It is not an accident that most piano trios are named for the pianist, and that the pianist often functions, or is seen to function, as the leader of the band. This pairing of one instrument with one structural element can set up hierarchies within the trio, because audiences tend to focus on melody, making the piano seem like the most important instrument. Most commonly, the piano takes the melody, the bass plays harmony, and the drums handle rhythm. Given the three structural elements of melody, harmony, and rhythm, the piano trio is ideally positioned, because each of the trio’s instruments can be responsible for one of the musical elements. The way rhythm unfolds can make a song sound like it is dancing, skipping, stumbling, flowing, or others. Rhythm is responsible for creating the timing of a song, not only setting the pace, but also how the song “moves”. Harmony provides context, and can make a given melody sound happy, sad, contemplative, or a wide range of other moods and feelings. Harmony consists of the notes played simultaneously with the melody. For example, if someone hummed the song “happy birthday”, most people would recognize it, even if the words weren’t being sung, because the melody carries the essence of the song. Melody consists of the progression of notes that give a song its identity. Music is generally regarded as being composed of three main elements: melody, harmony, and rhythm. One of the reasons that piano trios are ubiquitous is that the structure of the trio mirrors the structure of music itself. Piano trios can stand alone, or can serve as the backbone (called a “rhythm section”) for larger groupings of instruments. The jazz piano trio is one of the most fundamental and popular group formats, and consists of a piano, a bass, and drums.
In this essay, we examine two of the era’s leading jazz groups as models of pre- and post-transformation practice, and identify lessons learned for today’s healthcare environment. It turns out that the field of jazz music underwent a similar interprofessional transformation in the early 1960s. While both areas are important, we posit that additional issues lie at the heart of interprofessional practice, and will require significant cultural transformation before the ideal can be achieved. Efforts to foster more rapid adoption have focused mainly on structurally-based barriers to interprofessional practice or educational deficiencies of practitioners.
While these are laudable goals and have been demonstrated to foster a variety of positive outcomes,, ,, ] healthcare practice on the ground has been slow to evolve toward an interprofessional ideal. At its best, interprofessional practice entails seamless communication across disciplinary boundaries, broad participation in and shared responsibility for healthcare decision-making among multiple professions, and high quality team-based practice. There has been concurrent interest in interprofessional education, with articulation of core competencies by several international groups.
Over the last two decades, interprofessional collaborative practice has been increasingly embraced as an ideal model for the delivery of safe, high quality, and patient-centered healthcare.
0 kommentar(er)
