Fostering Lifelong Music Making

Once upon a time, not too long ago, I believed that I would live out the rest of my professional life as a tenure track professor, teaching future music teachers and shaping the world of music education through research, scholarship and advocacy. For any number of reasons, that's not where I currently find myself, but my interest and investment in the future of music education has not diminished, nor has my love of teaching, researching and writing. This article was written by me some time ago as part of my comprehensive exams for my PhD, please excuse how annoyingly academic it is at times-- 'tis the nature of the beast.

Every three years the National Association of Music Merchants (NAMM) in conjunction with the International Music Products Association commissions the research based consulting firm Gallup to take the temperature of the American public with regard to music consumership and attitudes toward music. As a part of the Housewright symposium on the future of music education in his response to Judith Jellison’s How can all people continue to be involved in meaningful music participation? Warrick L. Carter uses data from the 1997 Gallup survey to illustrate the vast amount of students who pack up their instruments upon graduation from music programs, with 55% stopping at age eighteen and another 24% stopping before age thirty-five. This amounts to a nearly 80% attrition rate. More recent figures indicate not only a loss in participation upon graduation, but dropping percentages of students enrolled in school music at the high school level over the past twenty years (Williams, 2011).?

As one of many papers commissioned for the Housewright Symposium on the future of music education, Carter along with Jellison highlight a de facto goal of music education--lifelong music participation. There are no explicit statements in the national standards from the National Association for Music Education (NAfME) that denote an interest in music education to foster lifelong music participation, but most educators and scholars would agree that it is the overarching goal that drives our work. And we are failing.?

Data from the NAMM surveys indicate a fairly steady and strong market for music consumership ranging from pianos and guitars to band instruments. An excerpt from the 2014 global report reflects the lack of music participation after age thirty, “Music and music making have broad-based appeal, but the industry’s largest number of customers still reside in the under-30 age bracket” (NAMM Global Report, 2014, p. 9 ) and to quote one industry manufacturer, “As long as parents are interested in enriching the lives of their children, we have a market for our products” (NAMM Global Report, 2014, p. 18). Another interesting highlight from the NAAM Global Report pertains to the overall value of the U.S. music market at $6.7 billion and the most profitable category, fretted products (including guitar, bass, ukulele, etc) bringing in approximately $1.32 million in profit. (pp. 6-7). With music consumership “strong” in the eyes of the industry, should we be concerned, are we doing everything we can for our students? As a field are we concerned with producing musical consumers alone? Turino (2008) asserts that “music is not a unitary art form, but rather..this term refers to fundamentally distinct types of activities that fulfill different needs and ways of being human” and further, “that musical participation and experience are valuable for the processes of personal and social integration that make us whole” (p. 1). Personally, these kinds of statements make me queasy, focusing on the consumerism and profit our students represent, but these statements shine a light on one of several reasons that school music finds itself set apart from all other musics, and never really carries over into adult life. As long as educators and parents value the current model and by extension market of music education, we will continue to see students pack up their instruments when they leave our classrooms.?

An overly simplistic view of the data from NAAM indicates that perhaps simply replacing traditional ensembles with guitar and ukulele ensembles will solve all of our woes. Or perhaps a rock band class--that is sure to engage a broader base of students than traditional Western classical instrumental ensembles? Sadly, the issues facing instrumental music education are not solved that easily, and the appeal of the rock/garage band, guitar or ukulele ensemble is not a panacea for music education (Allsup & Benedict, 2008; Kruse, 2016). Adapting school music to be more relevant, inclusive and engaging into adulthood has less to do with musical genre/style/ensemble type and more to do with the practices music educators use to supply students with the skills, tools, and knowledge to make music throughout their lives.?

This past summer, I found myself walking the streets of Glasgow, somewhat melancholy and travel-worn and found my way into a bookshop. I remembered that someone had recommended Hunger Makes Me A Modern Girl by Carrie Brownstein (2015) of Sleater-Kinney and Portlandia fame, and so I asked the clerk to direct me to a copy. I snatched their last copy and toddled off into the night. On my flight back to the United States I cracked open the cover for the first time and found the book I had picked up for fan girl leisure was actually a case study on the yearning and need to be musical, informal music learning, and examples of the opportunities to create a more open conception of music education.?

Early in the memoir, Brownstein describes that the music and concerts she attended in her youth were “mystifying and inaccessible”, that “the music was in the room and in my body, yet I had no idea how it had been assembled or how to break it apart” (p. 7). She describes a need for a vocabulary, a means to understanding, and a path to learning--a music education. Later, still lamenting her lack of expertise she writes,

When people gripe about girls’ rock camps and schools of rock, saying music, especially popular forms, can’t be institutionalized or taught, maybe part of that is true, but I always think about that night, How if the process had been demystified, less of a private club or a secret code, we wouldn’t have sat in the dark theater after we played, watching Codeine deliver a taut, deliberate set while we felt undeserving of having ever been onstage, blaming one another and ourselves, mad and heartbroken (p.75).

