A Dialectical View of Theory and Practice

Author(s): Estelle R. Jorgensen

Source: Journal of Research in Music Education , Winter, 2001, Vol. 49, No. 4 (Winter,
2001), pp. 343-359
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of MENC: The National Association for
Music Education

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3345617

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Sage Publications, Inc. and are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Journal of Research in Music Education

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 2001, VOLUME 49, NUMBER 4, PAGES 343-359 343

This philosophical essay explains how a dialectical approach to theory and practice
can be useful to music educators. It also offers a dialogical approach to working
through the conceptual and practical dilemmas raised by this dialectical approach.
The elements of a dialectical approach are explained and criticized using a dramatic
metaphor. Dialogue is a dialectic and a strategy for addressing the dialectics of theory
and practice. Also, some of the ways in which dialogue functions are explored.

Estelle R. Jorgensen, Indiana University

A Dialectical View of
Theory and Practice
Music education is caught in a dialectic (an argument invo
tension between two elements) between theory and practice. My
pose in this article is twofold: first, to explain how a dialec
approach to theory and practice can be useful to music edu
and those interested in their work, and second, to offer a di
approach-an exchange of ideas and opinions-as a way throug
conceptual and practical dilemmas raised by my dialectical v
theory and practice in music education. By formulating propo
and raising and rebutting potential criticisms of them, it als
structs a dialectic position that builds on the work of other p
phers.

A Dramatic Metaphor

Thinking of educational theory and practice using a "this-with-

that" approach (Yob, 1997, p. 237) in which theory and practice
move together as actors on the stage offers a rich and dynamic
metaphor for the dialectic between theory and practice. This artistic
metaphor conveys the image of two actors or dancers on the stage,
interacting and engaging each other, one coming to the foreground
and moving or speaking at one time while the other moves to the
background. Now one is prominent, then the other is prominent.
Now they are locked in debate or physical embrace, then they are dis-
tant and separate from one another.

Estelle R. Jorgensen is the editor of Philosophy of Music Education Review and profes-
sor of music in the School of Music, Indiana University, Merrill Hall, 1201 East 3rd
Street, Bloomington, IN 47405-7006; e-mail: jorgense@indiana.edu. Copyright @ 2001
by MENC: The National Association for Music Education.

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
344 JORGENSEN

The stage is a space of dynamic movement and flux as the nature

of the tension changes from time to time, now building in energy
and vitality, then lapsing into calm and repose. The fact that there
are two actors or dancers-each interconnected yet disconnected
from the other-complicates the situation. At some points, they seem
to join or move as one.
Dialectical tension creates problems in the relationship between
theory and practice, as both retain their separateness, impact unde-
niably on the other, yet are integrally interrelated. There is the
"ground between" the archetypical theoretical and practical, the
fuzzy territory in which theory may be more in the foreground than
practice, or vice versa. Resolutions are impermanent. A resolution is
forged for this time rather than for all time. Throughout the play,
this interrelationship moves and develops. Practices die to be
replaced by others.
Music education history is replete with examples of theories and
practices that largely disappear or die as others are born. For exam-
ple, the use of the gamut gave way, in turn, to fasola and tonic sol-fa,
and the American singing school gave way to music education in the
common and, later, public school (see Rainbow, 1967, 1989; Keene,
1982). Each theory and practice has its own time and place, and the
search for the one eternal high road to music education is illusory
and eventually futile. Each is more or less time-bound as it is also
place-bound.
Things in dialectic need not or cannot necessarily be melded or
fused in the sense that two things are conjoined as one at a particu-
lar moment in time. My dialectical perspective suggests that each pos-
sibility needs to be carefully taken into account so that its options are
not prematurely foreclosed. This perspective suggests a way of doing
philosophy rather than mandating a particular philosophy, world
view, or theory. It allows and encourages situations in which one
researcher or teacher may call for one theory and practice, while
another may call for an alternative theory and practice. Two teachers
may agree that a particular theory is called for and differ in respect
of the particular practices that ought to be implemented. Or two
researchers may agree in general terms about a particular practice,
but interpret it in the light of alternative theories. What is required
in this approach is that teachers and researchers reflect on the alter-
natives before them, be they theoretical or practical, and resist pre-
maturely foreclosing one or the other alternative before they make
their decisions. As artists, they may move toward different ends or
toward the same end in different ways, and they may draw inspiration
from different or the same sources. They may explore the territory
"in between" what might previously have been taken to be categori-
cal distinctions. Irrespective of the particular objectives or routes
chosen, or the company in which the journey is taken, such teachers
or researchers are reflectively practical, courageous, and confident in
meeting the inevitable ambiguities, ambivalences, and paradoxes of
teaching and learning.

