The Learner-Centered

Music Classroom

The Learner-Centered Music Classroom: Models and Possibilities is a

resource for practicing music teachers, providing them with practical
ideas and lesson plans for implementing learner-centered pedagogical
concepts into their music classrooms. The purpose of this book is to
propose a variety of learner-centered models for music teaching and
learning through the use of a variety of autoethnographic viewpoints.
Nine contributors provide working and concrete examples of learner-
centered models from their classrooms. Offering lesson plan ideas in
each of these areas, the contributors provide practical approaches for
implementation of learner-centered approaches in music instruction
across a variety of landscapes.
Learner-centered teaching provides an approach to music education
that encourages social, interactive, culturally responsive, creative, peer-
based, open-formed, facilitated, and democratic learning. Chapter 1
defines the what, why, and perceived benefits of learner-centered
approaches in music teaching and learning contexts. Chapters 2 through
10 include sample lesson plans, rubrics, etc., as models for teachers.
The contributors to this book suggest that learner-centered approaches,
when embedded into the culture and curricular framework of a music
classroom, offer exciting approaches for teaching music in ways that are
culturally and educationally appropriate in contemporary education.

Jonathan R. Kladder is Assistant Professor of Music Education at Ithaca

College.

David A. Williams is Associate Professor of Music Education and also

Associate Director of the School of Music at the University of South Florida.
The Learner-Centered
Music Classroom

Models and Possibilities

Edited by David A. Williams

and Jonathan R. Kladder
First published 2020
by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2020 Taylor & Francis
The right of David A. Williams and Jonathan R. Kladder to be
identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the
authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in
accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted
or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be
trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Williams, David A. (Music educator) | Kladder, Jonathan R.
Title: The learner–centered music classroom : models and possibilities /
edited by David A. Williams and Jonathan R. Kladder.
Description: New York, NY : Routledge, 2019. | Includes index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2019009026 (print) | LCCN 2019009954 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780429523632 (pdf) | ISBN 9780429551802 (mobi) |
ISBN 9780429537103 (epub) | ISBN 9780367204457 (hardback :
alk. paper) | ISBN 9780367204464 (pbk. : alk. paper) |
ISBN 9780429261510 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Music—Instruction and study.
Classification: LCC MT1 (ebook) | LCC MT1 .L525 2019 (print) |
DDC 780.71—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019009026
ISBN: 978-0-367-20445-7 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-0-367-20446-4 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-0-429-26151-0 (ebk)
Typeset in Sabon
by Apex CoVantage, LLC
We dedicate this book to all the music education students and
music teachers who are open-minded towards implementing
new teaching practices and to those who embrace new ideas
that challenge us to think differently about how we teach
music. The future of music teaching will continue to rely on
critical thinking about what we do, how we do it, and the most
appropriate methods that enhance student agency, creativity,
and lifelong music making. We are inspired by the outliers in
the profession who see a bright future for their students and
desire to embrace a different approach to music teaching and
learning in ways that challenge how we currently teach. We
also dedicate this book to the ones who hold a desire to try
something new. We recognize that trying new things is not easy.
It is often fraught with challenges and difficulties. We recognize
these challenges but hold to the belief that with determination,
grit, and creativity we all can make a difference in our students’
lives.
To those who are willing to try something different, we hope
this book provides encouragement.
Contents

List of Figuresix
List of Contributorsx
Prefacexiii

1 Learner-Centered Teaching: Alternatives

to the Established Norm 1
JONATHAN R. KLADDER

2 The Elementary Music Classroom 19

ZADDA BAZZY

3 Another View of the Elementary Music Classroom 39

CHRISTOPHER BURNS

4 The Traditional Secondary String Ensemble 51

SARAH GULISH

5 The Traditional Secondary Concert Band 69

DAVID A. WILLIAMS

6 The Traditional Secondary Vocal Ensemble 85

RADIO CREMATA

7 The Secondary General Music Classroom 105

PATRICK K. COOPER

8 The Steel Pan Ensemble 123

ANNE FENNELL
viii Contents

9 The Non-Traditional Secondary Music Performance Class 141

JONATHAN R. KLADDER

10 The Music Technology Class 161

NICK STEFANIC

Index182
Figures

1.1 A typical cyclical teacher-directed rehearsal sequence 4

1.2 Changing the power structure increases student
autonomy6
1.3 Allowing exploration and mistake making in the
classroom8
1.4 Creating inclusive spaces for all students in the
classroom10
1.5 A continuum of student choice in a learner-centered
classroom11
1.6 Facilitation is fundamental to a learner-centered
classroom12
1.7 Learner-centered spaces encourage student
ownership and engagement 13
1.8 A possible learner-centered rehearsal 15
2.1 An example of a “roller coaster” melodic contour 32
2.2 A second example of a “roller coaster” melodic
contour33
5.1 A sample grading rubric 72
9.1 An example of a four-member hybrid ensemble 145
9.2 An example of a five-member hybrid ensemble 145
9.3 An example of a six-member hybrid ensemble 146
10.1 A sample chord progression for the assignment 175
10.2 An image example for students to follow 177
Contributors

Zadda Bazzy—Zadda Bazzy has been in education for more than

20 years and has worked as both as an elementary music teacher and
a district-level arts specialist. She holds a B.F.A. in Musical Theatre, an
M.A. and a Ph.D. in Music Education, and a second M.A. in Educa-
tional Leadership. Dr. Bazzy has been certified by the National Board
for Professional Teaching Standards twice. In addition, she holds the
Master Level certification in the Orff-Schulwerk approach to music
education. She has received multiple awards for her teaching of ele-
mentary students, as well as an award for teaching undergraduate
Music Education majors at a university. Dr. Bazzy currently teaches
music at Queens Creek Elementary School in Onslow County, North
Carolina.
Christopher Burns—Christopher Burns currently teaches elementary
music at Lakeview Elementary School in Saint Cloud, Florida. He
received his B.M.E. from the University of Central Florida and his
M.M.E. from Boston University and is currently working towards a
Ph.D. in Music Education from the University of South Florida, with
interests in New Media integration as well as Creativity in the elemen-
tary classroom. Christopher adjuncts at the University of Central Flor-
ida teaching Elementary Music Methods and has presented workshops
in several states. He is currently the music chair of Osceola County,
Florida, as well as a member of the Osceola County curriculum team.
Patrick K. Cooper—Patrick K. Cooper is a native of Mesa, Arizona,
and recipient of the 2015 Outstanding Emerging Research Award.
His research interests capture the intersection of creativity, inclusion,
and motivation, with publications in Psychology of Music, Journal of
Popular Music Education, Research Perspectives in Music Education,
and in various edited volumes. He has taught a variety of music classes
at the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels, including K-8 general
 Contributors xi

