Why Study Music (from Vision 2020, The Housewright Symposium)
J. Terry Gates
J. Terry Gates is an associate professor of music education at the State
University of New York at Buffalo.
We can achieve well and have fun simultaneously.--Katie Davidson, age I7
I. "Why Study Music" Is a Disturbing Question
We have all confronted skeptics who claim that musical skill can be learned
without Planned, sequential instruction. Furthermore, most people, early in their
lives, develop strong preferences for a few types of music. We don't need to be
"taught what to like. And if people follow those strong preferences with action,
they gather detailed knowledge about the music that they invite into their lives,
most of it without conventional instruction. In the face of these beliefs and
others, what rationales support planned programs of music study and how do these
programs benefit our society and our people? What ethical basis is there for
interfering with these natural human processes?
Our profession rests on the assumption that music study is not only valuable but
necessary. "Why Study Music" is a question that invites professional risk. So, why bring it
One reason is that there are so many positive, enthusiastic, and convincing
answers. Music study is defended in curriculum documents, in appeals for more
time or money for school music, in parent conferences when a good student plans
to drop out of music study, in recruiting presentations, in advocacy brochures,
and more. These defensive arguments have a special urgency about them that arises
from the general belief that music education programs are at risk and that we
need constant assurances that music study makes sense. Perhaps that is why there
are so many answers. The skeptic asks, 'Why do you work so hard at justifying the
worth of your discipline? If it has always been so hard to justify music study in
American schools, why don't you just give up?"
Another reason to bring up the question is that there are so many exceptions. We
must respond to evidence that music study is unnecessary: We hear that Irving
Berlin could not write down the music he composed. We hear that most popular
music stars, even a few famous opera singers, "can't read a note." The skeptic
asks, if these accomplished musicians didn't need to learn through music study,
why should I bother to study music, or why should I support such a program for
We are forced to bring up this question because there is so much music around us.
Recorded music is readily available for purchase, and good playback equipment is
relatively cheap. Whole channels of television and, increasingly, cable radio
products and Internet sites are devoted to music presentation. Broadcast media
companies use music to draw targeted audiences to advertisers through the music
policy decisions that they make. "Music study seems redundant," says the skeptic.
In this mediascape, I can find all I need, so why push me into music I don't
need? And, why should I learn to perform it when there is little reason for me to
make my own music anymore?"
We should address this issue because it is common for people to say to musicians
something like, I can't sing a note, but I love music anyway." There are many
explanations for this negative and unnecessary claim, but it ultimately relieves
the speaker of musical responsibility. Many of these people cite negative events
during music study as the cause of that effect.
Finally, people at a young age tend to have very stabilized tastes for music they
like and eventually support financially, through media purchases or direct
support to music providers. Our regard for individual freedom supports personal
choice in matters like music. The reasoning goes: I know what I like, and I like
what I know, SO What gives you the right to challenge that? What gives schools
the right to select music for me or my child? Why should other people create a
list of music officially supported by public policy through government agencies
such as schools?"
Can We Answer the Skeptics?
The skeptic's questions are not easy to answer well. The simplest response to
all of them is that virtually everyone is drawn to music of some kind. Music is
complex enough to reward lifelong study, and people tend to return to behavior
that is reinforced. Music that rewards attention over one's lifetime requires
study, and study improves the range and subtlety of meanings we can derive from
musical experiences. The skeptic comes back: "But there is music in life that is
interesting, complex, and rewarding; we don't study many of these things as
deliberately as you think people should study music." Converting a virtue like
meaningful music into a necessity in public policy is as difficult to explain
intellectually and politically as it is agreeable socially and personally. Music
study is easy to defend but hard to rationalize.
Another simple response is that universal, conscious study of music springs from
traditional European-American values, and the function of public education is to
indoctrinate the young with those values. Proponents of this view often say, "We
should not question such important traditions. They have served us well, and they
continue to produce a healthy variety and an unending flow of new music to hear,
to perform, and to enhance the events and rituals in which we participate." Does
this leave too little room for the empowerment of the individual? Do we socialize
music study too much, and is this problematic in a society that values and even
depends upon individual creativity?
Now that the arts are part of the education core, not only in Goals 2000 but also
in most states I education policies, we have some quick work to do. Music
education and education in the other arts are in competition for funds and
policymakers' attention during the rapid development of high-stakes,
standards-based graduation examinations in so-called basic subjects. School
administrators attend workshops on how to motivate teachers to raise standards,
usually understood to mean that test scores in reading or mathematics, etc.,
should go up. They are hearing the policy assertion, If it isn't among the
graduation tests, it doesn't belong in the school." Alas, many are listening.
Within the current generation of school leaders' lifetimes, business and industry
visionaries have created a management outlook that favors plans to "focus the
organization," downsize, outsource optional services, and go to the bottom line
for validation. This is not lost on school managers. People from business and
industry are on school boards. For many of the school managers who are
accountable to these people, the bottom line is test scores.
We must meet the skeptic's challenges and glib, obvious responses to them with
new, better understandings of the effects and benefits of music
study-psychological, educational, cultural, social, and (even) economic. We must
also look a-head, to see if we can frame our deliberation of this challenging
question in such a way that new questions can enter the professional debate and
new understandings can contribute to the answers as they emerge.
The purpose of this document is to meet these social and cultural conditions with
some extended, research informed thinking about music study. We will confront
some of the thorniest issues related to the topic and develop reasoned answers to
some of the most difficult questions asked of us. Although oriented to the
learner, this paper will also envision stronger rationales for planned,
sequential music study and better music teaching practice for the coming
generation. At the beginning of each section below, there are some questions that
guided the writing. At the end of the paper, I've summarized the complex ideas
that form the six-part answer to the question ""
II. Music Study: The Issues
When One "Studies Music, " What Does One Do?
We learn all the time merely by living our lives. This is incidental
learning, and it occurs in most of life's situations; our environments,
including the people around us, shape the ways we approach other, less familiar,
environments. Humans study, on the other hand, with the assumption
that they are capable of shaping themselves in some predictable way-intentionally
and mindfully to broaden the experience upon which they live in the future or to
deepen it, usually both. Study is deliberate, planned learning. The distinction
is in the planning, predicting, and goal setting, not in the results. We learn a
great deal of unplanned content through incidental learning. Planning not only
allows us to guide our learning, but also gives us the potential to accelerate
our learning processes, to learn more quickly and efficiently.
