Music Education Philosophy: Changing Times CD

By Marie McCarthy and J. Scott Goble

D
C)
A half-century
of OIQ

debate aboutthe D 0e

n the latter half of the twentieth century,the music education basis

philosophical
profession in the United States underwent considerable (D '^-
change in its philosophical foundations. From the launch of
aesthetic education in the 1950s as a response to long-stand- for musiceducation uC-
ing functional values to the emergence of praxial philosophy leads through
in the 1990s as a reaction to the aesthetic movement, the philo-
sophical views guiding the profession have been shaped by the
social, political, and cultural values of the times. This article aesthetic,
functional,
recounts the evolution of these philosophies and offers an inter- (D
pretation of the changes that took place.l sociological,
cognitive,
The Emergence of Aesthetic Education and praxialschools
During the first half of the twentieth century, music education ')
CO
in U.S. public schools was associated with a variety of functional
values that reflected music's role in the social, physical, moral, and
of thought. n0
intellectual development of schoolchildren. However, certain soci-
etal developments in the 1950s and 1960s, including the cold war
and the civil rights movement, led a number of influential music
educators to become discontented with this state of affairs. These
educators-including Allen Britton, Charles Leonhard, Bennett
Reimer, and Abraham Schwadron-felt that music education
_5

Marie McCarthy is associate

professorof music educationat
the University of Maryland in
CollegePark, andJ. Scott Goble
is assistant professor of music
education at the University of
British Columbiain Vancouver

S EPT EMBER 2 0 0 2 19
needed a stronger theoretical founda-
tion, a more academically credible
(and perhaps more respectable) basis
upon which to explain its importance
in the school curriculum. They want-
ed this new foundation to be suffi-
ciently comprehensive to unify mem-
bers of the profession. They under-
took to establish this new foundation
on principles drawn primarily from
aesthetics, the branch of philosophy
that deals specifically with the arts
(see the sidebar for terms related to
various music education philoso-
phies).
The writings of John Dewey,
Susanne Langer, Leonard Meyer, and
other philosophers of the time served
as cornerstones for these efforts.
Langer had articulated a modernist
vision of music as "atonal analogue of
emotive life" in her 1948 book
Philosophyin a New Key and her 1953
book Feeling and Form.2 Her words
resonated strongly with an American
public then fascinated with the
European and American art music
being broadcast on radio and via the
new medium of television. Meyer
drew upon John Dewey's philosophy
of art3 and Gestalt psychology to
address issues of musical meaning,
communication, value, and greatness
associated primarily with Western art
music in his books, beginning in 1956
with Emotion and Meaning in Music.4
His work, too, met with wide accept-
ance. While the aesthetic perspectives
of Langer and Meyer differ in impor-
tant respects, both tended to focus pri-
marily on works of music (i.e., com-
positions) in their writings, regarding
them as forms of art; both employed
conceptual vocabularies usually asso-
ciated with Western art music; and
both emphasized the notion that all
music is similarly expressiveof human
feeling.
Meanwhile, educational theory and
practice were increasingly influenced
by the field of psychology. Education
theorist BenjaminBloom and his asso-
ciates grounded instructional practice
in emerging psychological principles
when they published their Taxonomy
of EducationalObjectives,the two vol-
umes of which focused on the "cogni-
tive" and "affective"learning domains
respectively.5 By 1963, psychologist
Jerome Bruner was advancing the
20
related notion of "concept learning"in tion. The establishment in 1966 of the
his writings, including his book The Journal of Aesthetic Education, which
Process of Education, which came to rapidly became a forum for debate of
have wide influence on instructional philosophical issues in music educa-
practices in all academic disciplines.6 tion, confirmed the strength of the
Accordingly, philosopher Nelson movement by the end of the following
Goodman focused on the symbolic decade.
nature of the arts and on art education However, it is clear from the pro-
within a psychological framework.7 ceedings of the Tanglewood Sym-
Historian Michael Mark has described posium that, while most of the partic-
the rise of interest in psychology by ipants agreed that the aesthetic para-
educational philosophers at this time digm was suited to the changing soci-
as the beginning of a "synergy be- etal values of the 1960s, some found it
tween philosophy and psychology."8 inadequate for accommodating musi-
cal practices of cultures outside the
Western musical canon. The need for
a "new aesthetic theory," based on
developments in technology, anthro-
Argumentsfromcognitive pology, and communication, was
highlighted in the final report of the
psychologyassistedmusic Symposium.11
Abraham Schwadron, one of the
educatorsin meetingincreasing
original proponents of the aesthetic
pressuresto validatemusicin j approach to music education philoso-
phy, discussed its limitations as he
education. straddled the line in his writings
between the need for the professional
security that might be achieved
through a unified philosophy and the
realities of a pluralistic society. He
The important book Basic Concepts advocated the adoption of a more rel-
in Music Education,stemming from a ativistic philosophy, one that would
Music Educators National Confer- emphasize "more inclusive under-
ence (MENC)-sponsored commission, standings of socio-musical values and
emerged in 1958, featuring chapters related educational means and
written by prominent music education ends."12 Schwadron'sperspective was
scholars dealing with aesthetic con- shaped by the broad range of his
cepts; it served to launch the new phi- scholarship, which drew from anthro-
losophy in a formal way.9The publica- pology, ethnomusicology, and reli-
tion of Charles Leonhard and Robert gious studies.
