This is to certify that the dissertation entitled MULTICULTURAL-World MUSIC EDUCATION AND MUSIC TEACHER EDUCATION AT THE BIG TEN SCHOOLS: IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS AND SUGGESTIONS presented by YIANNIS CHRISTOS MIRALIS has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D . MUSIC degree in Creams, Came—H Major professor 6" Date Illa/0'2 MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 I LIBRARY Michigan State i University I PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date If requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE ' DATE DUE 6/01 c:/CIRC/DateDue.p65op.1s MULTICULTURAL-WORLD MUSIC EDUCATION AND MUSIC TEACHER EDUCATION AT THE BIG TEN SCHOOLS: IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS AND SUGGESTIONS. By Yiannis Christos Miralis A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of ' DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Music 2002 \.__ ABSTRACT MULTICULTURAL-WORLD MUSIC EDUCATION AND MUSIC TEACHER EDUCATION AT THE BIG TEN SCHOOLS: IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS AND SUGGESTIONS. By Yiannis Christos Miralis The purpose of this study was (a) to examine the current multicultural-world music course offerings at the Big Ten universities and (b) to explore the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty regarding multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education. The following questions were explored: (I) What are the current multicultural-world course offerings available for undergraduate music education majors at the Big Ten schools? (2) What are the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education? (3) What are the suggestions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding issues of multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education? Data were gathered through document analysis and through thirty-three interviews with ethnomusicology and music education faculty members at nine of the Yiannis Christos Miralis eleven Big Ten schools. Data were then coded and emergent themes were categorized under two broad categories. Chapter IV presents findings in relation to the first research question on available course offerings. Chapter V presents findings in relation to the second question on identified problems and Chapter VI presents the findings in regards to the third research question on suggestions for improvement. Implications for music education and music teacher education are discussed throughout the document. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The successful completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without the help and support of numerous people who provided necessary assistance and encouragement throughout the writing of this document. I would like to thank them individually and collectively for all they have done for me personally and professionally. To my adviser, Dr. Colleen Conway—Thank you for being the chair of my committee and for your valuable comments and guidance until the very end of this project. You helped immensely in its development, shaping and completion, as well as in my own engagement and interest in qualitative research. To Dr. John Kratus, Dr. Michael Largey and Dr. Cindy Taggart—Thank you for your continuous support and assistance throughout my four years at Michigan State University. Through your courses you shaped who I now am as a music educator. To Dr. Kratus, thanks for helping me keep the big picture always in my mind. To Dr. Largey, thanks for guiding my interest in diverse musics, ethnography and ethnomusicology. To Dr. Taggart, thanks for your carefirl reading and helpful comments on this manuscript. To Dr. Terese Volk—Thank you for agreeing in being a member of my committee. Your knowledge and expertise was very valuable. To Tavia Zerman—Thank you for the time and the accurate transcriptions of the numerous interviews. I could not have finished this project without your help. To the thirty—three professors from the ten Big-Ten schools—Thank you for generously sharing your time and invaluable insights with me. Your diverse perspectives, opinions and ideas enabled me to get a better understanding of the complexity and iv importance of multicultural-world music education. This study would not have been possible without you and for that I am extremely gratefirl. To my family—~Thank you for your continuous support and unconditional love throughout my life and especially during my studies far away from home. To Doretta—Thank you for your love, encouragement and support. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ..................... . ..................................................... LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................ CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ................................. . ... . ..................................... Multicultural Music Education . Statement of the Problem .. .. .. . .. . Purpose and Research Questions Definition ofTerms .... .. . .. CHAPTER II Definition of Terms ................................................................. Culture .................................. Multicultural Education. .............. Multiethnic Education ..... ’ .......................... . ...................... Multicultural and Multiethnic Music Education ............. . ............ Choice of Terminology ..................................................... Rationale for World Music Education .............................................. Guidelines and Approaches Towards Multicultural-World Music Education in Elementary and Secondary Schools ........................................ Multicultural-World Music Teacher Education .................................... Research Examining Multicultural-World Music Teacher Education Programs ............................................................... Problems with Education in World Music .......................................... Universal Versus Contextual Thinking in Music ......................... Ineffective Teaching Approach of World Music ........................... Availability and Quality of Multicultural-World Music Materials .. Lack of Teacher Training in World Music ...................... . ............ Literature on the Big Ten Universities . .. Research 1n Music... .. . .. Research in Music Education Other Big Ten Research .. ........... Conclusion ..................................... vi xi Vivi-hm... 9 9 10 11 l4 I4 16 20 23 3O 35 40 40 45 SO 52 53 S3 54 S4 55 CHAPTER III Selection Procedure.................................. Criteria for Selection ....................................................... 58 Data Concerning Multicultural-World Course Offerings in Music . . . .. 61 Interview Data ....................................................................... 62 Interview Data Collection ................................................. 64 Theoretical Framework 67 Phenomenology ............................................................. 68 Heuristic Inquiry ........................................................... 69 Personal Background ................................................................ 7O Validity ................................................................................ 73 Grounded Theory .................................................................... 78 Data Analysis ........................................................................ 8O Multicultural-World Music Courses at the Big Ten Schools .......... 81 Perceptions of Ethnomusicology and Music Education Faculty Regarding Multicultural and World Music Education 84 Revised Research Questions ................................................ 88 CHAPTER IV COURSE OFFERINGS IN MULTICULTURAL-WORLD MUSIC AT THE BIG TEN SCHOOLS .................................. . ................................... 90 Category 1: Survey courses ....................................................................... 90 Category II: Geographic Courses ................................................... 92 CategoryIII: Interdisciplinary Courses 95 Category IV: Ethnomusicological Courses ........................................ 97 Category V: Performance Courses ................................................. 98 Category VI: Pedagogical Courses .................................................. IOO Category VII: Multicultural Courses .............................................. 103 Category VIII: Intracultural Courses .............................................. 104 Discussion ............................................................................. 108 CHAPTER V PERCEPTIONS OF ETHNOMUSICOLOGY AND MUSIC EDUCATION FACULTY REGARDING THE PROBLEMATIC DEFINITION OF MULTICULTURAL MUSIC EDUCATION ..................................... 1 16 Theme (1): Unclear and Ambiguous Definition of “Multicultural Music Education” ............................................................................. 1 17 Opinions of Ethnomusicology Professors ......................................... 1 19 136 Opinions of Music Education Professors ........................................... vii CHAPTER VI PERCEPTIONS OF ETHNOMUSICOLOGY AND MUSIC EDUCATION FACULTY REGARDING THE PROBLEMATIC NATURE OF MULTICULTURAL-WORLD MUSIC EDUCATION ........................ 150 Theme (2): No Flexibility in the Music Education Undergraduate Degree 150 Theme (3): A Predominantly White Student Body that has no Contact With Multiculturalism and World Music ....................................... Theme (4): A Predominantly White Faculty Body that has no Contact With 160 Multiculturalism and World Music ....................................... Theme (5): Issues of Politics and Power Within the Music Department ...... 162 155 Theme (6): Insincere Commitment from Departments and Universities ...... 170 Theme (7): Limited Understanding of the Broader Cultural and Social Context ......................................................................... 177 Theme (8): Superficial Implementation and Limited Successful Models Available ..................................................................... 182 Theme (9): Quantity and Quality of World Music Materials ................... 186 Opinions of Ethnomus1cology Professors ........................... ..... 190 CHAPTER VII SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF MULTICULTURAL-WORLD MUSIC EDUCATION ............................................................... 192 Theme (1): Incorporate Multicultural and World Music Perspectives I93 Throughout the Music Curriculum ..................................... Theme (2): Require a World Music Survey Class Specifically for Music 198 Majors ........................................................................ Theme (3): Offer Numerous Geographic Courses in World Music ............ 203 Theme (4): Offer Numerous Performance Courses in World Music .......... 206 Theme (5): Encourage a Closer Collaboration Between Music Education and Ethnomusicology ........................................................ 213 Theme (6): Examine All Music in its Cultural and Social Context ............ 216 Theme (7): Incorporate the Cultural Diversity Found in the Immediate Community ................................................................... 219 Theme (8): Provide Opportunities for Concerts and Workshops 1n World Music .......................................................................... 223 Theme (9): Hire Diverse Faculty ................................................... 225 230 Theme (10): Attract More Diverse Students ...................................... Theme (1 1): Facilitate Observations and Student Teaching Possibilities in 231 Culturally Diverse settings .................................................. Theme (12): Become Bimusical by Studying a Second Culture in Depth 236 Theme (13): Include Opportunities and Experiences With Improvrsation and Aural Learning of Music .............................................. 238 Theme (14): Provide Opportunities for Music Study Abroad, in a Culturally Diverse Setting ............................................................... 240 Theme (15): Offer a Multicultural and/or World Music Specialization in the ...... 245 Undergraduate Degree in Music Education .. .. .. . viii CHAPTER VIII 248 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................... Summary of the Study ...................... . ......................................... 248 Part I ........................................................................... 248 Part H ........................................................................... 251 Conclusions ............................................................................ 253 Need for More Discussion Over the Appropriate Terminology ....... 253 Need for a Strong Ethnomusicology Program Within the Department .......................................................... 256 Need for Change in Music Education and Music Teacher Education 258 Change in Primary and Secondary Music Education .......... 260 Change in Pedagogy ............................................... 261 Change in Music Teacher Education. ........................... 263 Change in Music Programs in Higher Education. ... . 265 Hire Faculty With Diverse Backgrounds, Interests and Experiences. 267 Recommendations for Further Research ..... . ..................................... 270 APPENDIX A. LIST OF ETHNOMUSICOLOGY AND MUSIC EDUCATION FACULTY WHO WERE IN'I‘ERVIEWED ...................................... 275 APPENDIX B. INTERVIEW PROTOCOL .............................................. 278 279 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Multicultural-World Music Course Offerings at the Big Ten Schools ...... I 10 Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4: Figure 5: Figure 6: Figure 7: Figure 8: LIST OF FIGURES Listing of Survey Courses ............................................... , ..... 91 Listing ofGeographic Courses 93 Listing of Interdisciplinary Courses ......................................... 96 Listing of Ethnomusicological Courses ......... , . . ... ........................ 97 Listing of Performance Courses ... . ...... . ............................. . ..... 99 Listing of Pedagogical Courses .............................................. 102 Listing of Multicultural Courses ........ . ..................................... 104 Listing of Intracultural Courses ............................................ . 105 xi CHAPTER I Introduction The vast technological changes that occurred in the world during the twentieth century have changed modern life tremendously. Specifically, through the invention of the automobile, the airplane, the television, the telephone, and more recently the computer and the internet, distances are shrinking, communication is expanding and the world is getting smaller and smaller. In addition, the fall of communism, the abolition of the borders in the European Union, and the current changes towards global economic policies have also had direct impact on every aspect of modern life, from economics and business, to politics and education. The same can be said about the more recent events of September 11, 2001, which illustrated how political and social changes that are occurring in such far away countries as Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, and Pakistan, can have an immediate and unfortunately dramatic impact on the whole world. Finally, the immigration waves that occurred towards such countries as Australia, England, Canada, France, and especially the United States, have reshaped our understanding of nationality and ethnicity and made it necessary to talk today, to a much greater extent than in the past, about non-homogenous, ethnically diverse and multicultural nations. Today’s world citizens have more chances to meet and interact with people from different cultural or ethnic backgrounds than ever before. One of the goals of education is to provide people with a variety of tools to help them in their professional and personal lives. Thus, educators in every field should make conscious efforts to provide opportunities and experiences for students so that they can adequately cope with these culturally and ethnically diverse encounters. The part of education that is directly 5 .5 responsible for this preparation has been identified as multicultural education. Multicultural Music Educaticm Campbell (1993) suggested that “multiculturalism is the power-packed word that is currently directing the course of government policy, funding agencies, popular mass- media entertainment and curricular reform. It can no longer be dismissed as an isolated or regional phenomenon” (p. 14). It is therefore inevitable that by the end of the 20‘h century multiculturalism has infiltrated every aspect of music education and has become one of its integral and important parts, especially in the United States (Campbell, 1993; Chin, 1996a; Okun, 1998; Volk, 1998). This infiltration can be traced to the two major events that shaped American music education, the Yale Seminar in 1963 and the Tanglewood Symposium in 1967. Both of these events included a wide range of participants and provided the necessary impetus for the inclusion of multicultural and world music in American public schools. In their discussion for the improvement of public school arts education, the participants of the Yale Seminar suggested that school repertoire should expand to include jazz and folk music. Any program of music instructions in the schools that does not find a place for at least sample studies in depth of some of these musical cultures and their music is turning its back on one of the most compelling realities of our times. (Palisca, 1964, p. 3) In the same manner but with a more inclusive scope, the Tanglewood Symposium encouraged music educators to augment their teaching repertoire to include popular, folk, contemporary, as well as music of other cultures. As stated in the Tanglewood Declaration (Britton, Gary, & Broido, 1968) “music of all periods, styles, forms, and cultures belongs in the curriculum” (p. 139). Following the Tanglewood Symposium, the Music Educators National Conference (MENC) took numerous additional steps to promote and support multicultural—world music education. Some of the objectives of the 1970 Goals and Objectives Project that were given priority attention called for a commitment towards the advancement of teaching of all musics and developing music programs for students from all socio-economic levels (as cited in Volk, 1998). MENC co—sponsored two national symposia focused on multicultural music and teaching (the Wesleyan Symposium in 1984 and the Multicultural Symposium in 1990), devoted three special issues of the Music Educators Journal on multicultural music (October 1972, May 1983, and May 1992) and published numerous books related to music from different world cultures (Anderson, 1991; Anderson & Campbell, 1989; Anderson & Moore, 1998; Campbell, 1996). In addition to MENC, other professional music organizations such as the International Society for Music Education (ISME), the Society for Ethnomusicology (SEM) and the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) have also been vocal about the need for multicultural awareness and training in music education. The 1988, 1992, 1996 and 2000 conferences of ISME dealt specifically with multicultural issues and encouraged the sharing of theoretical, philosophical and practical approaches to multiculturalism. In 1993 ISME also established the Panel on World Musics in order to assist and guide music teachers from around the world in their teaching of musics from different cultures (Volk, 1998). The Society of Ethnomusicology (SEM) demonstrated that they understood the importance of education in creating a more positive and inclusive climate towards music of all cultures by forming the Music Education Committee in 1968. It also collaborated with MENC in organizing the 1990 Multicultural Symposium and recently and publishing a recent series of interviews with prominent ethnomusicologists on a number of different world music cultures (Campbell, 1996). SEM has been instrumental in advocating for the inclusion of multicultural minimum requirements or competencies for all undergraduate music degrees. According to the 1999-2000 handbook of the National Association of Schools of Music, “students must have opportunities through performance and academic studies to work with music of diverse cultural sources, historical periods, and media” (p. 79). §t_atement of the Problem Even though all professional music organizations strongly advocate the inclusion of world musics in school and university curricula, the reality is that many institutions are still heavily focused on western art music. According to Chin (1996b), 50% of all higher education institutions accredited by NASM did not list any multicultural music course in their course catalogs. Chin’s findings revealed that “few of the departments and schools of music have met the goals set by NASM and recommended by leading educators” (p. 31). Wollenzien (1999) reported that in the period between 1985 and 1999, the number of courses in world music cultures that are offered at higher education institutions in the north central United States has risen from 58% to 89%. Finally, based on Moore’s (1993) finding that the deciding factor in a teacher’s decision to use world music in the classroom is his/her training and values, it becomes apparent that multicultural training during music teacher education is extremely valuable and crucial. Further research in this area is necessary if music education programs are to fulfill their role of successfully training and educating the new breed of music educators for the 21 century (Chin, 1996a; Jordan, 1992). Purpose and Research Questions The purpose of this study was (a) to examine the current multiculturaloworld music course offerings at the Big Ten universities and (b) to explore the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty regarding multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education. The following questions were explored: (1) What are the current multicultural-world course offerings available for undergraduate music education majors at the Big Ten schools? (2) What are the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education? (3) What are the suggestions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding issues of multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education? Definition of Terms Despite the fact that scholars and music educators widely talk about “multicultural education” and “multicultural music education,” the fact remains that there is much misunderstanding and disagreement as to what the term actually means (Dolce, 1973; Hidalgo, Chavez-Chavez & Ramage, 1996; Lundquist, 1987; Norman, 1999; Okun, 1998', Rodriguez, 1979; Sleeter, 1995; Sleeter & Grant, 1987). For this reason, a thorough review of available literature on the various definitions will be extensively covered in the following Chapter 11, Review of Literature. What is provided here is a short and concise list of definitions of terms that are used throughout this dissertation. It is not the purpose of this introductory definition of terms to provide definitions of music terms and genres that can be applied for various cultural and ethnic contexts. The interested reader is encouraged to look to the various ethnomusicological and musicological sources that provide in-depth analysis of the terms used in this dissertation. The following terminology definitions reflect the opinions of the author, unless otherwise indicated and may sometimes differ from other existing definitions. Big Ten schools: A group of eleven institutions of higher education that comprise the Big Ten Conference and consist of Purdue University at West Lafayette, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, Michigan State University at East Lansing, Ohio State University at Columbus, Pennsylvania State University at College Park, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Northwestern University at Evanston, University of Iowa at Iowa City, Indiana University at Bloomington, University of Minnesota at Minneapolis and University of Wisconsin at Madison. Classical music: Art music of Western Europe that exists mainly in a written, notated form. It is primarily the product of trained professional musicians and is regarded as the music of the middle and upper socioeconomic classes. Common elements: A description of the fundamental elements of music that, according to western EurOpean standards, are rhythm, harmony, melody, timbre, intensity, and form (O’Brien, 1980)- Culture: Based on Banks’ (1993) definition of multicultural education and Tiedt’ s & Tiedt’s (1995) definition of culture, it is described as a set of values, beliefs and behaviors that are characteristic of a group of people distinguished by race, gender, lifestyle, socioeconomic status, religion, ethnic affiliation, and ability/exceptionality. Ethnic music: Popular and folk music from around the world that exhibits strong connections with the cultural, racial, political and historical background of a specific ethnic group of people. Ethnomusicology: According to Nettl (1983), ethnomusicology is a discipline that focuses on the study of all types and periods of music from around the world following a comparative approach, through fieldwork and as part of the culture in which it was produced. Folk music: Music from different world cultures that is mainly a product of the working and/or low class and is therefore regarded, consciously or unconsciously, as lower in status than classical or art music. Folk music is often the product of self—taught and amateur musicians and is usually associated with traditional life-cycles of an agricultural community. Finally, folk music often exhibits an unclear distinction between producers and consumers aVIanueI, 1988). Multicultural education: Based on Attinasi’s (1994) and Banks’ (1993) definitions, the author uses the term to signify the kind of education that promotes social and educational change in order to achieve equality and equity among groups distinguished by race, gender, lifestyle, socioeconomic status, religion, ethnic affiliation and ability/exceptionality. Multicultural—world music education: Multicultural music education and world music