music, music technology, research methods, hip-hop, music theater,

and orchestra. He has taught at the University of South Florida and
the Crane School of Music at SUNY-Potsdam.
Radio Cremata—Radio Cremata is Associate Professor of music educa-
tion at Ithaca College. Originally from Miami, FL where he taught
in K-12 contexts for 15 years, he cultivated an affinity for learner-
centered environments. With a diverse teaching background, his expe-
rience encompasses public, private, charter, community, and online
settings. He has developed programs and supported student teaching
earning him honors from Little Kids Rock, Roland Music Corpora-
tion, Berklee College of Music, PBS, Henry Ford, Univision, Grammy
in the Schools Foundation, and the Fender Music Foundation. His
scholarship centers on diversity and inclusion in technology and popu-
lar music education.
Anne Fennell—Anne Fennell has taught music education, K-12, for
32 years and currently teaches four levels of Music Composition and
three levels of Steel Drum Ensemble, grades 9–12 in Vista, California,
in addition to her consulting and workshops that she provides both
nationally and internationally. She is a published author through Pear-
son Education, the GRAMMY Foundation, and Disney, and is the
NAfME Innovations Council Chair through 2020. Anne has received
numerous local, state, and national awards, including the 2017
National Teacher of the Year for Magnet Schools of America and a top
ten GRAMMY Music Educator Finalist for 2016. She holds a bach-
elor’s degree in Music Education; Orff-Schulwerk Certification Levels
I, II, III; and a master’s degree in Educational Leadership Studies.
Sarah Gulish—Sarah Gulish holds a Ph.D. in Music Education from
Temple University. Since 2007, Sarah has taught at Lower Moreland
High School in Pennsylvania. She serves as Adjunct Professor of Music
Education at SUNY Buffalo State and Temple University. Her teaching
centers on creativity and she is an active researcher, writer, presenter,
and clinician at the state, national, and international levels. Her expe-
rience as a popular musician has influenced her curricula and philoso-
phy as a music educator and is detailed in her book, Creativity in the
Classroom: An Innovative Approach to Integrate Music Education.
Jonathan R. Kladder—Dr. Jonathan R. Kladder is Assistant Professor
of Music Education at Ithaca College. His degrees are from the Uni-
versity of South Florida (Ph.D.), Boston University (M.M.Ed.), and
Hope College (B.M.Ed). Before his employment at Ithaca College, he
taught undergraduate music education courses at the University of
xii Contributors

South Florida, including Introduction to Music Education, Progressive

Music Education Methods, Creative Performance Chamber Ensemble,
Popular Music Ensemble, and Digital Music Production.
Nick Stefanic—Nick Stefanic teaches music production and motion
graphics classes at Dixie Hollins High School in St. Petersburg,
Florida, where he is the department chair of the Academy of Enter-
tainment Arts. With roots in progressive rock drumming and band
directing (only once at the same time), he has evolved into an active
performer, arranger, composer, songwriter, producer, and educator.
He earned a Ph.D. in Music Education from the University of South
Florida where he specialized in creativity, statistics, and instructional
technology, and he earned both a bachelor’s and master’s degree from
the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. His 13 years of teach-
ing experience in public, private, and online schools, from middle
school to graduate level teaching environments, includes band, choir,
guitar, percussion, Spanish, music theory, sociology of music, semiot-
ics and notation, and now music production and motion graphics.
His research interests include modeling musical creativity, notation
and representation, musical creative self-efficacy, and measurement of
musical experience.
David A. Williams—David A. Williams is Associate Professor of Music
Education and the Associate Director of the School of Music at
the University of South Florida (USF). He teaches music education
courses, including Foundations of Music Education and Progressive
Music Methods. He joined the faculty at USF in the fall of 1998, and
he holds a Ph.D. in Music Education from Northwestern University.
His research interests involve the use of learner-centered and informal
learning pedagogies and how these impact teaching and learning in
music education.
Preface

We are at an interesting time in our world, where culture seems to be

changing at an unprecedented pace. Technology now permeates every
aspect of our lives, from social media, news, communication, and, of
course, in music. With the world literally at our fingertips in our phones
and tablets, the way we learn and interact with one another has changed.
Contemporary culture now has access to millions of online resources for
learning literally almost everything and anything one could ever want.
This ease of access to data has changed how our students learn. Stu-
dents can learn almost anything on their own, with a digital device. This
access to learning has created new possibilities in the music classroom.
As teachers, we now hold vast opportunities to align student interests
with social and collaborative spaces like never before. Access to online
resources, phones, tablets, applications, and digital music allows students
to learn in ways that engage their interests. Even in virtual spaces.
Put simply, we are at a pivotal time in music teaching and learning.
We are at a time where students desire space, autonomy, and learning
experiences that are relevant and contextualized around their interests
more than ever before. This is the way the world now works, whether we
agree with it or not.
Interestingly, there are particular areas in education that either remain
isolated from this phenomenon, or are embracing it at an arduous pace.
Perhaps by the time our education system has changed to meet students’
needs now, our culture will have changed again, and thus, we will react
again too slowly. It seems that this arduous pace of change in education
also applies to music teaching in many areas of the U.S. For example, in
music teaching and learning, we continue to rely on a practice of peda-
gogy that is often focused on ensemble teaching in large ensemble set-
tings. It is teacher-directed. For some students, these ensembles allow for
a rich music learning experience. However, for others, these ensembles do
not always support individual, social, or relevant music learning in ways
that enhance their learning interests.
xiv Preface