House's 1959 college text, Foundations Other, more comprehensive philo-
and Principlesof MusicEducation,con- sophical perspectives were also avail-
tributed further to establishing the able to music educators at that time,
profession's acceptance of an aesthet- but they were either not pursued or
ics-based philosophy as its theoretical not accepted by the profession at
foundation.10 large. Theodore Brameld's social
With a remarkably minimal reconstructionist view, perhaps most
amount of debate or discussion, music notable for its openness and flexibility,
educators throughout the nation was passed over, likely due to its asso-
began to adopt the notion of uniting ciation with utilitarian educational
the profession under the banner of outcomes.13 The sociological ap-
aesthetic education, and MENC soon proach developed largely by Max
endorsed the new idea as well. Various Kaplanl4 and then advanced by John
well-publicized professional dia- Mueller may not have been embraced
logues, such as the 1963 YaleSeminar, by the profession because of its associ-
the Seminar on Comprehensive Mus- ation with "nonmusical"learning out-
icianship in 1965, and the 1967 comes. Simultaneously,ethnomusicol-
Tanglewood Symposium, served to ogists and cultural anthropologists
spread and popularize the notion of like Charles Seeger and Alan Merriam
music education as aesthetic educa- presented functional perspectives on
MUSIC EDUCATORS JOURNAL
music, but their views were also not
embraced.15 It seems apparent that
the profession was more comfortable
holding to views grounded in aesthet-
ic philosophy. In a sense, the new
movement toward an aesthetic philos-
ophy, as Mark has since observed,
"was to have the effect of disassociat-
ing music education from societal
goals, at least in the minds of many
music educators."16 Unquestionably,
the adoption of an aesthetic basis for
music education resulted in a singular
and cohesive philosophy for the pro-
fession, but it could be argued that its
focus was narrow and would ultimate-
ly not accommodate shifting social
and cultural realities.
The Heyday of Aesthetic
Education
With the groundwork laid for its
full acceptance by the profession, the
aesthetic education movement blos-
somed in the 1970s, beginning with
the publication of Bennett Reimer's
landmark book A Philosophyof Music
Education.17 Reimer advanced the
philosophical position of "absolute
expressionism," which he had adopt-
ed from Meyer's theory of musical
expression. This philosophical view-
point, Reimer argued, provides a
sound basis for "the claim that the arts
in education are both unique and
essential for all children."18According
to the absolute expressionist position,
the meaning of a given musical work
is primarily internal to that work; the
expressive emotional meanings
evoked by the music "exist without
reference to the extramusical world of
concepts, actions, and human emo-
tional states."19 Of primary impor-
tance is the notion that the relation-
ships within a musical work alone are
capable-in and of themselves-of
exciting feelings and emotions in the
listener. The meanings that particular
forms of music carried within the
social contexts in which they had
originated were not considered.
One important result of Reimer's
book was that it brought into focus
the relationship between philosophy
and advocacy. In fact, the book
launched a new phase of advocacy, in
which the values of music in educa-
tion were seen to evolve out of a par-
ticular philosophical position. Reimer
S EPT EMBER 2002
TermsRelatedto Music
EducationPhilosophies
Aesthetics
The branchof philosophythat deals with art (especiallyfineart),its sources,
forms, and effects. Aestheticphilosophiesof music educationfocus on preparing
students to perceive and respond appropriatelyto musicalworksas forms of art
(especiallygreat works or "masterpieces")in order to "educate their feelings"
and to evoke in them "aesthetic experience" (i.e., a unique,highlypleasurable
state of mind).
Cognitive Psychology
The study of humanthought processes, drawingprimarilyfrom the disci-
plines of psychology, anthropology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, neuro-
science, and philosophy.
Functionalism
A theory or practice that emphasizesthe necessity of adaptingthe struc-
ture or design of something to fit its social function or role. Functionalist
approachesto musiceducationemphasize teaching music in a way that supports
the social, physical,moral,and intellectualdevelopment of students in a com-
munityor society.
Praxis
As used by the ancient Greeks to distinguishfrom theoria (speculative
knowledge of pure, eternal truth) and techne (knowledge required to create,
make,or produce something),a kind of knowledge characterizedby the sorts
of reasoning and critical thinkingnecessary for getting "right results" for the
benefit of people in a given domainor situation.Praxialphilosophiesof musicedu-
cationfocus on involvingstudents in the musicalpracticesof different cultural
groups and helpingthem to understandthe intentions of those who undertake
them, as well as the social, historical,and culturalconditions in which they orig-
inate,exist, and have meaning.