In this paper,study refers to what individuals do to learn deliberately,
in self-guided musical growth as well as in "formal" and "informal" settings for
study, in and out of schools. The orientation of this paper is the person
because, regardless of the setting, it is the person who learns; this paper
attempts to describe the process "from the inside out." Learning is always
personal; one does not learn for someone else. This is true in study as well as
in incidental learning. But a person can learn something in order to guide the
learning of others-a common occurrence, in music teaching as well as in music
making. 1 Regardless of what one does with what one has learned, learning is an
individual process and, as we shall see below, study is the way we deliberately
change ourselves. Learning is the necessary condition and foundational assumption
When someone studies music, she or he intentionally engages music and
music-related materials and ideas to reconstruct and improve some of the skills,
knowledge, evaluative insights, and cognitive capacities used in musical
experiences. The learner then arrives at new encounters with music as a changed
person, more capable than before. Study, then, consists of actions designed to
produce personal learning. Incidental learning lacks the focused intentionality
of study. Because this paper's principal audience consists of music teachers in
educational institutions, much will be said about schooling. However, a proper
understanding of musical study ignores barriers between the sources of learning;
the reader should not assume that the setting for music study is confined to or
focused primarily on schools.
Four interactive and overlapping types of change occur in music study.
Cognitive capacity: Study depends upon a persons capacity to construct and recall
information, but cognitive capacity is not confined to this. With music, the
source of the information disappears after the sound dies away, but we are
equipped to deal with this well. Perception is the neurophysiological process
that both enables and is shaped by cognition. But, perception is not a passive
process. We construct what we perceive, and our prior experience shapes what we
notice about a situation. Cognitive capacity expands when we do this. With
mindful, alert repetition, we notice more; our experience becomes richer. As an
ever-expanding result of music study, then, there should be noticeable increases
in the amount of information one can construct during a musical experience. Alas
we cannot yet measure this capacity directly. Intuition is perhaps the most
closely related indicator of human cognitive capacity, and music study increases
the range and improves the validity of one's musical intuitions.
Repeated experience and intuition can also be limiting if we become comfortable
with their current state, for such comfort is the foundation of bias Since
perception is an active process and shapes what we notice it takes some effort to
keep expanding one's perceptual field with new musical experience so that mere
habit or, worse,
boredom does not result from repeated experience with music. Not only does study
depend on expanded perceptual capacity, but the effort to expand it pays off in
richer information, better intuition, and greater cognitive capacities.
Evaluative insight.. Everybody has experiences that repel, attract, or
leave them unmoved. Expanding our cognitive capacities, chiefly through
repetition with the same or similar experiences, leaves us with the sense that
some of these experiences are better than others, even though they might be
similar in general. Five performances o the same music vary enough that our
inclination is to rank them, or at least rate their effectiveness. Rarely are
Through music study, there should be noticeable increases in the persona
development and use of criteria related to musical and human value. These can be
noted and shared through one's estimates of goodness or fit between
musical events and human capacities, needs and study, should explore the
potential and actual results of musical actions at deeper and deeper levels of
subtlety and import.
Knowledge: This music-maligned term always needs to be defined in
analytical contexts. I will use the term to mean analytical abilities and the
precision of the terms that support them. In this context, knowledge includes
things such as musical terminology, analytical strategies and principles, even
"rules" for tone production. Knowledge has been gained when there are observable
increases in the precision, communicability, and usefulness (really, validity)
of terms, strategies, and principles; and a improved speed and
accuracy in recalling such things. One can increasingly use memory as a reliable
source of schemes useful in analysis.
Sharing musical experiences when the causes for them (the musical situations)
have disappeared requires language and many other symbol systems even conductors'
gestures. As our musical experiences grow in variety and complexity, and as we
communicate with each other about them, the validity of the terms, strategies,
and principles about music becomes tested against that of others.
Skills: I will use a narrow definition of the term skills. In this
analysis the term skill is not analogous to more inclusive or general uses of the
term, such as expertise, or (as used in schools) library skills, or
writing skills. Expertise involves more than psychomotor or manipulative
Here are some analogous terms used in educational and psychological writing and
discussions: techniques, psychomotor learning, manipulative abilities, executive
functions, or execution. These terms mean about the same thing as skill, and it
would not be necessary here to analyze the variations. Skill is an important
result of music study.
Expanding or increasing one's musical skills results in changes in human
characteristics useful for musical purposes. These include characteristics such
as strength, accuracy, predictability, endurance, flexibility, control, and speed
in one's use of a musical instrument, including the human voice, as well as
computers and any other means of producing sounds used in music.
At its best, music study occurs during and through authentic participation in
music. In this way, then, music study differs little from practical music making
and listening. Skilled music teachers, however, design musical settings that
create a patterned, efficient,
sequenced, and thorough development of musical abilities in learners. To the
student, learning music and doing music differ little. The pedagogical process
that is promoted here is similar in general to good teaching in mathematics,
social studies, or language arts instruction; i.e., the instructional and
learning strategies have an authentic quality. However, musical experience is not
equivalent to these others. It is unique and important. Bennett Reimer's paper
develops the idea that musical knowing is not only different from mathematical
knowing and the rest, but also equals their importance to living a human life
Does Music Study Add Up to Anything?
The best reason to study music is that it gives people a reliable, thorough,
and efficient way of becoming expert at creating, communicating, and deriving
meaning musically in the world of humans. Musical expertise "matures" becomes
embodied--when a person naturally and effectively mobilizes his or her best
musical resources in musical situations without prodding from someone else. It is
important to understand that this need not be institutionally related to
As noted above, however, it is too common for people in the United States to
abandon active music making or excuse away their nonparticipation. A major cause
for this is that many musicians have made a wall out of expertise, and some have
set themselves up as gatekeepers. We must now lead people to define expertise
dynamically and personally, not as some sort of barrier to a musical life. The
gap between school music and what I call life music can be narrowed by redefining
expertise as an action one initiates mindfully that synergizes one's skills,
knowledge, evaluative insight, and cognitive capacities in practical, authentic
There is no need to certify expertise any more than we do now, but there is a
need to help people to diagnose their musical expertise and motivate them to
expand it. National and state standards help music teachers to identify and
diagnose some aspects of musical expertise, but standards should not be used to
"evaluate musicianship." Musicianship is much broader, more fluid, more varied in
its expression among people than any list of competencies suggests. This does not
negate the value of standards. Music teachers can learn how to use standards
diagnostically, and use these diagnoses with other data to support their critical
leadership function in the musical and educational health of our
The distinction between an expert and a novice, in music or in
anything else, cannot be based on the identification of a threshold that
separates people. The terms novice and expert merely represent ends of a
continuum that can be abstracted from life when we bring our learning to bear on
a problem. We find ourselves somewhere along the
novice/expert continuum in just about everything we do. Musical expertise,
then, is the term I will use to refer to a characteristic of all persons that
represents the aim of music study-the embodiment of musical skills, knowledge,
evaluative insight, and cognitive capacities, coupled with the capacity to
self-diagnose them, to expand them effectively and efficiently, and to use them
synergistically in musical situations of all kinds.
