Carumba !

Rethinking Music Education for the 21st Century Justin Carumba

The 21st Century presents many challenges for a music educator, either in the field or pre-service. Meeting the National Standards in music class is a task that all music educators must overcome. To make the task less difficult, the Three Artistic Processes have been developed in order to organize curricula and lesson plans around the standards. What is included in music curricula is always up for debate. Ultimately, a well-rounded music educator will present lessons and curricula that will cater to all types of learners and create transformative learning in the classroom. Pre-service Music Educators and the National Standards The National Standards for Music Education were published by the Music Educators National Conference (now the National Association for Music Education) in 1994. Basically, the standards say, that pre-kindergarten through twelfth-grade students should be engaged in a variety of activity during music classes (Riley 2009, par. 1). The nine National Standards include musical activities like singing, performing on instruments, improvising, composing, arranging, reading, notating, listening, analyzing. describing, evaluating, and understanding relationships (Riley 2009, p. 1).

! 2013 ! ! Introduction !

Carumba !2

The importance of the National Standards has risen since 1994; many publications and conference sessions have been on the topic of the Standards. At the same time, it is important for pre-service music educators to understand the National Standards. As posited by Cathy Benedict (2010) in Critical Issues in Music Education: Contemporary Theories and Practices, the music standards appear to provide...evidence to the fact that learning music is measurable and, as a result, a necessary basic (p. 155). In a research study observed by Patricia Riley (2009), a number of pre-service music educators enrolled in an introduction to music education class were asked about their awareness of the National Standards. Only 27% of the participants strongly agreed or agreed that they were aware of the National Standards (p. 9). In the same study by Riley (2009), after completing the course, 100% of the students had either strongly agreed or agreed to their awareness of the National Standards (p. 9). It is obvious that the knowledge of the standards is important for the pre-service music educator. Application of the National Standards can be a challenge for music educators. Cathy Benedict (2010) identifies that the nine music standards are presented as behavioral objectives, which consequently adhere more literally to what students must know and be able to do to demonstrate that [they] are proficient in the skills and knowledge framed by the content standards (p.154). Music educators currently in the field definitely feel this sort of pressure coming from the standards and meeting the expectations of all nine. In studies observed by Riley (2009), the standards relating to singing, listening, reading and notating were found to be favored most by a number of music educators (p. 10). The least favorable standards involved improvisation, composition, and understanding relationships (p. 11).

Carumba !3

Overall, it is obvious that music educators and pre-service music educators find the National Standards important. The application of the standards are difficult to put in to place. According to Riley (2009), music teacher preparation programs must include experiences focused on providing training in implementation of the standards, particularly the composing, understanding relationships, and improvising standards (pp. 12-13). Many pre-service and inservice music educators feel like they lack time and resources in their curriculums to properly meet the National Standards in their classrooms. When music teachers are being assessed, the case is often brought up of which standards are being met and which standards are relevant to a teachers classroom (Benedict 2010, p. 155). Another critique brought up by Benedict is that the standards do not take into account the process of learning, developmental issues, or philosophical views represented by leaders in American education (Benedict 2010, p. 155). How can we as music educators achieve the goals of the National Standards but also develop well-rounded music students? Better yet, how can we as music educators prepare our students for lifelong success in the 21st century? The National Standards and the Three Artistic Processes According to the mission of the New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards for Visual and Performing Arts, the arts enable personal, intellectual, social, economic, and human growth by fostering creativity and providing opportunities for expression beyond the limits of language (2009). On top of the National Standards, state standards apply to music educators as well. The difficulty to approach lessons and curricula with a sense of standards-based teaching increases.