Sociology
The study of human society and of social relationships,organization,and
change (includingthe study of beliefs and values),as well as the processes influ-
encing them.
later provided what was to become the tion.21 The aesthetic approachbecame
most popular definition of aesthetic increasingly evident in curriculum
education, describing it in words soon projects in the 1970s, including the
adopted by music education advocates CEMREL Aesthetic Education Pro-
as "the development of sensitivity to gram, the Cleveland Area Project, and
the aesthetic qualities of things."20 Harvard Project Zero, among others.
Following the publication of Rei- Textbooks were published based on
mer'sbook, a number of organizations the philosophy, most notably the 1974
undertook efforts to put the philoso- basal series Silver Burdett Music, for
phy into practice. In 1971, MENC and which Reimer was a guiding author.22
CEMREL (the Central Midwestern Certain trends in education and
Regional Educational Laboratory) psychology in the 1970s had an
published Toward an Aesthetic Edu- impact on the direction of the aesthet-
cation, featuring papers by scholars ic movement. As economic changes
dedicated to the development of the caused policy makers to become more
aesthetic movement in music educa- concerned with "the basics" in educa-
21
tion (raising questions of educational
accountability,which led arts teachers
to intensify arts advocacy efforts),
educators emphasized outcome-based
curricula, measurement of behavioral
and instructional outcomes, and
increasingly sophisticated quantitative
research methodologies intended to
facilitate curriculum development and
evaluation. Not surprisingly,a number
of studies within music education at
the time explored how the develop-
ment of students' aesthetic sensitivity
affected their music learning and
achievement. Educational leaders
sought to draw links between psychol-
ogy, educational psychology, and aes-
thetic education, applying the concept
of taxonomy to music instruction, cre-
ating instructional objectives describ-
ing aesthetic behaviors and affective
outcomes, and evaluating aesthetic
education programs. Arguments from
cognitive psychology-especially the
results of related brain research then
being published-assisted music edu-
cators in meeting increasing pressures
to validate music in education.
Other trends in education influ-
enced the direction of aesthetic educa-
tion in turn, and music educators
embraced many of these trends with-
out fully considering their compatibil-
ity with the tenets of the aesthetic phi-
losophy. Many music educators did
not question their colleagues' efforts
to expand and clarify "aesthetic edu-
cation," but, rather, accepted the phi-
losophy without full understanding of
its curricularimplications.
New Directions: Challenging
the Aesthetic Paradigm
While Reimerand others steadfastly
continued to advancethe aesthetic par-
adigm,23 Abraham Schwadron and
Douglas Lemmon arguedthat the para-
digm was inadequatefor accommodat-
ing cultural differences manifested in
various forms of music alive in the
diverse population of the United States.
Schwadron emphasized that the aes-
thetic philosophy could not account
for "the nature of the pluralistic socie-
ty, the many musics, and the variety of
accepted modes of thought."24
Lemmon saw the aesthetic philosophy
as leading in two unacceptable direc-
tions: "Eitherwe must believe that all
musicians ... work according to the
22
principles of Reimer'stheory of art ...
or only those works and activities of
musicians that can be shown to con-
form to the conditions laid down by
Reimer's theory of art can be justifi-
ably included in ... a curriculum in
music."25
Praxialphilosophydrawsupon i
Aristotle's
notionof praxisas |
actionrootedin practicerather;
than in theory.Y.!
i would likely doom the profession.30
Simultaneously, alternative views
of the social value of music were
being advanced by scholars outside
the mainstream of music education
in the United States. Ethnomusicolo-
gist John Blacking publicly strove to
reconcile his own background as a
classical pianist with his experiences
studying the musical practices and
beliefs of the Venda people of South
Africa (and others) in a series of lec-
tures entitled How Musical Is Man?
published in 1973.26 Sociologist John
Shepherd and others were engaged in
demonstrating how particular forms
of music reflect the wider social real-
ity of which they are a part in Whose
Music? A Sociology of Musical
Languages (1977).27 Scholar-teacher
Christopher Small, in his 1977 book
Music, Society, Education, proffered a
historical account of how the emer-
gence of the scientific worldview in
the Renaissance influenced the
course of Western musical develop-
ment.28 He drew comparisons with
non-Western musical practices,
advancing a new way of considering
the role of music in education.
However, the work of these scholars
had little or no immediate influence
on mainstream music education phi-
losophy.