Most people have musical profiles that describe their levels of expertise in the
several "components" identified by whatever assessment of expertise is being
used. Such assessments, by definition, limit the diagnosis of expertise to the
components designed into the assessment tools. All such tools are like stencils,
letting information flow only through whatever "windows" were put there.
Moreover, people expect reports of the results of the assessment. In K-12 music
performance assessment, it is common to locate six levels on the novice/expert
continuum, generally defined by the artistic difficulty of a large body of
musical literature. Music performance competitions and other third-person
evaluations produce ratings or rankings. When required to do so, music teachers
There are other grounds for a diagnosis of musical expertise than musical
difficulty. Based on a series of studies in England and other countries, Keith
Swanwick and his associates described an eight-level diagnostic scheme for
assessing expertise in music composition, performance, and listening, the synergy
of which Swanwick calls musical knowledge or musical understanding.3 David
Elliott suggested a five-component orientation to analyzing musicianship and
assessing musical growth.
There is still another view. Thomas Regelski sees musical expertise as a life
process undefined by stages or types, but defined instead by the person living
and participating musically in his or her world.4 Expertise is a term not
applicable in this formulation, except as each person becomes interested in
defining it; and one does not "Study music' in the sense normally used to refer
to the deliberate development of one's skills, knowledge, evaluative insight, and
cognitive capacities in relative isolation from each other. Rather, notes
Regelski, In music, then, this comprehensive. functional, and basically tacit
'know how' is what is called artistry, functional musicianship, musicality,
virtuosity, or creativity-usually all are implied" (p. 47).
Such know how develops naturally through action. Levels of know how can be
described at any given point. However, descriptions vary with the person, the
assessment instrument, the level of know how, and the musical task of the
An important distinction arises here between assessing musical expertise
diagnostically and evaluating it against some standard described in advance,
regardless whether such standards were defined by others or by oneself. Doing
curriculum or making predictions about levels of expertise depends upon some
generalized view of how humans study and learn music. Programmatic (or even
curricular) efficiency comes from grouping people with similar know how together,
predicting how the diagnosis might go at various stages or making some other
accommodation to diversity among developmental profiles. The term efficiency
again rises to the surface. 5 Programmatic efficiency, however, is a weak
personal motivator at best.
Unfortunately, the discussion of various musicianship patterns of growth above
slights the personal nature of music study. People test their expertise in ways
unique to their musical interests. Personal motivation and study are intertwined,
of course. When a person confronts a musical situation that is interesting enough
to motivate attention and, at the same time, is challenging or disturbing,
baffling, too difficult to manage easily, etc., one studies. The person is not
likely to be motivated to study if he or she does not value a better outcome
enough to do what it takes to meet the difficulty with better personal tools-to
determine a way to make things better and to learn how to do it.
People challenged in this way attempt to analyze the difficulty in order to focus
the learning, to make the learning efficient as well as effective. The most
lasting and liberating motivations come from within the musical situation. As a
result of the analysis of the musical difficulty, one forms plans, gathers
materials, and takes action, usually to change one's current profile of skills,
knowledge, standards of quality (evaluative insight) and what one notices
(cognitive capacities). One studies. Then, people enter (create) the musical
situation again mindfully, aware of an improved capacity to have the musical
benefits at a higher level. The person diagnoses and assesses learning, a marker
In incidental learning, all of this happens intuitively and often
instantaneously, without much deliberation. We can thank our pedagogues,
philosophers, and psychologists for the current state of our ability to slow the
process down enough to find out how it can be improved. To the learner, however,
in music study or not, musical curiosity is a natural motivator: "What would
happen if I ... ?" Curiosity; as well as our growth as people, motivates music
study. What we valued and sought to experience as children no longer satisfies
when we are older because we have changed as people. Music rewards study because
there is always music to meet the needs of persons of any age or stage in life.
Music teachers should intervene in this process only if they can make it
What Happens to the Learner during and after Music Study?
By now, nearly everyone interested in children has heard of the "Mozart
Effect" and the findings from research that support it.6 Symposiums,7 books,
recordings, workshops, governors' gifts to new mothers, and convention sessions
are devoted to its promise. It is good that musical behavior and its human
effects are being seriously studied by psychologists and neurologists, and, as
Clifford K. Madsen told the American Music Therapy Association in 1998, "We hope
that further investigation confirms these preliminary investigations." 8 All
music teachers share that hope. Bennett Reimer (most recently, 1999) and his
philosophical predecessors such as Charles Leonhard, Harry Broudy, and James
Mursell argue for a music-based rationale for music study, rather than a
justification based on extramusical benefits. This, also, is a value that music
teachers share. These are not competing values if we are clear what we mean by
the term music.
Because music is fascinatingly complex, its study is rewarded, but research into
music learning mechanisms moves slowly. This is becoming apparent not only in
music but in other disciplines. Although researchers have increasingly better
equipment and better research designs, work in music research is still in its
early stages, and it will take time for definitive answers to musically human
questions to emerge. Teachers and policymakers must stay in touch with such
research and put what is learned into the musical and educational perspectives
arising from their professional situations.
The distinction between incidental learning and deliberate musical study is
important in such research. Above, I asserted that music study involves planned
increases in musical skill, knowledge, evaluative insight, and cognitive
capacities. Incidental learning
learning by participating in the musical traditions in one's life-space-may
result in these increases, but such things are seldom planned. For research,
assessment tools must be sensitive to one or the other. Studies of music
achievement most often test the efficacy of teaching-learning procedures.
Incidental learning can complicate the conclusions if it is not "controlled for"
in some way. Conversely, studies of incidental learning are seldom
"uncontaminated by" deliberate attempts of subjects to grow musically.