Supplying our students with the means to understand, break apart, and create music (regardless of genre) is essential in the fostering lifelong music participation.???

In a chapter titled “Schooled” Brownstein articulates,?

I didn’t really think of myself as a musician. I don’t know if I would consider myself a musician now, not in the technical sense. I don’t know much theory, I play by instinct and feel, I could probably get schooled by an eight-year-old on tonics and inversions. But back then, the word “musician” had a professional characteristic to it that would have made it even more alienating and anathema” (Brownstein, 2015, p. 79).

Brownstein’s feelings are not uncommon. I imagine that many of us, no doubt, have encountered students like Brownstein, but it is possible that some of us have not as the type of student she represents may never cross the threshold of our classrooms. What creates this feeling? There is a complexity tied to the title musician and a general discomfort in identifying oneself as musical (Salvador, 2014). Despite her own doubts and the loaded trappings associated with the definition, Brownstein is indeed a musician, and a rare one at that--part of a small population that continue to make music in their adult lives.

Starting as early as 1935, educators, philosophers, and scholars have been contributing to a constant drone bemoaning the lack of carryover of school music, calling for the research of lifelong music participation, and the need for music education to adapt (Emett Wilson, 1935; Kendel, 1946; Myers, 1995; Kratus, 2007; Miksza, 2013; Tobias, 2013). From Tanglewood to the Housewright declaration and Vision 2020 to present, music education shows a sometimes blatant disregard for the writing on the wall or in the words of David A. Williams (2011), “the elephant in the room” (p.51). The past two decades have added even more voices to the discourse about large ensembles of the past 100 years and the problems within the prevailing teaching practices of such ensembles (Allsup, 2003; Allsup & Benedict, 2008; Jorgenson, 2014; Mantie, 2012; Williams, 2011). Despite Kratus’ (2007) declaration that music education had reached a tipping point paired with a vast array of literature proposing a way forward (Miksza, 2013; Tobias, 2013; Turner, 2013; Regelski, 2013) music education remains largely static.

Ball (2012), in his seminal work concerning policy, politics, and schools offers an explanation for the disconnect between research and practice in education, asserting that education research is often used to merely justify a political position, little more. In the United States, there seems to be a preoccupation with debating the value and legitimacy of musical forms and skills outside of the Western classical paradigm (Cutietta, 1991; Mantie, 2013). Additionally, within music education, there is a constant need to reinforce the value, worth, and legitimacy of our programs and large ensembles. Our own feelings of inadequacy and lack of legitimacy are echoed in our students and communities, myself included. For me, formal experiences in large ensembles have led me to a feeling of lack (of skills, musicking, engaging).? After 23 years of formal music training and experiences, I am selling my horn, the ultimate symbol of my musicianship. In many ways, the same but quite different from Brownstein, I do not know if I truly consider myself a musician, at least not in the real, active sense. As a profession, we have exalted ideas of elitism, specialization and extreme talent that alienates musicians like Brownstein and the music industry has done the same, exalting their own brand of expertise, practice, and talent that equally alienates, separates and creates division. The models we have demonstrated for our students and communities have created deeply embedded definitions of what it means to be musical, types of musicians and musical activities that are valid, legitimate and worthy (Gates, 1991; Gaztambide-Fernandez, 2010).?

The answers to our woes as a profession are as unique and complex as the communities where we teach. It is not as simple as keeping and extending the status quo to create more community bands, or switching the paradigm to a garage band--neither work for everyone and as we know, music participation is not one size fits all(Allsup & Benedict, 2008). A solution or suggestion that is easily given in regard to the disconnect between school music and everything else is to diversify the courses you offer to students that include the varied musics that we experience outside of schools. If we can create relevant, engaging courses for students that they can apply to their daily lives, that in turn will foster lifelong music participation. Perhaps, but what is the process or procedure for proposing a new class or even changing the structure of an existing class? As evidenced above, there is a lack of communication or impact between the research ventures of education and actual practice (Hargreaves, 1997).?

As a research community, we are hyper aware of the shortcomings and successes of music programs of the last century. Practitioners, while aware, live in a reality that is more complex than simply applying the models and practices suggested by research-- if they even have access to said research. Teachers in the trenches may want to flip the metaphorical table of music education practice in their districts, but flipping tables rarely accomplishes more than making a mess (creating confusion)? and potentially hurting those around the table (students). I suggest that we reset the table, invite everyone (administrators, teachers, students, parents) and serve a nourishing meal that suits the cultural and dietary needs of everyone at the table. The large ensemble, as it stands, and the practice of specialization has a tendency to breed exclusivity and a set of skills that does little to serve students after graduation. Can the large ensemble help foster a versatile set of skills that could be applied to the diverse music making that exists outside of schools?

