Choosing Composition as a Major

To examine the different aspects of studying composition as major, I'd like to mention about the least adequate environment first.

Whether if you have aptitude for music or have fundamental or advanced knowledge of music, you need to make your living. That may sound like I'm a capitalist oppresor, yet my statement is considered true. You need to provide yourself time, and optimum money in order to be mentally and physically 'ready' to compose in this time you provided.

Now that you have these two provided, let's consider about what you may do in your time.

There are several possibilities which are:

-Choosing composition as major

-Studying something else at uni, and studying composition on your own or with a tutor.

-Studying composition on your own without going to any school.

Third option looks unlikely (yet possible), however first two are quite possible.

Now to talk about uni, this may help you to see what you can get 'from' school. Think about school as a place that gives you atmosphere of what you are studying, and inspiration. Atmosphere will make you feel connected and you 'belong' to a part of academia. You'll eventually become more adapted to the jargon, thus you'll be motivated by any means. And inspiration will provide you a pill of experience (by teachers)- not making you learn faster but giving you eagerness to delve into more. Having these two essentials not enough until you have the spark that starts reaction, which is a basic knowledge.

Does it mean you can't find atmosphere and inspiration unless you go to school? No, that's wrong. Sure you can find these two, no need to mention knowledge. But! You'll never find educational experience which will make you rocket jump from where you are (schools guarantee they contain tutors, not all tutors guarantee they contain educational experience). You are going to have to find anything on your 'own'. This is really a gamble. I took this path and found rare tools (in exchange of ruined time) which vastly helps me now, in terms of self-studying, however, if you are willing to study composition, it is absolutely wise to combine your eagerness with an experienced tutor's guidance.

This, again, doesn't mean you can't make on your own. But again, seeing where you are, where you go and how to get there, revising and correcting your mistakes quickly, embodying your targets, helps you more than you imagine.

I figured 3 conditions (rather milestones) for myself about how to be a composer. Maybe it'll help you too.

A composer needs to:

- be diligent to build a sound foundation about any subject in music, and passionate to keep up building.

- see the fine line where rationality meets and departs emotions, and grasp their individual meaning.

- be adventurous and valiant to show your works.

Everyone will eventually find theirselves studying on their own, but it's about how to get there.

I hope I helped you a bit.

Before you decide if you want to go into a composition degree program, you need to decide what you'd like your end goal to be and determine what you need to attain to make that goal happen.

For me, I decided early on that I would become a film composer, and the best way to do that would be to get a composition degree in Southern California. This way I could study academic composition while still being able to secure internships in the industry and write my donkey off in the film music world throughout college. I was also very lucky to have professors that were very accepting of my film music goals, as not all professors are.

If you're interested in film, a helluva lot more goes into being a film composer than just knowing how to write music. In the grand scheme of things, maybe 10% of it is actually knowing how to write (a big 10% though), while the other 90% is who you know, your personality, and your skills in technology (a necessity these days). As an academic composer, you can focus on just what you want to, without having to juggle the extraneous items that a film composer must.

Also, in determining your end goal, you need to decide on the money factor as well. Even though it is about the same level of unlikelihood that one will become successful in either industry, (film composing perhaps a bit more unlikely), successful concert composers make factors of 10 less than successful film composers, and as a result usually end up taking a teaching position as well. Is teaching something you'd see yourself enjoying? In this case, as everyone has said, it is probably a good idea to get a PhD.

Either way, good luck, and let us know what you decide!

Also, in determining your end goal, you need to decide on the money factor as well. Even though it is about the same level of unlikelihood that one will become successful in either industry, (film composing perhaps a bit more unlikely), successful concert composers make factors of 10 less than successful film composers, and as a result usually end up taking a teaching position as well. Is teaching something you'd see yourself enjoying? In this case, as everyone has said, it is probably a good idea to get a PhD.

Or at least a Music Ed degree to teach music at the K-12 levels. This requires state certification. Even a PhD won't qualify you for teaching K-12 unless you carry the state certification as well.

Can't you just take a test for that? haha.

In some states. k-12 education is highly controlled by the states, not the federal gov't. Other states require courses, others require nothing.

