Just A Song Sunday: Eureka! I Found It!!
For weeks now, I've been struggling with the idea of these posts. I've been torn between the idea of putting up "how-to" scripts on how to run therapeutic music experiences (TMEs) and trying to figure out how to maintain the integrity of the education, training, and experience of all of us music therapists out there. I never want someone using my ideas to state that they "do music therapy because of this blog post I read once."
So, I went to a presentation at National Conference which reinforced an idea that I had found but hadn't really been able to articulate. The presentation was Curriculum-Based Music Therapy: A Guide to Writing Structured Interventions and was led by Ryan Carroll, MS, MT-BC and Kate Stanley, MT-BC. This is a topic that I feel I know quite a bit about, and I attended to see if others were thinking the way I think. Turns out, they do!!
Anyway, I was sitting in the presentation, taking notes when Ryan Carroll said something that simply struck a chord with me. The conversation was about using conditional design during music therapy sessions - what I consider "flexibility" and "being in the moment" during sessions. Who knew that there was an official name for that?? Not me. Not until that presentation two Fridays ago. Now I do. That wasn't the revelation.
The revelation came from a comment that either Ryan or Kate made towards the end of the presentation. It came along with the statement that they weren't trying to tell others what to do when it came to using the curriculum they had developed. The statement went along like this "there is a difference between intervention and therapy."
Yes.
There is a difference between following an intervention plan and making it therapy. I think this is a fundamental difference between music therapists and those who state that they use music with people for specific goals. (There are lots of them out there who state that they use music but the therapy part of the interaction is missing.)
I can give out ideas, and others can use them, but music therapists know that an idea is only as good as the therapeutic relationship.
So, I went to a presentation at National Conference which reinforced an idea that I had found but hadn't really been able to articulate. The presentation was Curriculum-Based Music Therapy: A Guide to Writing Structured Interventions and was led by Ryan Carroll, MS, MT-BC and Kate Stanley, MT-BC. This is a topic that I feel I know quite a bit about, and I attended to see if others were thinking the way I think. Turns out, they do!!
Anyway, I was sitting in the presentation, taking notes when Ryan Carroll said something that simply struck a chord with me. The conversation was about using conditional design during music therapy sessions - what I consider "flexibility" and "being in the moment" during sessions. Who knew that there was an official name for that?? Not me. Not until that presentation two Fridays ago. Now I do. That wasn't the revelation.
The revelation came from a comment that either Ryan or Kate made towards the end of the presentation. It came along with the statement that they weren't trying to tell others what to do when it came to using the curriculum they had developed. The statement went along like this "there is a difference between intervention and therapy."
Yes.
There is a difference between following an intervention plan and making it therapy. I think this is a fundamental difference between music therapists and those who state that they use music with people for specific goals. (There are lots of them out there who state that they use music but the therapy part of the interaction is missing.)
I can give out ideas, and others can use them, but music therapists know that an idea is only as good as the therapeutic relationship.
There you go. This is going to be the foundation of my thoughts for Sundays. There is a difference between intervention and therapy.
Thank you, Ryan and Kate, for the presentation and for the clarity. I was listening.
Comments
Post a Comment