While the initial effort in adapting the large ensemble to foster lifelong music participation lies with the teacher (aka director or conductor) the overall movement of the class is away from the teacher as leader, master and sole arbiter of knowledge, to a more democratic, dialogic and open conception of leadership and learning (Allsup, 2016). The majority of the work lies being open to codesigning instruction, dialing into the class and school culture, and communicating with and listening to students. Students and teachers become joint stakeholders with a responsibility to foster learning and growth. It is important to point out, while the teacher may not lead in the traditional sense, they still maintain a certain level of authority through their subject area knowledge (Freire, 1995).? Modifying the conception of teacher as leader invites in informal learning practices that allow the roles of teacher and learner to flex and flow with ease. Describing a peer teaching moment, Brownstein (2005) writes

He’d show me chords by way of playing… I’d play along to the two chord song while Jeremy sang. He was patient with me, encouraging. I’d go home and practice, feeling that even with just a few chords, everything was now in my grasp” (p. 53).

Informal learning practices like peer teaching and peer critique cannot be forced or led by the teacher, asking students to provide feedback to different sections. While it is a good practice and creates a dialogue, it is artificial, forced. The interaction described above is for lack of a better word, authentic. Both parties chose to participate and through their dialogue and process, the student left with skills, motivation, and confidence-- crucial characteristics that drive music making. Additionally, showcasing more informal learning practices, they used no notation and utilized listening and imitation to learn the chords. Reading notation is a valuable skill, but equally valuable is the ability to learn a tune by ear. Bringing ear based music learning to the classroom can only serve to enhance the abilities and skills of our students (Woody, 2012).?

Participatory forms of music making, in contrast to presentational forms are inherently more open, flexible and dialogic-- allowing and depending on players to fill different roles with varied levels of difficulty (Thibeault, 2015; Turino, 2008). At the heart of the participatory model is the experience and the people experiencing it. Brownstein (2015) frequently articulates that the experience of music making is not necessarily or often about the music, but rather the people with whom we experience the music. This concept is echoed in the experiences of students in traditionally structured ensembles, but the disconnect occurs when they are no longer grouped with those people or led in these music making activities. Participatory models are present in every community, in churches, among friends, at contra dances and Friday night karaoke. Incorporating participatory practice to the large ensemble can be as simple as taking one class a week to pick and learn a simple tune, arranging and tweaking the form to suit the students you have in the ensemble collaboratively. Making space outside of regular classes is also important-- to reach those students who do not identify with, cannot register for or know what our music classes can offer. Thibeault (2015) highlights how after-school and community groups can expose new groups of students to music, infuse life into dying programs, and provide opportunities for learners of all ages to participate in music making. Taking these practices further, we can create space in the community (school and outside) to offer these types of participatory experiences. The space created within the ensemble and throughout the community will sow seeds that promote lifelong participation. Each experience will also add to the shared understanding of what music making (in turn music education) looks like for the community. To change the status quo, to create cultural overlap and to foster lifelong music the music classroom must open and extend to reach and educate students of all ages.??

In society today, the lives of our students exist in a variety of places, many virtual. We do not teach in a world where information and learning is closed. Students regularly converse via text messages and social media, learn and share music through videos on platforms like Youtube, and produce their own music with programs like garageband and audacity. Simply creating a virtual space for your students to interact, create, and discuss can completely change the climate of the classroom, again blurring the lines between teacher and student (Turner, 2013). Technology and the internet are offer a unique opportunity to connect students and create a dialogic, democratic, lifelong conception of music education. Interacting with and using these mediums are everyday habits for students, by incorporating them into our teaching practice we can extend our classrooms further and with it, the potential for carryover into adult life.?

All of these actions are in many ways uncomfortable. For many of us, these practices are foreign and strange, but allowing oneself to be vulnerable and fallible with students is not a failing, it is an exercise in trust-- an essential characteristic of a democratic, dialogic conception of education. The implications for creating motion toward this more open form of music education concern the classroom teacher, but also future classroom teachers and the programs that educate them. Open forms must reach further than K-12 music education. There is no greater stronghold for a master-apprentice model than higher education. Creating opportunities for current and future teachers to participate in more open, informal, and participatory modes of music making, some of the mystery can be taken away and a certain level of comfort or familiarity created.??