However, for general assessment purposes in music education, it is increasingly
important that assessment instruments be sensitive to both. That is, music
teachers must base instructional plans on what people actually know and can do in
music, not on what the teacher thinks she or he taught them. Once a clear
diagnosis of the student's musical characteristics is made, the teacher can
determine how to guide further musical studies.
This paper is about music study, but we must continually emphasize that planned
music study and incidental music learning accumulate and support each other in
the development of musical expertise. Some hypotheses about music study are
The ability to organize acoustic events into patterns (construct schemata, derive
meaning from sound) grows with music study.
Learning time compresses with
skilled management of the learning process as well as with age and experience.
That is, learning how to learn improves naturally, but teachers can accelerate
the process even more.
Music study, used as a contingency, "
effective reinforcer for academic behaviors like math [sic] or verbal learning,
as well as social behaviors like attentiveness. "9
Newer theories of human functioning integrate factors that once were separated.
For example, mind and brain are no longer seen as separate entities, studied by
putting one or the other in the foreground. Subject and object (subjective "vs."
objective) are no longer viable divisions of reality. Even the right brain-left
brain metaphors have lost their power to organize our thinking about how we use
our capacities. Mental processes (mind) are no longer separated from physical
processes (body) since their synergy is a much more powerful way of thinking
about human beings. The nature-nurture question is no longer asked seriously; we
now know "it's both." In general, the "or" and the "versus" are disappearing from
the way we explore human ecology. Things are not either this or that; they are
"both," in some form of integration. Moreover, theories of music are emerging
that view music as a unique and liberating form of embodiment. 10
When researchers looked at musical behavior in these integrative, "both-and"
ways, they found some interesting things.
More of the brain is engaged during musical experiences than during rest or
linguistic communication. 11 Musical participation, including listening, seems to
arouse other brain functions, such as spatial reasoning, attention, and
perception. Music can, as a result, carry other information, such as the letters
of the alphabet, the steps to a dance, the procedures in an industrial assembly
line, the brand names of manufactured products in jingles, and the place names in
There are more developmental patterns in music besides
the changing voice and certain kinds of music aptitude.12 Composition and
improvisation, listening abilities, and the ways musical performance is
integrated with the rest of one's life also exhibit developmental patterns.
Music study, then, changes people. 14 It expands the brain's electro-chemical
activity in the presence of music and, since the brain is an active part of
perception, and because perception and cognition are integrated processes, what
one notices in music expands. Our understanding of the extent to which this
affects other human functions is increasing, and there are few simple answers.
The following are some ways that music study can support various abilities useful
to the student in reaching several important educational goals: 16 analyzing
documents, analyzing performances and other actions, brainstorming, classifying,
comparing and contrasting, creating a product, decision-making, defining context,
developing and applying craftsmanship, developing personal commitment,
discovering/generating patterns, evaluating, sequencing, synthesizing, valuing
uniqueness and diversity.
As a result of our growing knowledge, we have a more thorough appreciation of the
complexity of our capacity to make sense out of our world. This is liberating
because unwarranted beliefs lead more often to division between people than to
understanding, tolerance, and collaboration. Music study and learning provide
independent, personal, expanded ways to experience life. This is empowering
because, with study, we are each able to construct an acoustical environment that
includes an ever-expanding store of personally meaningful music, rather than an
environment limited by the musical taste of other people.
III. Personal Empowerment Social Complications
There are ethical problems with the personal-power argument for music study,
however. If we turn for guidance to tolerance and understanding, rather than to
competition and dominance, we soon realize that in the personal-power argument we
are setting up a scenario in which we are "reacting" against others who are,
themselves, merely exercising their rights to create personal musical
environments. Musical space is as important for others as it is for ourselves. We
devalue other people's interest in expanding their cognitive capacities,
evaluative insights, knowledge, and skill in music at the risk of losing their
tolerance for ours. We must learn to value musical commitment in ourselves and in
others. A music study program that motivates musical expansion and personal
choice accompanied by tolerance and creativity produces diversity of the richest
What Personal and Social Benefits are Unique to Music Study?
Personal motivations for music study do not explain what we know about
musical life, however. If personal music cognition were all there were to the
phenomenon, few traditions would emerge and we could not explain the power of
music to become treasured and to unify whole societies. Music study, then,
includes not only our own meaning making but also a study of the meanings that
others find and create in their music. Patterns emerge and habits form from this,
usually through incidental learning. As Howard Gardner points out about learning
By the age of third grade almost every kid in America can read. . . The question
is: Why don't kids read? The answer is because their parents don't read, and that
includes many teachers. ... So, kids are going to like music and be involved in
it if their families and the people around them are involved in music. 17
If music is learned through living, then, what about schooling? Is
institutionalized music study-school music-merely a neo-liberal attempt to wrest
control of students' musical lives away from their families and friends, and
shape their preferences for them "for their own good"? After all, guiding the
music learning of others requires that the guide, not the learner, make decisions
about musical experiences, and these decisions are based on the defendable and
well-considered belief that the musical experience selected for the learner was
appropriate. Is there a personal corollary to this? If we insist on our personal
prerogatives, isn't that enough? Why study music that lies outside of the music
found meaningful by our family, our friends, and ourselves? The short answer is
not a liberal one, but a libertarian one: We should reserve the right to exercise
musical options, even when these options seem to compete with the collective
taste. And, we cannot exercise options that we do not know are there. We should
also reserve the option not to exercise our independence but to connect musically
with a social group. This, too, is a natural process, but some seek belonging
through music systematically. Poignantly, many teenagers go to extremes to learn
the dances and purchase the recordings and videos that some desired group of
their peers finds fashionable, whether or not they are personally meaningful as
music to the teenager. People make sacrifices of money, time, and personal
freedom for the purpose of belonging, and music is part of this picture. This is
familiar to anyone who joins a religious or spiritual group, school, club, or
organization that uses music in its rituals. Expanded to whole societies,
belonging through music is the reason we teach children in America our repertoire
of songs. We should continue this process, but that is not all.
E Pluribus Unum
Partially to promote community, we plan music study for others not only so
that their musical experience is similar-so that they have the option of
belonging through music-but also so that their musical options increase beyond
those easily available in their personal surroundings. Music study contributes to
what some call the ecology of schooling, or the complex "landscape" that
the school presents to learners. Unity and diversity are both important parts of
this landscape in compulsory schooling, and music makes both unity and diversity
audible in ways that language does not. Planned well, music study can uniquely
give reinforcement to the many person-group relationships that the school is
designed to build. If competition is held up as the primary motivator for music
study, unity and diversity are lost. Competition reinforces conformity.