Some teachers have begun to realize that we need to start opening up

our philosophy about how, what, and why music is taught. Some of us
have recognized that if we desire to make music learning different, we
must act as catalysts. Others have embraced the idea that not all students
want to learn music in large ensembles. And even in large ensembles,
students can be offered the space and place to be active participants in
the rehearsal process. The contributors and editors of this book have
realized that if we want to see change, we are the ones responsible for
making it happen. We are the change agents. In the words of Mohandas
Gandhi, we must be the change that we wish to see in the world. And
so, some music teachers have started to think differently about how they
teach music.
It is our hope that this book will inspire us, as a field of music teachers,
to think differently about how music is taught. This book was envisioned
as a place where examples of learner-centered teaching could be exposed
in ways that might apply to your teaching context. Perhaps you are a
music teacher already teaching in these ways. If that is you, our desire is
that this book helps you realize that you are not alone, a misfit or outlier.
There are others who also teach like you. We also desire that this book
presents new ideas you can use in your teaching context to enhance what
you are already doing.
For those who are interested in learner-centered teaching, but are not
sure what it would look like, we created this book so that you might have
a lens to see it in practice. We wanted to provide a glimpse of learner-
centered teaching across a variety of contexts. Perhaps one of these set-
tings might apply to your teaching context and you might use some of the
ideas and lesson plans provided by the contributors.
For those readers who are in their undergraduate music education
degree work, the world is a bright and exciting place. Opportunities exist
before you in ways some of us who have been around for a while never
thought would be possible. This book is meant to be a resource for you—
that you might think of ways to incorporate learner-centered teaching in
your future career, in ways that inspire and support your future students
to be lifelong music makers.
As our world moves forward at an unprecedented pace, our dream is
that these contributions will inspire you to create a space or place that is
relevant to your students’ interests and desires. We hope you will create
a classroom space where students are encouraged to voice their thoughts,
support their chosen learning process, and learn in social spaces. After
all, this is how the world works. In almost every field in the private and
public sectors, individuals learn in social settings. They discuss and share
 Preface xv

ideas, sometimes disagree with one another, collaborate, and divergently

think about the way things are and how they might change to improve
them. We believe that music learning should look similar. It should not
be isolated from real-world learning experiences. As we move forward,
we are excited to explore new models and possibilities of music teaching,
where students are at the center of the learning process.
Chapter 1

Learner-Centered Teaching
Alternatives to the Established Norm
Jonathan R. Kladder

The history of music teaching in the U.S. continues to exemplify a variety

of approaches for teaching ensembles, private lessons, and general music.
Since its early conceptions, the pedagogy associated with music teaching
in all of these spaces has largely emphasized a teacher-directed approach.
This is evidenced across elementary and secondary general music class-
rooms, instrumental ensembles, and a variety of music theory and appre-
ciation courses. The volume of method books and repertoire continues
to expand supporting this type of instruction. Although more than
100 years have passed since the inclusion of music in formalized school
settings, beginning with Lowell Mason in Boston in the late 1800s, many
pedagogical approaches remain the same (Mark & Gary, 2007). During
these early years, music teachers focused on proper breathing, diction,
and vocal technique to improve singing in religious settings. The estab-
lished teaching style of the time was teacher-directed, paralleling most of
the pedagogy in other disciplines as well.
After singing became a more consistent and established part of the
school day, a new interest in wind ensembles slowly evolved in the U.S.
Eventually, they became a prevalent identity of music teaching in public
schools. At first, wind ensembles were extracurricular and led by stu-
dents. However, after WWI, musicians from military bands acquired
jobs teaching music in schools. The majority of these teachers adopted
a pedagogical approach that was almost identical to singing classes. The
ensemble was led by a single teacher, or “director,” who stood on the
podium, rehearsed the ensemble, selected repertoire for the concerts, and
organized school and community performances.
A focus on the musical performance in bands, orchestras, and choirs
continued to grow throughout the U.S. In the 1940s and ’50s a growing
interest to increase the quality and sound of school-based music ensem-
bles became prevalent. To accomplish this goal, contests became an inte-
grated part of the music-teaching profession, which influenced pedagogy
2 Jonathan R. Kladder

in significant ways. Participation in contests required attention to strict

protocols, including repertoire selection, a “conductor-as-educator” on
the podium, strict rehearsal techniques, and instrumentation. In many
ways, teacher-directed ensembles were perceived as the most efficient
way to rehearse and prepare ensembles for the contest because a conduc-
tor assured the repertoire being performed was adequate for adjudicated
performances, so groups would ideally receive high ratings.
The evolution and integration of contests into the music-teaching and
learning landscape supported the legitimization of wind ensembles in for-
mal schools and the teacher-directed pedagogy associated with them. This
created a need for skilled and highly trained music teachers. In response,
colleges and universities created new programs that offered music teacher
education training, which focused on teacher-directed pedagogy. This
continues today, with a focus on conducting techniques, rehearsal behav-
ioral management, score study, instrument technique, and sound devel-
opment for ensembles (Waln, 1949). Therefore, an established culture for
teaching music using a teacher-directed approach became an integrated
identity of the music-teaching profession and remains a signifier of music
teaching today.
More recently, the focus on teacher-directed pedagogy in music teach-
ing and learning has been interrogated as the sole focus of pedagogy in
most music classrooms. Some argue that it limits independent musician-
ship, autonomy, creative thinking, peer collaboration, mistake making,
and exploration (Allsup & Benedict, 2008). Others have suggested that
it limits music participation in formal school music and that a chasm
has grown between the ways students learn in real-world contexts and
in school (Kratus, 2007; Williams, 2011). Perhaps these assertions are
accurate, as our contemporary society continues to increase its desire for
autonomy, choice, and socialization. New approaches and techniques for
teaching music that are socially constructed, facilitated, and learner-led
may offer a relevant and meaningful learning experience for all our stu-
dents. Given the changing climate of our contemporary society, we sug-
gest that learner-centered teaching offers benefits for musicians in school
settings and meets many of the aforementioned assertions.

What Is a Learner-Centered Classroom?

There are a variety of characteristics unique to a learner-centered class-
room that contrast teacher-directed classrooms. Perhaps one of the most
significant identifiers is the role of the teacher and the amount of freedom
offered to the learner. This difference is seen in two basic areas. A teacher-
directed classroom focuses on the teacher and their ability to perform.
 Learner-Centered Teaching 3

It requires that the teacher knows and delivers all the facts and informa-
tion to their students. Conversely, a learner-centered classroom refocuses
the entire learning process on the student. Students help to guide their
learning processes, making a majority of the musical and non-musical
decisions. For example, the student may guide the design of classroom
assessments and learning goals. To guide our understanding regarding a
learner-centered classroom, the following six tenets are offered to assist
in conceptualizing student learning:

1. Learning is open-ended.
2. Choice and autonomy are centrally focused.
3. Learning occurs in meaningful contexts.
4. Learning is social.
5. Students are always engaged in the learning process.
6. Learning is based on active exploration and problem solving.