education. Multiculturgrl music education: “The study of music from groups distinguished by race or ethnic origin, age, class, gender, religion, life style and exceptionality” (Campbell, 1993). Multiethnic education: A form of multicultural education that is mostly focusing on issues that relate to various ethnic groups within the society. Multiethnic music education: “A program that focuses in greater depth on a representative and prominent musical style of a group of people united by national or ethnic origin” (Campbell, 1993). Music educators: Elementary, secondary and higher education teachers of music as well as music administrators. Popular music: Based on Nettl’s (1972) and Manuel’s (1988) descriptions of popular music, popular music is defined as music of primarily urban origins that is disseminated mainly through the mass media and its major function is for secular entertainment. Preservice music educators: Undergraduate college students majoring in music education. Western music: Art and/or “classical” music of Europe that has its roots in functional tonal harmony and is approached and understood at an intellectual as well as musical level. Even though the term refers mainly to music written and performed in such western European countries as Germany, France, Italy, England, Austria, it can nevertheless be applied also to the art and/or “classical” music of eastern European countries such as Russia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and others. World music education: Based on Okun’s (1998) and Schippers (1996) definitions, the term is defined as the theoretical and practical study of non—westem instruments, genres and styles of music in Western academic institutions. CHAPTER II Review of Literature This review examined related literature from a variety of areas and is divided in the following six sections: (a) definition of terms; (b) rationale for multicultural-world music education; (c) guidelines and approaches towards multicultural-world music education; ((1) research on multicultural-world music teacher education; (e) problems with education in world music; and (f) related research on the Big Ten universities. I have not included the historic evolution of the multicultural-world movement in the United States because this is thoroughly discussed in numerous other sources (Chin, 1996a; Miralis, 1996; Okun, 1998; Volk, 1998). Definition of Terms As indicated in the previous chapter, one of the most problematic aspects of multicultural—world education is the fact that there is not a clear and shared understanding of what the term “multicultural” means. For example, even though it is found in the titles of the vast majority of music education articles, books and research studies (Anderson, 1991a; Anderson, 1991b; Anderson, 1992; Anderson & Campbell, 1989; Anderson & Moore, 1998; Campbell, 1993; Campbell, 1994; Chin, 1996a; Chin, 1996b; Cox, 1980; Dodds, 1983; Elliott, 1989; Gamble, 1983; Gonzo, 1993; Goodkin, 1994; Griswold, 1994; Heller, 1983; Jordan, 1992; Klocko, 1989; Koza, 1996; Mark, 1998; Norman, 1994;0kun, 1998; Reimer, 1993; Sands, 1993; Skyllstad, 1997; Tucker, 1992; Volk, 1998), the term “multicultural” is nevertheless used interchangeably with such terms as “cross-cultural” (Campbell, 1990; Campbell, 1991; Palmer, 1994), “diverse cultural music” (Goetze, 2000), “ethnic music” (Meyer, 1960), “indigenous” (Rose, 1996), “inter- cultur ” (Swanwick, 1988; Schippers, 2000), “multiethnic-multicultural” (Lundquist, 1991), “multimusical” (Reimer, 1993), “musics of the world” (Anderson, 1980), and “world music” (Bieber, 1999; Fung, 1995; Nettl, 1992; O’Brien, 1980; Palmer, 1992; Schippers, 1996; Schmid, 1992; Seeger, 1972; Shehan, 1988; Stock, 1994; Trimillos, 1983). Swim. Before examining the existing literature on the incorporation of some of the above terms in the fields of education and music education, it is necessary to examine the meaning of the word “culture.” According to Williams (1985) Culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language. This is so partly because of its intricate historical development, in several European languages, but mainly because it has now come to be used for important concepts in several distinct intellectual disciplines and in several distinct and incompatible systems of though. (p. 87) He further illuminated that the current most widespread use of the word “culture” .. describes the works and practices of intellectual and especially artistic activity... [such as] music, literature, painting and sculpture, theatre and film... sometimes with the addition of philosophy, scholarship, history” (p. 90). A different examination of the word was provided by Cordeiro, Reagan and Martinez (1994) who, viewing it from an educational perspective, identified the following several important elements of culture: language, behaviors and behavioral norms, teaching and learning styles, family and kinship patterns, gender roles, view of individualism, historical awareness of cultural community and religious beliefs and practices. According to the authors, each person is inevitably culturally diverse since he/she is simultaneously functioning in various distinct cultures as identified by the above 10 elements. Lastly, a similar but more encompassing definition was provided by Tiedt & Tiedt ( 1995) who stated that culture “. .. connotes a complex integrated system of beliefs and behaviors that may be both rational and nonrational [sic]. Culture is a totality of values, beliefs, and behaviors common to a large group of people” (p. 10). Based on this definition, the culture of the students is characteristically different from the culture of their teachers, their administrators and even their parents. Multicultural Education Several authors from the field of education provided various descriptions and definitions of multicultural education (Attinasi, 1994; Banks & Banks, 1993; Boschee, Beyr, Engelking & Boschee, 1997; Gollnick & Chinn, 1990; Sleeter, 1995; Sleeter & Grant, 1987). Sleeter and Grant (1987) suggested that multicultural education is an “approach that promotes cultural pluralism and social equality by reforming the school program for all students to make it reflect diversity” (p. 422). Gollnick and Chinn (1990) supported that a multicultural curriculum promotes strengthening and valuing cultural diversity, human rights and respect for differences, alternative lifestyle choices, social justice and equality, and a just distribution of power and income (p. 31). Banks (1993) described multicultural education as “an idea stating that all students, regardless of the groups to which they belong, such as those related to gender, ethnicity, race, culture, social class, religion, or exceptionality, should experience educational equality in the schools” (p. 25). He further continued that multicultural education is not only an idea, but also an educational reform movement and a never- ending process aiming at the elimination of educational and social discrimination. ll Attinasi ( 1994) stated that “among the scholars in the field, the goals behind education that is multicultural and socially reconstructionist are to improve academic outcomes, promote equity among gender, ethnicity, and exceptionality; and effect change in the society beyond the school” (p. 7). According to Attinasi “multiculturalism requires not only a change in curriculum, but a change in school climate and pedagogy” (p. 8). Boschee, Beyer, Engelking and Boschee (1997) also supported that “multicultural education can be portrayed as a multifaceted, change-oriented approach that emphasizes equity and intergroup harmony. It is a belief and a process whose major goal is to transform the educational structure in our schools” (p. 217). Additionally, Sleeter (1995) stated that multicultural education is “rooted in a concern about inequality among groups” and educators interested in it should devote significant time addressing the historical roots of racist opportunity structures, the nature and impact of discrimination, the significance of group membership and the nature of culture (pp. 18—24). A number of authors from the field of music education provided their own definitions on the nature and goals of multicultural education (Blacking, 1987; Cobb, 1995; Elliott, 1989/1995; Schippers, 1996; Small, 2001). Elliott (1989/ 1995) incorporated Pratte’s (1979) definition of the term “multicultural” which refers to the coexistence of different groups within a society. Nevertheless, Elliott expanded this definition by supporting that the term also “connotes a social ideal: a policy of support for exchange among different groups of peOple to enrich all while respecting and preserving the integrity of each” (p. 14). He continued by clarifying that “a country can be culturally diverse, but it may not uphold the ideals of multiculturalism or pluralism” (p. 14). Similarly, Schippers (1996) debated over the nature of a multicultural society and 12 supported that “maybe the only feasible concept of a multicultural society is one in which many cultures exist more or less independently, but interact with each other constantly” (p. 20). Cobb (1995) provided a similar approach by indicating that “the ultimate goal of multicultural education is, not only to have students simply tolerate or understand the extreme degrees of diversity among people and their music, but to appreciate them as well” (p. 221). Blacking (1987) and Small (2001) are two of the music scholars that are strongly opposed to the use of the term “multicultural.” Specifically, Blacking (1987) indicated that music educators should avoid using the term in a tokenistic manner and cautioned about the focus on culture instead of the music itself. For him “music education should not be used to emphasize culture, because as soon as that happens there arise arguments about cultural hegemony, as well as false notions of what culture is: it should emphasize human variety and ingenuity” (p. 147) (emphasis in the original). He emphasized the intrinsic power of music and suggested that world music education “. .. will never succeed if it is multicultural; it must be multimusical. It can only be successful when people are touched by the aesthetic force of music and can transcend its social and cultural analogues” (p. 149). In a similar manner, Small (2001b) expressed his opposition to the term by focusing on the nature of the word “culture.” Specifically, he shared the following in regards to its use and its implications: The important thing [to remember] is that culture is not a thing but a set of assumptions about the way the world operates that may or may not be shared by a group of people. One cannot draw a line around a culture. In this sense the word ‘multicultural' seems to have little meaning, since we all carry around in us one set of such assumptions, no more and no less. We respect, or disdain, or admire, or destroy, not cultures but people, and no culture is ever lost... I am inclined to 13 believe that the catchword ’multicultural education’ is cant. I really don’t see how anyone can be multicultural -~ which isn‘t by any means to say that there can be no contact or sympathy between people from different cultural groups. But it’s people, not cultures, that matter, that make contact with one another, that respect one another. (personal communication, July 20, 2001) Multiethnic Education In addition to the above definitions and goals of multicultural education, another term that is often used in educational settings is that of “multiethnic education.” According to Banks (1994) multiethnic education is a specific form of multicultural education. [It] is concerned with modifying the total school environment so that it is more reflective of the ethnic diversity within a society. This includes not only studying ethnic cultures and experiences but also making institutional changes within the school setting so that students from diverse ethnic groups receive equal educational opportunities and the school promotes and encourages the concept of ethnic diversity. (pp. 93-94) Gollnick and Chinn (1990) added that multiethnic education is the education that incorporates ethnic content in the total curriculum of the school, from preschool through adult education. Through the inclusion of the study of ethnic groups as an integral part of the entire school curriculum, ethnic groups will no longer be ...viewed as separate, distinct, and inferior to the dominant group. A multiethnic curriculum prevents the distortion of history and contemporary conditions. Without it, the perspective of the dominant group becomes the only valid and correct curriculum to which students continually are exposed. (p. 101) Multiculturaland Multiethnic Music Education In the area of music education, the discussion and debate over the apprOpriate terminology surprisingly has been very limited. Blacking (1987) suggested that when we incorporate world musics in education it is not just a question of What can we bring in from India or the Caribbean? but How can we combat narrow-mindedness, racism, prejudice, in school books and ethnocentricism in education? How can we teach people through music- making that there is a larger social world outside and a richer world of experience 14 inside each individual? If British music education is to reflect a multicultural society, its task is not so much to make blacks feel at home in school, as to make sure that white children are really aware of the historical and cultural traditions of their black neighbours (sic). (pp. 146-147) Elliott (1989) supported that the three necessary criteria for a truly multicultural music education are “(1) the presentation of a culturally diverse musical repertoire; (2) a concern for equality, authenticity and breadth of consideration; and (3) a behavioral commitment to the values of multicultural artistic expression as a basis for a viable system of music education” (p. 17). Walker (1990) suggested that the main focus of multicultural music education should be “the culture-specific qualities of any musical practice” (p. 81). Even though he did not directly define what he means with the term “culture,” nevertheless it was apparent from his choice of musical examples that he referred to groups of people identified primarily in terms of their ethnic background. Lundquist (1991) provided a broader definition of the term by suggesting that “(m )ulticultural describes a perspective that acknowledges and respects a range of cultural expression from groups distinguished by race, or ethnic origin, age, class, gender, life style and exceptionality” (p. 21). She continued by indicating that “multiethnic refers to an environment that reflects the ethnic diversity of the society” (pp. 21—22). Campbell (1993) attempted to identify the subtle differences associated with each 66‘ of the above mentioned terms and supported that multicultural music education’ is the study of music from groups distinguished by race or ethnic origin, age, class, gender, religion, life style and exceptionally” whereas “a music program that focuses in greater depth on a representative and prominent musical style of a group of people united by national or ethnic origin is a model of ‘multiethnic music education’” (p. 15). She 15 distinguished “multiethnic music education” with “world music education” in that the later “features the study of musical components as they are treated in various musical styles across the world” (p. 16). Choice of Terminology Based on the above definitions by leading scholars in the field and acknowledging that the music profession has not yet addressed the teaching of music by composers from diverse age groups, socioeconomic classes, religious affiliations and life styles, it is apparent that when music educators refer to “multicultural music education” they refer to a form of “multiethnic music education.” This view is also supported by Campbell (1993), the leading scholar in the field, who disclosed that “the multiethnic task thus becomes far more reasonable and realistic than that prescribed by multicultural education” (p. 16). She further commented on this issue by stating that “multicultural music education has certain explosive prOperties and images that take off on a socio- political tangent in ways that we might not really intend” (Okun, 1998, p. 87). Previous research on the focus of multicultural education in the United States illustrated that this limiting approach is not something that is occurring only in the field of music education. Sleeter and Grant (1987) found that most studies in predominantly white, middle-class and affluent districts focused primarily on diversity in terms of ethnicity and race and ignored differences in terms of social class, gender, and handicap (p. 433). Norman (1994) also revealed that the majority of the participants in her study defined “multicultural music education” focusing primarily on the content of instruction rather than on the process or the recipients. In addition, in their content-focused approach 9 participants tended to identify culture solely on the basis of race and ethnicity and not in 16 regards to gender, socioeconomic status and/or ability. Norman added that there is a “. .. critical lack of a philosophy to support multicultural music education, and especially a philosophy that emphasizes equal opportunity in the classroom, school, community, and society at large” (p. 434). Norman’s findings were additionally supported by Koza (1996), who suggested that “the term [multiculturalism] has a more circumscribed meaning to most music educators. It refers to the teaching of ethnic music; the multicultural movement within music education traditionally has been concerned primarily with curricular content” (p. 264). Based on the above discussion I support that the use of the term “multicultural music education” is problematic, unsuitable and misleading, since it does not address crucial issues that leading scholars in the area of multicultural education have identified. Since it is widely used in the vast majority of the music education literature, I initially decided to follow Lundquist’s (1991) example by using the bicomposite term “multiethnic-multicultural.” Due to the fact that I personally view multiethnic education as a part of multicultural education and not vice-versa, I decided that the term "multicultural-multiethnic” was more appropriate. Even though I was happy with the above choice for a while, during the later part of my research I realized that I continued to be dissatisfied with the use of the term “multicultural.” I viewed it as an American term and, even though its use might be currently spreading around the world, in my mind it was mainly associated with images of white, middle class American music teachers engaging in what were often superficial and shallow approaches of incorporating music from different world cultures in their classrooms. At the middle stages of writing this dissertation, I further decided that I 17 consciously wanted to completely avoid the use of the term “multicultur .” This belief was further reinforced through the numerous informal interviews that I conducted with ethnomusicology and music education professors from the ten of the eleven Big Ten schools. The majority of them indicated that they do not like the term for a variety of reasons. This is consistent with the findings of Okun’s (1998) study that also included interviews with prominent professors from the fields of ethnomusicology and music education. The reader is referred to Chapter V that includes a detailed discussion on the opinions of the various professors in regards to issues of appropriate terminology. For a long time, I decided to use the term “world music” based on Schippers (1996) definition that I continually kept referring back to. He defined “world music” . .not as a form of music, or even a wide variety of different musics, but as ‘the phenomenon of music instruments, genres, and styles establishing themselves outside their cultures of origin’” (p. 17). I found this term to be concise, easy to use, and at the same time broad enough to embrace all types of western and non-western musics, without creating a dichotomy between inclusive and exclusive musical cultures. Moreover, the term was already being used in numerous educational settings around the country and the world to describe offerings in non-Westem music course offerings. Towards the last couple of weeks of writing this dissertation, I realized that although Schippers’ definition is appropriate for world music ensembles and courses in higher education, it nevertheless proved inadequate for addressing the inclusion and not the establishment of diverse types of music in secondary and higher education. It also proved limiting for the inclusion of pop, rock and folk music in the classroom. After continuous conscious and subconscious struggle with the appropriate terminology, I 18 reached my final decision to use both “multicultural” and “world” music education due to the different implications of each term. This decision was taken because, during the interviews with the various professors, I was using the term “multicultural music education” purposefully in order to get their opinions about this specific definition. Additionally, various professors were using the term themselves either in response to my use or because they use this term in their teaching. Because the issue over the appropriate terminology became a crucial part of this study, it was inevitable that I would have to use this term even though I did not want to do so. Therefore, I feel that I reached a functioning compromise by adding both “multicultural music education” and “world music education” and creating the new encompassing term of “multicultural-world music education.” The reader is referred to the Definition of Terms section of Chapter I for the specific definition that I provide for each term. Despite my final conclusion in regards to the terminology, the reader would realize that at different sections of the paper I am moving from the term “multicultural- world music education” to “multicultural music education” or “world music education.” This is not intended to confuse the reader but, on the contrary, to illustrate my thinking at different periods of the study accordingly and precisely, as well as the thinking of my informants. The reader should be reminded that as the document proceeds, we are moving back in time. For example, during Chapters V and VII revert back to my previous choice of using only the term “multicultural music education,” to illustrate the fact that l was still using this exact term during the interview process. The selection of an appropriate terminology is crucial so that it does not mislead l9 current and future music educators to believe that we are engaged in transforming education and society and addressing inequality and equity (which is what multicultural education is all about), when in fact they are not. If in the future the profession decides that it needs to take a more definite and substantial approach towards the social, educational and political implications of multicultural music education, the shift from “multicultural-world music education” to “multicultural music education” will be well justifiable and easy to make. At the same time it will also add credibility to our profession for recognizing its current limitations and dilemmas and will indicate that we do not blindly follow what other fields are doing, without us having the necessary philosophical foundation to support that. RationaLle for World Music Educgtiog Numerous articles address the importance of world music education in the public schools. Even though some of them might be more direct and extensive than others, nevertheless all of these sources provide a supporting philosophical foundation for the need of diverse musical study that will not focus exclusively on western art music. A number of scholars supported their argument by providing different rationale that advocate the inclusion of music cultures of the world in the music classrooms. Anderson (1980) provided the following four reasons for the expansion of the music curriculum: (a) western music is only one of many SOphisticated musics in the world; (b) there is a need for recognizing the musical contributions of ethnic Americans; (c) there are many valid but different ways of making music that students should know about and understand; and (d) by studying various worlds musics, students can develop “polymusicality” that in turn can lead to new musical flexibility and awareness. 20 Reimer (1993) suggested that the justification of world musics in American music education can be based on three levels. At the national level, teachers need to preserve and disseminate the western musical tradition. At the personal level teachers and students need to appreciate and preserve the various musical traditions found in the United States and, lastly, at the cross-cultural level, all citizens should be able to freely share the cultural diversity provided by the American open society. Fung (1995) provided the following three rationales: (a) social; (b) musical; and (0) global. According to the social rationale, students can develop an awareness, understanding and tolerance of people from diverse cultures through the study of diverse music practices. The musical rationale supports that world music study reinforces musical concepts, refines aural skills, promotes critical thinking about music and encourages thorough understanding of musical elements. According to the global rationale, today’s students need to develop a global view of humanity. Through modern technology, communication and travel, the world has become a “global village” and therefore students should ultimately regard themselves as world citizens. Numerous authors supported the study of world music in education for a variety of other reasons, those being demographic, educational, social, political, utilitarian and others (Campbell, 1993; Deans, 1983; Dodds, 1983; Elliott, 1989; Seeger, 1972; Krauss, 1967; Skyllstad, 1997). Krauss (1967) supported the preservation of diverse musics and cultures simply because their pure existence makes the world a richer place. He advocated that a fruitful dialogue and understanding between the various musical cultures can lead to open-mindedness, unbiased thinking and a better understanding of oneself, which are some of the goals of education in general. 