Yeah, it isn't THAT hard if you look... for example... FL or TN's requirements to become a teacher. Not that hard.

Or at least a Music Ed degree to teach music at the K-12 levels. This requires state certification. Even a PhD won't qualify you for teaching K-12 unless you carry the state certification as well.

Depending on the subject and the need of teacher's, many school boards can make arrangements so you can teach without a certification and then certify you later. I know my wife got that done when we lived in Texas.

Yeah, it isn't THAT hard if you look... for example... FL or TN's requirements to become a teacher. Not that hard.

None the less, a PhD does not QUALIFY you to teach K-12, even if states may 'make exceptions' from time to time. Where music is concerned, the market is already saturated with music teachers compared to other subject areas. The NCLB law requires administrators to hire certified candidates FIRST, so you could be more qualified and NOT get a job because of something technical.

Y"all are acting like certification and education courses are meaningless... There is a science to teaching, especially kids...

Yep. I definitely don't advise anyone to teach just because they need a job. If you don't got some kind of passion for the job, it'll eat you alive.

Depending on the subject and the need of teacher's, many school boards can make arrangements so you can teach without a certification and then certify you later. I know my wife got that done when we lived in Texas.

Yes, many states have this type of program.

None the less, a PhD does not QUALIFY you to teach K-12, even if states may 'make exceptions' from time to time. Where music is concerned, the market is already saturated with music teachers compared to other subject areas. The NCLB law requires administrators to hire certified candidates FIRST, so you could be more qualified and NOT get a job because of something technical.

I've never known PhD's to teach at public schools anyway (charter and private schools, yes). There is such thing as "overqualification".

The market may be over saturated with music teachers, but that doesn't mean all of them are competitive, competent or good. I've known plenty of, let's face it, moron students getting good internships and band director positions are certain high schools. Teaching is a serious profession and should really only be undertaken by the most qualified, but let's be honest with ourselves here: it doesn't take a rocket scientist to conduct Holst Suite in E-flat and tell Johnny Tremain to stop taking the melody of the octave.

None the less, a PhD does not QUALIFY you to teach K-12, even if states may 'make exceptions' from time to time. Where music is concerned, the market is already saturated with music teachers compared to other subject areas. The NCLB law requires administrators to hire certified candidates FIRST, so you could be more qualified and NOT get a job because of something technical.

This actually applies also to the UK and Greece, that I know of! ;)

Y"all are acting like certification and education courses are meaningless... There is a science to teaching, especially kids...

I think what I'm addressing are common 'assumptions' some composers tend to make about their career options without actually investigating the matter. When it comes to considering other options, many people find out much too late that more common sense assumptions they've made are incredibly wrong.

It makes sense, at least to me, that a Bachelors Degree in Music Education qualifies one to teach. It's not common sense to think that this degree is the ONLY WAY to qualify to teach... but it is the only way. It's not a commentary on teaching, it's simply a point to make that academic achievement alone will not suffice if you want more career options within your field.

Yes, many states have this type of program.

Yes, there are two 'alternative license' paths that non-certified individuals can use to apply. In music, you have to have a letter from an accredited university accepting you to their teacher certification program. Additionally, you have two years to complete that program or you lose your job, and again (with a saturated market in mind), if someone who is already certified to teach applies, no matter how much academic music coursework you've had, the school is required to hire someone who is already certified to teach.

Am I not making it abundantly clear how nearly impossible it would be to get a teaching job in music without a teaching certification?

Saturated market + NCLB certification/hiring requirement = Not gettin' the job no matter how much you know about music

I've never known PhD's to teach at public schools anyway (charter and private schools, yes). There is such thing as "overqualification".

The market may be over saturated with music teachers, but that doesn't mean all of them are competitive, competent or good. I've known plenty of, let's face it, moron students getting good internships and band director positions are certain high schools. Teaching is a serious profession and should really only be undertaken by the most qualified, but let's be honest with ourselves here: it doesn't take a rocket scientist to conduct Holst Suite in E-flat and tell Johnny Tremain to stop taking the melody of the octave.