Carumba !4

The Three Artistic Process model is a way for educators to organize their lessons and curricula. Scott Shuler (2011) posited the comprehensiveness, practicality, and authenticity of this model according to music education and the standards. The Three Artistic Processes provide a powerful model for organizing standards-based music teaching and assessment as well as a vision of the musically educated student...The Three Artistic Processes provide a means for teachers to deliver a balanced, comprehensive music program (p. 9). The three processes are Creating, Performing, and Responding. Shuler (2011) posits how the Performance process relates to the National Standards: successfully selecting literature for performance - step 1 of the Performing process - requires understanding technical (Content Standards 1 and 2), reading notation (Standard 5), analyzing form (Standard 6 and, to some extent, Standard 4 as well), and evaluating quality (Standard 7) as well as an understanding of style and cultural/historical context (Standard 9). Hence when Performing is taught as a thoughtful, student-centered process, students have opportunities to learn and apply most of the standards. The Creating and Respond processes similarly integrate multiple standards (pp. 9-10). The processes identify how learning is transferred by making music either through performance or creating or just by simply listening to music. Shuler (2011) states the ultimate goal of music education is to empower our students to continue active musical involvement as adults (p. 11). The artistic processes give students in the music classroom skills that will allow them to understand music education for life. This does not necessarily mean all students will graduate high school wanting to become music majors. Rather, students should experience a music education that teaches how to make their own musical decisions, how to self-assess, how to diagnose problems and areas of weakness and

Carumba !5

identify strategies to improve, and how to select music appropriate to abilities, for performing or listening (Shuler 2011, p. 11). Shuler (2011) mentions that the artistic processes are authentic to what musicians do on a day to day basis, from choosing repertoire to rehearsal to performance (p. 11). The teaching of the 21st-century skills with the artistic processes is highly stressed by Shuler (2011, p. 12). He puts emphasis on Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and Collaboration. Overall, music educators that use the Three Artistic Processes will have organized lessons and curricula. They will also be setting their students up for greater success in the future by empowering them to be more musically independent. Learning 21st-century skills in the music classroom will ultimately help students in the future. Preparing a Curriculum: What do I teach? Keeping in mind what was previously discussed, music educators need to actually come up with a curriculum. Frank Abrahams (2007) states that if music educators...are to teach a music curriculum that is liberating, are challenged to analyze present traditions and practices (p. 2). The questions arise: What is important to keep in my curriculum? What do I leave out? Abrahams (2007) posits, when music teachers realize that they are able to analyze, adapt, and manipulate curriculum in an unlimited number of ways, the open possibilities for creative experiences that are both liberating and transformational (p. 2). More issues arise: Should I use more popular music in my classroom or should I use more Western canon? Should I try using more world and multicultural music or American folk song? Dr. Abrahams (2007) relates these issues to critical pedagogy in the music classroom. He states when teachers connect school music to the childs own music, the music becomes

Carumba !6

empowering (p. 3) and it becomes their own. If urban school elementary students listen to artists like 50 Cent and Eminem, how are American folk songs relate to the students world? The same goes for students who are very much interested in Debussy, Mozart, or John Adams; the challenge is how are we supposed to give our students a well-balanced musical diet while still honoring their world? A solution: the MayDay group, established in 1992, sets its goals to apply critical theory and critical thinking to the purposes and practices of music education and to affirm the central importance of musical participation in human life, and thus, the vale of music in the general education of all people (www.maydaygroup.org). Essentially, the group has ideals for music educators to follow that ultimately promote musical open-mindedness. Who are my students? When it comes down to it, a good music educator has to base his curriculum off of the students and the capacity of learning they are able to do. Basing a curriculum strictly off of theory does not set students up for success; personalizing the curriculum to students needs and learning styles in order to create a transformative learning experience will greatly benefit all students. It is essential for all educators to cater to all different types of learners in order for their students to benefit the most. Bernice McCarthy states that her 4MAT Model requires that teachers establish their conceptual goals, create classroom climates that are conducive to honoring diversity, set up essential questions that go to the heart of the concepts, and create a total learning cycle complete with multiple kinds of assessments (2000, p. 123). The 4MAT Learning Type Measure outlines the different ways a student approaches classroom material. The four different types of learners can have their needs can be helped by knowing how to guide