MUSIC
Instead, philosophical writings
during the early 1980s reflected a pro-
fessional uneasiness stemming from a
different source, as government eco-
nomic policies began to channel fund-
ing away from the nation's public
schools, and arts education programs
were cut back in many school dis-
tricts. When music's importance rela-
tive to other academic subjects began
to be questioned publicly once again,
historian Michael Mark took a long
view of music education's history,
drawing a distinction between the
profession's utilitarian vs. aesthetic
rationales.29 A debate briefly ensued
in the Music EducatorsJournal, with
aesthetic educators voicing the merits
of their chosen philosophy while oth-
ers asserted that the "purposelessness
of music" implied by that philosophy
Remarkably,writings on aesthetic
education in the mid-1980s began to
be challenged by those who had previ-
ously been centrally involved in
advancing the movement. Writing in
1985, Leonhard observed, "Current
statements are often so vague and eso-
teric that few people can understand
them, especially laypersons."31 Also
sensing a deficit of substance in aes-
thetic arguments, scholar Richard
Colwell noted in 1986, "On the sur-
face, music [education] continues to
march forward under the aesthetic
education banner, but it is searching
for a new gonfalon that is not only
more understandable to the general
public but closer to what has become
accepted educational practice."32
Then, in a 1986 article on jazz edu-
cation as aesthetic education,
Canadian scholar David Elliott began
discussing particularlimitations of the
aesthetic philosophy. Elliott was in a
unique position to critique aesthetic
philosophy, as he had completed
coursework for his doctoral degree in
music education with Bennett Reimer
at Case Western Reserve University
He first took issue with its emphasis
on listening, observing that "jazz is a
way of performing; a way of being in
music. Participation, not contempla-
tion, is the hallmark of the jazz aes-
thetic."33 In a 1987 article, Elliott
argued that the absolute expressionist
basis of Reimer'saesthetic philosophy
could not account for the range of
EDUCATORS JOURNAL
affective responses beyond those typi-
cally associated with Western art
music.34 Reimer responded incisively
to these critiques, stressing the impor-
tance of aesthetic education as a fun-
damental concept that provided
coherence for the profession. He
warned that setting it aside would cast
music education into a constant state
of turmoil over its purpose.35
Meanwhile, new perspectives were
emerging from the field of cognitive
psychology, broadening the ways in
which educators in general conceptu-
alized music. In 1983, Howard Gard-
ner's highly influential book, Frames
of Mind, drew support from several
decades of research in cognitive sci-
ence to challenge the notion of
human intelligence as a single gener-
al capacity; Gardner postulated
instead the existence of seven rela-
tively discrete human competencies
or "intelligences" (linguistic, musi-
cal, logical-mathematical, spatial,
bodily-kinesthetic, intrapersonal,
and interpersonal).36 When one real-
izes that the human mind is partly
musical (i.e., that the manipulation
of sound is a natural and unique form
of human cognition) and that musi-
cal intelligence has relationships with
other intelligences, it is but a single
step for educators to recognize that
encouraging and nurturing musical
development may be an important
responsibility of the public schools.
Music education philosopher Keith
Swan-wick also incorporated per-
spectives from cognitive psychology
(as well as sociology) into his influ-
ential book Music, Mind, Education
(1988).37
The Emergence of Praxial
Philosophy
Along with a greater acceptance,
appreciation, and celebration of cul-
tural differences in the United States
public forum in the late 1980s and
early 1990s, music educators wit-
nessed the flowering of a broader
interest in philosophy within their
profession. A Special ResearchInterest
Group (SRIG)on Philosophy was offi-
cially established within MENC in
1990; an international symposium on
the philosophy of music education
was held at Indiana University during
that same year; and the first issue of
SEPT EMBER 2 0 0 2
the Philosophy of Music Education
Review was published in 1993. The
MayDay Group, an international com-
munity of theorists, also met for the
first time in 1993. They sought "(a) to
apply critical theory and critical
thinking to the purposes and practices
of music education, and (b) to affirm
the central importance of musical par-
ticipation in human life and, thus, the
value of music in the general educa-
tion of all people."38
At present,the nation'scultural
and musicaldiversityrepresents
a significantchallengeto those
seekingto providea unifying
philosophyforthe music
educationprofession.