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 345

Curriculum, as the site of this "ground between" educational the-

ory and practice, is a dynamic thing, always being improvised, nego-
tiated, and contested (Jorgensen, 2002b). Not only do theory and
practice contain common elements and aspects that affect each
other, but because of the ambiguity of theory and practice, specific
theories and practices are also being weighed and evaluated. Henry
Giroux (2000) suggests that educators and cultural workers need to
embrace the process of contest as an essential element of their work.
They ought to provide their students with the critical skills and per-
spectives to unmask those elements that John Dewey (1938/1963)
would call "miseducative" or prone to stunt or thwart personal,
social, and societal development and growth. As Giroux contends,
powerful societal forces threaten to destroy freedom of thought and
action, and the work of artists and educators and their supporters
should be to counteract those forces that promote violence, crude-
ness, banality, and coercion as it also opens the possibilities for peace,
tranquility, refinement, grace, and freedom.
In apposition to the metaphor of contest, I also see opportunities
for cooperation, widening the private and public spaces and negoti-
ating opportunities for seeing commonalities between different oth-
ers. Among the persuasive arguments that buttress this position are
those offered by Martha Nussbaum, Maxine Greene, Parker Palmer,
andJane Roland Martin. It is this possibility in searching for common
ground that constitutes, for Nussbaum (1997), a more humane view
than that of contest. For Greene (1988, 1995, 2001), artistic imagi-
nation offers a way for teachers and their students to form spaces and
communities in and through which they can become empowered to
transform their worlds. Coming to know oneself provides, for Palmer
(1998), a basis for courageous and affirmative teaching. In the telling
of her journey through academe, Jane Roland Martin (2000) shows
how alternative ways of living and working, teaching and researching
as a woman scholar can help affirm and energize women, and enrich
the life and work of the academy. Viewing curriculum as dialectical,
as a site for both cooperation and contest, suggests that curriculum
is not only a place of affirmation but also of transgression (Hooks,
1994) as teachers and learners dare to challenge the status quo-the
theories that do not work and the practices that are not reflective or
humane. And this is the space that many music teachers occupy as
they seek to do their work with integrity.
Aside from the ambiguity generated by this "both/and" tension or
dialectic is the ambivalence it holds for musicians, educators, and
those interested in their work. Since the entry of music into the gen-
eral education of schoolchildren, teachers have been focused on
instructional methods that can reduce some of the ambivalence
between what is desirable and what is possible, between one theo
and another, and one practice and another, and provide a sense
security and instrumental purpose for their work. And research
have sought ways of conducting inquiry that minimize doubt a
uncertainty. Accepting and following a particular instructional

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
346 JORGENSEN

approach or method short-circuits ambivalence as the teacher or

researcher espouses it as truth and refuses to doubt its efficacy. Such
an attitude breeds the kind of idolatry of, and preoccupation with,
method by teachers and researchers that Susanne Langer (1967)
roundly criticizes in her essay, "Idols of the Laboratory." Doubtless,
this methodological preoccupation, especially during the 19th and
20th centuries, was associated with the growing importance of scien-
tific ways of knowing. I suspect, however, that in a time of pervasive
change, it is also heartening for teachers and researchers to have
access to methods that free them from having to make a multiplicity
of sometimes difficult musical and educational choices. Israel
Scheffler (1991) refers to this refusal to doubt in the face of
tainty as forms of epistemic apathy and dogmatism, and he
attitudes as antithetical to the exercise of reason in teaching.
Teachers and researchers are better served by remaining open-mind-
ed, reasoning their way through the challenges they face in the par-
ticular times and places in which they do their work, even if this
means facing the possibilities of ambivalence, vulnerability, surprise,
orjoy along the way. Music curricula have swung back and forth from
one emphasis to another during the past two centuries.1 This ten-
dancy suggests that even though music teachers and researchers may
have wished for the one best way of teaching and learning music,
they have had the sneaking suspicion that their approaches were not
the best or only ones and that these approaches were limited and in
need of correction or rebalancing from time to time.

