The Kodály and Orff Schulwerk Methods
Across the first four weeks of this Semester, I engaged with two of the most significant strands of music pedagogy: the Kodály method and the Orff Schulwerk approach. Much of this learning occurred through active music-making by singing, moving, clapping, improvising, playing instruments, and musical games. In learning through making the music first, I began to see how these philosophies highlighted the performance of music, and backgrounded and embedded the theory throughout the lessons. Experiencing these approaches from the perspective of a student allowed me to reflect on what elements of each philosophy I wish to implement in my own teaching, and how they will shape the educator I aim to be.
The Kodály approach was developed out of Hungary in the mid 20th Century and centres the voice as the primary instrument, as well as emphasises the importance of developmental sequencing and inner hearing. In these classes I learnt and sang the folk repertoire, practiced implementing solfa hand signals and participated in structured singing activities and ensemble games. I found this clearly scaffolded method of instruction made the learning process accessible and always engaging. Occasionally the material we were learning became too complex in body and rhythmic coordination, and I experienced first-hand moving beyond the zone of proximal development and into frustration. I was often struck by how effectively the simple musical material could quickly lead to exploring complex concepts, and contribute to the development of ‘whole musicianship’. This is explained by Kodály as the four elements of becoming a well trained musician: a well trained heart, mind, ear and hand, that are all working in equilibrium. These ideas align with McPherson's ideas of the multi-modalities of being a musician, which requires developing every facet of musicianship, including less obvious ones such as appraising, analysing, conducting and even teaching itself.
The Orff Schulwerk approach is a complementary pedagogical method, and I found its focus on embodied learning and improvisation to work well in tandem with the Kodály method. Its emphasis on combining music and movement, as well as incorporating body percussion, ostinato and layered ensemble part work helped create a strong sense of collective music-making. This approach made me reflect on the often dominance of the Western art music tradition, and how its separation of music and movement is anomalous to the vast majority of musical traditions worldwide where the two are inseparable. I found that approaching musical concepts in this kinesthetic way made them immediately tangible, and how teaching through these methods can help support diverse learners who may rely more on movement to understand rhythm and develop a sense of beat.
Working within the Kodály and Orff frameworks really highlighted how essential it is to have confident vocal modelling, and the role of the teacher as facilitator in establishing a supportive learning environment. I found that moving beyond simple direct instruction and teaching as part of the collective provides a way in for all types of learners, and ensures that every student has an opportunity to be actively engaged at all times.
Considering these pedagogical philosophies together, I can see how each contributes distinctively to my emerging professional identity. Kodály offered a framework for building musical literacy through a clear structure, as well as providing musical systems such as solfa and ta-ti-ti. Orff emphasised creative exploration, embodiment, and inclusive engagement through kinesthetic learning. Experiencing these approaches practically broadened my understanding of the variety of pedagogical methods, and reinforced to me the idea that music education is inherently diverse.
Below are some explainer videos of both Kodály and Orff Schulwerk.