21 Deans (1983) provided demographic information from 1910 and 1979 about American society that indirectly supports multicultural education. Based on information gathered from the US. Bureau of the Census, Deans indicated that in the 1970’s the increase of the foreign born population of the United States was, for the first time since the years before World War I, faster than that of the native population. Campbell (1993) shared some more recent demographic information from the 1990 national census which pointed out that one in four Americans is nonwhite or Hispanic. She pointed out that “at the end of our lifetimes, the ‘average’ US. resident... will trace his or her descent to... almost anywhere but white Europe” (p. 14). Glidden (1990) added that “the sheer force of numbers... causes us to recognize that pluralism and multiculturalism are not just concepts to be studied and discussed by academic sociologists but are real issues that must be dealt with on a daily basis” (p. 4). Dodds (1983) was more specific when he stated that multicultural-world music education encourages community and social involvement and can lead students to (a) enlarge their musical vocabulary; (b) appreciate diversities; (c) participate in different ways of making music together; ((1) understand the influences of ethnic musics on western music (classical, popular, jazz, rock); (e) understand the relatedness of the arts; (0 be intellectually stimulated; and (g) develop tolerance and respect for other cultures. Skyllstad (1997) provided an example of the use of world music for utilitarian purposes. Specifically, Skyllstad described the successful use of ethnic music as a means of conflict management in different conflict areas of the world such as Croatia, Campodia, Mali, Israel, and Bosnia. He further described a three-year education project in Oslo, Norway, which focused on fostering interracial understanding and intercultural 22 cooperation among three immigrant communities of Oslo. As part of the project, students from 18 local schools engaged in musical, dancing and artistic activities from Asia, Africa and Latin America. Each ethnic culture was studied for a whole year and competent immigrant teachers and native artists were invited to teach in the schools. The success of this event led to the establishment of the Norwegian Intercultural Music Center (NIMC) in 1992 that organizes an annual World Music Festival with imrni grant and native musicians from their home countries. The festival became so successful in that it necessitated its expansion in all four Nordic capitals. At the same time, NIMC also broadened its role and function in the community by assisting young immigrant musicians in organizing their own musical groups, providing them with practice rooms, recording studios and even free production of video and audio promotion materials. From the above success of the NIMC it becomes clear that with adequate collaboration, support and vision, multicultural-world music education can have a positive impact on society. An additional focus on philosophical and political issues regarding multicultural- world music education was provided by Seeger (1972), who discussed three commonly- held concepts of American education and their connection with broad political issues, as well as Elliott (1989), who examined music education as culture by providing short excerpts on how music is taught in three different cultures. Both of these articles can be of great help to music educators when attempting to understand the complexity of the multicultural reality. Guidelines and Approaches Towards Multicultural-World Music Education in Elementary and Secondary Schools Numerous scholars and teachers suggested different guidelines and approaches 23 towards the common goal of enriching students’ understanding and appreciation of ethnically diverse musics from around the world. Some of them provided broad guidelines that could be used in any setting in which we learn and teach music from another ethnic or cultural group (Blacking, 1987 ; Boyer-White, 1988; Campbell, 1997; Goetze, 2000; Schippers, 1996). For example, Blacking (1987) suggested that emphasis must be laid on the contributions of individual composers and performers. Education authorities must ensure that schools have visits and workshops by highly skilled performers of compositions and genres that have been developed in Asia and Africa, as well as by pianists and violinists. It is necessary for children to hear a piano recital by a Jamaican or an Indian and a sitar recital by an English person, if only to demonstrate the individuality and transcendental universality of the arts. (p. 147) In a different approach, Boyer-White (1988) stated that music educators should identify existing ethnic groups in their classes, encourage students to share their unique cultural backgrounds, construct their music program to reflect those backgrounds, invite parents to help collect materials and resources about their own cultural/ethnic groups and avoid reverse discrimination. Similarly, Campbell (1997) shared five specific principles of world music education. These were: (a) listen repeatedly and carefully to the music; (b) study to understand the musical structures, the musical and transmission processes, the cultural context, and the meaning and value of music to the people; (c) practice the music repeatedly; (d) connect and invite native performers to teach and perform for our students; (e) ask for help and guidance from music scholars. Goetze (2000) made the following eleven recommendations when performing multicultural-world music with a vocal and even an instrumental ensemble: (a) consult native musicians from the culture; (b) determine the appropriateness of performing the selected music; (c) consult written and audiovisual resources to find more about the culture and share knowledge with your students; ((1) invite a native from the culture to 24 meet the students and possibly establish a personal relationship with them; (e) learn the music aurally, by listening and imitating; (f) educate students about the limitations of their voices; (g) carefully imitate visual aspects such as posture and facial expressions; (h) record and consult the pronunciation of the text by a native speaker; (i) respect the culture by continually listening and consulting the original source; (j) explore performing the music without the conductor; and (k) share contextual, musical and historical information about the music and the culture with your audiences. Schippers (1996) shared his experience from the establishment and development of the Amsterdam Music School’s World Music Department. The example of the World Music Department is probably one of the few, if not the only example mentioned in the literature, of an established, encompassing and successful multicultural-world music education program for non-college students. The uniqueness of this department lies in the fact that diverse music from ten different cultural areas is completely integrated into the Amsterdam Music School in a way that it is “. . .not merely another minority ghetto in a white institution” (p. 17). The twenty-five specialists in these world musics use the same classrooms, the same rates and the same contracts than any other music teacher of the School. Even though some of the musical traditions that are taught are connected with the minorities living in Amsterdam, nevertheless those traditions were selected primarily for their integral value as a worthwhile music tradition. According to Schippers’ approach, world musics should be “. . .well integrated into the ‘regular music’ curriculum... and the central focus should be formed not so much by the cultures the music comes from, but rather by the musical uses and principles underlying the music” (pp. 20-21). Several other authors shared their ideas about structuring and presenting a 25 multicultural-world music lesson (Goodkin, 1994; McCullough-Brabson, 1990; Shehan, 1984; Shehan, 1988). Shehan (1984) used the example of Balkan folk dances to suggest the following five sequential steps when teaching any folk dances: (a) guided listening to the music focusing on the instruments and the rhythm; (b) listening to the melody, form and texture and physically realizing the underlying rhythmic framework; (c) use of descriptive words to indicate the motion of the dance; (d) transfer of movement from the hands to the feet; and (6) use of music to accompany movement. Shehan (1988) provided the following eight tested steps when using world music in general music classes: (a) start with a lesson in local, national and international geography; (b) encourage students to share and teach their own songs and dances; (0) promote personal contact with parents and relatives with an ethnic background; (d) show the interelatedness of music with the other arts by organizing a visit to a museum; (e) discuss the lives of some of the world’s greatest ethnic musicians; (f) have students compose music for dramatizations of folk tales; (g) explore and classify ethnic instruments as chordophones, aerophones, membranophones and idiophones; and (h) examine ethnic elements in western orchestral works. McCullough-Brabson (1990) shared her experiences of introducing ethnic instruments to middle school children. She proposed the following five strategies that could enrich this experience: (a) discuss the origin, material, performance technique, sound, uses and functions of instruments by asking historical, technological, musicological and sociological questions; (b) use various listening examples for each instrument; (c) classify each instrument and allow students to freely explore the sound possibilities of each of them; (d) engage students in the Instrument Identification Game in 26 which students listen to an instrument being played and are asked to identify it without seeing it; and (e) have students perform multicultural-world songs and games with the instruments. Goodkin (1994) proposed five approaches for organizing multicultural-world music content: (a) as part of a culture study unit taught by the classroom teacher; (b) as part of a unit on celebrations around the world; (c) around song themes; (d) around instrument types; and (e) around musical concepts. Structuring lessons and units on multicultural-world music can be based on the common elements approach. Even though different authors might disagree on the temiinology used for the naming of the common elements found in all of world’s musics, this approach is the most widely used in the literature. For example, Gamble (1983) proposed a spiral curriculum that followed the common elements approach in which musical elements such as pitch, rhythm, form, dynamics and timbre are examined at every level through a wide variety of musical examples from around the world. According to Gamble, the unique characteristic of this approach is that the diversities of world’s musics become an advantage rather than a problem. In addition to Gamble, a couple of other authors suggested the use of the common elements approach for the structuring of an introductory class to the world’s musics at the college level (O’Brien, 1980; Sakata, 1983; Trimillos, 1972). O’Brien (1980) suggested structuring a music appreciation course around the common elements of music, identified as rhythm, harmony, melody, timbre, intensity, and form. A goal of this course was to help students develop a conceptual framework for processing any type of music. Sakata (1983) shared her ideas about constructing a survey class on the world’s music cultures 27 UT based on such musical elements as melody, rhythm, texture, instruments, form and composition. Throughout the course, students engage in a comparative and cross—cultural examination of musical and social principles from different world cultures. Trimillos (1972) described how the course “Music in World Culture,” that was developed at the University of Hawaii, was structurally based on a progression of different musical cultures and on the various musical elements of pitch distinction, texture, melody, rhythm and form. The course finished with an examination of music as an aesthetic experience. Elliott (1989/ 1995) discussed and compared music education in specific cultural settings and proposed the following six hierarchical curricula of multicultural-world music education: (a) the assimilation curriculum, focusing exclusively on western European classical music; (b) the amalgamation curriculum, incorporating world musics based solely on the new elements and musical ideas that they bring to popular, jazz, classical, and contemporary music; (c) the Open society curriculum, which focuses on contemporary music styles such as electronic, aleatoric, new age, punk and world music; ((1) the insular multiculturalism curriculum, built on one or two minority musics that predominate in the local community; (e) the modified multiculturalism curriculum, in which ethnic music styles from the host community are taught in a culturally authentic manner, organized around musical elements, contexts and behaviors; and ultimately (f) the dynamic multiculturalism curriculum, in which students develop musical ideas inductively, through the examination of a broad range of world musics and concepts. According to Elliott, the dynamic multiculturalism curriculum is the only model that is truly multicultural, since it applies a pan-human perspective to numerous music cultures of the world. Elliott’s six models of multicultural curricula remain the only 28 existing paradigms in the music education literature. Nevertheless, even though his article is commonly cited, its implications for multicultural-world music education are still undiscovered. In a similar manner to Elliott’s (1989/1995) graduated models of multicultural curricula, Glidden (1990) provided five stages of multicultural art experiences in public schools. These are presented in the following graduated order of complexity: (a) emphasis on the arts of one’s own culture; (b) exposure to the arts of other cultures; (0) comparison of the arts across cultures; ((1) hands-on involvement with the arts of other cultures; and (e) individual involvement with cross-cultural experiences. According to Glidden’s paradigm, the ultimate multicultural experience that is accomplished on the firth stage is one in which students are “...led to creative experiences of mixing and merging aspects of more than one culture” (p. 8). Sarrazin (1995) examined challenges and problems facing teachers who use world musics and provided suggestions. According to Sarrazin, music teachers should understand that their Western musical background is not appropriate and relevant when learning and teaching about musical cultures of the world. Through an examination of Native American music, she indicated that the function, role, instrumentation and aesthetics of many world musics are in complete opposition to Western music. Therefore, it is important that teachers of multicultural-world music become aware of the musical and cultural context of the group they are teaching, in order for the experience to be valuable. One area that is not addressed much in the literature is that of the music teacher as fieldworker when collecting multicultural-world materials in the community or abroad. 29 Even though many authors suggested that multicultural-world music teachers should use materials found in their classrooms and communities, few have written about preparing and actually doing this kind of fieldwork. Two articles that appeared in the May 1983 issue of the Music Educators Joumgj (Brooks-Baham, 1983; Jessup, 1983), addressed this activity by giving practical and theoretical suggestions regarding selection and preparation of equipment, stepping into a different culture, gaining rapport from and working with informants, dealing with biases, and carefully structuring fieldwork. Leblanc’s (1983) short article on broadening students’ music preferences can also be of great value for multicultural-world music educators, because it illustrated how various influences can affect the complex process of musical preference. According to Leblanc, educators can positively affect students’ preferences by selecting appropriate musical examples (for younger students, the faster the music the better), providing background information and using forced repetition in their teaching. Multicultural-World Music Tengr Education Hood’s (1960) article on ”The challenge of bi-musicality” has been frequently cited by many ethnomusicologists and music educators interested in multicultural-world music. Even though at the end of his paper Hood indirectly questioned the significance of the term “bi—musicality” through his examination of the essence of musicality, nevertheless his ideas about being competent in another style of music left a strong impact. Indeed, as indicated in a number of sources, it is the belief of many scholars that in order to reach the goals of multicultural-world education in music, one needs to become at least bimusical (Campbell, 1994; Campbell, 1997; Palmer, 1994). Based on the need to implement multicultural-world music education in the public 30 f‘. schools, numerous authors addressed the crucial need for change in the way music is taught. Without referring specifically to music teacher education, their ideas can nonetheless have a strong impact on how future music teachers are educated. For example, Krauss ( 1967) stated that world music education would be meaningful only when it leads to the creation of new perspectives and relationships. As he articulated, The music of foreign cultures should not be included in the course of instruction merely to satisfy an encyclopedic urge for completeness-our courses already suffer from an overabundance of material. Pedagogically, there is no justification for including foreign music as a curiosity simply because nothing should be left out. A subject becomes meaningful only when through its inclusion new perspectives and relationships are created, or new accents for musical instruction and musical understanding are provided. (p. 32) Seeger (1972) examined the three prevailing philos0phies on American public school education and revealed their connection with political and social beliefs of the time. Based on this examination, he supported that music was an integral factor of the economic, intellectual and political changes that were affecting the world and proposed that music education in public schools and universities should be ready to follow those changes. Thirty years after its publication, the title of Seeger’s article (“World musics in American schools: A challenge to be met”) still holds true. Cox (1980) cited a 1976 study that examined the level of preparation and knowledge of Afro-American music by music educators in the Los Angeles Unified School District. The results of the study were disappointing: 85% of the teachers received no seminar training, 77% received no professional training and 82% received no training during their university education. The findings of this study become even more distressing when one considers that the prominence of the African-American community in the United States. A number of articles focused directly on curricula in the area of music teacher 31 education and provided descriptions of existing multicultural-world courses or proposed change of the curricula to reflect contemporary social and musical realities (Anderson, 1992; Campbell, 1994; Klocko, 1989; Lundquist, 1991; Mukuna, 1997; Sands, 1993; Trimillos, 1972). Trimillos ( 1972) described a course developed at the University of Hawaii entitled “Music in World Culture.” Through listening to musical examples and lectures, participating in discussions, observing and participating in performances, and constructing a variety of musical instruments, students examine and understand the musical and cultural contexts of a variety of world musics. As Trimilos indicated If music education is to provide a student with the alternatives necessary for an education, rather than providing just music training, and at the same time equip him for some kind of involvement with music in his postschool life, the present commitment of education to a monocultural musicality seems questionable. (p. 91) Klocko (1989) supported that the current Eurocentric worldview of music education should be replaced by a more global worldview in which popular, ethnic and jazz musics find their place in the college music curricula. Even though Klocko believed that adding more required courses is not the solution, he nevertheless supported that undergraduate music students should be required to take an introductory course examining timbre, musical elements, textures and forms through a diverse variety of world’s musics, at least one course in American popular music and a survey course of non-Westem music. Anderson (1992) agreed with Klocko and proposed that music education curricula should be restructured to incorporate multicultural-world components in music history and literature, music theory, performance, clinical and field experiences, philosophical and historical studies and research. Sands (1993) also supported that music from a variety of ethnic cultures should be integrated in all levels and areas of the undergraduate 32 1' curriculum. According to Sands, all music faculty should have responsibility for attaining the multicultural-world goal, from music theorists, music historians, music educators to instrumental and vocal teachers. In this way all music students would be exposed to broader musical experiences, not only music education and ethnomusicology students. Sands concluded by providing a description of a suggested course in multicultural music education and by addressing the need to recruit future music educators from underrepresented ethnic groups. Mukuna (1997) advocated that new methods must be designed for multicultural- world music education. These new methods should take into account the norms and values that specific world cultures use when teaching their own music. Lundquist (1991) provided ideas pertaining, but not limited to, a multicultural-world rationale, knowledge base covered through the proposed program, personal attributes needed for developing a multicultural-world perspective, goals of the proposed program, necessary skills and knowledge needed for an effective preparation of the graduates and many more. Lundquist’s article offers an extensive coverage of multicultural-world music teacher education and is a necessary reading for all interested in this area. In a similar manner, Schippers’ (1996) world music program in Amsterdam can serve as a model for multicultural-world music preparation in higher education. Schippers addressed many practical and philosophical issues related with world music education, such as what content to cover, selection of materials, how world music can fit into the structure of a western music school, quality of teaching, method of teaching (oral-written, holistic-analytic), learning process versus product, authenticity and change, and many more. He emphatically stated that our vision of a multicultural society should be one in 33 which there is constant social and cultural interaction between the different cultures in the society. He suggested that the skills and attitudes of the teacher are the central factor for the success of the integration of world music into the “regular music” program. Schippers’ last comment directly relates to Palmer (1994), since he is the only one who addressed the necessary personal qualities of cross-cultural music educators. He identified those qualities as: (a) empathy for a wide variety of ethnic values; (b) Open- mindedness toward other musical systems; (c) musical inquisitiveness; (d) macro view of humanity; (e) willingness to become at least bimusical; and (f) willingness to become at least bicultural. He further supported that music departments should encourage and demand that their students become well trained in at least one musical culture other than western music. Furthermore, Palmer is one of the few scholars who supported that, apart from watching and listening to recorded and live performances of the music and reading about the culture, learning the native language of the people is extremely important. Schippers (2000) described the preparations for the inauguration of the first school in higher education that is dedicated to teaching musics of the world. Specifically, the World Music Center in Portugal is scheduled to open in 2003 and it will offer an undergraduate degree in world music with specializations in performance, instrumental education and classroom/community music education. By approaching world musics as living and thriving musical cultures, students will study music from a principal and secondary musical tradition, as well as music history, music notation, choral music and dance from around the world. The teachers will be traditional music masters, accomplished musicians and specialists in education from around the world. Even though the World Music Center does not exist yet, it promises to become a model for training 34 music teachers specializing in world music. WWWM Montague (1988) examined preservice teacher training practices in multicultural- world music education in twenty-six universities and colleges in the United States. Through a preliminary questionnaire and a personal interview with twenty-f1 ve professors from the fields of music education and ethnomusicology, information was gathered in regards to fifty-eight courses that address multicultural-world music. Forty—two of those courses that were required or elective for undergraduate music education majors, were categorized into the following four major categories: (a) required multicultural-world music education courses taught by a music educator (five courses); (b) required music education methods courses with a multicultural component, taught by a music educator (twentyeone courses); (c) elective multicultural-world courses in music education, taught by a music educator (seven courses); and (d) elective or required ethnomusicology courses taught by ethnomusicologists (nine courses). Another important part of Montague’s study was to investigate and examine the affect of multicultural-world state legislation and policies on multicultural-world music education programs in higher education. It was revealed that, even though state laws are likely to have a positive impact on promoting multicultural-world programs in music education in higher education, the most frequent reason for the existence of such programs was the initiative of individual faculty members. In addition, it was found that all music education professors involved with multicultural-world education had received some kind of preservice training themselves, either through college classes and workshops, through their own background, or through their own teaching experiences. 