Conformity is not the same as unity, and diversity is seldom valued in musical
competition. Unity, on the other hand, is an important quality, felt rather than
directed, and music can be part of it. There is not a good English word for the
German word gemütlich, the good quality of community that people
experience during events that promote unity rather than conformity.
In the ecology of schooling there is much use made of competition. The same
students who study music compete in other arenas of their school lives, and, to
be sure, there are competitions in music. On the whole, for most students,
however, the competition values of these other school experiences are set aside
in good music study. The emphasis is on creativity and sharing knowledge,
insight, and skill. Out of the diverse contributions of musical students in a
good music program comes an especially vibrant unity that reinforces their
certainty of belonging, and this certainty increases their tolerance for
Music study, then, models an ecological approach to schooling through its
infinite variety of worthy traditions and its real-time integration of process
with product, a feature common to all music. Physical knowing (skill) in music
contributes to and is supported by other forms of knowing in good musical
practice. Through music study, however, we learn to separate the forms of knowing
from each other, to improve on them, and then to re-integrate the result in a
musical whole again. In this way, music study is a metaphor for the ways of
knowing found scattered and largely separate throughout the student's
Not only in the social sense, then, but also in the curricular sense, diversity
of ways of knowing and varieties of creative contributions become unity in music
study. E pluribus unum.
Why Should All People in the United States Study Music?
No society lasts for long that, falls to maintain a complex and diverse
culture and neglects to use it in the general education of its young. The value
that we call "free speech" lies at the core of America's strength, and we
interpret this now to include all forms of symbolic expression, artistic
behavior, and communication. Though this value protects disturbing expression,
sometimes, it also permits an open flow of insights. People who sense that change
is needed communicate something about their views. Music and the other arts
participate in this landscape of insight." People who are in touch with this
landscape, but whose feelings aren't so well formed, can sense when someone else
is expressing similar needs. There is communion. Sensitive people can connect,
participate, reject, revise, communicate, and advance the insight for themselves
and others. They can avoid the feeling of being alone with their inchoate
This cultural process and the exercise of free expression are critical to the
health of our society. The larger, industrialized twentieth-century societies
that attempted to control and limit their people's cultural resources by the
censorship, repression, and politicization of music, the other arts, and religion
However much people often express regret that "things aren't as they used to be"
in today's musical participation, we must recognize that culture--music--remains
stagnant at the risk of losing its meaning and importance as a social and
cultural resource. In fact, school music programs should emphasize musical change
and personal creativity. Doing so will go further to strengthen our society and
preserve the importance of music in schools than the mindless preservation of
bygone skills and repertoires.
Preservation need not be mindless. Our heritage contains monuments of human
thought that some call the canon of western civilization, a cultural store that
is deemed valuable enough that it ought to be preserved by teaching. Through
music study, students gain access to the musical minds of geniuses such as Bach,
Mozart, and Beethoven. If music teachers emphasize musical processes that
challenge all students to share their musical thoughts--including their musical
recreations of the masterworks-through their skills, knowledge and evaluative
insights, then music study, even study of the masters, can have a new, stronger
There is an important view that schools should transmit the complex mix of values
that define the cultures within our borders, including those values reflected in
their musics. At the same time, we expect schools to deliberately model and teach
social conventions such as waiting in line, staying to the right, neatness,
punctuality, "walk, don't run," polite speech, personal space, empathy for
someone hurt, patriotism, individual contributions to group outcomes, and many
more. If part of the school's function is to promote a civil society, then these
are laudable habits for children to form, whether or not they know why they are
forming them. Perhaps music programs reflect a mindless approach to learning
social conventions when they emphasize technique over critical insight in
learning to perform the musical canon. For example, reinforcing correct, accurate
performance and ensemble conformity and discipline at the expense of musical
insight, or emphasizing slick public performance as the principal focus of music
study for all children may reflect the broader "school values" listed earlier in
this paragraph. Alas, in doing so, such programs model for children a disdain for
valued musical actions that go beyond correct, prepared performance. Lost are the
social and personal values growing out of improvisation, composition and
revision, experimentation with musical ideas, and pushing the envelope of one's
cognitive and perceptual capacities through music. People who promote correctness
and uniformity are disturbed that students can challenge social conventions
through the arts. To people disturbed by the authentic music produced by
students-much of it exploratory-individual expression is not what these school
values and social conventions support. There are good, practical reasons and
functions for social conventions; teaching social conventions mindlessly
mis-educates children on such points.
Musical actions are metaphors of this problem, and music study helps children and
young people negotiate the issues that arise from it. Through a good music
program, one that emphasizes both individual and group accomplishment, both
personal insight and recreative skill, all students can grow in that special
value that supports our group preservation of individual "free speech" or, in its
more contemporary formulation, "freedom of expression." Music study requires and
reinforces individual action that alternatively creates and recreates, expresses
and replicates. People who study music for extended periods learn how and when to
be themselves and when to be a good group member.
This encourages children to form the dual habit of individual expression and
group accomplishment. These interact. Neither trumps the other in our culture.
All should study music because there are few other places in their early life
experiences where personal sensitivity and contributions to the group are in such
consistent, close, and powerful synergy.
At its best, then, music study is both an individual and a communal process.
There are many valued musicians (people call them "self-taught ', ) whose study
is largely one of individual exploration not only to increase their skills, but
also to increase their knowledge of other musicians whose music making they
admire. Individual taste guides their study, and some of these musicians
contribute significantly to the musical monuments of our culture. indeed, all
active musicians, regardless of the external sources of their expertise,
contribute to the society's "landscape of insight" to which I referred
Far from denigrating the contributions of self-taught musicians, our society
values these models and marvels at them. It is instructive that they are held up
against the kind of "musical training" that stereotypes many school programs. The
fact that self-taught musicians are contrasted with institution taught musicians
should be a warning that music education institutions are losing credibility to
the degree that individual musical impulses of children are subjugated to some
mistaken notion of group values. We must know more than we do about the music
learning strategies of self-taught musicians and bring such strategies into our
pedagogy rather than reject them. After all, once we leave "formal" instructional
settings, we become self-taught. Musical expertise is oriented to self-guided
musical study and music making.
For these and other reasons explored here, all persons should study music in a
program that challenges both individual musical initiative and communal (group)
achievement. In this way, the cultural value that marks our special brand of
individual/group integration is modeled for children and practiced by them, and
is therefore preserved in the schools.