In these venues, the most fruitful
perspective emerging in contrast to
music education as aesthetic educa-
tion was praxial philosophy, which
drew upon Aristotle'snotion of praxis
as action rooted in practice rather
than in theory. Philosophers Francis
Sparshott and Nicholas Woltersdorff
had opened the door to praxial
considerations of music in Philip
Alperson's 1987 anthology, What Is
Music? An Introductionto the Philos-
ophy of Music.39Drawing a contrast to
aesthetic philosophy, Alperson em-
phasized that considering different
forms of art from a praxial perspective
involved understanding them "in
terms of the variety of meanings and
values evidenced in actual practice in
particularcultures."40
Informed by these and other influ-
ential writings of the time, in 1995
Elliott produced MusicMatters:A New
Philosophyof MusicEducation,in which
he integrated multicultural and socio-
logical perspectives on music within a
praxial framework by asserting that
members of different cultural groups
throughoutthe world who make music
are the practitioners of "a diverse
human practice," which he called
"MUSIC."41 He asserted that a univer-
sal aspect of "musicing" (i.e., the
behavior common among different
forms of music-making as practiced
around the world) is that "musicers"42
are typically engaged in what psychol-
ogist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi called
"flow" experiences.43 Elliott argued
that, as members of different cultural
groups throughout the world develop
skills and take on challengesin "music-
ing" in their respective traditions, they
typically effect "flow" and thereby
bring order to their own conscious-
ness, engendering personal self-
growth, greater self-knowledge, and
raised self-esteem. On these bases, he
affirmed the value of music in educa-
tion.44 Elliott'spraxial philosophy has
influenced thinking, writing, and
teaching among music educatorsinter-
nationally
Music education philosopher
Thomas Regelski also affirmed the
value of a praxialapproachin thinking
about music and music education,
though his argumentsand conclusions
have differed in important ways from
those of Elliott. Drawing upon the
work of scholar Ellen Dissanayakeand
other thinkers,45 Regelski has under-
scored that philosophical accounts of
music and music education must
extend beyond the Western art tradi-
tion to account for all forms of musical
praxis. Advocatinga curriculumthat is
open and validating of all forms of
musical activity (e.g., recreation,enter-
tainment, therapy,ritual, and ceremo-
ny), he has asserted that "to teach
music properly is to teach ... what in
all the world music is 'good for."'46
In recent years, many scholars writ-
ing on music education philosophy
have not engaged directly in the
debate that has ensued between
aesthetic and praxial philosophers,
choosing instead to address issues sur-
rounding musical practices in particu-
lar contexts. In her book In Searchof
Music Education, Estelle Jorgensen
identified and helpfully illuminated
several tensions presently impacting
the profession. Among them, she dis-
tinguished between various concep-
tions of education, delineated the role
of music in various sociocultural
spheres, and offered a dialectical view
of music education that highlighted the
23
 dilemmas facing the profession.47 As
Selected Readingsin Music the profession'sinterestin sociocultural
EducationPhilosophy mattershas increased,greaterattention
is being given to works like David
Alperson, Philip,ed. What Is Music?An Introduction
to the Philosophyof Music. Hargreaves and Adrian North's The
PA: Social Psychologyof Music48and John
University Park, State
Pennsylvania UniversityPress, 1994.
Shepherdand Peter Wicke'sMusic and
Blacking,John. How MusicalIs Man? Seattle: University of Washington Press, Cultural Theory, both published in
1973. 1997.49 These books demonstrate the
Bloom, BenjaminS., ed. Taxonomyof EducationalObjectives:
The Classification
of centralityof musical behaviorin differ-
EducationalGoals,HandbookI: CognitiveDomain.New York:David McKay, ent societies and account for its embed-
1956. dedness in the social and cultural
A Democratic
Brameld,Theodore B. H. Patterns of EducationalPhilosophy: processes of people's everyday lives.
NY:World
Yonkers-on-Hudson,
Interpretation. Book Co., 1950. Wayne Bowman fruitfully explores
related issues such as moral growth,
Brameld,TheodoreB.H. TheUse of ExplosiveIdeasin Education: Culture,Class,and social transformation, and political
Evolution.
Pittsburgh:Universityof PittsburghPress, 1965. concerns in "The Limits and Grounds
Bruner,Jerome S. The Processof Education.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversity of Musical Praxialism."50
Press, 1960. Nevertheless, a debate between the
Choate, RobertA., ed. DocumentaryReportof theTanglewood philosophers holding to aesthetic phi-
Symposium.Reston,
VA:MENC, 1968. losophy and those holding different
praxial conceptions has continued to
Committee on Basic Concepts in Music Education,ed. BasicConceptsin Music the end of the twentieth century and
Education.Chicago:National Society for the Study of Education,1958. remains alive in the twenty-first.51For
Csikszentmihalyi,Mihaly.Flow:The Psychologyof OptimalExperience.New York: example, Bennett Reimerhas just com-
HarperPerennial,1991. pleted a third edition of his influential
aesthetics-basedwork, A Philosophyof
Dewey,John.Art as Experience.New York:Minton,Balch,and Co., 1934. Music Education: Advancing the
Dissanayake,Ellen.WhatIsArtFor?Seattle:Universityof WashingtonPress, 1988. Vision,52and David Elliott is now edit-
Elliott,David L.MusicMatters:ANew Philosophyof MusicEducation.New York: ing Dialogue in Music Education:The
Oxford UniversityPress, 1995. Praxial Philosophy,a text intended to
support his praxial philosophy-based
Gardner,Howard.Framesof Mind:TheTheoryof MultipleIntelligences.
New York:
writings.53
Basic Books, 1983.