35 Norman’s (1994) study addressed multicultural-world music teacher education programs in an indirect way. Specifically, through the examination of the perceptions of current and prospective music education faculty, music supervisors and music teachers in regards to multicultural-world music education, Norman found that proponents of multicultural-world music education gained their expe1ience primarily through personal study and/or informal exposure via travel, rather than through systematic formal instruction at the collegiate level. Chin (1996a) examined the practice of multicultural-world music education in higher education by analyzing the 1994-1995 college catalogues of 538 NASM accredited institutions. It was found that 42% of the schools did not offer any multicultural music course, 27% offered one such course and 13% offered two multicultural courses. A surprising finding of Chin’s study was that only 16% of the total 920 multicultural courses were required for music majors and only a minimal 2% were specifically designed to help deveIOping teachers use a multicultural approach when teaching music. Most of the courses were designed for non-music majors, fulfilling undergraduate requirements for general education. Therefore, the impact that these courses can have on future music teachers is trivial. The second part of Chin’s study was a case study of two institutions with strong programs in multicultural-world music education. Even though the two chosen schools displayed differences in size, location, highest music degree offered and source of funding, they nevertheless shared the following four characteristics that were crucial in expanding their music curricula: “strong leadership, institutional commitment to promote change and support for diversity, congruous and flexible planning, and allocation of 36 resources” (p. 133). Chin concluded her study by stating that there is a need for professors and administrators who have broad visions and are open minded and persistent enough to initiate change on the focus of the institution, who will provide rich resources for multicultural music education and ultimately broaden its goals and curricula to view music as a universal phenomenon. In a similar study, Okun ( 1998) conducted a case study of the multicultural perspectives in the undergraduate music education program at the University of Washington. This specific setting was selected based on the four criteria of having a strong multicultural component in its undergraduate music education curriculum, being a large state institution, offering a high number of multicultural-world music courses, and especially of being the only one with a required non-Westem component in its undergraduate music education program. Based on the findings of his case study and on the interviews with four prominent professors who validated his interview instrument, Okun (1998) compiled the following six elemental necessities for implementing multicultural-world perspectives in the music teacher education program: (a) reform of the teacher education curricula; (b) introduction of multicultural-world perspectives as early as possible in the undergraduate program; (c) need for a more balanced undergraduate curriculum that will include jazz, popular and non-western musics; (d) gradual curriculum reform rather than a drastic one; (e) need for clarification and consensus on the use of terminology; (f) cooperation between music education faculty and ethnomusicologists to provide undergraduates with the necessary ethnomusicological techniques. Overall, Okun (1998) also suggested that the following five guidelines be 37 addressed when assessing or implementing multicultural-world goals in undergraduate music education programs: (a) future music teachers should receive broad and well— rounded education; (b) educational materials should reflect a global perspective; (c) community members should be actively involved in the musical environment of the university; (d) all future music educators should be required to take at least two and ideally five multicultural courses; and (e) the music education program should be enriched with music from a variety of world’s cultures. Even though the above studies of Chin (1996) and Okun (1998) are valuable in providing a more detailed understanding of strong multicultural-world music teacher education programs, the reader should be aware that, based on their selection criteria, the two institutions chosen by Chin and the University of Washington chosen by Okun are not representative of the reality of multicultural-world music teacher education in the United States. Wollenzien (1999) conducted a study that, even though it did not focus specifically on multicultural-world programs, it nevertheless included relevant information regarding this subdiscipline of music education. He replicated Schmidt’s (1985) study and examined the content of undergraduate music education curricula in colleges and universities of the north central United States. A total of forty-seven schools from ten states participated in the study and results revealed that the percentage of courses on music of world cultures increased significantly, rising from 58% in 1985 to 89% in 1999. Only two other courses, music in early childhood and research in music education, were given more attention in 1999 than in 1985. Despite the reported increase in world music course offerings, this study revealed that only twenty-seven (57%) of the 38 participating schools offered a complete course on music of world cultures. Wollenzien’s findings were supported by Koster and Gratto (2001) who examined the available undergraduate offerings in world music courses and ensembles at the eastern division of MENC, a division that comprises of twelve states in the eastern part of the United States. From their examination of the official web sites of 442 degree-granting institutions, the researchers found that of the 180 institutions that offer a degree in music and/or music education, only 121 of them (66%) offer at least one course in world music. Koster and Gratto revealed that regardless of the uneven distribution of offerings in world music from institution to institution most schools satisfy the world music requirement with an introductory survey course entitled “World Music.” A surprising finding of this study was that, of the 79 NASM affiliated institutions that were included, only 34 of them offer any world music course. This signifies that the NASM requirement for world music course offerings is currently met by less than half of the member institutions in the eastern division of MENC, or by 43%. What is even more disturbing is that only 8 of those affiliated institutions (10%) require their undergraduate music majors to take a world music course. Therefore, only one in every four schools that offer a course in world music requires its students to take such a course (24%). Koster and Gratto’s (2001) study provided additional support that, even though the music education profession has been verbally supporting and encouraging the inclusion of world musics in education, nevertheless the reality proves to be quite disparate. According to the researchers, The absence of these [world music] courses from the Web sites of a number of the institutions surveyed implies a disparity between undergraduate degree requirements and the demands of an academic marketplace in which a knowledge of world music that goes beyond the merely functional has already become a 39 common condition of employment for professional music education positions at every level. (p. 2) All above research in the field of world music education at the higher education level (Chin, 1996a; Koster & Gratto, 2001; Montague, 1988; Norman, 1994; Okun, 1998; Wollenzien, 1999) strongly supports that there is a growing interest and need for more studies in this area of music education. It is hoped that this study will contribute considerably towards this end. Problems with Education in World Music Numerous scholars addressed problematic issues that arise when we incorporate world music in education. Those problems relate specifically to the ineffective teaching approaches of world music, the lack of available materials, and more importantly, the teachers’ lack of training in world music. Universal Versus Contextual Thinking in Music Numerous scholars interested in the use of world musics in education have spent considerable time debating over the issue whether music should be approached as a universal language for all people or whether its cultural and contextual connections are so critical that they pose significant problems in world music education. The debate over the universality of music dates back in the nineteenth century (Campbell, 1997) and has been one of the most intense debates in the field of ethnomusicology. A great number of articles have been published on this debate and the interested reader is encouraged to look for them in the ethnomusicological literature for more in-depth analysis. Since this study is focusing on the use of world music in education, the review of literature will therefore focus mainly on those viewpoints that address the educational implications of the above debate. It became apparent that the discussion on the 40 educational implications of the universal (or not) nature of music intensified especially in the last five years or so with the publication of a number of articles in the International Journal of Mugc Education (Burton, 1997; Campbell, 1997; Letts, 1997; Mukuna, 1997; Rivera, 1997; Walker, 1996; Westerlund, 1999). Burton (1997) based his argument on King’s and Brownell’s (1966) book on the disciplines of knowledge and adapted their ten characteristic traits of a discipline to fit into the field of music. For Burton (1997), the following generic characteristics of a discipline can be used to support the claim that music is a universal language of all cultures and all time periods. According to the authors, a discipline is: (1)a community of people with shared interests, values, and goals; (2) an expression of the human imagination; (3) a domain in the intellectual life; (4) a tradition with its own history of events and ideas; (5) a mode of inquiry - a set of principles and procedures for understanding the domain; (6) conceptual structure - a set of interrelated concepts or key ideas; (7) a specialized language and/or a set of symbols; (8) a heritage of literature and a communication network; (9) a valuative and affective stance with an implicit view of human beings and their place in the world; and (10) an instructive community with its own ways of drawing new members into the group. (p. 45) Burton supported that, these ten universal and cross-cultural characteristics of a discipline, when applied to the field of music, can be of great help to music educators designing instructional programs that incorporate world music. Campbell (1997) examined the historical development of the debate over the universality of music, and suggested that it is inevitable that outsiders to a musical culture will bring their own perspective to it and draw their interpretations based on that perspective. Therefore, ‘no, not exactly is music universally understood.’ Music has cross-cultural features of structure and behaviours [sic] — ‘universals’ — ‘tis true. But it takes time (some might argue a lifetime) to deeply understand a musical culture, the musical genres and expressions of a given group of people as they themselves understand it, in order to know its function, its sociocultural context, its full 41 .- meaning. (pp. 36—37) Campbell’s ( 1997) answer to the educational implications of the above cultural and contextual nature of music lies on Hood’s (1960) concept of bimusicality and his belief on the importance of developing performance ability in a musical culture. She therefore supported that “this view of bimusicality is thus based on the premise that the world consists of series of musics, each of which, like a language, is understood most fully when it is learned” (p. 37). Letts (1997) supported that music is not a universal language but a universal phenomenon. He further addressed the political dimension of the argument indicating that “whether or not music is used as a language between all nations may depend not only on its communicative powers, but whether governments decide to forbid it, or on the other hand, to encourage it” (p. 23). Letts regarded the debate over the universality of music as idealistic and politically contentious. He argued that often when we listen to music from other cultures we might recognize their musical sounds but without any understanding of their critical intentions. He therefore brought attention to the current world tendency towards greater breadth and superficiality and supported that music’s role is to provide rich in-depth experiences to balance that trend. Returning to his original argument over the universal nature of music be summarized that concerning the invocation to music educators that music should be used as a universal language to bridge the gap between nations: yes, of course, it is a noble and desirable aim. Our students, after all, live in an extraordinary and multicultural world, and we have a responsibility to help them to make sense of it, in its breadth. (p. 28) Mukuna ( 1997) addressed the above debate by stating that it is imperative to have an understanding of the cultural context in order to understand and appreciate various world musics. He mentioned that even though musical universal characteristics can be 42 tr r r L‘. I 3 6 CH 16:”: transplanted in different cultures, “...they are given meaning only through their syntactical structure” (p. 49). Therefore he disregarded the cliché about the universality of music and stated that “the world contains many musical ‘languages,’ each of which has its own system with its own set of syntactical and semantic rules” (p. 50). Walker (1996) supported the above statement and he even went further to question to use of the word “music” by examining it against the cultural context of the Balinese gamelan. According to him, “the term ‘music’ is as culturally laden with western traditions of the last several hundred years as is the term ‘gamelan’ with Balinese traditions” (p. 8). He also used the example of the Ghanaian dwom, which signifies the use of the voice in social activities such as dance and theatre. He rightfully asked “why should the Ghanaians want to use our western word music to signify dwom, any more than western musicians would want to use dwom to signify what the West calls music?” (p. 10). Therefore, based on these two illustrations of the western context of the term “music,” Walker supported that the term cannot be used universally but should be limited for the activities that we already define as “music” in the west. Westerlund (1999) also argued against the universal nature of music and reemphasized the importance of contextual knowledge based on different cognitive systems and beliefs. She supported her argument by presenting a comparison between the western and the African way of thinking and how each one has a direct influence on music making in each culture. For instance, Westerlund illustrated how western philosophical thinking is rooted on such ideals as “monological individualism,” universals, newness, naturalness, freedom, and dualistic thinking. Furthermore, with its blindness to colonialist features, western philosophy is often arrogant towards and 43 ignorant of non—European cultures. Based on this worldview, western music education was founded on aesthetic education and has separated art music from folk music, music from dance, the musical object (composition) from the musical subject (performer), melody from rhythm, and the somatic from the intellectual experience of music. In contrast, African worldview is based on a unitary conception of reality in which subject and object, experience and thought, body and mind, music and dance are inseparable, as is an individual from his community. Therefore, social sharing, group participation, personal involvement and integration are basic functions of the African society. In a similar manner, African ways of music making are based on a holistic experience of music through singing, performing and dancing, valuing personal and group involvement in music making activities that are an integral part of everyday life. For Westerlund (1999) the answer to whether music is a universal language or not is a definite no. As she indicated, “if a universal theoretical view is searched for, it needs to find a solution to the pluralism in practices so that no universal criteria are established for how music could be part of our students’ good life” (p. 101). This, she added, presents a definite challenge for western music education, in its struggles to address pluralism and multiculturalism. In contrast to the belief of the above authors that music is not a universal language, Rivera (1997) provided an argument for the opposite. Viewing the debate from a quite different angle, she supported that Music, as the art of sound, needs no translation nor dictionaries, because when it is orally expressed it is embedded in tradition and when it is written every musician with a basic training in sight-reading can read it, and perform it either vocally or with a music instrument. That is why a music score can be passed on from musician to musician, from century to century, from continent to continent and from country to country. (p. 53) 44 Even though it is apparent that Rivera is referring to western musical notation and performance, she nevertheless suggested the development on an international music repertory that should include various musical genres from every world country. Ineffective Teaching Approach of Multicultural—World Music Even though the vast majority of authors in music journals support and promote multicultural-world music education, many authors addressed concerns about its applicability and effectiveness and provided their own suggestions for improvement (Campbell, 1992; Cobb, 1995; Glidden, 1990; Hookey, 1994; Letts, 1997; Mukuna, 1997; Nettl, 1992; Rose, 1996; Sleeter, 1995; Walker, 1996; Westerlund, 1999). Campbell (1992) and Nettl (1992) addressed those concerns and discussed some of the possible reasons why multicultural-world music education is often not as effective as it should be. Specifically, Campbell (1992) identified that limited curriculum time, inadequate teacher training, difficulty in using foreign languages and poor methodological knowledge have a negative impact on multicultural—world music education. She also provided her personal suggestions that could lead to improvements in quality of multicultural-world music instruction. Nettl (1992) provided helpful insights from the field of ethnomusicology and answered similar concerns regarding insufficient time, multicultural goals, musical context, value and preference. These two articles can be of great value to music educators encountering difficulties in implementing multicultural-world approaches in their schools. Glidden (1990) commented on the ineffectiveness of world music education. He argued that Most Americans are not uncomfortable with multiculturalism when it is confined to a level of tokenism or when they read about it in some other community, but in 45 our own workplaces or schools, most of us are not comfortable in dealing with cultural attitudes, habits, and artistic preferences that differ from our own. (p. 4) Glidden’s (1990) comment is supported by other authors who commented on the superficiality of instruction in multicultural-world music education. Sleeter (1995) examined how the background and experiences of preservice teachers from different racial backgrounds, in this case White students and students of color, affects their understanding of multicultural education in any way. What she found was that prospective students of color have a better understanding of such fundamental multicultural concepts as racism, inequality, discrimination, group membership and culture, due to their direct, real-life experiences with these concepts. According to Sleeter, “. .. the impact of systematic and persistent discrimination is a very difficult concept for most White teachers to grasp, since they do not experience racial discrimination themselves” (p. 20). So is the concept of culture, which for many Euro- Americans is often expressed in sharing ethnic food in festivals. This misconception inevitably affects how many teachers address multicultural education, which according to Sleeter “is very often reduced to folksongs and folktales, food fairs, holiday celebrations, and information about famous people” (p. 23). Sleeter’s (1995) approach in educating preservice teachers is focusing on teaching history through the eyes of an “involuntary minority group,” having students develop a profile of their family histories, focusing on group relations and differential access to recourses, conducting and sharing mini-ethnographies around racial, language, class and gender issues, and overall investigating issues of racism, sexism, discrimination, power and knowledge construction. Sleeter concluded that the most important lesson that students need to learn is “to ask the right questions and to seek answers from people [we] 46 have been socialized to ignore or look down upon” (p. 28). It is for this reason that she viewed “extended contact with another group on its own ‘turf”’ (p. 26) as essential for White preservice teachers. Hookey (1994) shared her own experiences in regards to the difficulties that preservice music educators encounter when dealing with issues of multiculturalism and diversity. She pointed out that even though preservice music educators are eager to include world music materials in their teaching, their lack of awareness on the impact of their own cultural background and of the dominant culture in the society pose significant challenges in their teaching effectiveness. She further suggested that teachers should authentically and sincerely structure and prepare the involvement of culture bearers in classroom activities in order for those activities to be meaningful and valuable. Finally, Hookey argued that there needs to be a change in our teaching approaches from teaching about diverse cultures to teaching within those cultures. Unfortunately, she provided no specific ideas on how music educators might achieve that. Cobb (1995) suggested that music education is primarily cultural education and therefore it should give bigger emphasis on the understanding of the cultural context of the music. She further added that university courses in music should be expanded to include non-Westem, jazz and folk music from different cultures and periods. In addition, Cobb suggested that teachers should make up for cultural deficiencies in textbooks by inviting visiting musicians, composers and scholars in their classrooms. Letts (1997) also addressed the need for in-depth experiences with world music. He specifically stated that even in a life full of fun and variety, what we all remember and value the most are our most profound experiences. The music education that should have priority 47 is the music education that induces those experiences of depth. It should not be sacrificed too much to competing demands for breadth that leave students with only superficial experiences. (p. 28) Mukuna (1997) pointed out that often the ineffective instruction with world music is due to the fact that music educators mistakenly continue to rely on western methods of teaching and evaluation, often with devastating results. He argued that, in the same way that music is contextual and socially and culturally constructed so is music education as well. Therefore, music educators should take into consideration the context of culturally defined values and beliefs regarding artistic education and training. “The teaching of any music must be preceded by the teaching of its cultural context,” he suggested (p. XXX). Mukuna also added that “if a multicultural perspective in music is to be successful, new methods must be designed... it is misleading for one to think that he/she is conveying the true cultural expression/content when this is divorced from its context” (p. 49). Rose (1996) provided a more in-depth analysis of the way that western music education is an inseparable part of western culture and society by describing the role and function of formal music education as a means of producing and reproducing cultural identity. She specifically stated “. . .that despite being surrounded by indigenous cultures, schools often remain unaffected by students’ individual and/or collective cultures and operate in isolation from the wider cultural milieu” (p. 45). She further suggested that music education curricula need to become more holistic, interdisciplinary and relevant to students, and that “teachers need to view themselves, and understand their roles as critical agents in all aspects of cultural reproduction and production” (p. 50). In a similar manner, Walker (1996) compared the cultural context of the western term “music,” the Balinese term “gamelan” and the Ghanaian term “gwon” and suggested that music education should continue focusing on western music, but the curriculum 48 should also incorporate other activities that would be covering non-western cultures. Based on this approach, knowledge of cultural context becomes extremely crucial for the effectiveness of multicultural-world music education. That is the reason why Walker suggested that experts in such culturally fundamental areas as technology, beliefs, socio- religious practices and rites be consulted and invited to share their valuable information and experiences. As he clearly argued There would be no educational