Should Every Person Travel a Similar Music-Study Path?
Music is ubiquitous, and it is part of being human. Being identified with our
culture through music study requires that we start any episode of study wherever
we "are" musically. Teachers who intervene in this process can take the student
from there to levels of musical expertise that provide lifelong avenues for
individual growth. Music teachers can provide efficient learning of the
essentials of the music currently being created and used, and thereby help
individuals to compress the time it takes to act effectively on their musical
impulses. Building multiple paths to reaching a mature, self-generated expansion
of musical expertise is critical if all are to contribute, and the corollary
values of respect, tolerance, and empathy for others' insights are built by
sensitive teachers along the way. This diagram (click on the diagram to increase
its size) shows graphically how this can be modeled.
If music study
is to be efficient and effective both for the person and for the group, then
there is a path. There are music-study patterns that the profession has found
effective. The "content" of music study can be outlined as it is below, 18 and
there are sequences for study within the various parts of the outline that the
profession has found efficacious.
Elements of music
learning that are common to all paths:
deliberately produce and discriminate pitch changes
derive meaning from pitch/loudness/timbre
create and decode notation for pitch/loudness/timbre
maintain and respond to steady beat
derive meaning from rhythm
create and decode notation for
compose and improvise meaningful music
derive meaning from
gestures of conductors, performers
gain insight from multiple
evaluate musical validity of compositions and
performances by self and others
move musically (dance)
mastery and enjoyment
orient skill increases to tonal, rhythmic,
and expressive expertise
analyze, evaluate, and produce
study music's many social, cultural, ethnic contexts
find and use multiple sources and settings for musical learning
recognize and use varied instructional sources
The music teacher will be able to guide and accelerate learning for the
twenty-first century by emphasizing the following characteristics of teachers:
motivator, facilitator, diagnostician, critic, evaluator, organizer, questioner,
researcher, scholar, and (most important) active musician. The teacher's
contribution to music study is to accelerate and guide learning. The teacher's
musical expertise gives guidance to students and the teacher's pedagogical
expertise accelerates their learning
IV. Public Musical Health
What Is the Likely Future Relationship between Professional Music Teaching
and Music Study?
Although space does not permit a full exploration of
the issue here, there is a research base supporting pedagogical training. 19 Such
preparation professionalizes intuitive music teachers by making their instruction
deliberate and better adapted to the diverse needs of the entire population,
including those who are uniquely motivated to study music. Learning for all
becomes accelerated and more efficient. Teachers converse about pedagogy, and
there is efficiency in any specialized professional vocabulary. In pedagogical
communication, common goals emerge along with shared strategies for reaching
them. New knowledge of learning processes employs deliberate alternatives to the
skills-dominated methods of intuitive learners, "Self taught" musicians.
What would music in society be like in 2020 if all music instruction programs
were closed tomorrow, from kindergarten through graduate school? Would people
still study music? Would America be better off? What are the unique functions of
professional music teachers? How do sources for incidental music learning such as
mass media or the Internet contribute to music study? How do these differ in
their contributions to the "musical health" of our society?
Of course music study would continue if music schools and music in public schools
disappeared. What replaces them would be an idiosyncratic mix of parallel musical
universes that mirror the many categories of expertise and interest that cover
our landscape now, from religious sects to motorcycle clubs.
The argument against musical eclecticism as a public policy is that we risk our
society's cultural and social health by leaving music to the entertainment
industry. As I have said elsewhere 20
If education is in trouble at the systemic level then we must immediately begin
to draw folks into action in large numbers or risk-what? Perhaps, we risk
abandoning music education to some cultural processes that represent disturbing
... to cultural processes such as the mass media that demand too little of
. . . to cultural processes such as advertising that convince people to buy
musical products that diminish rather than expand human musical
. . to cultural processes such as many government leaders' political interests
that push us back to a tribal, xenophobic approach to musical living, when the
information age moves us in just the opposite direction, and
. . . to cultural processes such as retailing and commercial broadcasting that
indoctrinate us with the commercial view: that musical insights should be no
deeper than one's childhood appetites and no wider than the personal borders of
one's convenient lifespace.
Music teachers can meet these challenges by adopting what might be called a
"public health" approach to their work. That is, K-I2 music teachers, especially
classroom music teachers, are in professional contact with the entire population.
In addition to the expertise that the teacher provides directly to students, he
or she has the tools and should have the motivation to discover and evaluate the
community's musical resources. Music teachers, more than any other occupational
group in music, have the professional expertise and the opportunity to equip both
future citizens and whole communities for liberating, powerful musical
How Can the Institutionalization Process of Music Study Be Strengthened in Our
The public policy justification for music study revolves around only a few
basic questions, some of which were addressed above. One that remains is: At what
developmental point should music study become deliberate and professionally
Music study for infants, a policy in parts of northern Europe, and practiced
informally in families everywhere, is becoming increasingly institutionalized in
America. The "Mozart Effect" has given new impetus to infant and toddler music
education, and we have long known that sound imprinting occurs before
Music teachers know professionally that an early start in music has lifelong
benefits not only to musical growth, but also to general functioning. This and
the growing body of music research accumulates to suggest that we adopt a "public
musical health" perspective, where music teachers engage not on y K-12 students
but others-parents of infants, to name one group-as part of the work. 21
Today, there are literally hundreds of well-written publications that promote
music education. In spite of this, we are asking "" This is evidence that we
sense some gaps.
What is missing are ways to document the overriding importance of the
individual-social musical process, and to de-emphasize the current focus upon
various kinds of products, whether stated as "testable" outcomes, music performed
in public, or changed brains. We need to find ways to convince others in the
world outside our profession of the essential benefits of the process of music
learning, investing them with enthusiasm for "walking the path" of music
As a whole profession, we must redefine instructional efficiency in terms of
musical health, individual and societal, before we can be better advocates for
our collective pedagogical insights and expertise. To do this effectively, we
must remove the "either-or" formulation from our professional arguments. There is
weak logic in an argument that forces choices-either the person or the society;
either performer or listener; either producer or consumer; either curricular or
extracurricular; either pop music or classical music. People whom we must
persuade to our cause do not recognize these dichotomies as important. Music is
"both-and," and our collective advocacy must be inclusive.
So, What Does Music Study Do for Us as Persons and as a People?
Music study contributes uniquely both to the general and specialized
education of people.