Carumba !7

them to success. McCarthys philosophy is very much connected to John Deweys. As posited in Simpson et. al, a teacher as a navigator, therefore, needs to know where the educative ports are located and how these ports may be entered most successfully by each student (2005, p. 62). The role that the educator plays as a navigator for the students is an extremely important one, especially when dealing with learning types. In order to stray away from misguiding his student from a negative learning experience, an educator must not carelessly allow a students impulses to drive her onto educational shoals or over falls. Nor can [he] abandon the student to the stimuli and forces of an accidental or spontaneous environment (Simpson, Jackson, Aycock, 2005, p. 63). The student and the educator create a sort of partnership that allows the two work together and learn from each other. Essentially, this is critical pedagogy in its basic form. If the teacher were to be left out of the equation, however, there is only so much the student could learn by himself. Without an educator, the student will have to step through the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Founded by Lev Vygotsky, this area is the distance between the actual developmental level as a determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance [educator] (Smagorinsky 2007, p. 61). Educators should guide their students through the ZPD using critical pedagogy. This way, the educator not only reaches out to the student, but he also learns from the experiences that come from teaching the student. As they teach, educators should always be mindful of the learning types set out by McCarthy. Educators should be able to guide their students to the best path to educative success according to their students learning type. All in all, the educator should be the driving force for their students success, while learning alongside with the student.

Carumba !8

In transformative learning, information flows freely from learner to learner, and the teacher becomes a partner in the learning process (Wink 2011, p. 8). This allows for the learner to think freely and enables them to change their way of thought. This makes lessons and course material more memorable. Dewey points out that education, therefore, must begin with a psychological insight into the childs capacities, interests, and habits...these powers, interests, and habits must be continually interpreted - we must know what they mean. They must be translated into terms of their own social equivalents - into terms of what they are capable of in the way of social service (Dewey 1897, par. 6). By looking at what interests the learner, the educator can make wise decisions on making a lesson plan that will actively engage students and change their perception. School life should grow gradually out of home life...[it should include] the activities with which the child is familiar with at home...[if educators] exhibit these activities to the child and...[the] child will gradually learn the meaning of them [allowing him to play] his own part in relation to [the activities] (Dewey 1897, par. 11-12). Essentially, by taking things the student experiences at home into the classroom, Dewey believes that the student will be more focused and engaged in classroom activity. Transformative learning entails learning that is memorable for students. Usually, the course material is easily relatable to the students life, making the subject matter more enjoyable for the student. Planning transformative lessons should also change the educator as well. The educator should try to relate to the way of the students way of life in order to make the course material engaging. Educators must be aware of the knowledge of their students to prevent

Carumba !9

stoppage in their lesson flow. Ultimately, students should be leaving transformative lessons with something they can remember and something that was relatable to their world. Conclusion Music educators, pre-service and in-service, need to be aware of the 21st Century and the challenges they face. Meeting the National Standards is always a challenge, but with the Three Artistic Processes model, organizing a curriculum around the standards is relatively simple. Deciding what to put in the curriculum is definitely up to the educators discretion; critical theory and critical pedagogy take great effect when deciding what is important to teach. Overall, to be a successful music educator, the teacher must ultimately know how to cater to the needs of the students and create transformative learning in the classroom.

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Carumba !10

Reference List Abrahams, F. (2007). Musicing Paolo Freire: A critical pedagogy for music education. In P. McLaren & J. L. Kncheloe (Eds.). Critical pedagogy where are we now (pp. 223-238). New York: Peter Lang. Retrieved Online.

Benedict, C. (2010). National Standards in Music. In Ables, H. F. & Custodero, L. A. (Eds.). Critical issues in music education contemporary theory and practice (pp. 154-155). Oxford University Press: 2010.

! Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed. School Journal. 15. 77-80. ! MayDay Group (2013). <www.maydaygroup.org> ! McCarthy, B. (2000). About Teaching: 4MAT in the Classroom. About Learning, Inc., 2000. !
New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards for Visual and Performing Arts (2009).

Riley, P. E. (2009). Pre-service music educators perceptions of the national standards for music education. Visions of Research in Music Education, 14. Retrieved from <http://www-usr.rider.edu/~vrme/>

! ! ! !

Shuler, S. C. (2011). Music education for life: the three artistic processes--paths to lifelong 21st-century skills through music. Music Educators Journal, 97, 9 (pp. 9-13). Simpson, D.J.; Jackson, M.J.B.; & Aycock, J.C. (2005). John Dewey and the art of teaching: Toward reflective and imaginative practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Smagorinsky, P. (2007). Vygotsky and the social dynamics of classrooms. The English Journal. 97(2). 61-66. Wink, J. (2011). Critical pedagogy: notes from the real world. (4 ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Incorporated.