Sight Reading Philosophy

Dean Rieger
Secondary Choral Methods

My philosophy on sight reading in an ensemble setting is that the music must be substantial and
meaningful. In other words, 4-8 measures of a random melody isnt as valuable as sight reading 2-4 part
accessible choral repertoire. It will be more effective and more educational than the aforementioned
examples and it opens the door to possible teachable moments through either history or theory. Sight
reading easier Bach Chorales, or renaissance motets will give the students a more valuable musical
experience, and requires more focus on their part, not to mention it is also more of a challenge. I think it
is not unreasonable to have students read these excerpts on solfege in moveable do, and la/do based
minor. The solfege syllables can really be helpful in pieces that are tonal and they also establish
intervallic relationships in the students ears.
I believe that sight reading these types of pieces will help the ensemble when learning new
concert repertoire and being more comfortable in all sight reading situations. It is harder to connect as a
singer to simple melodies than it is to legitimate choral repertoire and therefore the students would feel
more invested to do well when singing, especially if they are not told the piece is just for sight reading
purposes. If the teacher pulls out a piece and starts it off by saying that it doesnt really have a purpose
and that it is just an exercise, the students are far less likely to care. That being said, sight reading should
be approached by the teacher as an extremely meaningful experience, that way it comes off to the
students as a meaningful experience. It must be consistently reinforced as necessary and valuable. If
approached correctly, it can help the students immensely in their studies of music as a whole.
RESOURCES

As I mentioned above, the resources I would use are the most accessible Bach chorales, easier
motets, such as Sicut Cervus, or O Magnum Mysterium. The Oxford Series is also pretty valuable. My
experience with those is limited to Bryans sight reading course here at CSU, but from what I have seen,
they can be meaningful and very useful. Masterworks Press, CPDL and IMSLP are all great resources for
finding the 2-4 part repertoire I mentioned, especially masterworks press because they have the
archives based on difficulty.
PROCEDURE
When sight reading the chorales or motets, it is really as simple as pulling those pieces out at
the beginning of each rehearsal and just singing through it on solfege or text for maybe 5-10 minutes or
so. I think if too much time is spent it becomes rehearsal and not sight reading so there has to be a
balance and the choir cant spend too much time on a piece or section of a piece when sight reading.
Obviously, the point is to read the music without learning it beforehand. I would give the choir a minute
or so to look through it and figure out some solfege syllables, and then start the piece.
ASSESSMENT
Ensemble assessment would be performance based on a general scale. Were they or were they
not able to have some success on the allotted sections. As for individual assessment, once or twice a
semester, pulling each student out to sight read a few phrases of something new and having a scale for
how accurate they were with pitches and what system they used to accomplish it would be the
assessment. I would write comments on where they got lost or why they got thrown off, where they hit
note issues, etc.