The discussion surrounding the traditional large ensemble and the need for educators to adapt classes to foster lifelong music making is both hidden and omnipresent. The failings of music education with regard to the large ensemble are not with the music it teaches or the traditions that drive it. However, continued debate on the value of other music is a waste of time, what each of us value is subjective. There are common threads that connect different musics but there is not one form of music that is best or universal. Working to create more open conceptions of teaching within the large ensemble, using informal and participatory practices in conjunction with technology can help supply our students and by extension members of the community with the skills and tools to enjoy a lifetime of music participation.?

Allsup, R. E. (2016). Remixing the Classroom: Toward an Open Philosophy of Music

Education. Indiana University Press.

Allsup, R., & Benedict, C. (2008). The Problems of Band: An Inquiry into the Future of

Instrumental Music Education. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 16(2),

156-173. Retrieved from https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/40327299

Ball, S. J. (2012). The micro-politics of the school: Towards a theory of school organization.

Routledge.

Brownstein, C. (2015). Hunger makes me a modern girl. London. Virago.

Cutietta, R. (1991). Popular Music: An Ongoing Challenge. Music Educators Journal,77(8),

26-29. Retrieved from https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/3398149

Freire, P. (1995). A dialogue: Culture, language, and race. Harvard Educational Review,

65(3), 377-403.

Gates, J. T. (1991). Music participation: Theory, research, and policy. Bulletin of the Council

for Research in Music Education, 1-35.

Gaztambide-Fernández, R. (2010). Wherefore the Musicians? Philosophy of Music Education

Review, 18(1), 65-84. doi:10.2979/pme.2010.18.1.65

Hargreaves, D. (1997). In Defence of Research for Evidence-Based Teaching: A Rejoinder to

Martyn Hammersley. British Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 405-419. Retrieved

from https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/1502078

Housewright Symposium on the Future of Music Education, Madsen, C. K., & Music

Educators National Conference (U.S.). (2000). Vision 2020: The Housewright

Symposium on the Future of Music Education.

Jorgensen, E. (2014). Values and Philosophizing about Music Education. Philosophy of Music

Education Review, 22(1), 5-21. doi:10.2979/philmusieducrevi.22.1.5

Kendel, J. (1946). Music Education Carries On. Music Educators Journal, 32(6), 8-8.

Retrieved from https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/3386902

Kratus, J. (2007). Centennial Series: Music Education at the Tipping Point. Music Educators

Journal, 94(2), 42-48. Retrieved from

https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/4539675

Kruse, A.J. (2016) 'They wasn't makin' my kinda music': a hip-hop musician's perspective

on school, schooling, and school music, Music Education Research, 18:3, 240-253,

doi: 10.1080/14613808.2015.1060954

Mantie, R. (2012). Bands and/as Music Education: Antinomies and the Struggle for

Legitimacy. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 20(1), 63-81.

doi:10.2979/philmusieducrevi.20.1.63

Mantie, R. (2013). A Comparison of "Popular Music Pedagogy" Discourses. Journal of

Research in Music Education, 61(3), 334-352. Retrieved from

https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/41999709

Miksza, P. (2013). The Future of Music Education: Continuing the Dialogue about Curricular

Reform. Music Educators Journal, 99(4), 45-50. Retrieved from

https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/43289016

Myers, D. E. (1995). Lifelong learning: An emerging research agenda for music education.

Research studies in music education, 4(1), 21-27.

NAMM Global Report. (2014). Retrieved March 02, 2017, from

https://docplayer.net/6220528-The-2014-namm-global-report.html

Regelski, T. (2013). Another Perspective: A Response to "Toward Convergence" Music

Educators Journal, 99(4), 37-42.

Thibeault, M. D. (2015). Music education for all through participatory ensembles. Music

educators journal, 102(2), 54-61.

Tobias, E. (2013). Toward Convergence: Adapting Music Education to Contemporary Society

and Participatory Culture. Music Educators Journal, 99(4), 29-36. Retrieved from

https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/43289013

Turino, T. (2008). Music as social life: The politics of participation. Chicago and London.

University of Chicago Press.

Turner, C. (2013). Another Perspective: Crowdsourcing Our Ensemble Rehearsals. Music

Educators Journal, 100(2), 68-71. Retrieved from

https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/43288817

Williams, D. (2011). The Elephant in the Room. Music Educators Journal, 98(1), 51-57.

Retrieved from https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/23012641

Wilson, M. (1935). Why School Music Does Not "Carry Over" Music Educators Journal, 22(2),

31-31. Retrieved from https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/3384994

Woody, R. (2012). Playing by Ear: Foundation or Frill? Music Educators Journal, 99(2),

82-88. Retrieved from https://0-www.jstor.org.library.unl.edu/stable/23364292