From an outside perspective, a learner-centered classroom may look cha-

otic, unorganized, and haphazard. A closer examination of the classroom
will reveal a room where students are actively engaged in the learning
process, often within a social and collaborative space. Each pathway a
learner chooses is unique, meaningful, and relevant. Although a learner-
centered classroom requires careful planning and preparation, it ide-
ally creates open spaces for students to engage with one another. Let’s
consider some more specifics to guide our understanding of a learner-­
centered classroom.

Gatekeeping: Changing the Balance

of Power in the Classroom
Stepping into many music classrooms reveals a similar picture, a culture
established within a hierarchical power structure. Oftentimes, the teacher
is perceived as the information holder and is expected to know all “right”
or “wrong” information, imparting their knowledge to the students
(Freire, 2018). This power structure is embedded into our educational
system and remains the dominant and established cultural norm in most
classrooms. In this type of classroom, the teacher is a gatekeeper. They
are the authoritative figure who makes the decisions, choosing repertoire,
directing the rehearsal, managing student behaviors, planning concerts,
and developing the assessments.
In secondary instrumental ensembles, this power is evidenced in two
main areas: physical and psychological. The physical presence of a
podium suggests a hierarchical power structure that is teacher-directed.
4 Jonathan R. Kladder

The teacher is elevated and stands on the podium, conducts the ensem-
ble, and requires that students listen to the directives from the teacher.
Students are often told what and how to play the music. This mandates
that there is one final decision, the one that is told to the students from
the teacher and is a decision that all members of the ensemble must
reach. Although there may be particular moments when student input
and problem solving are supported, talking and social collaboration is
often discouraged. The rehearsal space is almost entirely controlled by
the teacher. In most rehearsals, this process is cyclical: students play, the
teacher listens, assesses, and offers feedback. This process repeats. It is
common to find a music teacher making most of the interpretive, crea-
tive, and musical decisions. Musical phrasing, dynamics, and other inter-
pretations are often all dictated by the teacher (Figure 1.1).
The music teacher education curriculum established in most universi-
ties and colleges perpetuates and honors this type of teacher education
as well. Undergraduate and graduate students in most colleges and uni-
versities in the U.S. are required to take a pre-selected set of skill-based
courses in conducting, rehearsal techniques, classroom management,
pedagogy, and instrument technique. Although there are a few outliers
in the music education profession, instruction is often taught and mod-
eled using a teacher-directed approach. Student-teacher placements also
reflect this design, as students are expected to maintain a power structure
set in place by their cooperating teacher.
The general feedback music teachers use to address students in the
classroom also reflects a teacher-directed mentality. Phrases such as,
“I want the flutes to play louder” or “When you play the melody there,

Students Teacher
Play Listens

Students
Teacher
Respond
Assesses

Teacher
Feedback

A typical cyclical teacher-directed rehearsal sequence

Figure 1.1 
 Learner-Centered Teaching 5

you should not . . .” frequent many rehearsals. This sends messages to

students about who is in control and who is not. In most cases, this type
of instruction discourages student engagement in the learning process
and places teachers as the gatekeepers of the musical and non-musical
decisions in the classroom. In teacher-centered classrooms, students are
kept from engaging in the music-learning experience in ways that encour-
age ownership and active participation beyond playing an instrument.
Contrary to teacher-directed classrooms, a learner-centered classroom
seeks to change the role of the teacher, from gatekeeping to facilitat-
ing student input and ideas. One goal is to encourage student participa-
tion, validate student ideas, provide a means for active participation, and
encourage ownership.
In general in music classrooms, often similar themes emerge. Although
flexibility of physical space is often increased, the majority of secondary
general music classrooms focus on a teacher-directed approach. The cur-
ricular goals, assignments, and projects remain the sole organizational
responsibility of the teacher. In elementary classrooms, flexible spaces,
instruments, and the need for play warrants the opportunity for open
forms of facilitation and are often more creative in their pedagogical
approaches than at the secondary and tertiary levels. Re-imagining these
music classrooms using a learner-centered approach encourages students
to engage in learning at new levels. They assist in the decisions made in
the classroom by answering some of the following questions in an open
and collaborative space: What will be the repertoire for the upcoming
concert? What are the main goals for our music class this year? How
should I respectfully respond to the musical decisions of my peers? How
might I contribute in positive and valuable ways?
Offering opportunities for students to make non-musical and musi-
cal decisions decreases the likelihood of teacher-directed gatekeeping and
supports student autonomy (Figure 1.2).
Imagine a secondary instrumental classroom where the podium disap-
pears, students no longer sit in organized rows, and the ensemble is physi-
cally arranged in a way that supports social and collaborative learning.
What about a secondary general music class that develops projects and
assignments around their learning interests and real-world learning experi-
ences? In a learner-centered classroom, these imaginations become a reality.

Risk Taking and Mistake Making: Exploration

in Learner-Centered Spaces
Learner-centered classrooms allow opportunities for students to take
risks, make mistakes, and explore the world around them. They create
6 Jonathan R. Kladder