Gates, J. Terry,ed. Music Educationin the United States:ContemporaryIssues. Conclusion
Tuscaloosa,AL:Universityof AlabamaPress, 1988. This account of music education
Goodman, Nelson. Languagesof Art An Approachto a Theory of Symbols. philosophy over the latter half of the
twentieth century reflects historical
Indianapolis,IN:Bobbs-Merrill,1968.
changes well beyond the forum of
Hargreaves,DavidJ.,and Adrian C. North. The SocialPsychologyof Music.New music education. Numerous other far-
York:Oxford UniversityPress, 1997.
reaching changes-including the esca-
Jorgensen,Estelle R.In Searchof MusicEducation.Urbana,IL:Universityof Illinois lation, decline, and end of the cold war,
Press, 1997. the emergence and continuing influ-
ence of the civil rights movement, and
Kaplan,Max. Foundationsand Frontiersin Music Education.New York: Holt, the attendant rise of multiculturalism
Rinehart,andWinston, 1966.
in education-have contributedto fos-
Krathwohl,David R., BenjaminS. Bloom, and Bertram B. Masia.Taxonomyof tering an ethic of acceptance and
EducationalObjectives:
The Classificationof EducationalGoals,HandbookII: mutual interest among peoples of
AffectiveDomain.New York:David McKay,1964. diverse cultural backgrounds. At the
Langer,Susanne.Feelingand Form.New York:Scribner's,1953. same time, interdisciplinarydialogues
among scholars in anthropology,psy-
Langer,Susanne.Philosophy
in a New Key:AStudyin the Symbolismof Reason,Rite,
andArt New York:PenguinBooks, 1948. chology, sociology, political science,
and other disciplines have fundamen-
Leonhard,Charles.A RealisticRationalefor TeachingMusic. Reston,VA:MENC, tally altered the curricular content of
1985. these academic fields. (See the sidebar
Leonhard,Charles, and Robert W. House. Foundationsand Principlesof Music for selected readings in music educa-
Education.NewYork:McGraw-Hill,1959. tion philosophy)
From the beginning of this period,
the "music education as aesthetic edu-
Continued on page 25 cation"movement had numerous posi-
24 MUSIC EDUCATORS JOURNAL
tive effects: It highlighted the distinc-
tiveness of Western art music as an art
form and validated it as a curricular
subject having academic content,
thereby elevating the educational sta-
tus of music and lending respectabili-
ty to the music education profession.
It provided a single conceptual basis
upon which music educators could
unite in their efforts to explain the
importance of their subject in the cur-
riculum. Thus, it helped to profes-
sionalize music education. In estab-
lishing a conceptual framework and a
vocabulary to explain music's mean-
ing and value, the movement afforded
a means by which teachers, parents,
and administrators could discuss the
importance of music in education,
thereby supporting the profession's
advocacy efforts.
More recently, those who have
brought praxial perspectives to the
philosophical dialogue in music edu-
cation have focused attention on dif-
ferent cultural forms of musical activi-
ty as significant human behaviors,
challenging the Western art tradition's
focus on musical "works"as objects.
These scholars have emphasized that
philosophical accounts of music and
music education must address the
unique cultural characteristics of and
affective responses associated with the
multitude of musical traditions sur-
rounding and impacting today's
schools. Informed by a variety of cul-
tural perspectives and different aca-
demic disciplines, these thinkers have
urged music educators to illuminate
for their students the important role
that different forms of musical activity
play in everyday life.
At present, the nation'scultural and
musical diversity represents a signifi-
cant challenge to those seeking to pro-
vide a unifying philosophy for the
music education profession. Aesthetic
and praxial philosophers have ad-
dressed this state of affairsin quite dif-
ferent ways. If controversy is an indi-
cation of vitality, the dialogue now
taking place among these thinkers
would seem to bode well for the future
of music education.
Notes
1. This articleis basedon a chapterby
the authorsentitled,"Settingthe Praxial
Viewin HistoricalContext,"in Dialoguesin
S EPT EMBER 2 0 0 2
Continuedfrom page 24
MusicEducation.3rd ed. NewYork:SchirmerBooks,
Mark,MichaelL.Contemporary
1996.
McCarthy,Marie,ed. MusicEducationas Praxis:Reflectingon Music-Making
as Human
Action.College Park,MD:Universityof Maryland,1999.
MENC and Central Midwestern Regional Educational Laboratory (CEMREL).
Towardan AestheticEducation.
Washington,DC: MENC, 1971.
of Music. Evanston,IL:Northwestern University
Merriam,Alan. TheAnthropology
Press, 1964.
Meyer, Leonard B. Style and Music:Theory,History,and Ideology.Philadelphia:
Universityof PennsylvaniaPress, 1989.
Reimer, Bennett. A Philosophyof Music Education.2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1989.
Schwadron,AbrahamA. Aesthetics:Dimensionsfor Music Education.Reston, VA:
MENC, 1967.
Seeger, Charles. Studiesin Musicology,1935-1975. Berkeley,CA: University of
CaliforniaPress, 1977.
Shepherd,John, and Peter Wicke. Music and CulturalTheory.Cambridge,England:
Polity Press, 1997.
Shepherd, John, Phil Virden, Graham Vulliamy,and Trevor Wishart. Whose
Music?A Sociologyof MusicalLanguages.London:Latimer,1977.
Small,Christopher.Music,Society,Education.London:Calder, 1977.