point in training children to sing like the choristers of King’s College, Cambridge, without King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, and its rituals and beliefs. And the Balinese ‘Ramayana’ vocal declamations would be as out of place in King’s College chapel as would the sounds of King’s choristers singing in a Balinese ritual drama. (p. 12) For Walker, the starting point for such contextual music implementation is nowhere else than at the revision of current music education curricula to focus on the work of 20th century composers. He proposed that music education should focus on the activities and theoretical motivations of such major composers as Debussy, Bartok, Stravinsky, Cage, Xenakis, Reich, Glass and others who were strongly influenced by non-western ideas and practices. He added that “it is extraordinary that music education in schools generally continues to be virtually oblivious to what has happened in the 20'h century, and there is a wealth of information about the cultural embedding of these activities” (p. 12). Finally, Westerlund (1999) also discussed western and African philosophical worldviews and suggested that ”it does not suffice to add new, exotic musical contents (new musics) to old curriculum constructions and to old teaching methodologies” (p. 101). She stated that it might be possible to gain an insight into different world views of music but the critical question is . .whether Western music teachers and especially teacher education institutions and researchers, who should be the first to enhance music 49 education, are willing to admit alternative views, to see the variety of possibilities music has in a human being’s life” (pp. 100-101). Availability and Ouglity of Multicultural-World Music Materials One of the most common concerns of educators is the lack of appropriate multicultural-world materials. Several articles addressed this specific concern by providing suggestions on where to locate and how to incorporate music materials from different cultures (Bieber, 1999; Cobb, 1995; Conlon, 1992; Edelman, 1990; Griswold, 1994; Schmid, 1992; Schmidt, 1999; Smith, 1983; Tucker, 1992). For example, Smith (1983) provided an annotated bibliography, filmography and discography focused on Hawaiian and Samoan music. Edelman (1990) examined possible problems and benefits of using Jewish music in our classrooms and shared a short bibliography and a list of classical repertoire based on Jewish music. Conlon (1992) shared helpful warm-up and ear-training exercises for traditional three- or four—voice choral groups, as well as a list of African, African-American, Asian, European, Hispanic, Near Eastern and North- American choral works. A similar list of instrumental works for band and orchestra from around the world was complied by Volk and was included in an article by Schmid (1992) who suggested different ideas for choosing and programming repertoire, analyzing music, rehearsal techniques, listening and working with smaller ensembles. Tucker (1992) provided a thorough annotated bibliography of books, films and recordings about many world cultures, as well as a list of suppliers of ethnic instruments, recordings and books in the United States. Additionally, Bieber (1999) commented on cultural context, selection of repertoire, and transcribing and arranging world music. Griswold (1994) wrote one of the few articles on multicultural-world music 50 resources through the Internet. He specifically included numerous web addresses on popular, rock, classical musics, a variety of ethnic cultures from all over the world, instrumental and choral groups, various types of musical research, on—line libraries, specific western musical instruments, pedagogy and composition. Griswold’s article is an excellent resource for all music educators in today’s technological world. Cobb (1995) described how she was surprised to find out that cultural units in the 1990 editions of the general music series books were fewer than in the editions in the 1980’s. She theorized that “rather than promoting students to accept and respect the diversity of Americans, the series focused on promoting and defining the dominant American culture” (p. 222). Cobb counterbalanced this reality by having her students experience a variety of cultural activities outside of school class time. She also invited music teachers from inner city, suburban and rural schools to come and talk to her classes on issues of human relations, racial bias and discipline. The ultimate goal of these activities was for students not only to understand and tolerate cultural differences, but also to appreciate them. Other authors were more critical and concerned about the unavailability of appropriate materials from the various diverse music cultures of the world (Rose, 1996; Schmidt, 1999). Rose discussed various ideas about curriculum development and commented on the enormous influence that publishing and recording companies exert on determining music education curricula. She clearly illustrated the politics behind the problem by stating that It is mind mind-boggling that in a country as vast as Canada, and in an environment as musically rich as Newfoundland, there exists only a handful of pieces with which to provide opportunities for instrumental music students, in a large ensemble setting, to experience indigenous music.(e.g. ‘Canadian Folksong 51 R1 Rhapsody’ and ‘Newfoundland Rhapsody’). Accordingly, as part of our endeavour [sic] to develop music education curricula that include indigenous music, we need to encourage arrangers, composers, publishers and recording companies to address this issue, and continue to develop resources and materials that include indigenous musics. (pp. 48-49) Rose further suggested that —multicultural-world music, or according to her terminology, indigenous music, would be more effective when incorporated in the overall cunicula of the school in such curricular areas as social sciences, language, creative writing, history, politics, economics and the arts. Similarly, Schmidt’s (1999) dissertation examined the influences that social, institutional and historical discourses exert on music textbooks published by the two major publishers of Silver Burdett Ginn and Macmillan/McGraw Hill. According to Schmidt, these discourses exhibit strong and complex connections with issues of power and politics that are often conflicting and contradictory in nature. By closely examining grade three and grade five of the above two textbooks series, it was found that, despite the evidence of strong influences of multicultural education, music textbooks failed to avoid the trap of oversimplifications and stereotypical representations of the various cultural groups in the society. At the same time, Schmidt’s findings revealed that the textbooks included only few cultural lesson activities and that multicultural knowledge deriving from understanding and valuing of diverse cultural perspectives was rarely assessed, therefore resulting in a somewhat shallow multicultural approach. Lack of Teacher Trainirg in Multicultural-World Music Two research studies have addressed the lack of teacher training in multicultural- world music (Moore, 1993; Stellacio, 1995). Moore (1993) collected data from 237 randomly selected general music teachers through an 80-item questionnaire. Results indicated that, despite the positive attitude of those teachers towards world music, the 52 three most frequent responses for its limited inclusion in the classroom were: (a) inadequate preparation for the teaching of world music; (b) insufficient knowledge of world music; and (c) beliefs about the higher importance of Euro-American music over world music. Moore (1993) concluded that “the primary long-range solution to the problem this research reveals lies with the redefinition of adequate preparation of music educators in their pre-service training” (p. 122). Stellacio (1995) interviewed six music supervisors and seventeen general music teachers regarding their beliefs, attitudes, goals, approaches and challenges pertaining to a multicultural curriculum in general music. She found that “music educators are inadequately prepared to meet the exhaustive demands of teaching with a multicultural perspective” (p. 300) and suggested that music educators should not focus only on curricular content but should develop a critical and praxial multicultural pedagogy as well. Litegagure on the Big Ten Universities This last section of related literature includes research focusing on the Big Ten universities and relating to (a) the area of music, (b) the area of music education and (c) other areas that portray structural or thematic similarities to my work. Research in Music Ellis (1994) investigated the procedures used by five prominent band conductors from four of the Big Ten universities in the preparation of a performance of a major band composition. Regardless of differences in age, background, experience and education of the five conductors, the author found a number of notable consistencies among them. In another music related study, Fuller (1995) examined the status and function of the 53 marching bands of the Big Ten universities and found that almost all of the bands have their music especially arranged to fit their performance needs and instrumentation and that their entertainment philosophy is equally balancing between traditional and innovative marching designs. Research in Music Educgtigg Heidel (1999) examined the relationship between the rankings of 124 undergraduate music education students and 5 music education instructors at five Big Ten universities. No significant differences were found between the composition and musical criteria rankings of student and expert subjects, indicating that pre-service music educators are able to objectively evaluate the quality of unfamiliar band pieces in a manner similar to professional music educators. Although Wollenzien’s (1999) study was not focused solely on the Big Ten schools, it nevertheless included nine of the eleven Big Ten schools, examining the content of their undergraduate music education degree. Other Big Ten Research Badu (1992) conducted a case study of selected chaimersons at Big Ten universities investigating their perceptions on how and why they had been selected for the position, their administrative expectations and their job satisfaction. Findings revealed that the Chairpersons did not believe that their racial background affected their selection for the position and that they did not experience isolation or discrimination of any type. George (1995) examined the level of preparation and training that preservice teachers received about computers and information technology in general. Using the schools of education of the eleven Big Ten schools and 21 public school corporations in the state of Indiana as his sample, the author discovered that there is a significant gap 54 between the level of computer literacy that preservice teachers achieve and the expectations that hiring school districts have. George (1995) concluded that what is needed is the integration of computer and information technologies into the entire undergraduate education curriculum and not the mere addition of related courses. As this review of literature illustrated, in the last decade there has been an increased interest in a wide variety of programs offered by the eleven Big Ten schools (Badu, 1992; Ellis, 1994; Fuller, 1995; George, 1995; Heidel, 1999; Wollenzien, 1999). Researchers have focused their attention at this specific group of schools for a number of reasons that are thoroughly addressed at Chapter HI. Conclusion This review of selected literature illustrated that the subdisciplines of multicultural and world music education present a complex and dynamic field within music education that is closely interconnected with numerous other areas such as philosophy, curriculum design, institutional change, performance and rehearsal techniques, cultural studies, interdisciplinary education, aesthetics, politics, and faculty recruitment. Much of the literature was found in practitioner journals such as the _M_us£ Educators Journal, the Intemgtional JoumaL of Music Education, and the Journal of Music Teacher Education. Only a few research studies in the area of multicultural-world music teacher education were found (Chin, 1996a; Montague, 1988; Norman, 1994; Okun, 1998). All of these sources stress the need for more studies focusing on the implementation of the subdiscipline in a variety of institutional settings. 55 CHAPTER III Methodology The purpose of the study was (a) to examine the current world and multicultural- world course offerings at the Big Ten universities and (b) to explore the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty regarding world music education and undergraduate music teacher education. Specifically, the study addressed the following three research questions: (1) What are the current multicultural-world course offerings available for undergraduate music education majors at the Big Ten schools? (2) What are the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding multicultural-world music education and music teacher education? (3) What are the suggestions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding multicultural-world issues in music education and music teacher education? The study was divided into two parts. Part 1 (Chapter IV) addressed the first component of the purpose and the first research question which was intended to identify current multicultural-world course offerings available for undergraduate music education majors at the Big Ten schools. Data for Part I were gathered through document analysis from a variety of sources such as school course catalogues, departmental web pages, and academic schedules and/or timetables (see Table I). Part II of the study (Chapters V, VI and VH) contains the results of a qualitative interview design that addressed the second part of the purpose and the second and third research questions. Data for part II were 56 gathered through in-person and phone interviews. Appendix I provides information regarding the ethnomusicology and music education faculty that were interviewed from each institution and the type and length of each interview. Overall, this study of the music education programs of the eleven Big Ten schools was at the same time focusing directly on each individual school setting and indirectly on the total group of schools known as the Big Ten. The breadth and depth of each program was examined in regards to multicultural-world preparation of preservice music educators. Every effort was made to provide rich description of the multicultural-world courses offered, as well as of the perceptions of the music education and ethnomusicology faculty in regards to the problems, approaches, and practices of multicultural-world music education. Through the interview process I was able to gain an in-depth understanding of the various programs in music education and the way they address multicultural-world music education at the undergraduate level. Selection Procedure The selection of the Big Ten schools as the focus of this study represents what has been defined as “purposeful sampling.” According to Patton (1990), Qualitative inquiry typically focuses in depth on relatively small samples, even single cases (n=l), selected purpose-fully... The logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in selecting information-rich cases for study in depth. Information- rich cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of central importance to the purpose of the research, thus the term purposeful sampling. (p. 169) According to their official web site “the Big Ten Conference is an association of 11 worldeclass universities whose member institutions share a common mission of research, graduate, professional and undergraduate teaching and public service” (www.bigten.org). The conference is predominantly known for its intercollegiate athletic 57 programs. This is mainly because the conference was originally founded in 1896 when the presidents of seven Midwest universities (University of Chicago, University of Illinois, University of Michigan, University of Minnesota, Northwestern University, Purdue University, and University of Wisconsin) met to discuss about initial ways of regulation and control of intercollegiate athletics (official web page). The legislation that followed “served as the primary building block for amateur intercollegiate athletics” (official web page). The conference expanded in 1899 with the additions of Indiana University and the State University of Iowa and in 1912 with the addition of Ohio State. In 1946 the University of Chicago withdrew to be replaced in 1949 with Michigan State College (now Michigan State University). The last member to be added was Pennsylvania State University in 1990. It should be noted that Purdue University does not have a music major program. Its Division of Music is a service division, offering undergraduate elective courses in general education. In addition, it does not have any world or multicultural-world music courses. Therefore, this study is focusing on the ten remaining Big Ten schools. In order to avoid the possibility of identification of individual schools and professors, each of the ten Big Ten schools included in Appendix I was assigned a number and each professor was assigned a pseudonym. Criteria for Selection Big Ten schools are a well-known and respected group of higher-education institutions. According to “Rugg’s recommendations on the colleges” (1999), seven of the eleven schools are placed in the list of one hundred colleges that “offer students the best opportunity to maximize their education” (p. xii). On “Profiles of American colleges” (Barron’s, 1999), one of the Big Ten schools is categorized as “most 58 competitive,” four are categorized as “highly competitive,” three are categorized as “very competitive,” one is categorized as “competitive,” one is categorized as “less competitive,” and one as “noncompetitive.” Finally, Cass—Liepmann (1996) categorized the Big Ten schools as follows: one of the schools as “most selective,” two of them as “highly + selective,” one as “highly selective,” two as “very + selective,” two as “selective +” and three of the schools as “selective” (pp. xxix-xxxiv). The Big Ten schools are also well respected for the high educational level that they provide in the field of music. Based on “Rugg’s recommendations on the colleges” (1999), four of the Big Ten schools are classified as “most selective” and one is classified as “very selective” (pp. 50-51). Rider’s (1983) informal rating survey of the ten most reputable doctoral programs in music education and music performance provided additional support by including seven Big Ten schools in the music education category (70%) and five in the music performance category (50%). A more scholarly approach was taken by Standley (1984) who analyzed and quantified the contents of three respected journals of music research in terms of the overall productivity of academic institutions, the number of dissertations reviewed from each academic institution, and the most productive and most eminent music research scholars. Findings indicated that six of the top twelve and/or eight of the top twenty-five most productive academic institutions in music research were Big Ten schools (50% and 32% respectively). In addition, seven of the top twelve and/or eight of the top twenty academic institutions with the greatest number of dissertations reviewed in the Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education were Big Ten schools (58% and 40% respectively). Big Ten schools are probably attracting a larger and more diverse student body 59 than other schools in their state or region. This might have an effect not so much on the programs of study that are offered in those institutions, but more on extracurricular activities and organizations that address multicultural and multiethnic diversity. In the area of music, all but one of the Big Ten schools are offering the highest degree available in the field (Ph.D. or D.M.A). Even though this study is focusing mainly on undergraduate, preservice music education programs, nevertheless a program that offers the highest degree of education in any one field is more likely to have a more diverse offering of courses available not only to its graduate students but also to its undergraduates as well. Even though many of those diverse courses may not be available for undergraduate credit, their mere existence at the program will at least make undergraduate students more aware of a wider diversity of academic interests within the field of music. In addition, since ethnomusicology is predominantly an area of concentrated study at the graduate level only and since experts support that ethnomusicology and ethnomusicologists should play a more central role in the training of teachers (Okun, 1998, p. 123), then the focus on doctoral level institutions in music becomes imperative. Another important reason for the selection of the Big Ten schools was the fact that ten of their eleven music departments are accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM). The one institution that is not in NASM member does not have a music department but only a small music program. Even though membership in NASM is voluntary, nevertheless institutions must fulfill a number of requirements in order to become members. In addition, NASM re-evaluates its member institutions every ten years, and therefore members have to make sure that they keep up with the changing 60 requirements and guidelines of NASM. Ten of the eleven institutions that comprise the Big Ten Conference are state schools. The fact that this specific group of schools is predominantly publicly funded becomes important since research has indicated that the second most important impetus for having programs that address multicultural-world music education are “. .. laws, especially those which address teacher certification, which are specific enough to be monitored” (Montague, 1988, p. 188). Therefore, one may support that state and federal laws affect (directly or indirectly) the education, multicultural education and/or multicultural-world music education programs of state institutions, more so than those programs of a private institution. It seems that the individual music departments of the schools in the Big Ten Conference play a prominent role in the profession and represent what Patton (1990) would call “intensity sample.” Their well-respected music programs and the variety that they exhibit among them, make them rich in information and thus an appropriate group of schools to study. As Patton (1990) described, “an intensity sample consists of information-rich cases that manifest the phenomenon of interest intensely (but not extremely)” (p. 171). Data ConcerningMulticulturaLWorld Course Offerings in Music The first part of the study focused on identifying current multicultural-world course offerings available for undergraduate music education majors at the Big Ten schools. Collection of data started in early February of 2001 through a thorough examination of course catalogues, departmental web pages, and academic schedules and/or timetables from each of the Big Ten music schools and/or departments. The web 61 pages of the music schools and/or departments were examined and every effort was made to locate the Internet address that listed their course offerings. Data collection for this part continued during the interview process, when I asked the various professors for information regarding available multicultural-world music courses in their institutions. Additionally, individual music schools and/or departments were contacted and were asked to provide a printed copy of their course offerings. W The second part of the study was a qualitative interview design focused on identifying the perceptions and suggestions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding multicultural-world music issues in music education and music teacher education. Interviewing has been valued as an important part of data collection in qualitative research (Wolcott, 1992). Since the rise of qualitative research in the late 1970’s as an equally valid way of conducting scholarly research (Gage, 1989; Seidman, 1991), researchers have been actively engaging in various types of interview techniques in order to better understand social phenomena, relationships and experiences. As Seidman (1991) indicated, “interviewing, then, is a basic mode of inquiry. Recounting narratives of experience has been the major way throughout recorded history that humans have made sense of their experience” (p. 2). The unique characteristic of interviewing that makes it such an important method of data collection is that it allows the researcher to enhance and elaborate on knowledge that has been gained through document examination (Patton, 1990; Seidman, 1991). According to Patton (1990), “the purpose of interviewing, then, is to allow us to enter into the other person’s perspective. Qualitative interviewing begins with the assumption 62 that the perspective of others is meaningful, knowable, and able to be made explicit” (p. 278). In order to fulfill the second purpose of this study and explore the perceptions of selected music faculty about multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education, it was necessary to try to understand their own perspective about the meanings, goals, philosophies, methodologies and problems related with each of the above terms. The perspectives of music education and ethnomusicology faculty about these issues are not only meaningful and valuable but I would argue the most meaningful and valuable since they are the ones who would have to struggle with those issues and share them with their students. Seidman (1991) provided a supporting rationale for utilizing interviewing techniques by stating that The purpose of in-depth interviewing is not to get answers to questions, nor to test hypotheses, and not to ‘evaluate’ as the term is normally used... At the root of in- depth interviewing is an interest in understanding the experience of other people and the meaning they make of that experience. (p. 3) This is what I tried to achieve through the interviews. Since there is not only one universally shared definition of multicultural and world music education and there is not only one approach to educate and prepare preservice music educators in regards to these subdisciplines, the purpose of my interviews were to understand the individual struggles, perspectives and experiences that various professors of music had with incorporating and teaching about the music of other cultures. I also did not intend in any way to evaluate the PefSpectives, approaches and methodologies of individual professors or schools in regards to multicultural-world music education. Instead, I wanted to explore and understand how different professors and music departments approach those issues in therr 63 teaching and curricula. Through the interview process the researcher has ample opportunities for gaining a deeper understanding into complex human behaviors and actions that would not be available only through observation and/or examination of documents. As Seidman (1991) described, “to observe a teacher, student, principal, or counselor provides access to their behavior. Interviewing allows us to put behavior in context and provides access to understanding their action” (p. 4). Finally, through an interview process the researcher can gather information on events and behaviors that took place in the past, or occurred in places that are far removed from where the researcher is able to go. These factors were prevalent during the development of this study and were instrumental in influencing the decision on relying on interviewing as the primary method of data collection. The following quote from Reason ( 1981) is addressed to those researchers who are reluctant in acknowledging and accepting interviewing, and hence qualitative research methods, as a valid method of research. For him The best stories are those which stir people’s minds, hearts, and souls and by so doing give them new insights into themselves, their problems and their human condition. The challenge is to develop a human science that can more fully serve this aim. The question then, is not ‘13 story telling science?’ but ‘Can science learn to tell good stories?’ (p. 50) Interview Data Collection \ Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS). Collection of data started in Spring/summer of 2001 with personal visits to schools I, VI, and X. Prior to my visits on campus, considerable time was spent on each music department’s web page to identify music education professors who might be involved with multicultural-world music education. The identification of the appropriate professors was based on information 64 —— gathered by reading about the professor’s professional background and the courses that s/he was teaching. Subsequently, ethnomusicology and music education professors from the music department of the three schools were contacted by email prior to my arrival on campus and an appointment time was arranged during my two—day visit to those three schools. It should also be indicated that during my visit at University X, I was able to have an informal in-person interview with one of the ethnomusicology professors with whom I did not arrange any meeting in advance. I was fortunate that this professor was available during that day and did not object to talking with me without our arranging it beforehand. A total of sixteen in-person interviews were conducted during the visits in the above three Big Ten schools. All interviews were recorded using a small portable Sony TCM-ZODV cassette recorder and a normal bias audiotape, except for one interview in which the cassette recorder was malfunctioning and effort was taken in collecting as much data as possible by hand. The sixteen in-person interviews provided approximately ten-and-one-third hours of data or a total of 623 minutes. They ranged from a minimum length of sixteen minutes to a maximum length of seventy-six minutes, with the average length of an in-person interview being thirty—nine minutes. During the remaining time of spring/summer of 2001, ethnomusicologists and music education professors from the remaining seven Big Ten schools were contacted and interviewed over the phone. The majority of the professors who were interviewed were employed full-time at their respective music schools, with the exception of a few interviewees who were visiting professors serving as sabbatical replacements. Conscious effort was made to include at least three professors from every university, ensuring that at 65 least one of them was from each of the fields of music education and ethnomusicology. Despite that effort, the researcher was unable to complete the minimum number of three interviews in two of the ten schools. At University V this was because a number of professors did not return my phone calls and/or email requests for an interview. At University IX the reason was that there is no ethnomusicologist on the faculty. It was decided that a pseudonym would be given to each professor in order to provide the reader with a clear indication of the overall input by each professor. Since each pseudonym is representative of the gender of each professor, gender identification was also provided. Nevertheless, gender was not a determining factor in the data analysis for this study. Appendix I includes a complete list of all the professors who were interviewed, their gender, a pseudonym, their area of specialty, the type of interview conducted with them (in-person/phone) and the length of the interview in minutes. A total of seventeen phone interviews were conducted during the visits in the above three Big Ten schools. All interviews were recorded using a small portable Sony TCM-20DV cassette recorder, a normal bias audiotape and a 43-1237 telephone control from Radio Shack. The seventeen phone interviews provided approximately nine-and- one-sixth hours of data or a total of 548 minutes. They ranged from a minimum length of nine minutes to a maximum length of fifty-seven minutes, with the average length of a phone interview being thirty-two minutes. In-person and phone interviews included a wide range of open-ended questions regarding the professor’s background and philosophy, the current status of multicultural- world music education at their institution and at the profession in general, its philosophical foundations and practical application, as well as discussion about problems, 66 considerations of and suggestions about multicultural-world music education. In addition, I inquired about the professional relationships between music educators and ethnomusicologists in the department. A more detailed list of the interview questions can be seen in Appendix B. Data collection through the interviews started in the spring of 2001 and continued until the beginning of fall. A summative timeline of data collection is provided below: January 2001 Started collecting data from university web pages. February 2001 Started conducting phone calls to arrange interview dates and times. March 2001 Started in-person interviews. April 2001 Started phone interviews. Concluded in—person interviews. September 2001 Concluded phone interviews. October 2001 Concluded collecting data from university web pages. Theoretical Framework As with any other paradigm that evolves, develops and spreads in many different areas, qualitative characteristics can be found in a number of approaches that have different philosophical, theoretical and practical focus. Based on their distinct research purposes, questions, and practical applications, these approaches are distinctly separated, with limiting interaction across and among them (Patton, 1990). Bogdan and Biklen (1992) supported that “whether stated or not, all research is guided by some theoretical orientation. Good researchers are aware of their theoretical base and use it to help collect and analyze data” (p. 33). Due to my own involvement with multicultural-world music education and in the last two years with multicultural- 67 world music teacher education, I feel that the heuristic perspective can provide a supporting framework for providing my own experiences with multicultural-world music (teacher) education. Heuristics is one of the qualitative theoretical frameworks that not only allows, but also encourages the personal perspective of the researcher to take an important part in the shaping of the inquiry. Since heuristics is a form of phenomenological inquiry, in the remainder of this section I will examine and analyze the underlying premises of phenomenology and heuristics and address their application in my own study. Phenomenology Phenomenology is rooted in the early century German philosophical tradition of Heidegger and Husserl (Bresler, 1995). Its name is derived from the Greek word “(patvoueva” (phenomena) and it signifies the attempt to understand how people experience and ascribe meaning to various phenomena in order to make sense of the world. Phenomenology focuses on the subjective experience of the person’s reality of an objective phenomenon (Patton, 1998) and has a bipartite nature, referring first to the essence of the people’s experience and second to the methodological necessity to personally experience the phenomenon under study in order to fully understand it. Bresler (1995) defined this as “lived experience,” which is later turned into a textural recollection. Phenomenologists gather their data through in—depth open-ended interviews and reflective journals. Even though both of these strategies are not naturalistic, the phenomenological experience remains holistic and contextual. 68 _‘ vim- Heuristic inquiry. The term “heuristics” derives from the Greek word “evpiorcco” which means, “I discover” or “I find.” The term was initiated by the psychologist Moustakas (1990) who explained that heuristic inquiry refers to a process of internal search through which one discovers the nature and meaning of experience and develops methods and procedures for further investigation and analysis. The self of the researcher is present throughout the process and, while understanding the phenomenon with increasing depth, the researcher also experiences growing self-awareness and self—knowledge. Heuristic processes incorporate creative self-processes and self-discoveries. (p. 9) Hence, the unique characteristic of heuristics is that it places the utmost importance on the personal experiences and insights of the researcher (Patton, 1990). This is in direct contrast with the traditional positivistic methods of scientific research, but is exactly what makes heuristic inquiry so unique. As the primary research instrument in the study, it is therefore imperative that the researcher has enough personal experiences and a strong interest in the phenomenon under study. It is also necessary for those personal experiences to be not only adequate in number, but, more important, deep and intense in order to provide thoughtful insights about the phenomenon. Douglass and Moustakas (1985) identified the following four qualities that are unique to heuristic inquiry: (a) connectedness and relationship; (b) depiction of significant personal insights; (c) synthesis of derived knowledge, tacit understanding and the researcher’s intuition; and (d) importance on continued visibility of research participants as whole persons. These qualities illustrate the humanistic nature of heuristic inquiry, in which other professional and nonprofessional people with the same experiences and interests on the phenomenon are welcomed in the study and are treated as co-researchers. 69 As indicated in the introduction, my own personal experience, involvement, and deep interest in multicultural—world music education is the primary reason for my choice of the heuristic inquiry. Heuristic inquiry provided an avenue for sharing and discussing my experiences, insights and concerns with other professionals that share the same interest in this area of music education. Through open—ended or semi-structured interviews, the subjective nature of heuristic inquiry can become a strength, since the diversity in personal experiences and insights can lead to fruitful discussions and encompassing understandings of the phenomenon under study. According to Moustakas (1990) The heuristic process is autobiographic, yet with virtually every question that matters personally there is also a social-and perhaps universal-significance. Heuristics is a way of engaging in scientific search through methods and processes aimed at discovery; a way of self-inquiry and dialogue with others aimed at finding the underlying meanings of important human experiences. The deepest currents of meaning and knowledge take place within the individual through one’s senses, perceptions, beliefs, and judgments. (p. 15) It is these personal and at the same time social and universal perspectives on multicultural and world music education that this study tried to identify and address. Through the personal perceptions and judgments of the author and the dialogue with thirty-three professors interested in the promotion and teaching of music from different world cultures, a deeper level of knowledge and understanding has emerged. Personal Background The basis of my initial interest in music from a variety of world cultures stems from my own personal background as a Greek-Cypriot citizen studying in the United States and from various circumstances that occurred in my academic, musical, and professional development. As a native of Cyprus, a small island on the south eastern part of the Mediterranean, I was raised with a wide variety of musical stimuli, starting from 70 Greek popular, rock and folk music, rembetica (a kind of urban blues of contemporary Greece), English rock and popular music of the 1970’s to 1990’s, and inevitably, Cypriot folk music. In addition, through years of private music lessons in violin and my performing experience with the Cyprus Youth State Orchestra, I was introduced to the world of Western classical music. In addition, during my two years of being a saxophonist and violinist in the Military Band of the Cyprus National Guard, I came in contact with music for marching and concert band, as well as with “laika” songs from Greece (a descendent of the rembetica, a type of urban popular music). It was my rich musical experience in the National Guard that sparked my interest in coming to the United States in order to get a broader musical education. After my military service was completed, I attended the Pedagogical Academy of Cyprus, where for three years I was deeply involved in all musical activities such as singing and playing guitar, violin, and baglama (a fretted string instrument of the lute family). Furthermore, I also became involved with the Greek Folk Dance Group of the academy, for which I was the lute player and with which I occasionally engaged in Greek folk dancing. It was during this time that I was selected to be a member of a student group that represented Cyprus in two European music festivals, performing Greek and Cypriot folk and popular music. These international musical experiences strengthened my desire for an extended musical study abroad. Upon coming in the United States to study saxophone and music education, I realized the impact that Greek and Cypriot music had had on the development of my personality. Even though I was extremely satisfied with my undergraduate musical studies at the midwestem conservatory that I attended, there were numerous days that I 71 did not want to hear anything other than Greek music. I felt that it was “my music,” and only through this type of music my identity was reflected and my soul soothed. Even though I was thousand of miles away from home, whenever I was listening to any type of Greek music the long distance was eliminated and I temporarily felt at home again. My own feelings about cultural significance of music and its varied impact in our lives led me to start thinking about the role of music in public school education. Through my private and public school music teaching experiences, I was trying to find ways that would enable my students to come closer to music and experience its affect with touching the inner parts of their souls. I realized that this was an extremely difficult task, especially considering the racially, ethnically and socially diverse student body in the American public schools. This inevitably introduced me to multicultural-world music education and I decided to focus my master’s thesis on this area. I therefore wrote a teacher’s guidebook for Greek folk music that can be used for middle school general music. Since then, my personal and professional involvement with world and multicultural-world music education has intensified. I have deepened my understanding of and involvement with the field of ethnomusicology by pursuing a cognate in that area, I have attended workshops and seminars related to multicultural-world music education as well as national and international conferences in ethnomusicology and music education, I have familiarized my self with the extended body of literature on ethnomusicology, world music and multicultural education, and I have presented numerous workshops and lectures on Greek music. Furthermore, I continue to focus much of my public school and college music teaching on multicultural-world music education. 72 22.11am All researchers in any type of research are concerned with the quality and accuracy of their data. In both quantitative and qualitative research, validity is an indication of whether an instrument is measuring what is supposed to be measured (Hittleman & Simon, 1992; Wolcott, 1990). However, due to the contextual and situational nature of qualitative research, the direct application of traditional understandings of validity in studies that examine social and human phenomena is not possible. Kirk and Miller (1986) suggested that validity in qualitative research refers to the degree to which the findings of a study were interpreted in a correct way (1). 20). Therefore validity in qualitative research is a criterion that examines whether findings are authentic, trustworthy and credible. Even though the quest for validity is necessary and valuable, at the same time it can also become problematic, burdensome and even “a dangerous distraction” (Wolcott, 1990, p. 146). This is because the primary instrument in qualitative research is the researcher, and it is inevitable that the design, focus and findings of qualitative research will in someone way be affected by the professional, and one might argue by the personal as well, background of the researcher him/herself. According to Patton (1990), “validity... hinges to a great extent on the skill, competence, and rigor of the person doing fieldwork” (p. 14). As Lincoln and Guba (1994) articulated “... objectivity is a chimera: a mythological creature that never existed, save in the imaginations of those who believe that knowing can be separated from the knower” (p. 181). Based on the above analysis, it becomes apparent that validity in qualitative research is relative, and there is no such thing as one and only valid description and 73 explanation of a phenomenon (Smith & Deemer, 1994). J anesick (1994) supported that “validity in qualitative work has to do with description and explanation and whether or not the explanation fits the description” (p. 393). Even though this might be viewed by some as an inherent weakness for “valid” research, I personally view this as one of the inherent advantages of qualitative research that make it much more appropriate and valuable when investigating issues that have to do with human relations and the social sciences. Real life illustrates that truth is often buried between rich and complex layers of social, cultural, hierarchical, and political contexts that rarely provide the “luxury” of a right or wrong answer. In the same manner, truth is rarely a matter of black or white, but what is of interest and value is the significant area of gray in between. According to Wolcott (1990), “there is no single and ‘correct’ interpretation... For every actor in these events there are multiple meanings” (p. 144). He further illustrated the difference between understanding and knowledge and stated that as a qualitative researcher he does not “. . . go about trying to discover a ready-made world; rather [he] seek(s) to understand a social world we are continuously in the process of constructing” (p. 147). Moustakas (1990) provided additional support by stating that “the question of validity is one of meaning: Does the ultimate depiction of the experience derived from one’s own rigorous, exhaustive self-searching and from the explications of others present comprehensively, vividly, and accurately the meanings and essences of the experience?” (p. 32). Moustakas’ statement illustrated some of the approaches in which qualitative researchers attempt to increase the authenticity and credibility of their findings. Overall, this is achieved by providing detailed descriptions and explanations of how the data was 74 collected and analyzed. Wolcott (1990) offered the following nine suggestions that could significantly increase the trustworthiness of qualitative findings: (a) talk little, listen a lot; (b) record accurately; (c) begin by writing a preliminary draft early on; ((1) let readers “see” for themselves by including primary data without immediate interpretation; (6) report fully; (f) be honest about our subjectivity; (g) seek feedback by using member- checks; (h) try to achieve balance between our interests and our thoughts; and (i) write accurately. In this study, validity was addressed through the following measures: (a) multiple interviewees; (b) member checks; and (c) attention to investigator expertise. Specifically, in an effort to draw maximum meaning out of the personal interviews, a conscious effort was made to interview not only music education professors but also ethnomusicologists. This interdisciplinary approach is also found in previous studies in the area of world and multicultural-world music education (Chin, 1996a; Okun, 1998; Volk, 1994, 1998). In addition, numerous other authors directly or indirectly indicated a need for closer collaboration between the two disciplines of music education and ethnomusicology (Burton, 1997; Elliott, 1989; Elliott, 1996; Mukuna, 1997; Nettl, 1992; Nketia, 1957; Reeder Lundquist, 1991; Rose, 1996). Validity was also addressed by allowing my informants to read and comment on the written transcripts of our informal interviews. This provided faculty members with the opportunity to clarify possible misunderstandings and allowed me to ask additional questions that arose after the interview was over. This practice is identified in the literature as “member checking” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Seidman, 1991). Specifically, Lincoln and Guba (1985) suggested that “the member check, whereby data, analytic 75 categories, interpretations, and conclusions are tested with members of those stakeholding groups from whom the data were originally collected, is the most crucial technique for establishing credibility” (p. 314). They added that “member checking is both informal and formal, and it occurs continuously” (p. 314). Therefore, in addition to the formal member checking opportunity that I provided my informants after the completion of our interview, I was also engaged in informal and continuous member checking by asking clarifying questions during the interview process. This proved to be valuable, especially because the informal interview was the only time that I was able to engage in an interactive discussion with my informants. Seidman (1990) also incorporated member checking to make sure that he accurately analyzed data and that the vulnerability of his informants was protected. He further explained how issues of ownership and differing interpretations might arise during member checking. Nevertheless, his own position was clear in regards to his responsibilities towards his informants. He explicitly clarified that “except with regards to issues of vulnerability or inaccuracy, however, I retain the right to write the final report as I see it” (p. 75). This is also the position that I hold in this research project. The analysis of the interview data illuminated that subtle issues of personal and professional conflict and disagreement played an important role in the level of commitment to and implementation of multicultural-world music education at each institution. It is precisely these issues that I wanted to address in this study but at the same time making sure that I protected the identity and vulnerability of each of the participants. Finally, my long personal and professional interest in, involvement with and commitment to multicultural-world music education, provide the necessary supporting 76 background in regards to investigator expertise. According to Patton (1990), one of the three distinct elements that add credibility to a qualitative study is “the credibility of the researcher, which is dependent on training, experience, track record, status, and presentation of self” (p. 461). It is expected that my own training as a doctoral candidate in music education with a cognate in ethnomusicology at one of the Big Ten schools, as well as my previous training for the master’s degree in music education at another institution committed to world music education (Bowling Green State University), provided a thorough training that is necessary for a better understanding of multicultural- world music education. My own professional experience as a general and instrumental music teacher here in the United States and back in Cyprus for a total of four years provided me with an involved enough experience in a variety of diverse setting within music education at the public school. Additionally, the fact that I have presented world music workshops at numerous regional, national, and international conferences in music education, has enriched my background and status as an educator committed to multicultural-world music education. For all these reasons, rich investigator expertise enhanced the validity of this study. In addition to the above three preliminary measures, validity will also be negotiated after the study has been conducted and written by the people who read it. Each reader individually and groups of people collectively will support or question the validity of this study with their reactions to it. According to Patton (1990), “the ultimate test of the credibility of an evaluation report is the response of information users and readers to that report. This is a test of face validity. On the face of it, is the report believable? Are the data reasonable? Do the results connect to how people understand the world?” (p. 77 469). Stake (1994) provided further support by stating, “not incidentally, readers often are invited to generate their own interpretations and implications. The researcher acts as an agent of the reader, supporting alternative interpretations by offering data in detail” (p. 39). Grounded Theory As indicated in the Review of Literature, numerous authors commented directly or indirectly on the need for and the importance of a thorough and solid music teacher preparation in world and multicultural-world music education (Campbell, 1994; Chin, 1996a; Lundquist, 1991; Mark, 1998; Moore, 1993; Norman, 1994; Sands, 1993; Standifer, 1990; Stellacio, 1995; Volk, 1998). In addition, in order for the subdiscipline to continue to grow and expand, it is imperative that more researchers in music education closely examine and investigate how existing music education programs at the undergraduate level cope with the multicultural-world imperative. This is true not only for exemplary programs in that area as in the case of the studies by Chin (1996a) and Okun (1998) cited above, but also in the wide variety of programs ranging from small colleges to large universities, from private institutions to publicly funded ones, and from colleges in urban areas to those in large, metropolitan cities. Those studies should examine the philosophical foundation of the institution in regards to multicultural-world music education and multicultural education in general, the number and foci of related courses, the nature of music concepts that are introduced and taught, the variety of methods used, the short and long-term goals of individual courses and the overall program, the criteria for admissions in the music education program, the diversity in the student body and in faculty, the possible strengths and 78 deficiencies of those programs, and many more. It is through this process that a substantial body of research on multicultural—world music teacher education will be produced. This can ultimately lead to the development of a grounded theory on how future music educators are trained in regards to world music. According to Strauss and Corbin (1990), “grounded theory is a theory that is inductively derived from the study of the phenomenon it represents” (p. 23). They continued by explaining that “the grounded theory approach is a qualitative research method that uses a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived grounded theory about a phenomenon” (p. 24). These two sociologists developed this approach in the 1960’s, and, even though it was initially used mainly in sociological research, its procedures for data analysis can be used by a variety of disciplines, depending on the different focus and interest within each discipline. Similarly, different researchers with different theoretical perspectives can follow its procedures and produce unique grounded theories. This is because theorists creatively define and interpret data that can be generalized and applied in a variety of related contexts (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). It should also be added that “the theoretical formulation that results not only can be used to explain that reality but provides a framework for action” (Strauss & Corbin, 1990,p.22) Based on earlier studies of multicultural-world music teacher education (Chin, 1996a; Montague, 1988; Okun, 1998), this study was an attempt to provide more information for the construction of a grounded theory on this important component of undergraduate music teacher education. 