C hanging the power structure increases student autonomy

Figure 1.2 

opportunities for students to problem solve and actively engage in criti-

cal thinking skills. In most cases, learning is messy. As the famous jazz
musician Miles Davis once said, “Do not fear mistakes; there are none.”
We argue that learner-centered classrooms support such a notion. Unfor-
tunately, the established routine in many music classrooms encourages
performance perfection, discourages mistake making and informal learn-
ing procedures, and prioritizes concert/rehearsal etiquette in place of
real-world learning experiences. While performance perfection, concert/
rehearsal etiquette, and formalities are certainly appropriate ideals to fos-
ter and support in some situations, the freedom allotted to students to
take risks and make mistakes is often overridden by the aforementioned
ideals.
Adopting a learner-centered approach to music teaching and learning
begins by opening up our philosophical beliefs regarding what constitutes
 Learner-Centered Teaching 7

good teaching. It requires a boldness to relinquish control of the class-

room, where students explore, take risks, and make mistakes. It requires
a new way of thinking—one that may not focus entirely on a final perfor-
mance, but values student input and opinions. This requires a conceded
effort, thought, time, planning, and an ability to step back and relinquish
control of the classroom. Learner-centered music classrooms are ideal
spaces where students can be encouraged to explore new musical hori-
zons and when facilitated effectively, offer the freedom for students to
engage in social learning. Like anything in life, we learn by doing, explor-
ing, and learning from our mistakes.
Finally, a learner-centered classroom strives to be a place that is free of
judgment, which may require a rethinking about your classroom culture.
Has your focus for good teaching remained largely in the performance
arena? Perhaps rethinking about your classroom through a learner-
centered approach reduces the total number of musical performance or
encourages students to choose the total number of performances. If reduc-
ing the total number of concerts is not an option, perhaps you decide
with your students to replace a formal concert with one that is designed
and planned entirely by your students. This would offer students space to
explore and learn in ways that are supported by facilitation and positive
encouragement. We suggest that rethinking about music teaching and
learning in ways that support mistake making and risk taking are key
attributes found in a learner-centered classroom (Figure 1.3).

Inclusiveness: Student Ideas Are Considered

As Valuable in Learning
How does a learner-centered classroom create a welcome and open space
for all students to learn, make, and share music? In what ways is a learner-
centered classroom inclusive of all learning styles and student interests?
To begin, learner-centered approaches do not follow a standardized
approach to teaching and learning. In teacher-directed classrooms, learn-
ers are often required to fit in a predetermined mold. Teachers inform
their teaching practice, in many ways, with the assumption their stu-
dents know and understand little about the content they are teaching.
Anyone who has taught, or has experienced the challenges of managing
a classroom, understands that our educational institutions often thrive
on standardized, objectifiable, and measurable student outcomes. This
“measurable” data seek to prove student learning gains over time, offer-
ing a means for evaluating the performance of a particular school, grade,
class, or teacher (Nichols & Berliner, 2007). In other words, we teach to
the test (Orfield & Kornhaber, 2001). Unfortunately, in many cases, these
8 Jonathan R. Kladder

A llowing exploration and mistake making in the classroom

Figure 1.3 

types of standardized tests undermine good teaching practices and alien-

ate a significant number of students (Eseberre, 2012). The classroom then
becomes an exclusive space.
However, the goal of a learner-centered classroom is to create flex-
ibility, where creativity is supported, and students engage in a learning
process that is meaningful. For example, instead of relying on the per-
formance as a means to guide curricular decisions and musical goals,
students might assist in shaping the curricular decisions and musical
goals. If they are offered a voice, some students may choose to end the
year with a participatory performance, while others a studio recording.
Some may create a community music experience, where they perform for
an outreach or community event. The overall intention is that students
are included in the decision-making process and the classroom creates
space for flexibility, adaptiveness, and constant reassessment of student
 Learner-Centered Teaching 9

interests. Student ideas, thoughts, and interests are all valid and included
into their learning experiences.
In learner-centered classrooms, much of the learning is peer-based and
social. This means students are encouraged to share their wealth of expe-
riences and knowledge with one another. The learner is not assumed to
know little. Rather, students’ prior knowledge and experiences are con-
sidered valuable and included in the learning process. Often referred to
as constructivism, their formation of new knowledge occurs in ways that
are meaningful and relevant. As students interact with their peers and
the world, they develop new knowledge so it can be built upon in ways
that shape their understanding of music, their identity as a musician, and
music’s role in the world.
In a learner-centered classroom, learning is a social and active pro-
cess. For example, one student may have grown up in a family rich with
African drumming and a largely aural/oral tradition, and use these prior
experiences in classroom learning. This sharing of prior knowledge not
only allows opportunities for students to include their previous musical
understandings and identity, but also provides teachers the opportunity
to validate and affirm their cultural backgrounds and significance in the
world. Finally, it encourages other students within the classroom to learn
from their peers the richness and vastness that music has to offer. There-
fore, a signifier of a learner-centered classroom includes and validates
multiple viewpoints, previous music experiences, ideas, and insights
(Figure 1.4).
Finally, all types of learning intelligences and needs are integrated into
the curriculum and a variety of resources and opportunities are encour-
aged by the facilitator. Students enter our classrooms with many previous
experiences; they are curious, knowledgeable, and often enthusiastic to
learn new skills and concepts. Importantly, they have ideas and rich musi-
cal experiences that may be used to inform and guide music learning. In
imagining a learner-centered space, the following items illuminate how a
learner-centered classroom ideally supports inclusive teaching practices:

1. Student/musician(s) have musical ideas that are allowed, permitted,

and encouraged.
2. Student/musician(s)’ interpretations and musical experiences are val-
idated and included.
3. Student/musician(s) are encouraged to bring their own type of musi-
cianship to the group.
4. Student/musician(s) support relevant and meaningful learning.
5. Student/musician(s) have a voice and are able to express multiple
viewpoints.
10 Jonathan R. Kladder

C reating inclusive spaces for all students in the classroom

Figure 1.4 

6. Student/musician(s) learn in a socially collaborative space.

7. Student/musician(s) are allowed to support assessment/performance
decisions.

The Role of Teachers and Students

Perhaps one of the most distinguishing differences between a teacher-
directed and learner-centered classroom is that the role of a teacher is
always changing in a learner-centered classroom. It evolves and adapts
depending on the activities, assignments, and assessments. Some elements
of learner-centered teaching may require more organization, while others
nothing at all. We suggest the following continuum in conceptualizing a
learner-centered classroom, where a significant portion of student learn-
ing occurs in the middle of the arrow (Figure 1.5).
 Learner-Centered Teaching 11

A continuum of student choice in a learner-centered classroom

Figure 1.5 

If we use the continuum to conceptualize the teachers’ role in a learner-

centered classroom, one single attribute is evident: flexibility. In a learner-
centered classroom, there is no exact place on the continuum that the
classroom would remain; depending on the goals, assessments, and cur-
riculum, the classroom would constantly change. One consistent factor
is that the teacher is mainly a facilitator, which can be challenging. It
requires consistent assessment and reflective practices; ideally, teachers
would evaluate and reevaluate their students’ learning. Regular debrief
sessions, private/group meetings with students, and independent moni-
toring of learning may be necessary.
Of fundamental importance in a learner-centered classroom is the
changing role of the teacher. Instead of a director, or “educator-as-­
conductor,” teachers take on a facilitative role. In essence, the teachers’
role is to increase the amount of opportunities for students to be active
participators in the learning objectives, assignments, performances, or
projects. It requires the facilitator to assess, often in the moment, the
right amount of facilitation required (Figure 1.6).
Following are additional items we believe should be considered a role
of the teacher in a learner-centered classroom:

1. Establish a culture of respect for all ideas shared.

2. Consider precepts for each classroom visit, where students learn
appropriate social behavior with their peers and facilitators(s).
3. Practice and model peer feedback in ways that are conducive to posi-
tive learning experiences for all.
12 Jonathan R. Kladder

F acilitation is fundamental to a learner-centered classroom

Figure 1.6 

4. Model and support an openness to student interpretations and ideas.

5. Create classroom spaces that are equitable to all.
6. Avoid interjecting often.
7. Allow students opportunities to make mistakes, learn from them,
and try again.
8. Support learning that is interdisciplinary, relevant, and based on
prior music experiences.

In addition to the different responsibilities of the teacher in a learner-­

centered classroom, the roles of the students also change. Students are
doing most, if not all of the work. In essence, students take ownership
of their learning processes and goals. As many years of research span-
ning a wide variety of disciplines suggest, those who do the work, do
 Learner-Centered Teaching 13

the learning (Doyle, 2011). In a teacher-directed classroom, students

are often passive learners. A variety of lectures, assignments, and tests
prepare students for a world that contradicts our contemporary society.
In real-world contexts, individuals learn through exploration in social
spaces. Learner-centered classrooms encourage students to take own-
ership of their learning, as participators, fellow curriculum developers,
team players, decision makers, and musicians.
Therefore, a completed view of a learner-centered classroom illumi-
nates the key attributes seen in Figure 1.7. These attributes highlight sim-
ilarities to the six tenets discussed earlier and provide an understanding
into how each area impacts the other. Students maintain an active role
in the learning process, where they are encouraged to engage with one
another, and the teacher, in ways that support their ownership over the
established learning goals and objectives.

Learner-centered spaces encourage student ownership and engagement

Figure 1.7 
14 Jonathan R. Kladder

We surmise that some of the following attributes might assist in further

defining the roles of students in a learner-centered classroom:

1. Student/musician is a teacher themselves.

2. Student/musician collaborates regularly with peers and facilitator(s).
3. Student/musician supports most assessment procedures and exami-
nations.
4. Student/musician uses prior musical experiences to inform the cur-
riculum.
5. Student/musician co-creates assignments and assignment deadlines.
6. Student/musician supports a curriculum that is relevant to real-world
skills.
7. Student/musician supports grading, when and where necessary.
8. Student/musician maintains a clean and working classroom envi-
ronment.
9. Student/musician develops relationships with professional stakehold-
ers to support relevant and real-world learning.

Although a broad range of opportunities exist within the roles of a teacher

and student in a learner-centered music classroom, the most obvious is
the shift of control and responsibility found between the teacher and stu-
dents. Students have an active role in the music-making and classroom
decisions, allowing them the opportunity to take control of their learning
in ways that support meaningful experiences for all.

Benefits to Learner-Centered Teaching

Prior research suggests a variety of benefits in a learner-centered class-
room, including increased student engagement, critical thinking skills,
ownership, student choice, motivation, and individualization (Weimer,
2002). In the following paragraphs, we unpack each of these areas fur-
ther, with the hopes that each remaining chapter will illuminate these
benefits in the real-world, P-12 music teaching and learning contexts.
Higher levels of student engagement are evidenced when the learner
is an active contributor throughout the learning process and students
learn more in genuine and authentic ways. Essentially, active participa-
tion increases engagement. The time-honored teacher-directed classroom
is neat and tidy; easy to assess, plan, and prepare; and often provides
a straightforward approach to assuring that every student “learns” the
required material (Freire, 2018). However, in many of these classrooms,
students are passive participants and disengaged from the learning pro-
cess. For the majority of our students, teacher-directed classrooms reduce
 Learner-Centered Teaching 15

opportunities for students to make creative decisions, think divergently,

or learn in social spaces through collaboration. In a learner-centered
classroom, social learning is dependent upon students making the crea-
tive and musical decisions. It requires them to think divergently, problem
solve, work cohesively with their peers, and take ownership. All of these
attributes point towards a high level of engagement.
In a learner-centered classroom, most decisions are made in a neu-
tral and open space between the learners and the facilitator (Zepke &
Leach, 2010). Therefore, the learner has an equally shared voice in the
overall curricular and assessment decisions. Students are offered choice
and facilitators pose questions to guide their critical thinking skills. As
the facilitator provides open-ended questions for students to discuss and
answer, students collaborate, problem solve, and determine answers in
social spaces. Offering these types of opportunities for students devel-
ops stronger rapport and trust between the facilitator and the learners.
It requires that students engage in high-level thinking skills. A learner-
centered rehearsal may take a different approach than mentioned earlier
in this chapter. If we remain in a cyclical pattern, the rehearsal would be
led primarily by the students and facilitated by the teacher. A learner-
centered rehearsal cycle is provided in Figure 1.8.
Contrary to most music classrooms, where the musical decisions, lit-
erature, rehearsal schedule, and instrument selections are often made
entirely by the teacher, a learner-centered space may relinquish some con-
trol of these areas and provide opportunity for students to make some of
the decisions. When learners are offered input into their learning goals,
processes, and outcomes, they are provided a sense of ownership over