I know of Music PhDs who teach in public schools. One of them is director of bands in the county where I grew up (different school than the one I attended, though).

I think what I'm addressing are common 'assumptions' some composers tend to make about their career options without actually investigating the matter. When it comes to considering other options, many people find out much too late that more common sense assumptions they've made are incredibly wrong.

It makes sense, at least to me, that a Bachelors Degree in Music Education qualifies one to teach. It's not common sense to think that this degree is the ONLY WAY to qualify to teach... but it is the only way. It's not a commentary on teaching, it's simply a point to make that academic achievement alone will not suffice if you want more career options within your field.

Yes, there are two 'alternative license' paths that non-certified individuals can use to apply. In music, you have to have a letter from an accredited university accepting you to their teacher certification program. Additionally, you have two years to complete that program or you lose your job, and again (with a saturated market in mind), if someone who is already certified to teach applies, no matter how much academic music coursework you've had, the school is required to hire someone who is already certified to teach.

Am I not making it abundantly clear how nearly impossible it would be to get a teaching job in music without a teaching certification?

Saturated market + NCLB certification/hiring requirement = Not gettin' the job no matter how much you know about music

I know of Music PhDs who teach in public schools. One of them is director of bands in the county where I grew up (different school than the one I attended, though).

It's unwise to get a PhD from a school that's bottom tier in your particular field.

? What are you talking about?

I'm saying that if you're going to get a PhD in something, you should probably be going to a top 20 school in the field, not North Dakota Community State University or something. I'm not being elitist, it's just the truth. I mean otherwise, especially if you plan poorly as ar as career advising, you'll have the embarrassment of having a PhD and working in a public school for 24k a year.

I'm saying that if you're going to get a PhD in something, you should probably be going to a top 20 school in the field, not North Dakota Community State University or something. I'm not being elitist, it's just the truth. I mean otherwise, especially if you plan poorly as ar as career advising, you'll have the embarrassment of having a PhD and working in a public school for 24k a year.

Newsflash...

Pay grade is tiered in K-12 jobs... a bachelors may get you $28k a year on average where a masters will net you somewhere in the mid 30s. A PhD may net you high 30's, which is about the income one could expect from their first full time faculty position at a university straight out of college. Years of teaching experience are also tiered at both the K-12 level and the academic faculty level. There's not a lot of difference in salary between these two career areas, at least not in the first 10-15 years.

A PhD may net you high 30's, which is about the income one could expect from their first full time faculty position at a university straight out of college.

I truly feel sorry for the SOB who actually would take that salary...

The ADJUNCTS in the music department at my school make that much.... lolz

I truly feel sorry for the SOB who actually would take that salary...

I can't wait to hear what you think you know about career opportunities and salary expectations for PhD's in Music coming right out of university.

According to salary websites, and my friends in music departments, an associate professor makes a medium of 49,000. So I stand by my statement and say I feel sorry for that SOB who decides to take 38k.

Yes, and the highest paid profs in my school of music make over 100k

Don't go to a bottom tiered school in Arkansas or something folks, you will go nowhere and committees will laugh at you.

Salary websites don't factor in adjustments made for cost of living or take into account the urban or rural factors either that actually affect how many jobs are available in a given region.

I may be generalizing a bit, but I'm certainly not exaggerating the figure, either. 38k isn't actually that bad in the Southeast area... but it's no Million Bucks.

AA's kind of right. Cost of living does matter a lot. making 35k in New Orleans is nothing like making 35k in NYC.

But, as to the tiered thing -- not necessarily. As I said, every k-12 school board is different. What's happening in the RSD here wouldn't fly at PS128 in Manhattan.

I was actually trying to point out how not-so-different salaries are teaching in K-12 compared to academic faculty positions at a university in the same region. In our area, the board of regents works with a very similar cost of living adjustment to that of county school boards for public school salaries.

If you want to make the most money teaching in a public school in the US, I'm told that teachers in Philadelphia are paid more than teachers in any other US city when cost of living and regional job availability are factored into the statistics. It's somewhere just above $50k, but cost of living is lower which gives that salary a little more mileage than in other areas.