79 Data Analysis Analysis and interpretation of data, as well as presentation of findings are the fundamental activities of qualitative research (Patton, 1990). These activities present a challenging task, since there are no exact rules and procedures to be followed. The researcher’s role in qualitative research is extremely critical. According to Patton (1990) “there are no absolute rules except to do the very best with your full intellect to fairly represent the data and communicate what the data reveal given the purpose of the study” (p. 372). Throughout the period of the study, care was taken to vigilantly reflect back to the underlying purpose and fundamental questions of the study. This was extremely valuable especially due to the abundance of data gathered through the thirty-three interviews with music professors. The continuous interaction between research purpose and questions and data analysis and interpretation was fundamental in the shaping of the study in its current form. Since this interaction occurred from the very beginning of the study and was especially apparent during the data collection period, it is almost impossible to identify exactly when data analysis begins. This is a unique characteristic of qualitative research on which a number of researchers have commented (Conway, in press; Patton, 1990). As Patton (1990) suggested, “in the course of gathering data, ideas about possible analysis will occur. Those ideas constitute the beginning of analysis” (p. 377). This is exactly what happened in this study. From its initial stages of data collection through the universities’ web pages, I was simultaneously thinking of questions that I should ask different professors from the various schools. Similarly, during individual interviews I was concurrently listening to and connecting what my informants were sharing with me 80 with the predetermined questions that I wanted to ask them, and I was additionally coming up with new important questions that did not occur to me before the interview. As the number of completed interviews was increasing, so did the number and scope of the questions that I wanted to ask my informants. Conway (in press) described this process by stating that “data collection and analysis often merge together in a non-linear way.” It was my intent as a researcher to carefully analyze, thoroughly interpret, and truthfully present findings in a creatively appropriate way for fellow researchers to read and understand. Multicultugalgnd World Music Courses at the Big Ten Schools For this part of the study data were collected primarily through university web pages and course catalogues and were also enriched and supplemented by additional information gathered through the interviews. University web pages were consulted at the beginning, middle and end of the study in order to ensure that information was current and accurate. Music departments were contacted and asked to provide materials that pertained to course offerings and degree requirements. Finally, during the informal interviews with ethnomusicology and music education faculty, I asked specific questions pertaining to course offerings in the area of multicultural-world music education. After data on these courses were collected through the above procedure, they were reviewed and categorized into the following five categories used by Chin (1996a): (a) survey; (b) geographic; (c) interdisciplinary; (d) ethnomusicological; and (e) performance studies. During that process these five categories were found inadequate and were supplemented with the following three categories added by my analysis: (f) pedagogical; (g) multicultural; and (h) intracultural. Even though every effort was made 81 to choose categories to be mutually exclusive, there were cases of courses that could be included into more than one category. It should also be understood that these seven categories are one possible approach in identifying, coding, and categorizing data relating to multicultural and world music course offerings. The first category (survey) includes courses that examine music as a worldwide phenomenon. These music survey courses examine how musical elements are treated in a wide variety of musical cultures from around the world. They also address the cultural context of music and familiarize students with various world music genres and their use and function in their respective societies. The second category (geographic) contains courses on musical traditions from a specific country or geographic region. These ethnomusicology courses in world music cultures provide a more focused and in-depth examination, analysis and understanding of a number of national and regional musical genres and their cultural context. The third category (interdisciplinary) includes ethnomusicology courses that are a combination of the above two categories. These interdisciplinary courses are similar to survey courses in that they cover a variety of musical genres not specified by national or regional boundaries, but at the same time they provide a focused examination of the connection of music with other non-musical perspectives such as gender, race, politics, and the media. It should be indicated that this classification is significantly different from the one used by Chin (1996a) who identified it as encompassing “interdisciplinary courses that include world music as a component” (p. 81). The main difference is that the interdisciplinary courses included in this study are first and foremost music courses and not just any types of courses that include a world music component. 82 Ethnomusicological courses that cover the historical development, theoretical orientation and methodological approaches of the field of ethnomusicology make up the fourth category. In the fifth category (performance) are courses that provide performance instruction in vocal and instrumental music from around the world, whereas the sixth category (pedagogical) lists music education courses that include at least a minimum coverage on multicultural—world music education. The seventh category (multicultural) lists courses that are offered through the schools of education and are required for undergraduate music education majors. It should be indicated that almost every major university in the United States offers numerous courses that could be classified as multicultural courses through their departments of Literature, Composition, Humanities, Social Sciences and the Arts. The purpose of this study, though, was not to identify those courses but to examine how undergraduate music education majors are prepared to address world music and multicultural education. Therefore, this category includes only those multicultural courses that were identified through the interview process as required for the Bachelor’s degree in music education. Finally, the eighth category (intracultural) includes music courses that focus on musical genres that are a unique cultural and artistic product of the United States and the western world and with which the majority of American students have a basic familiarity and affiliation with. These musical genres are identified as popular, rock, blues, gospel and jazz music. Contrary to most studies in multicultural-world music education that do not consider such courses as belonging to the category of multicultural music, it was decided that these courses would be included in this study because they represent musical 83 expressions of diverse groups distinguished by one or more of the categories addressed within multicultural education, i.e., race, gender, lifestyle, socioeconomic status, religion, ethnic affiliation, and ability/exceptionality. Taking rock music as an example, one might agree that it is a unique cultural expression of musicians from a specific racial, ethnic, religious and socioeconomic status. A similar argument can be made for the blues, gospel, jazz and popular music. Therefore, due to the wide diversity of the student body in American institutions of primary, secondary and higher education, courses in jazz, rock, blues, gospel and popular music can be identified as multicultural music with which most students will have some familiarity with and others will not. The argument becomes clearer when one considers the large number of international students that attend American universities and for whom gospel music and the blues might be completely unfamiliar and foreign. A complete description of course offerings in multicultural and world music appears in Chapter IV. Perceptions of Ethnomusicology and Music Education Faculty Regarding Multicultural and World Music Education The thirty-three interviews that were conducted for this study were transcribed at different time periods by the researcher and an experienced transcriber. The transcriber was a beginning music educator, who is therefore well acquainted with the field of music education and the subdisciplines of multicultural and world music education. In addition to her experience as a music educator, she also had had extensive experience as a transcriber, and she has been hired by a number of other qualitative researchers in the area. Many of them have commented on her thorough and precise transcriptions and the 84 understanding that she brings as a musician and educator. She transcribed twenty of the thirty-three interviews. Data from the interviews were analyzed through content analysis. Through that process, important patterns in the data were identified, coded and categorized (Patton, 1990). Initially the following fifteen categories were used for data analysis: (a) reasons regarding the problematic nature of multicultural and world music education; (b) multicultural and world music courses offered; (0) university requirements regarding multicultural and world music; ((1) suggestions for improvement of multicultural and world music education and music teacher education; (e) individual philosophy about multicultural and world music education; (f) individual definition of the term “multicultural music education”; (g) relationships between ethnomusicologists and music educators within the institution; (h) influence of personal background; (i) opinion about the current status of multicultural and world music education; (j) teaching approaches that they use in regards to multicultural and world music education; (k) opinion about available materials; (1) opinion about world music ensembles; (m) courses that they teach; (it) reaction of students to multicultural-world music education; and (0) reason for the incorporation of multicultural-world music perspectives in their institution. As indicated above, it is unclear at which exact point in the period of the study that these fifteen categories were established. Many of them were developed consciously as well as unconsciously even before the proposal of this study, during my preparation for the comprehensive examinations of the doctoral degree. Specifically, during the month of October 2000, I took the first part of my comprehensive examinations in which three of the four questions were directly focusing on multicultural-world music 85 education. For my preparation for those questions I had to locate and read numerous sources that addressed and examined philosophical, theoretical, contextual, methodological, and practical issues relating to world and multicultural-world music education. From that time on my understanding of the complexity of those issues was becoming stronger and stronger, and as every time I felt I was coming across some answers in the related literature, I was also finding myself asking more questions than ever before. The same process continued during the writing of the proposal for this study. Having to articulate exactly what the focus of my study was going to be proved to be a valuable exercise. I started developing the questions I wanted to ask my informants so that I could determine how different educators and scholars addressed similar issues. Many of these ideas helped to create the analysis codes. The final additions to the coding list occurred during the content analysis process. By carefully going through each one of the thirty-three interviews and attempting to label and categorize each aspect of the answers to my questions, I was forced to identify more categories than I expected. Similar patterns and themes were emerging in several of the interviews, and I was trying to be as inclusive and analytical as possible. At the same time, I also defined numerous and specific codes within some of the above categories. For example, categories (a) (i.e., Reasons regarding the problematic nature of multicultural and world music education) and (d) (i.e., Suggestions for improvement of multicultural and world music education and music teacher education) ended up having nine and fifteen codes/themes respectively. The list of those codes was open and growing until the end of the content analysis process. This is especially true, 86 because every new reading of the interview data was producing new insights and connections with related research and with interview data themselves. As Patton (1990) explained “several readings of the data are necessary before they can be completely indexed” (p. 382). The following nine codes/themes were used in organizing the wide variety of faculty perceptions and ideas regarding the problematic nature of multicultural-world music education: (1) unclear and ambiguous definition of “multicultural music education;” (2) no flexibility in the music education undergraduate degree; (3) a predominantly white student body that has no contact with multiculturalism and world music; (4) a predominantly white faculty body who has no contact with multiculturalism and world music; (5) issues of politics and power within the music department; (6) insincere commitment from departments and universities; (7) limited understanding of the broader cultural and social context; (8) superficial implementation and limited successful models available; and (9) quantity and quality of multicultural-world music materials. Similarly, the fifteen codes/themes for the implementation and improvement of multicultural and world music education are as follows: ( 1) incorporate multicultural and world music perspectives throughout the music curriculum; (2) offer a world music survey class specifically for music majors; (3) offer numerous geographic courses in world music; (4) offer numerous performance courses in world music; (5) examine all music in its cultural and social context; (6) encourage a closer collaboration between music education and ethnomusicology; (7) provide opportunities for concerts and workshops in world music; (8) hire diverse faculty with wide interests; (9) attract more 87 diverse students; (10) incorporate the cultural diversity found in the immediate community; (11) facilitate observations and student teaching possibilities in culturally diverse settings; (12) become bimusical by studying a second culture in depth; (13): include opportunities and experiences with improvisation and aural learning of music; (14) provide opportunities for music study in a culturally diverse setting abroad; and (15) offer a multicultural and/or world music specialization in the undergraduate degree in music education. After content analysis was deemed as complete and comprehensive as possible, findings were compared with those from other related research and supportive and alternative explanations were entertained. This is part of the following five chapters IV, V, VI, VII and VIII. Revised Research Questions During content analysis of the interview data, emerging themes were categorized under a number of different broad categories that, by the end of the content analysis process, had reached a total number of fifteen. Within each one of those categories, there were numerous codes/themes that in some cases as in the case of the first and fourth categories, reached a total number of nine and fifteen respectively. Despite the fact that many of those categories were closely interconnected with one another, they nevertheless identify distinct aspects of the same issue. This did not seem problematic at the time but was instead found appropriate and valuable. However, upon reviewing the data I realized the enormous amount of information that I had collected through the interviews. While writing Chapter V of the study, I recognized that it would be a tremendous task to organize and structure all this 88 information in a meaningful and useful way for the reader. Based on this realization it was decided that, in order to represent the results of this study in a focused and concise way, the second research question had to be changed slightly. By narrowing this research question I would be able to address this problem adequately without betraying the overall purpose of the study. The initial research question was: What are the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding multicultural-world music education and undergraduate music teacher education? This research question was modified as follows: What are the perceptions of music education and ethnomusicology faculty members at the Big Ten schools regarding the problematic nature of multicultural—world music education and undergraduate music teacher education? 89 CHAPTER IV Course Offerings in Multicultural-World Music at the Big Ten Schools Data collected from college catalogues, bulletins, and web pages of academic schedules and timetables from each of the eleven Big Ten schools were cross—referenced with the rich data gathered through the thirty-three interviews and organized into the following eight categories: (a) survey; (b) geographic; (c) interdisciplinary; (d) ethnomusicological; (e) performance; (f) pedagogical; (g) multicultural; and (h) intracultural. Each category is presented in this chapter as a descriptive overview of the Big Ten academic music programs. As stated in Chapter HI, Purdue University did not have a music major program and did not offer any music courses that fall into the category of multicultural or world music. Therefore, the following information regarding course offerings at the Big Ten concerned the remaining ten schools only. It should also be stated that, although this study is focusing mainly on undergraduate music teacher education programs, Chapter IV included graduate courses as well. The reason is that many of those courses were available both for undergraduate and graduate students, and it was deemed unnecessary and inefficient to try and distinguish among them. Moreover, the existence of various graduate courses on multicultural-world music can provide increased motivation for the study of diverse musical cultures. Category I: Survey Courses The survey category included courses that examine music as a worldwide phenomenon. These courses did not provide an extensive investigation of the different 90 music cultures that they examine. Instead they attempted to provide an overview of the richness in musical expression from around the world, similar to a music appreciation course with a broader perspective. The majority of these courses was specifically for undergraduate students and was primarily taught by an ethnomusicologist, a graduate student in ethnomusicology, or by a musicologist who also had some training in ethnomusicology. The most common titles in this category were “Introduction to World Music” and “World Music.” Courses such as “Introduction to Art Music: International Perspectives,” “Introduction to the Literature of Music” and “Music in Culture” were also included in this category. Of the total sixteen survey courses offered by nine of the ten Big Ten schools, seven were designed specifically for music majors (44%), four were designed specifically for non-music majors (25%) and five were available for both (31%). Figure 1 contains all the available courses in the first category. Next to each course there is a classification of “M” signifying that the course was specifically for music majors, “Non M” signifying that the course was specifically for non-music majors and “Both” signifying that the course was offered for both music and non-music majors. Only five of the ten Big Ten schools (50%) offered and required such course of their music majors. Figure 1 Listing of Survey Courses 110: Introduction to Art Music: International Perspectives (M) 139: Introduction to the Literature of Music (M) 140: History of Music (M) 213: Introduction to World Music Cultures (M) 351: The World of Music (M) 458: Music in Culture (M) 1801: Music, Society and Cultures (M) 140: Music Cultures of the World (Non M) (Non M) 342: Introduction to World Music 91 (Non M) xxxxx: Introduction to World Music 1804: World Music (Non M) 103: Introduction to the Music Cultures of the World (Both) 105: Traditions in World Music (Both) 111: Introduction to World Music and Culture (Both) 133: Introduction to World Music (Both) (Both) 178: Music, Culture and Identity Category II: Geographic Courses In the geographic category were courses on musical traditions whose titles included some reference to a specific country or geographic region. These courses had a more focused geographical scope than the survey courses above and provided a comprehensive and in-depth examination of the music of those countries and/or regions. They were generally designed and taught by ethnomusicologists according to their individual interests and areas of specialty. Even though the majority of these courses focused on folk music, four of them (6%) concentrated on popular music (i.e., “Pop Music of the Non-Western World,” “Latin-American Popular Music”). The decision for their inclusion in this second category of geographic courses instead of the eighth category of courses in popular, rock, blues and jazz music was based on the fact that their course titles included some reference to a country or geographic region. This category also included five courses (7%) whose titles indicated that they cover Black music (i.e., “Black Sacred Music,” “Black Music of Two Worlds”). These courses were included in this second category because the indication “Black music” has a strong connection to specific geographic regions such as Africa, North America and the Caribbean. Additionally, since the majority of music majors in the Big Ten schools were white Caucasian students, it was decided that these courses will not be categorized in the eighth category because, unlike 92 pop, rock and jazz music, the majority of music students will probably not have close ties with Black music. For the same reason no courses on pop, rock, blues and jazz music were included in this category. Of