I. People create, communicate, and derive unique meanings from music. Musical
actions are open-ended constructions. They arise from people's sense of
meaningfulness. It takes study to broaden and deepen our ability to use music
along with other ways to communicate our insights with and among people.
2. In music making, product is uniquely and intimately related to process. In
both small units of musical behavior and large, the process of making music
contains immediate and constant feedback, sets the foundation and generative
impulse for subsequent actions, and reinforces both individual and communal
actions by setting up musical products as problems or hypotheses rather than as
ends in themselves.
3. Music study empowers all people. Music making of a high degree of insight and
complexity is possible with a wide range of materials. Resources needed for music
making are readily accessible, and deep musical experiences can evolve from free
resources. The human voice and environmental materials afford primary means for
making music, and study helps people to learn how.
4. Music study results in, depends upon, and rewards personal excellence. Music
making puts craftsmanship in the foreground at every level of expertise.
Expanding and growing skillfulness occupies a natural and prominent place in all
degrees of musical complexity. In music making, evaluation is clear and public,
and the standards are both personal and socio-cultural. Music study and music
making are unique person-group settings for personal growth.
5. In spite of the public nature of music making, musical goals and the means to
reach them are ultimately personal. Reaching musical goals confirms personal
efficacy as it rewards disciplined action, sometimes over long periods of time.
For all students, music study affords an expanded means of personal efficacy. For
some people, music study is a crucial, primary pathway to personal development.
Music study rewards self-discipline in a uniquely integrated experience of
process with product and a uniquely powerful synergy of being with
6. Part of compulsory education's purpose is to promulgate cultural values,
promote community, integrate people with society largely through cultural and
social means, reduce isolation, and promote an advanced tolerance for diversity.
Music study integrates these purposes in single actions. Good music study
requires people to learn several important musical traditions, to engage the
masters of these traditions, and to embody the means and the motivation to
contribute to our culture's future by giving effectively to its present.
If there is a "bottom line" to all of this, we study music to give us as persons
a reliable, thorough, and efficient way of becoming expert at creating,
communicating, and deriving meaning musically in our human world. Musical
expertise "matures" when we take charge of our own music learning program. We
deliberately expand the range of musical experiences, and naturally and
effectively mobilize our best musical resources in musical situations of a wide
variety. The professional task for music teachers is to stay learner-centered,
nurturing this human process until it flowers in a society full of musically
My thanks go to the people who contributed to the
foundations of this paper: The Commission-Ed Calle, Jennifer Davidson, Jack
Heller, Daniel Scheuerer, David Shrader, and Larry Williams; and others who
reacted to earlier drafts-especially, Mary E. Bickel, Paul Lehinan, Michael Mark,
and Thomas Regelski. Although the writing and the responsibility for the
viewpoint are mine, their contributions were critical to whatever success this
1. In this paper, "music making" means music performance, composition, and
improvisation. "Musicing," as used by Elliott (1994), and "Musicking" by Small
(1998), include also dancing and listening. For a further discussion of this
issue, see Gates (199I).
2. Paul Lehman's chapter in this publication expands on the issue of teaching
toward the Standards.
3. See Swanwick (199I, 1994), Swanwick and Franca (1999), and Swanwick and
4. Regelski uses the term "praxis" for this way of seeing musicality. Praxis
means "mindful action" or action based on judgment. As Regelski
puts it (Spring 1998, p. 32): "Praxis, in this view, amounts to theory, judgment,
wisdom, and knowledge put into action by and as a rational phronesis of 'good' or
'right results' for particular circumstances." Action, of course, suggests a
contribution of skill; otherwise, the results Regelski describes would happen
accidentally. However, musical technique-building, in the praxial view, occurs in
the process of doing music for particular circumstances not developed in the
abstract, isolated from music making with the implication that one is building
skills that some day one might find useful. Praxially built skills are applicable
to future music making but are not abstracted from it in "scale studies" or
"technic-builders." That said, where weak skills block musical expression, the
learner diagnoses this and attacks the problem, perhaps with help from others;
but he or she does so intentionally, with a musical application in mind. He or
she studies. The term phronesis refers to the application of judgment through the
options that occur naturally and become guiding in a mindful act before, during
and after the action. See also Regelski (Fall 1998).
5. Smith (1997) challenged the relevance of most available music research to our
understanding of novices. He found that most "music science" used musical
experts, rather than novices, as the point of reference in the rationales, and he
proposes new directions, including a re-examination of such beliefs as octave
6. For a brief summary of the current intelligence/music rationale, see Grorriko
and Poorman (1998). See also Rauscher (1997).
7. Two recent symposiums are the Ithaca Conference '96: Music as Intelligence
(Brummet, 1997) and The1999 Charles Fowler ColloquiumEnlightened Advocacy:
Implications ofResearch for Arts Education Policy and Practice (I6-I7 April 1999,
at the University of Maryland, College Park).
8. Clifford K. Madsen, personal correspondence, 9 April 1999.
9. Abeles, Hoffer, and Klotman (1994, behavior p. 262). Here, they are
summarizing, findings from Madsen, Greer, and Madsen (1975), and Madsen and
I0. Wayne Bowman, Lucy Green (1997), and Eleanor Stubley are among those
developing newer theories of musical embodiment, taking musical experience and
human functionality to new levels of integration.
11. Studies in support of this use technologies that include neural mapping,
brain chemistry studies, blood flow studies, using PET, MRI, EEG, CAT, etc. See
Hodges (1996), ch. 7, for a solid overview. Both Hellmuth Petsche and John
Holahan and their collaborators have published various studies using such
technology, as have Donald Hodges and others in the Institute for Music Research
(IMR) at the Universities of Texas, San Antonio. Michael Wagner also works in
I2. See Gordon (1987) and Walters and Taggart (1989) for definitions and accounts
of what Edwin Gordon calls developmental music aptitude.
I3. See Swanwick (199I, 1994), Swanwick and Tillman (1986), and Swanwick and
Franca (1999) for crosscu rural research in music composition and I tening
development. See Green (1997) and Kemp (1996) for thorough explorations of
musicians' personalities in Western music's II schooleX traditions. Alas, few
psychological studies of this scope are available in the II unschooled"
tradition, but see Keil and Feld (1994) for what will prove to be a
groundbreaking ethnographic and social psychological analysis of vernacular
I4. See Howard Gardner's discussion of how this works in Brummett (1997, pp.
I5. See Searle (1994) for a good analysis of the brain-mind issue and Dissanayake
(1988, 1992) for applications of genetics to the arts.
