I personally don’t think that was a good point to make. It surprised me because he seemed so serious about it and actually thought that they were in the same league.
There were a couple of things that I disliked about this article. The first thing was even though I said earlier how it’s great that he is passionate about this, but honestly to me it is also a bad thing. Throughout the article I was questioning if he was actually serious about what he was writing. It almost seemed like too out of the ordinary for me to comprehend. Something else that really got to me, was when he said that they were “Ipadists”. IPads are not a musical instrument, they aren’t like an instrument you would see in an ensemble. I don’t know why they think that though, it didn’t make any sense to me whatsoever. I honestly don’t believe someone would ever be able to be considered a musician if they play the iPad. There is no way, you don’t need any musical background to play the iPad. I just don’t understand where he is coming from with all of this.
One question I have is, why? Why did you ever think of this? It just confused me so much with what he was saying.
Reading #7
Tobias, E. S. (2013). Toward Convergence Adapting Music Education to Contemporary Society and Participatory Culture. Music Educators Journal, 99(4), 29-36.
The article this week was in interesting one. It was different than other ones because it really focused on the music remixing. Not so much of creating new music. There were things that I didn’t like and things that I did like that I will get into later.
Something that I found interesting about this article is that there are so many different types of things to take an original piece of music and change it to something else. I personally only knew of a few of these techniques so it was cool to find out that there are more then that. It’s also interesting that teachers are now going to try and incorporate into their teaching because it will have students become more interested in the class. What would be a cool idea is if they create a class about this. Sort of like a composition class but it’s like a remixing class where they can do that for the class and get marked for it. I feel like that will have more people engaged in music within high school.
What I liked about this article was that they incorporated some of the competitions that went on for this type of thing. I liked that they did that because when teachers read that they can look into competitions and maybe if some of the things are good enough in their class, they can be entered. It would be an engaging thing for the students so they can work hard and be entered in these contests and competitions.
What I didn’t like about this article so much was the fact that they didn’t really talk about how much this would cost in a school. Schools now have a smaller budget then they did a while ago. This makes it hard for the school to get the equipment needed for this to actually become a regular thing in the school. Plus they would have to factor in the cost to fix the stuff if it is ever broken or not working. It would have been nice if they did talk about that so the teachers can have an understanding of how much this is all going to cost and know what to ask for when trying to get the things for the classroom.
A question for the author is, has this whole thing been tested in the classroom before? If so, how did it work out? Were the students engaged the entire time, or did more students want to join in on this to see if they would like it too? Just want to know if it was a success or not.
Tobias, E. S. (2013). Toward Convergence Adapting Music Education to Contemporary Society and Participatory Culture. Music Educators Journal, 99(4), 29-36.
The article this week was in interesting one. It was different than other ones because it really focused on the music remixing. Not so much of creating new music. There were things that I didn’t like and things that I did like that I will get into later.
Something that I found interesting about this article is that there are so many different types of things to take an original piece of music and change it to something else. I personally only knew of a few of these techniques so it was cool to find out that there are more then that. It’s also interesting that teachers are now going to try and incorporate into their teaching because it will have students become more interested in the class. What would be a cool idea is if they create a class about this. Sort of like a composition class but it’s like a remixing class where they can do that for the class and get marked for it. I feel like that will have more people engaged in music within high school.
What I liked about this article was that they incorporated some of the competitions that went on for this type of thing. I liked that they did that because when teachers read that they can look into competitions and maybe if some of the things are good enough in their class, they can be entered. It would be an engaging thing for the students so they can work hard and be entered in these contests and competitions.
What I didn’t like about this article so much was the fact that they didn’t really talk about how much this would cost in a school. Schools now have a smaller budget then they did a while ago. This makes it hard for the school to get the equipment needed for this to actually become a regular thing in the school. Plus they would have to factor in the cost to fix the stuff if it is ever broken or not working. It would have been nice if they did talk about that so the teachers can have an understanding of how much this is all going to cost and know what to ask for when trying to get the things for the classroom.
A question for the author is, has this whole thing been tested in the classroom before? If so, how did it work out? Were the students engaged the entire time, or did more students want to join in on this to see if they would like it too? Just want to know if it was a success or not.