Swanwick,Keith.Mind,Music,Education.New York:Routledge, 1989.
Swanwick,Keith.MusicalKnowledge: andMusicEducation.NewYork:
Intuition,Analysis,
Routledge, 1994.
I
MusicEducation:ThePraxialPhilosophy,ed. 6. Jerome S. Bruner, The Process of
David J. Elliott (New York: Oxford Education (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
UniversityPress,in press). University Press, 1960).
2. Susanne Langer,Philosophyin a New 7. Nelson Goodman, Languagesof Art:
Key: A Study in the Symbolismof Reason, An Approach to a Theory of Symbols
Rite, and Art (Cambridge, MA: Harvard (Indianapolis,IN: Bobbs-Merrill,1968).
University Press, 1942) and Feeling and 8. MichaelL. Mark,Contemporary Music
Form (New York: Charles Scribner'sSons, Education, 3rd ed. (New York: Schirmer
1953).The quotationis takenfromFeeling Books, 1996), 67-70.
and Form,p. 27. 9. Committee on Basic Concepts in
3. For furtherreadingon Dewey'sphi- Music Education, ed., Basic Concepts in
losophy of art, see John Dewey,Art as MusicEducation(Chicago:National Society
Experience(New York:Minton, Balch, and for the Study of Education, 1958).
Co., 1934). 10. Charles Leonhard and Robert W
4. Leonard B. Meyer, Emotion and andPrinciplesof Music
House,Foundations
Meaning in Music (Chicago: University of Education(New York:McGraw-Hill,1959).
Chicago Press, 1956). 11. RobertA. Choate, ed., Documentary
5. Benjamin S. Bloom, ed., Taxonomyof Report of the TanglewoodSymposium
EducationalObjectives:The Classificationof (Reston, VA:MENC, 1968).
Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive 12. AbrahamA. Schwadron, Aesthetics:
Domain (New York:David McKay, 1956); Dimensionsfor MusicEducation(Reston,
David R. Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, VA:MENC, 1967), v.
and Bertram B. Masia, Taxonomy of 13. See Theodore B. H. Brameld,
EducationalObjectives:The Classificationof Patterns of Educational Philosophy: A
Educational Goals, Hand-bookII: Affective Democratic Interpretation (Yonkers-on-
Domain (New York:David McKay,1964). Hudson, NY: World Book Co., 1950), and
25
Toward a Reconstructed Philosophy of
Education(New York:Dryden Press, 1956).
14. See Max Kaplan, Foundationsand
Frontiers in Music Education (New York:
Holt, Rinehart,and Winston, 1966).
15. See Charles Seeger, Studies in
Musicology, 1935-1975 (Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press, 1977), and
Alan Merriam, The Anthropologyof Music
(Evanston, IL: Northwestern University
Press, 1964).
16. Michael Mark, "Aesthetics and
Utility Reconciled: The Importance to
Society of Education in Music," in Music
Educationin the UnitedStates:Contemporary
Issues, ed. J. Terry Gates (Tuscaloosa,AL:
University of AlabamaPress, 1988), 120.
17. Bennett Reimer, A Philosophy of
Music Education (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
PrenticeHall, 1970).
18. Bennett Reimer, A Philosophy of
Music Education, 2nd ed. (Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall, 1989), 27.
19. Leonard B. Meyer, Emotion and
Meaning,3.
20. Bennett Reimer, "Putting Aesthetic
Education to Work," Music Educators
Journal59 (September 1972): 29.
21. MENC and Central Midwestern
Regional Educational Laboratory (CEM-
REL), Toward an Aesthetic Education
(Washington,DC: MENC, 1971).
22. Elizabeth Crook, Bennett Reimer,
and David S. Walker, Silver BurdettMusic
(Morristown,NJ: Silver Burdett, 1974).
23. For example, see Reimer, "Putting
Aesthetic Educationto Work,"and HarryS.
Broudy,"HowBasic is Aesthetic Education,
or Is 'Rt the Fourth R?" Bulletin of the
Councilfor Researchin MusicEducation,No.
57 (Winter 1978): 1-10.
24. Abraham A. Schwadron, "Philoso-
phy in Music Education: State of the
Research," Bulletin of the Council for
Researchin Music Education,No. 34 (Fall
1973): 49. See also AbrahamA. Schwadron,
"ResearchDirectionsin ComparativeMusic
Aestheticsand Music Education,"Journalof
Aesthetic Education 9 (January 1978):
99-109.
25. Douglas C. Lemmon, "Strategyin
Bennett Reimer's A Philosophy of Music
Education," Bulletin of the Council for
Research in Music Education, No. 51
(Summer 1977): 8.
26. John Blacking,How MusicalIs Man?
(Seattle: University of Washington Press,
1973).
27. See John Shepherd, Phil Virden,
Graham Vulliamy, and Trevor Wishart,
26
Whose Music? A Sociology of Musical
Languages (London: Transaction Books,
1977).