I6. Thanks go to Jennifer Davidson suggesting and contributing most of
I8. See National Standards for Music Education (Consortium of National Art
Education Associations, 1994; and Music Educators National Conference, 1996) more
detailed lists. See also chapters in t
19. See Colwell (1992).
20. Gates (1998).
2I. John Feicrabend, Donna Brink F. Edwin Gordon, Lill Levinowitz, and other
leaders in the practice of working with infants have developed teaching
procedures based on their own research and experience, continuing a practice that
builds on pioneering work by such people as Donald Pond and Robert
Selected Bibliography and References Note.. The books and articles
selected here are among many of relevance to the topic, and this list is by no
means exhaustive. It represents an attempt to connect the science of music
learning and teaching with the belief systems of music in the Western tradition.
In addition to the books, there are many excellent journal reports of research
exploring a manageable number of experimental variables in music learning. The
items listed here were selected from music research journals since 1992 if the
primary purpose was (a) to review or critique current or recent research in music
learning, or (b) to provide an extended treatment of music learning processes or
developmental stages. For journal articles, the year 1992 was selected to extend
rather than replace the most recent critical reviews of this literature in
Colwell (1992) and Hodges (1996).
Abeles, Harold E, Charles R. Hoffer, and Robert H. Klotman. Foundations of
music Education. 2d ed. New York: Schirmer Books, 1994. Brummett, Verna, ed.
Ithaca Conference 96---Music as Intelligence: A Sourcebook. Ithaca, NY.
Ithaca College, 1997. Colwell, Richard, ed. Handbook of Research on Music
Teaching and Learning. New York: Schirmer Books, 1992.
Consortium of National Arts Education Associations. National Standards for
Arts Education. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference,
Demorest, Steven M. "Sightsinging in the Secondary Choral Ensemble: A Review of
the Research." Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education I37
(Summer 1998): I-I5.
Dissanayake, Ellen. What Is Art For? Seattle, WA: University of Washington
_. Homo Aestheticus: Where Art Comes firom and Wby. New York: The Free
Dowling, W Jay, and Dane L. Harwood. Music Cognition. Orlando, FL:
Academic Press, 1986.
Elliott, David. Music Matters. New York: Schirmer Books, 1994.
Fiske, Harold E. Music and Mind. Lewiston, NY. Mellen Books, 1990.
_. Music Cognition andAesthetic Attitudes. Lewiston, NY. Mellen Books,
Gates, J. Terry. "Music Participation: Theory, Research and Policy." Bulletin
of the Councilfor Research in Music Education I09 (Summer 199I): I-36.
International Theorizing in Music Education: The MayDay Group and Its Agenda."
Presented at the International Society for Music Education, Pretoria, South
Africa, 25 July 1998. (For the text, see < http: / /members. aol. co m/j
tgates/ maydaygroup/-> on the page titled The May Day Group Agenda.)
Gordon, Edwin E. The Nature, Description, Measurement and Evaluation of Music
Aptitudes. Chicago: G.I.A. Publications, 1987.
Green, Lucy. Music, Gender, Education.Cambridge: Cambridge University
Grorriko, Joyce Eastlund, and Allison Smith Poorman. "The Effect of Music
Training on Preschoolers' Spatial-Temporal Task Performance," Journal
ofResearch in Music Education 46, no. 2 (Summer 1998): I73-8I.
Hargreaves, David J., and Adrian C North, eds. The Social Psychology of Music.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Hennion, Antoine. Comment la Musique Vient aux Enfants: Une
Anthropologie de LEnseignement Musical. Paris: Anthropos, 1988.
Hodges, Donald A., ed. Handbook of Music Psychology. 2d ed. San Antonio,
TX: The University of Texas at San Antonio, 1996.
Keil, Charles, and Steven Feld. Music Grooves. Chicago: University of
Kemp, Anthony E. The Musical Temperament.. Psychology and Personality of
Musicians. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Kjelland, James M., Jody L. Kerchner, and Marian T. Dura, eds. "The Effects
Music Performance Participation on the Music Listening Experience: A
Literature." Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music
Education I36 (Spring 1998): I-55.
Krumhansl, Carol L. Cognitive Foundations ofmuslcal Pitch. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1990.
Madsen, Clifford K., R. D. Greer, and Charles H. Madsen. Research in Music
Behavlor. New York: Teachers College, 1975.
Madsen, Clifford K., and Carol A. Prickett, eds. Applications of Research in
Music Behavior. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 1987.
Music Educators National Conference. Performance Standards for Music.*
Strategies and Benchmarks for Assessing Progress toward the National Standards,
Grades PreK-I2. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference,
Rauscher, Frances H. "A Cognitive Basis for the Facilitation of Spatial-Temporal
Cognition through Music Instruction." In Ithaca Conference 96-Music as
Intelligence: A Sourcebook, edited by Verna Brummett, 3I-44. Ithaca, NY..
Ithaca College, 1997.
Regelski, Thomas A. "The Aristotelian Bases of Praxis for Music and Music
Education as Praxis." Philosophy of Music Education Review 6 (Spring
_____ Schooling for Musical Praxis." Canadian Music Educator 40, no. I
Reimer, Bennett. 'Tacing the Risks of the 'Mozart Effect'." Music Educators
journal 86, no. I (July 1999): 37-43.
Searle, John R. The Rediscovery of the Mind. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, 1994.
Small, Christopher. Musicking.. The Meanings of Performing and Listening.
Hanover, NH: University Presses of New England, 1998.
Smith, J. David. "The Place of Musical Novices in Music Science." Music
Perception I4 (Spring 1997): 227-62.
Swanwick, Keith. Further Research on the Musical Developmental Sequence."
Psychology o fMusic 19 (1991): 22-32. Musical Knowledge: Intuition,
Analysis and Music Education. London: Routledge, 1994.
Swanwick, Keith, and Cecilia C. Franca. "Composing, Performing and Audience
Listening as Indicators of Musical Understanding." British Journal of
Education I6 (1999): 5-19.
Swanwick, Keith, and June Tillman. "The Sequence of Musical Development: A Study
of Children's Composition. II British Journal ofMusic Education 3 (1986):
Walters, Darryl L_ and Cynthia Crump Taggart, eds. Readings in Music Learning
Theory. Chicago: G.I.A. Publications, 1989.
Wilson, Edward 0. On Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Woodford, Paul G., ed. Critical Thinking in Music., Theory and Practice.
London, Ontario, Canada: The University of Western Ontario,