Social Music Edgagement

MUE 550: Studies in Music Curricula

SoME Flyer

Summary

            The Social Music Engagement (SoME) program is designed to provide students a diverse opportunity to explore sounds. Within these experiences, students can interact in social ways, either within their own imagined realities or their lived experiences. Experimenting with sounds in ways that relate to their lives outside of the SoME classroom is a core principle of the design of the project based classroom. A foundation of allowing individual students to determine what they want to know so they can use that understanding in their own way is core part of the big idea guiding the SoME program: the human experience is affected in many ways.   This visionary program is relevant in the 21^st century classroom and evokes necessary changes to the traditions of music education.

The Big Picture

            The education system, as it is seen today, remains largely unchanged from its original manifestation in the United States. What have changed are the social and cultural influences that affect student population within those schools. The interaction of curriculum design, teacher execution, and student interest should drive the journey school classrooms embark on. Unfortunately, there is a disconnect between these three considerations that lead to one-sided representation in schools. These issues arise in all societies that offer a universal approach to education (Walker & Soltis, 2009). Additionally, external influences or mandates dictate

Music Education Issues and Challenges

            In music education, these challenges can be compounded by the idea that music exists in all social and cultural settings. The differences between these experiences can be profound, uniquely associated with specific communities, showing intense diversity in small geographic areas. The idea of trying to design a universal music education model that accounts for all ways of being musical is overwhelming to the average educator.

            The learning opportunities that influence music educators’ practices and pedagogical decisions are often drawn from experiences as a student, more than as a pre-service teacher. This “apprenticeship of observation” is powerful in the development of the educator and often leads to a perpetuation of old ideals, disregarding the evolving community in the classroom (Lortie, 1975). In addition, music educators are faced with trying to fulfill the assessment expectations that are emerging in the school community. The resources given to other content areas are often broad, with multiple potential approaches to assessment. In the music classroom, these resources are not provided. Music educators are left to interpret other’s materials, in order to satisfy expectations. The common practice in these situations is to find ways to justify current practices so that they can fit within the constraints of assessment and music educators do not engage in reflection on practice and curricular decisions.

…for more information, contact me at njohnstonmusic@gmail.com

Resources

Allsup, R. E., & 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.

Barrett, J. R. (n.d.). Planning for Understanding: A Reconceptualized View of the Music Curriculum. Music Educators Journal, 91(4), 21–25.

Barrett, J. R. (2007). Currents of change in the music curriculum. In L. Bresler (Ed.), International handbook of research in arts education (pp. 147–162). Dordecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Barrett, J. R., and K. K. Veblen. (2012). Meaningful connections in a comprehensive approach to the music curriculum. In G. E. McPherson & G. F. Welch (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Music Education, v. 1 (pp. 361–380). New York, NY: Oxford.

Bennett, P. D. (2013a). So, Why Sol-Mi? Music Educators Journal, 91(3), 43–49.

Campbell, M. R., Thompson, L. K., & Barrett, J. R. (2010). Constructing a personal orientation to music teaching. New York, NY: Routledge.

Darling-Hammond, L. & Barron, B. (2008). How can we teach for meaningful learning? In Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Educational Goals and Purposes: Developing a Curricular Vision for Teaching. In Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 169–200). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Eisner, E. (2002). Educational Aims, Objectives, and Other Aspirations. In The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Hanley, B., & Montgomery, J. (2005). Challenges to Music Education: Curriculum Reconceptualized. Music Educators Journal, 91(4), 17–20.

Hanley, B., & Montgomery, J. (2002). Contemporary Curriculum Practices and Their Theoretical Bases. In R. C. & C. P. Richardson (Ed.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning: A project of the Music Educators National Conference (pp. 113–143). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Helm, J. H.; Katz, L. G. (2011). Young Investigators: The Project Approach in the Early Years (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Henderson, J., & Kesson, K. R. (2004). The Arts of Inquiry: Toward Holographic Thinking. In Curriculum Wisdom: educational decisions in democratic societies (pp. 41–66). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Lortie, D. (1975). The limits of socialization. In Schoolteacher: A sociological study (pp. 55-81) . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (1975).

Regelski, T. (2002). On “ Methodolatry ” and Music Teaching as Critical and Reflective Praxis. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 10(2), 102–123.

Schubert, W. (2008). Curriculum Inquiry. In F. M. Connely, M. F. He & J. Phillion (Eds.), The sage handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schubert, W. H. (1986). Portrayal: The Curriculum Field. In Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Scott, S. J. (2012). Rethinking the Roles of Assessment in Music Education. Music Educators Journal, 98(3), 31–35. doi:10.1177/0027432111434742

Shuler, S. C. (2011). Music Education for Life: Building Inclusive, Effective Twenty-First-Century Music Programs. Music Educators Journal, 98(1), 8–13. doi:10.1177/0027432111418748

Slattery, P. (2006). Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era (2nd ed., p. 3). New York, NY: Routledge.

Small, C. (1998). Musicking. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Tobias, E. S. (2012). Hybrid spaces and hyphenated musicians : secondary students’ musical engagement in a songwriting and technology course. Music Education Research, 14(3), 329–346.

Walker D. F., J. Soltis & F. Schoonmaker. (2009). Curriculum and Aims (5th ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Williams, D. a. (2011). The Elephant in the Room. Music Educators Journal, 98(1), 51–57. doi:10.1177/0027432111415538

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.