the seventy geographic courses offered by eight of the ten Big Ten schools, seventeen focused on music from North America (24%), twelve on music from Asia (17%), eight on music from Europe (11%), five on music from Africa (7%), three on music from Latin America (4%) and three on music from the Caribbean (4%). Additionally, four courses (6%) covered two geographic areas (i.e., “Music of Latin America and the Caribbean”) and three courses (4%) covered three (i.e., “Selected World Musics: N. America, Africa and E. Europe”). Finally, there were also two courses (3%) that focused on a geographic area other than the above (i.e., “Middle Eastern Folklore,” “Music of the Pacific Islands”) and thirteen courses (19%) for which it was unclear from the course titles which specific geographic areas they covered (i.e., “Pop Music of the Non~Westem World,” “Black Music of Two Worlds”). Figure 2 Listing of Geographic Courses North Americg 240: Survey of African-American Music 317A: American Folk Music 317A: American Indian Music 335: The Music of America I] 356: Mariachi Performance and Culture 369: Hawaiian Music in the American Colonial Context 419: Music in the United States 423C: American Folk Revivals 450: Music in the US. 456: Asian American Music 457: The Musics of African Americans 460: Euro-American Folk and Popular Music 509: Seminar in Afro-American Music History and Criticism 535: American Folk and Vernacular Music 93 608: Mexicano/Chicano Popular Music 609: Black Music in America 650: Music of the US. Asia 317A: Music of China 317A: Music of Indonesia 317A: Music of Japan 317B: Music of India 326: Topics in World Music: Asia 402: Musical Cultures of the World: East and Southeast Asia 429: Music of East and Southeast Asia 461: The Music of Asia 462: Japanese Music 463: Southeast Asian Music 466: Music of Asia I 467: Music of Asia 11 1211929 317: Music of Great Britain 317: Music of Spain and Portugal 317A: Balkan Music 317A: Music of Scandinavia 337A: Music in the Czech Lands 337A: Russia in the Twentieth Century 675: Music of the Russian Folk Tradition 888: Topics in Russian Music Africa 327: Topics in World Music: Africa 338: African Mbira Music 426: Music of West Africa 465: Music of Africa 789: Performance Practices in African Music Latin America 3178: Latin-American Music 413: Latin—American Popular Music 690: Seminar in Latin-American Music Caribbean 430: Music of the Caribbean 464: Music of the Caribbean 892A: Haitian Music, Cultural Nationalism and Musical Authenticity Other 307: Middle Eastern folklore 469: Music of the Pacific Islands Two Geographic Regions tin America and the Caribbean orld Music: The America’s (India, L. America) 104: Music of La 328: Topics in W 353: Selected World Musics 94 459: Music Cultures of Africa and South America Three Geo a hic Re ions Unidentified Region 103: Pop Music of the Non—Westem World 106: History of Black Music 121: Black Music of Two Worlds 244: Survey of African and African-Derived Music in the Western World 317A: African and New World Negro Music 317B: Music of the Near East 330: Black Sacred Music: History 337: Improvisation and World Musicianship 354: Black Religious Music 423A: Studies in Improvisation 425: Music of South Asia and its Diaspora 566: Contemporary Improvisation 748: Contemporary Art Music of Africa and the Diaspora QrLegory III: Interdisciplinary Courses The third category of interdisciplinary courses included those courses that examined music in a broader and sometimes more focused context rather than from a purely musical one. This classification was significantly different from the one used by Chin (1996a), who identified interdisciplinary courses as those that included a world music component. The fundamental difference between these two classifications under the interdisciplinary category is that, in this study, the interdisciplinary courses were predominantly music courses instead of interdisciplinary courses with a world music component.” Their inclusion in this category was based on the fact that their course titles did not include any reference to national or regional boundaries but instead referred to such concepts as “politics,” “culture,” “identity,” “gender,” and “media” (i.e., “Music, Politics and Identity,” “Music, Media and Popular Culture”). These interdisciplinary music courses provided a broad theoretical and analytical examination of musrc and were 95 mainly taught by ethnomusicologists or musicologists. Music technology courses that provided description and training on composing, recording and editing music for recordings and films were not included in this study at all. Of the total twenty-eight interdisciplinary courses offered by nine of the eleven Big Ten schools, eight of them examined music in relation to gender (29%), six examined music in media (21%), two courses addressed music in relation to politics (7%), two courses examined the relation between music, race and ethnicity (7%) and two courses focused on music and the society (7%). The remaining eight courses (29%) investigated the connections between music and cosmology, dance, authenticity, Islam, orientalism, identity and culture. Figure 3 Listing of InterdisciplingryCourses 317: 340: 436: 483: 491: 638: 685: 750: 103: 177: 301: 315: 508: Music and Gender Gender and Music Music and Gender Women and Music Pop Music, Gender and Sexuality Women in Music Rhythm and the Latina Body Politics Women and Music Performance of Gender Music and the Media Music in Multimedia Music, Media, and Popular Culture Music in African Film: Sounding and Imaging Music for Film Film Music 1902: Music, Disability, Film 179: Music and Politics Nationalism and Music 4238: Musical Ethnography and the Politics of Representation 319: 405: 537: Music, Rgce and Ethnicity Music, Race and Ethnicity in the US. Staging America: Class, Race, Ethnicity & Gender in American Musical Theater Music and Society Sociology of Music 96 423: Ethnomusicology and Social Theory Other 103: Concepts and Context of Western Music 178: Music Culture and Identity 322: Authenticity 329: Music and Islam 332: Orientalism and Music 423B: Music and Cosmology 470: Music and Dance 609: Performance in Community and Culture Category IV: Ethnomusicological Courses The ethnomusicological category included courses that covered the historical development, theoretical orientation and methodological approaches of the field of ethnomusicology. All of these courses were taught by ethnomusicology faculty and examine issues such as ethnography, social theory, foundations, and transcription and analysis. There were a total of nineteen ethnomusicological courses offered by eight of the eleven Big Ten schools. Three courses focused on the ethnography of music (16%), two courses focused on fieldwork (11%), and two courses focused on transcription and analysis (11%). The remaining twelve courses (63%) focused on other related issues. As indicated by their course numbers, the majority of them were graduate level courses. Figure 4 Listing of Ethnomusicological Courses Ethnography of Music 253: Ethnography of Music 318: The Ethnography of Musical Experience 5950: Music Ethnography: Twin Cities Fieldwork in Music 833: Fieldwork in Ethnomusicology 885: Fieldwork in Ethnomusicology Transcription and Analysis 494: Transcription and analysis of Traditional Music 500: Transcription and Analysis Qtlrer 316: Anthropology of Music 97 319: Foundations of Ethnomusicology 323: Proseminar in Ethnomusicology 403: Practicum in Folklore/Ethnomusicology 501: Colloquy in Folklore/Ethnomusicology 515: Proseminar in Ethnomusicology 672: Introduction to Ethnomusicology 714: Paradigms in Ethnomusicology 832: Seminar in Ethnomusicology 886: Theories and Methods of Ethnomusicology 915: Seminar in Ethnomusicology xxx: Paradigms in Ethnomusicology Category V: Performance Courses In the performance category were courses that were taught by ethnomusicologists, choral and jazz educators, and provided performance instruction in vocal and instrumental music from around the world. Some of these courses did not focus solely on instrumental or choral music, but combined singing, instrumental performing and dancing as in the case of the Mariachi and African Performing Ensembles. Of the fifty-nine performance courses offered by ten of the eleven Big Ten schools, eight were vocal ensembles (14%). Three of these vocal ensembles (Chorus, Chorus and International Vocal Ensemble) performed a wide range of repertoire from around the world. The International Vocal Ensemble specialized on folk music mainly from non-western cultures, whereas the two Choruses performed repertoire predominantly from the western classical tradition. The remaining five choral ensembles specialized on African and African American gospel music. The majority of the instrumental performance courses focused on the study and performance of jazz music (thirty courses or 51%). Seven instrumental ensembles focused on music from Asia (12%), five on regional music of Africa such as the Ugandan xylophone and the Zimbabwean mbira (9%) and two on Caribbean, EurOpean, Latin 98 American and North American music respectively (3% each). Six of the seven Asian performing ensembles (86%) focused on Javanese gamelan music. All of the performance courses that were included in this study were credit-bearin g ensembles. Performance ensembles that were organized and ran by students and were not available for credit were not included. Figure 5 Listing of Performance Courses Vocal Chorus Chorus International Vocal Ensemble Essence of Joy Gospel Choir Gospel Choir Gospel Chorale Black Music Ensemble Black Sacred Music Ensemble Asia Javanese Gamelan Beginning Javanese Gamelan Javanese Gamelan Ensemble Japanese Music Study Group Beginning Javanese Gamelan Intermediate Javanese Gamelan Advanced Javanese Gamelan Africa Mbira Ensemble Mbira Ensemble African Performing Ensemble Beginning Ugandan Xylophone Intermediate Ugandan Xylophone 9331313232 Trinidadian Steel Band Trinidad Steel Pan Ensemble Egress Balkan Ensemble Slavic Performing Ensemble Latin America Andean Pan Pipe Ensemble Latin American Ensemble 99 North America North American String Band Mariachi Ensemble Jazz Jazz Band I Jazz Band H Jazz Band HI Jazz Messengers Jazz Combos Student-Faculty Jazz Ensemble Jazz Ensemble Jazz Lab Jazz Combo Jazz Band Jazz Combo Jazz Ensemble Jazz Harp Performance and Improvisation Small Jazz Ensembles Jazz Ensemble Small Jazz Ensembles Jazz Ensemble I Jazz Ensemble H Jazz Ensemble HI Small Jazz Ensembles Jazz Band I Jazz Band II Jazz Band 1H Jazz Ensemble Jazz Singers Jazz Combo Jazz Ensemble Jazz Lab Ensemble Jazz Combo Jazz Ensemble Category VI: Pedagogical Courses The sixth category included music education courses that contained a multicultural-world music component, focused on multicultural issues in music or covered techniques and pedagogics for the inclusion of diverse music in education. These courses were taught by music education faculty and addressed philosophical, historical, methodological and practical aspects of using music from diverse world cultures in music 100 classes at the elementary and secondary level. The majority of the fifty-three pedagogical courses offered by ten of the Big Ten schools (thirty-three courses or 68%) were core music education courses that contained a unit or component on multicultural-world music (i.e., “Teaching General Music in Elementary School”). The remaining seventeen courses (32%) focused specifically on multicultural issues and world music in education (i.e., “Music and the Special Learner,” “Teaching World Music in the Classroom”). Specifically, nine of those seventeen courses (53% or 17% of the total pedagogical courses) focused specifically on multicultural issues in music education (i.e., “Multicultural Principles and Music Education”). Three of them covered multicultural music education identified broadly in terms of diversity (18% or 6% of the total pedagogical courses), another three focused on special education, two focused on exceptional students (12% or 4% of the total pedagogical courses) and one on social factors (6% or 2% of the total number of courses). The remaining eight of those seventeen pedagogical courses (47% or 15% of the total pedagogical courses) addressed techniques and pedagogics for the inclusion of diverse music in education (i.e., “Teaching World Music in the Classroom”). Six of them focused on jazz techniques and pedagogy (35% or 11% of the total pedagogical courses), one on American folk music and one on world music in general (6% or 2% of the total pedagogical courses respectively). These six jazz courses were not included in the eighth category of intracultural music because their course titles indicated a pedagogical rather than a performance emphasis. Overall, eight of those seventeen courses were graduate courses. These were the three courses that focused on music for diverse learners, the two courses the focused on 101 music for exceptional students, the one course that focused on the connections between music education and the society, one course that focused on music in special education and the one course that focused on the teaching of world music. There were only two undergraduate pedagogical courses that focused specifically on multicultural issues in music education (“339: Music and the Special Learner” and “373: Music for Special Education Teachers”). Figure 6 Listing of Pedagogical Courses 131: 140: 142: 143: 145: 231: 235: 239: 242: 243: 244: 258: 260: 332: 333: 334: 335: 336: 338: 339: 340: 342: 342: 362: 363: 470: 572: 575: 862: Iatroductorv and Methodological Courses in Music Educatifl Introduction to Music Education Introduction to Music Education Methods and Materials: Secondary School General Music Pre—student Teaching Experiences Methods and Materials: Elementary School Music General Music K-l2 Elementary and Junior High Instrumental Music Principles and Techniques in Music Education Teaching Music in the Elementary School Teaching Music in the Junior High School Teaching of Instrumental Music Philosophy of Music Education The Music Teacher as Communicator Teaching Choral Music in the Secondary School Teaching General Music in the Elementary School Teaching General Music in the Secondary School Teaching Instrumental Music in the Elementary School Teaching Instrumental Music in the Secondary School Trends in Elementary School Music: Kodal y and Orff Teaching School Music Choral Techniques and Materials for Secondary School Teaching General Music in Secondary Schools . Methods and Materials for Teaching Elementary Musrc Teaching General Music H Teaching Hi gh-School Non-Performance Courses Introduction to Music Education Teaching General Music in Secondary Schools Teaching Choral Music H Seminar in Music Curriculum and Methodology 1201: Introduction to Music Education 102 3301: Teaching Elementary Vocal and General Music 3302: Teaching Secondary General Methods 946: Past Perspectives on Music Education 947: Current Issues in Music Education Introduction to Music Education Choral Methods Music, Multiculturalism and World Mus_ic Techni ue and Peda o 196: Jazz Band Techniques 248: American Folk Instrument Performance Practices 332: Jazz Improvisation for Music Educators 344: Jazz Ensemble Rehearsal Techniques 364: Jazz Pedagogy at the Keyboard 458: Pedagogy of Jazz 566: Jazz Ensemble Techniques 5750: Teaching World Music in the Classroom Music for Diverse Learners 758: Multicultural Principles and Music Education (graduate) 759: Teaching Music to Culturally Diverse Learners 948: Diversity Issues in Music W 339: Music and the Special Learner (undergraduate) 373: Music for Special Education Teachers (undergraduate) 777: Practicum in Teaching Music for Handicapped Leamers W 773: Introduction to Music for Exceptional Learners 775: Teaching Music for Exceptional Learners Music Education and Society 877: Social Factors in Music Education Category VH: Multicultflm The multicultural category included courses that were offered through the School Of Education at each university and were required for undergraduate music education majors. These non-music courses were taught by professors in the field of education and provided extensive coverage of issues on multiculturalism, diversity and equality. Typical course titles in this category were “Diversity in Education” and “Teaching in a Pluralistic Society.” A total of ten such multicultural courses were found in six of the ten Big Ten schools. Five courses addressed issues of diversity and pluralism (50%), two courses 103 examined the connection between school and the society (20%), one course addressed issues related to special education (10%), another one addressed issues related to exceptional students (10%) and another course examined inclusion in education (10%). In three of those six schools (Universities I, IV and VHI), undergraduate music education majors were able to choose between two of those multicultural courses that could satisfy the same diversity requirement. Figure 7 Listing of Multicultural Courses Diversity and Pluralism 240: Diverse Learners in Multicultural Perspective (University IV) 250: Diversity in Education (University IV) 300: Teaching in a Pluralistic Society (University I) 300: Elementary Education for a Pluralistic Society (University I) 300: Teaching in a Pluralistic Society School and Sociaty School and Society 5009: Human Relations: Applied Skills for School and Society SW 336: The Field of Special Education Exceptional Children 327: Educating Exceptional Children (University VIII) Mum. 506: Strategies for Inclusive Schooling (University VHI) Category VIH: Intracultural Courses The last category of intracultural course offerings included music courses that focused on musical cultures with which the majority of the American music students have a close affinity and might identify it as their own music. Such music courses provided broad examination of jazz, blues, rock, and American popular music, as well as in-depth coverage of the work of specific music groups or individuals within those genres. These intracultural courses were generally taught by applied music faculty and musicologists. Some of the most common titles in this category were “Jazz 104 Improvisation,” “Advanced Jazz Improvisation,” “History of Jazz,” and “History of Rock.” A total of eighty-seven such courses were found in ten of the eleven Big Ten schools. Seventy-three courses focused on jazz music (84%), six on rock music (7%), four on popular music (5%), two on the blues (2%), one course on hip-hip ( 1%) and one on popular and rock music (1%). Of the total seventy-three jazz courses, thirty focused on improvisation (41% or 35% of all intracultural courses), sixteen on jazz history (22% or 18% of all intracultural courses), eleven on performance (15% or 13% of all intracultural courses), four on composition, appreciation and composition and arranging (6% or 5% of all intracultural courses respectively), three on theory (4% or 3% of all intracultural courses) and one on arranging (1%). Overall, two of the ten Big Ten schools (Universities HI and V) offered fifteen intracultural courses each or a total of thirty courses (35 %), another two schools (Universities H and VIH) offered twelve courses each or a total of twenty-four courses (28%) and one other school (University I) offered fourteen intracultural courses (16%). Together these five schools offered sixty-eight of the seventy-eight intracultural courses (78%). Figure 8 Jazz Listing of Intracultural Courses 101: Freshman Jazz and Improvisation Performance 101: Introduction to Improvisation 102: Jazz Improvisation 162: Applied Jazz Improvisation 201: Sophomore Jazz and Improvisation Performance 209: Jazz Improvisation I 210: Jazz Improvisation H 211: Jazz Improvisation HI 230: Beginning Jazz Improvisation I 231: Beginning Jazz Improvisation H 105 243: 262: 301: 321: 331: 332: 333: 336: 337: 362: 362: 401: 466: 467: 470: 471: 472: 510: 530: 567: 110: 141: 205: 206: 308: 309: 310: 311: 334: 335: 393: 395: 412: 417: 468: 546: Advanced Jazz Improvisation Applied Jazz Improvisation Junior Jazz and Improvisation Performance Jazz Improvisation I Jazz Improvisation Jazz Improvisation Jazz Improvisation Basic Jazz Improvisation Advanced Jazz Improvisation Advanced Jazz Piano Improvisation Applied Jazz Improvisation Senior Jazz and Improvisation Performance Jazz Improvisation I Jazz Improvisation H Improvisation Forms Jazz Improvisation IH Jazz Improvisation IV Advanced Jazz Improvisation Jazz Improvisation Advanced Jazz Improvisation History Jazz Perspectives History of Jazz The Big Bands The Legendary Performers Black Music (l920-Present): Rhythm Section and Combos Black Music (1920-Present): Vocalist/Trombone/Miscellaneous Instruments Black Music (1920-Present): The Trumpet Black Music (1920-Present): The Saxophone Jazz: Its Roots and Elements Selected Topics in Jazz Studies History of Jazz Contemporary Jazz and Soul Music Evolution of Jazz History of Jazz Jazz Scene: Historical Perspectives Modern and Contemporary Jazz Styles Performance 110212: Jazz Piano 1501: Jazz Piano 151J: Jazz Voice 152J: Jazz Stringed Instruments 153J: Jazz Woodwind Instruments 154J: Jazz Brass Instruments 155J: Jazz Percussion Instruments 201: Jazz Piano 106 232: Jazz Keyboard Harmony 361: Jazz Piano for the Non-Keyboard Player 466: Jazz Piano Composition 330: Writing for Jazz Ensembles 331: Advanced Jazz Writing 468 : Jazz Composition 533: Jazz Composition Appreciation 150: Introduction to Jazz 320: Jazz for Listeners 446: Survey of Jazz Styles 1902: Jazz: An American Art Form Composition and Arranging 231: Jazz Composition and Arranging 433: Scoring for Jazz Ensembles 457: Jazz Composition and Arranging I 458: Jazz Composition and Arranging II m: 199: Jazz Theory 318: Styles and Analysis of Jazz 333: Jazz Theory Arranging 433: Scoring for Jazz Ensembles 469: Jazz Arranging Rock 201: History of Rock and Roll Music I 202: History of Rock and Roll Music H 301: Rock Music in the 703 and 805 320: Music of Jimi Hendrix 402: Music of Frank Zappa 505: Poetics of Rock Music mp 075: American Popular Music 142: American Popular Music 305: Popular Music in the USA 1920-1950 401: The Music of the Beatles M xxx: The Spiritual and the Blues 497: Blues Legacies mm 389: Hip Hop Music and Culture PM 320: Women in Pop and Rock Music 107 Discussion As indicated earlier in Chapter HI, this study focused on course offerings in multicultural-world music education at ten of the eleven Big Ten schools. The above data analysis included no courses from Purdue University since there was no music major program at that university. It should be pointed out that all remaining ten schools of the Big Ten conference offered courses under the performance, pedagogical and intracultural categories. Due to the fact that one of those ten schools did not have an ethnomusicologist on its faculty, that same school did not offer any courses under the survey, geographic, interdisciplinary, ethnomusicological and multicultural categories. The only courses from this school that were included in this study were five courses in the performance category (a choral group performing sacred and secular music from the African and African-American tradition, three different levels of jazz ensemble and jazz combos), as well as a pedagogical course in choral music (“Choral Methods”) and two intracultural courses on jazz music (“Evolution of Jazz” and “The Spiritual and the Blues”). Faculty in this university are aware that this absence of multicultural-world music courses could be perceived as a deficiency in their music program and are working on improving this situation. The following words by Mario, a music education professor, clearly illustrate the current climate that exists within the department in regards to issues of multicultural and world music education. We are in discussion as we Speak, literally, on the whole issue of multiculturalism, whether to imbue existing courses with aspects of multicultural repertoire or to actually create a course on multicultural music or world music to be required of all students in the School of Music. It remains to be seen when this will occur because at this point we do not offer a degree in ethnomusicology here. Consequently, no faculty member has been asked or invited to structure a course in multicultural music. And so it’s an administrative decision, it’s not a faculty decision at this point. But it’s becoming a faculty and an administrative 108 compromise because we realize that it’s a huge hole in our curriculum. The other problem, as you can imagine is if we add the course in as an elective and don’t make it a requirement, then many students won’t take it because they’re already up to their ears in credits... As I said, the courses in multicultural music or multicultural education in the School of Music don’t exist not because students aren’t interested. There is tremendous interest on multicultural and world music on behalf of the students. It has been a lack of vision on the part of our administration and faculty in the past that something doesn’t currently exist. And we now have no choice but to deal with it because it’s a glaring, how shall I say this, we realize that we need to shore up aspects of our total curriculum. And so something is being done. If you call me a year from now hopefully we will be able to report on something a little bit more positively. These words were indicative of the urgency with which the department was attempting to address its limited number of course offerings in the area of multicultural- world and world music. It remains to be seen how soon these changes will take place. The current administration and faculty seemed to be taking sincere and significant measures to address this area of their curriculum. Table 1 illustrates the number of courses offered by each of the ten universities included in this study. 109 \ nJ\aN~.u.\ fillli *1 1. ill .1 till lll - llzfilllllgz l - l - l lllll j lllrfi ll: l lfilllll- .rr.N4m;. ax - c. m If, 2) V“ 23‘ 3C N 3 K C ! ‘ r .< 55 u— 3. m c N. Z _ m illlllr- -li -ll -, . , . L. x :: ..,,N -- .- .-;L~;- :e::i-~-.-. .;.m i ._ : c - :;._ ,i-o. - ..c, .- _ Le -x. ‘n ‘r N [\ , C \C \C can > i l l r l l l l em x - . N N m m _ n _ >_. .m% r, ,- m_. - - N, -, a .10., ,.-h .,..--; m-, ‘, ; w -. .. c . -.- ,. .:_: .o4 z: .. ,e~;,:, :,:,N a c l. lll. .l til llllll..lr l Tilll l...-rilll .. ltllrl, I; l. ..I ,l m r\ as N- r.-,._ 4