Students Students
Play Listen

Students
Students
Respond
Assess

Students
Feedback

A possible learner-centered rehearsal

Figure 1.8 
16 Jonathan R. Kladder

their learning. The goal is that students play an active role in the out-
comes of their learning, which means they are more likely to engage with
the learning process.
Learner-centered classrooms allow students choice and increased
freedom. These attributes are unique to most music-learning spaces in
a learner-centered classroom. Students have the opportunity to choose,
along with their peers, the types of assignments they would prefer to have,
any performances, and the music they wish to learn. In a learner-centered
classroom, choice, autonomy, and freedom are integrated throughout
the entirety of the learning process. In fact, these attributes are key ele-
ments that reflect the core belief of what makes learner-centered spaces so
unique, engaging, and integral to the success of student learning.
Students take on a variety of roles. At particular points in the learn-
ing process, a student may take on the leadership role within their group
or the large ensemble. In this setting, they may help guide, support, and
assist the group in achieving their goals. This person may help to organ-
ize the types of outcomes and needs for moving the group forward. In
our experiences, there often are multiple students who will take on the
leadership role, organize the space, bring additional materials, and assure
everyone knows what is expected of them. Yet in other points along the
journey, the same student may be a contributor, following the lead of
their peers.
Importantly, a learner-centered approach offers more opportunities
for individualized and differentiated learning. As students engage with
technology in contemporary society, our students, perhaps more than
from any previous generation, bring a wealth of knowledge. This means
that teachers now have a significant challenge in ensuring all students
receive an education that meets their individual interests. Since a learner-­
centered approach encourages students to take control of their learning,
they are able to build on their preexisting knowledge more easily. Facili-
tators shape the curricular decisions around these prior experiences, thus
supporting a more differentiated classroom for all students. The majority
of learning is shaped around the individualized needs of each student,
rather than holistically.
In the field of music teaching and learning, a shift from the alterna-
tive norm of music teaching in contemporary culture suggests exciting
new possibilities to engage students in meaningful and relevant learning.
As our contemporary culture continues to change, we believe a learner-­
centered pedagogy allows teachers and students to adapt and change along
with it. Learner-centered classrooms encourage an inclusive, diverse, and
meaningful learning experience in ways that support student choice, own-
ership, engagement, exploration, and mistake making.
 Learner-Centered Teaching 17

References
Allsup, R. E., & Benedict, C. (2008). The problems of band: An inquiry into
the future of instrumental music education. Philosophy of Music Education
Review, 156–173.
Doyle, T. (2011). Learner-centered teaching: Putting the research on learning into
practice. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Eseberre, J. (2012). Teaching to the test: Should standardized tests be the primary
source to create classroom curriculum? A case study, Doctoral dissertation,
Hope International University.
Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Bloomsbury
Publishing.
Kratus, J. (2007). Music education at the tipping point. Music Educators Journal,
94(2), 42–48.
Mark, M., & Gary, C. L. (2007). A history of American music education. Lan-
ham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes
testing corrupts America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Orfield, G., & Kornhaber, M. L. (2001). Raising standards or raising barriers?
Inequality and high-stakes testing in public education. New York, NY: Priority
Publications.
Waln, G. (1949). Improving the school music competition-festival. Music Educa-
tors Journal, 35(3), 26–27.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Williams, D. A. (2011). The elephant in the room. Music Educators Journal,
98(1), 51–57.
Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals
for action. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), 167–177.
36 Zadda Bazzy

None of Some of Most of All of

the Time the Time the Time the Time

The group was able to explain 1 2 3 4

how their musical choices
enhanced the poem.

For their self-assessment, students use the rubric to assess their group,
and then answer the following questions:

In what ways did you contribute to your group’s composition and

performance? In what ways did the other group members contribute
to your group’s composition and performance?

For the teacher’s assessment of students, the teacher may use the group
score, as well as an individual score based on (a) how well the student
collaborated with peers, and (b) the student’s individual contributions to
the group.

What Do Students Need to Do Before the Next Class?

In the subsequent lesson, groups may revise their composition and per-
form again (standard MU:Cr3.1.41). In addition, students may revise the
criteria for evaluating the performances. Before the next class, students
should reflect on how they could improve their group’s performance, as
well as how they could modify the rubric so it is more effective for evalu-
ating performances.

References
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2018).
What is SEL? Retrieved from https://casel.org/what-is-sel/
Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2010). It takes some getting used to: Rethinking
curriculum for the 21st Century. In H. Jacobs (Ed.), Curriculum 21: Essential
education for a changing world (pp. 210–226). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Doyle, T., & Zakrajsek, T. (2012). Learner-centered teaching: Putting the research
on learning into practice. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Kindermann, T. A. (2016). Peer group influences on students’ academic motiva-
tion. In K. R. Wentzel & G. B. Ramani (Eds.), Handbook of social influences
in school contexts: Social-emotional, motivation, and cognitive outcomes
(pp. 31–47). New York, NY: Routledge.
Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Educational psychology: Developing learners (6th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
 The Elementary Music Classroom 37

Ormrod, J. E., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. (2017). Educational psychol-

ogy: Developing learners (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading compre-
hension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317–344.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Webb, N. L. (2007). Issues related to judging the alignment of curriculum stand-
ards and assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 7–25.
 The Traditional Secondary String Ensemble 67

i. What works well with this arrangement/melodic notation?

ii. What (if anything) needs to be adjusted or rearranged?
(Note: Many students will struggle with taking rhythms and
putting them into notation. Figuring out the best way to
notate rhythms as a group will help students better under-
stand how to arrange.)
b. Group discussion: What was challenging about this process?
What was easier than expected?
c. Teacher provides a brief explanation of what will be next in this
project (completing arrangements and performing final arrange-
ments for the class) and will dismiss students to pack up.

Assessments
Formal: Noteflight arrangement graded for accuracy and completion
Informal: Acknowledgment of performance tasks, informal observations
while visiting each group during the working period.

What Do Students Need to Do Before the Next Class?

Students need to make sure they have a complete notated part for the
melody of their hook and need to begin notating their individual har-
mony and bass parts.

References
Green, L. (2016). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom
pedagogy. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Gulish, S. A. (2017). Creativity in the classroom: An innovative approach to
integrate arts education. Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Higgins, L., & Campbell, P. S. (2010). Free to be musical: Group improvisation
in music. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
 The Traditional Secondary Concert Band 83

their perception of the flow of rehearsals, and ideas they have to improve
the process for the next round of concert preparation. Then, at one of the
first post-concert rehearsals the teacher will lead a discussion of the full
ensemble where students will provide input on improvements to the pro-
cess. Depending on the flow of this discussion, the ensemble could vote
on several of the ideas put forward and those that “win” will be imple-
mented in the next concert preparation period.
Just as with the creative assignments strategy, I would caution that
doing this type of activity only once a year is not enough. Students will
need more opportunities so that they can build on previously learned
skills. I would also suggest the best time for this to start would be as early
as possible in a student’s first year in band classes. Students in a begin-
ning band class should be given several chances to “do the musical work”
in rehearsals. This might start as early as when students play their first
pitch as a whole note, followed by a whole rest, etc. Allow the students
to start themselves and play the exercise without a conductor. It’s quite
possible they will fall apart, but what a wonderful learning opportunity!
Talk to them about why they fell apart and have them try it again . . . and
again . . . and again, until they can do it fairly well. Then have them do
the same with their next exercise and ask students to suggest what needs
to be done for the ensemble to improve.
Again, just imagine what students could be doing musically as seniors
in high school if they begin their school band experience this way. Just
imagine what these students could be doing musically as adults!