28. Christopher Small, Music, Society,
Education(London:Calder,1977).
29. Michael Mark, "The Evolution of
Music Education Philosophy from
Utilitarianto Aesthetic,"Journalof Research
in MusicEducation30 (Spring 1982): 16-21.
30. PatriciaCoates, "Alternativesto the
Aesthetic Rationale for Music Education,"
Music EducatorsJournal 69 (March 1983):
31-32. See the entire issue for other articles
on rationalesfor music education.
31. Charles Leonhard, A Realistic
Rationalefor TeachingMusic (Reston, VA:
MENC, 1985), 5.
32. Richard Colwell, "Music and
Aesthetic Education: A Collegial Relation-
ship," Journal of Aesthetic Education 20
(Winter 1986): 37.
33. David J. Elliott, "JazzEducation as
Aesthetic Education,"Journal of Aesthetic
Education20 (Spring 1986): 45.
34. David J. Elliott, "Structure and
Feeling in Jazz: Rethinking Philosophical
Foundations," Bulletin of the Council for
Researchin MusicEducation,No. 95 (Winter
1987): 13-38.
35. Bennett Reimer, "Music Education
and Aesthetic Education:Past and Present,"
Music Educators Journal 75 (February
1989): 22-28, and "Music Education as
Aesthetic Education: Toward the Future,"
Music EducatorsJournal 75 (March 1989):
26-32.
36. Howard Gardner,Frames of Mind:
The Theory of Multiple Intelligences(New
York:BasicBooks, 1983).
37. Keith Swanwick, Mind, Music,
Education (New York: Routledge, 1989).
Swanwick continued to draw ideas from
cognitive psychology in his later books,
Musical Knowledge:Intuition,Analysis and
Music Education (New York: Routledge,
1994) and TeachingMusic Musically (New
York:Routledge, 1999).
38. J. TerryGates, "Actionfor Changein
Music Education: The MayDay Group
Agenda," in Music Education as Praxis:
Reflectingon Music-Making as HumanAction,
ed. Marie McCarthy (College Park, MD:
Universityof Maryland,1999), 15.
39. Francis Sparshott, "Aesthetics of
Music: Limits and Grounds," pp. 33-98,
and Nicholas Woltersdorff,"The Work of
Making a Work of Music," pp. 101-29, in
What Is Music? An Introduction to the
Philosophy of Music, ed. Philip Alperson
(University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State
MUSIC
UniversityPress, 1994).
40. Philip Alperson, "WhatShould One
Expect from a Philosophy of Music
Education?"Journal of AestheticEducation
25 (Fall 1991): 233.
41. DavidJ. Elliot, MusicMatters:A New
Philosophyof Music Education(New York:
OxfordUniversityPress, 1997), 43.
42. Ibid.
43. According to Csikszentmihalyi,
"optimal human experience" or "flow" is
characterizedby the concentration,absorp-
tion, and enjoyment one sometimes experi-
ences as one undertakesa particularactivity.
See Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow: The
Psychology of Optimal Experience (New
York:HarperPerennial,1991).
44. Elliott, MusicMatters,109-22.
45. Ellen Dissanayakeadvanced evolu-
tionaryperspectiveson the role of the artsin
particular societies throughout history in
What Is Art For? (Seattle: University of
WashingtonPress, 1988).
46. Thomas A. Regelski,"Prolegomenon
to a PraxialPhilosophy of Music and Music
Education,"Musiikkikasvatus: FinnishJour-
nal of MusicEducation1 (1996): 35-36.
47. Estelle R. Jorgensen, In Search of
Music Education(Urbana,IL: University of
Illinois Press, 1997).
48. David J. Hargreavesand Adrian C.
North, TheSocial Psychologyof Music(New
York:OxfordUniversityPress, 1997).
49. John Shepherd and Peter Wicke,
Music and Cultural Theory (Cambridge,
England:Polity Press, 1997).
50. Wayne Bowman, "The Limits and
Grounds of Musical Praxialism," in
Dialogues in Music Education:The Praxial
Philosophy,ed. DavidJ. Elliott.
51. See, for example, M. B. Spychiger,
"Aesthetic and Praxial Philosophies of
Music Education Compared: A Semiotic
Consideration," Philosophy of Music
EducationReview 5 (Spring 1997): 33-41;
Marie McCarthy,ed., Music Educationas
Praxis; Gerard L. Kneiter, "Elliott's'New'
ConservatoryApproach:A Review Essay,"
Philosophy of Music Education Review 8
(Spring 2000): 40-51; Thomas A. Regelski,
"Accounting for All Praxis: An Essay
Critique of David Elliott's Music Matters,"
Bulletinof the Councilfor Researchin Music
Education,No. 144 (Spring2000): 61-88.
52. Bennett Reimer, A Philosophy of
MusicEducation:Advancingthe Vision, 3rd
ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall, in
press).
53. Elliott, Dialogues in Music
Education.M
EDUCATORS JOURNAL