The above list is perhaps more accessible to the music educator that Orff’s and gives us some solid ground on which to stand. If we look at these ‘points’ alongside Orff’s ‘characteristics’ we begin to gain much more of a sense of the Schulwerk.
Some years after presenting these didactic concepts, Hermann Regner presented some traits of Orff Schulwerk “which should be taken very seriously in order to justify calling our work Orff Schulwerk” (as described in Haselbach, 2013). These relate to Orff Schulwerk being seen as an “open” system.
Openness in relation to working with the printed models.
The volumes are models and stimulant for teachers. We must know the purpose of the pieces so we can lead a group to an independent and creative exploration using a given model.
Openness in relation to the target group.
Orff Schulwerk can be used with all age ranges, with beginners and professional musicians, in and outside of school. We must adapt our choice of material and method of instruction.
Openness in relation to new sound sources.
The Orff instrumentarium with beginnings in non-European cultures has brought about other ‘invented’ instruments and sounds made by everyday items.
Openness in relation to movement and dance.
Movement is not understood just as a means to help the learning of music, but considered unified as an artistic medium of human expression.
Openness in relation to interdisciplinarity.
This refers to a state of being where expression occurs with our whole self.
Reducing our teaching to music only without integration of language and movement contradicts a fundamental characteristic of Orff Schulwerk.
Openness to contemporary music and art.
If we consider the volumes as an inexhaustible source of ideas and models, then it is our obligation to develop a positive attitude towards contemporary art of all kinds.
Barbara Haselbach has been involved in the Schulwerk since the Orff Institute began in 1961. She personally knew both Orff and Keetman and can talk with great authority about Orff Schulwerk. She puts forth “central themes of the approach” that were considered when
the television programs began (Haselbach, 2013, p. 11). The themes here are provided verbatim but I have summarised her descriptions.
1. The wholeness of music-making…which integrates music, language and movement. 2. The stimulation of creative abilities…through the process of teaching, improvisation
and working in groups.
3. The instruments…with playing techniques leading quickly to musical expression. 4. The encounter with the foundation of the respective cultural traditions…in song,
dance and text.
5. Playful learning and learning through play…a motto applicable today.
These themes overlap the characteristics and Principles outlined by others, and point to the Principles she and Hartmann outlined in 2013. These Principles specify “features that characterize Orff-Schulwerk and that have little or no weight in other music educational concepts” (Haselbach & Hartmann, 2013, para 1).
Orff had in his mind a musical sequence of education, clear from analysis of the five volumes of Music for Children he and Keetman produced. But he did not concern himself with specific pedagogy—how to teach music using this framework. In my discussions with teachers, few analyse the original Music for Children volumes to further their understandings of the pedagogical framework of these publications. There is certainly nothing in the
volumes that speak precisely to the Principles suggested by Haselbach and Hartmann, and I believe this makes their document even more valuable. For a clear understanding of Orff Schulwerk philosophy, the volumes and the Principles as outlined need to be read in conjunction with each other. Orff believed in teachers’ abilities to take the material and develop their own pedagogical system in line with the philosophy he saw as embedded in the volumes. However, the musical knowledge required to do that is beyond the scope of many Australian primary school music teachers.
The Haselbach and Hartmann Principles speak to my beliefs about Orff Schulwerk and I present these as the framework for the elaboration of my understandings of this approach. They however do not cover the full gamut of what almost all Orff educators would see as the most fundamental of beliefs. “Without doubt, there are features of the Orff approach, which are non-negotiable” (Stewart, 2013, p. 16). These non-negotiable aspects sit under the Orff Schulwerk philosophical umbrella with humanistic aims related to inclusion, participation, a holistic view of the learner, joyfulness, and the critical place of relationships.
I have embraced these Principles but do not advocate an inflexible ‘this is what it is’ model of Orff Schulwerk. Rather I want to draw together what I believe are the most tangible and credible aspects of the Orff Schulwerk literature, coupled with my own continuing
understandings and beliefs, in order to assist in expounding the Principles in a cohesive way.
Each of the seven Principles of Orff Schulwerk is listed here and further explained verbatim in brackets by Haselbach and Hartmann (2013). They are not being presented in order of importance related to Orff Schulwerk, rather to the flow I see as appropriate in this context.