References
Burvall, A., & Ryder, D. (2017). Intention: Critical creativity in the classroom.
Irvine, CA: EdTech Team Press.
Doyle, T. (2008). Helping students learn in a learner-centered environment:
A guide to facilitating learning in higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Pub-
lishing Inc.
 The Traditional Secondary Vocal Ensemble 103

This may lead to some new areas in which students, practitioners, and
scholars advance secondary choral learner-centered experiences.

Conclusion
Secondary choral contexts are rich in habits and traditions (Regelski &
Gates, 2009). Choral music teachers may often assume a default role
of director. That director, intentionally or otherwise, may often ignore
student perspective by selecting the music, rehearsing the ensemble,
and putting on performances. This chapter highlights some tangible,
accessible, and realistic approaches that I have found worked for me as
a secondary choral music teacher who values learner-centered experi-
ences. I have learned that my values as a music educator were largely
shaped by my experiences. By no means expect others to share in all
of them. I hope that including the context of my personal experience
and the vignette helped to contextualize some of my personal ideas and
biases. I also hope that readers might relate to some of the strategies and
ideas within this chapter and find opportunities to adapt them to their
classrooms.
We are living in the midst of a changing music education culture (Kra-
tus, 2007). Student voice, learner autonomy, and personal agency seem
to be values gaining more traction inside and outside music education
contexts. This chapter and others in this book help bring those ideas
into focus. Music teachers interested in growing in their learner-centered
practices should try some of these suggestions. Teachers new to some
of these ideas might try a few simple ones out that involve a lowering
of teacher control. Friends of music teachers who might seem caught in
their teacher-centered habits might encourage them to read this chap-
ter and/or share with them some examples of how secondary choral set-
tings might function in learner-centered contexts.

References
Brown, J. K. (2008). Student-centered instruction: Involving students in their
own education. Music Educators Journal, 94(5), 30–35.
Cremata, R. (2017). Facilitation in popular music education. Journal of Popular
Music Education, 1(1), 63–82.
Fuelberth, R., & Todd, C. (2017). “I dream a world”: Inclusivity in choral music
education. Music Educators Journal, 104(2), 38–44.
Kratus, J. (2007). Music education at the tipping point. Music Educators Journal,
94(2), 42–48.
Lind, V. R., & McKoy, C. (2016). Culturally responsive teaching in music educa-
tion: From understanding to application. New York, NY: Routledge.
104 Radio Cremata

Regelski, T. A., & Gates, J. T. (Eds.). (2009). Music education for changing times:
Guiding visions for practice (Vol. 7). New York, NY: Springer Science & Busi-
ness Media.
Shaw, J. T. (2015). “Knowing their world” urban choral music educators’ knowl-
edge of context. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63(2), 198–223.
Waldron, J. (2018). Online music communities and social media. The Oxford
Handbook of Community Music, 109.
140 Anne Fennell

Class Reflection
• Was there a moment or beat of complete unison playing? Where,
how did that sound or feel?
• Where did the class ensemble have conversation sections?
• Where and how did your group find challenging moments?
• If your group stopped and started, what created this and how did
your group fix this?

What Do Students Need to Do Before the Next Class?

Students should copy or take a picture of their group’s pattern and prac-
tice this or create their own pattern to extend the learning. Students can
also brainstorm other ways to extend this rhythm work (creating comple-
mentary ensembles, playing backwards, adding solos, etc.).

References
Couros, G. (2015). The innovator’s mindset. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting.
Gregory, G. H. (2016). Teacher as activator of learning. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Kallick, B., & Zmuda, A. (2017). Students at the center: Personalized learning
with habits of mind. ASCD.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning
organization. Performance + Instruction, 30(5), 37.
160 Jonathan R. Kladder

engagement. For this reason, developing an appropriate classroom cul-

ture may take time and planning.
Implementing a hybrid ensemble as a non-traditional approach to
music teaching and learning using a learner-centered framework offers
exciting new avenues for students to participate in music. I believe a
hybrid ensemble supports a cohesive goal that music teachers should
strive for: to provide a relevant, meaningful, quality, robust, diverse, and
inclusive music-learning experience for all students.

References
Abril, C. R., & Gault, B. M. (2008). The state of music in secondary schools: The
principal’s perspective. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(1), 68–81.
Dewey, J. (1959). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Doyle, T. (2012). Learner-centered teaching: Putting the research on learning into
practice. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Kratus, J. (2007). Music education at the tipping point. Music Educators Journal,
94(2), 42–48.
Lamont, A., Hargreaves, D. J., Marshall, N. A., & Tarrant, M. (2003). Young
people’s music in and out of school. British Journal of Music Education, 20(3),
229–241.
North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1999). Music and adolescent identity. Music
Education Research, 1(1), 75–92.
North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & O’Neill, S. A. (2000). The importance of music
to adolescents. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(2), 255–272.
Palfrey, J. G., & Gasser, U. (2011). Born digital: Understanding the first genera-
tion of digital natives. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Tobias, E. S. (2012). Hybrid spaces and hyphenated musicians: Secondary stu-
dents’ musical engagement in a songwriting and technology course. Music
Education Research, 14(3), 329–346.
Williams, D. A. (2011). The elephant in the room. Music Educators Journal,
98(1), 51–57.
Williams, D. B. (2012). The non-traditional music student in secondary schools
of the United States: Engaging non-participant students in creative music activ-
ities through technology. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 4(2–3),
131–147.
Wise, S., Greenwood, J., & Davis, N. (2011). Teachers’ use of digital technol-
ogy in secondary music education: Illustrations of changing classrooms. British
Journal of Music Education, 28(2), 117–134.