A Critique of the Dialectical Approach

Critics may charge that a dialectical approach will unsettle teach-

ers because it complicates rather than helps resolve their situations.
There are now more things to reflect about, and the options are not
as clear-cut or easily settled as might be the case in a less dialectical
or paradoxical world. Committing to a particular approach or direc-
tion frees the teacher from having to deal with the ambiguity of and
ambivalence about particular theories and practices. Even if one
could decide what it is that one ought to accomplish as a music
teacher, there are the continuing challenges concerning how best to
achieve those objectives and what to do when the things one wants to
accomplish seem impossible to achieve in a particular situation.
Training teachers as technicians to follow the ideas and practices
designed by others leaves them bereft of important conceptual, criti-
cal, and practical skills. Among these are the skills of designing and
implementing their own perspectives and procedures and coping suc-
cessfully with the associated anxiety, surprise, and joy along the way.
Donald Sch6n (1987) rightly suggests that teachers need to be pre-
pared as "reflective practitioners"-able to diagnose the particular sit-
uations they face, design appropriate activities for their pupils, impro-
vise instructional strategies as they engage in dialogue with their col-
leagues and students, and evaluate changes needed for the future.

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 347

Teaching music shares much with improvisation, playing jazz, and

notions of artistry (see Berliner, 1994; Allsup, 1997; Howard, 1982).
This suggests the need in teacher education to provide opportunities
to reflect on one's teaching, critically think through one's objectives,
dialogue with one's colleagues and students, imaginatively design
strategies that meet the interests and aptitudes of one's pupils, and
thoughtfully assess one's work with students. To this end, Carlotta
Parr (1999) sees philosophical reflection as a major element in
teacher education at all levels of expertise and experience.
Regarding teachers as reflective practitioners suggests that rather
than attempting to provide a road map for all teachers to follow,
philosophers ought to foster frameworks of ideas as well as the con-
ceptual tools and skills that allow teachers to analyze, formulate, and
evaluate their own perspectives and practices. Such a view sets teach-
ers free to think reflectively for themselves, and thereby meet the
needs and interests of students in their own particular situations
rather than follow uncritically the dictums of others.
A more compelling criticism is that a dialectical view does not go
far enough.2 Postmodern thought has embraced a greater awareness
of holistic views of personhood in place of dualistic thinking about
persons and things. The validity of categorical distinctions between
mind and body or theory and practice has been challenged; these
distinctions have been labeled artificial and even incorrect when
viewed practically, in the phenomenal world. Rather than co
dualities, proponents of this view would argue that one oug
think more holistically about how aspects in dialectic interse
even fuse. To the extent that dialectics are read as dualities in dis-
guise, they may not sufficiently highlight the interrelatedness of
ory and practice.
This criticism can readily be answered on two counts: (1) I
been at pains to distinguish theory and practices as weak syndr
and not dualities; (2) a dialectical perspective need not negate h
tic views of personhood. Langer (1957) also draws on the meta
of the dance to describe the living and evolving qualities of th
as wholes, integrated and articulated structures. The dancers m
about on the stage as living beings in which the whole dance t
scends the particular dancers. True, she was writing of articu
structures that together comprise the artwork, but I see no r
why her metaphor cannot be applied here. Beyond the dial
between theory and practice, there are others, for example,
between who the person is and what the person does, betwee
whole person acting within the phenomenal world and the ten
between theory and practice that this person confronts in dec
how to think and act in that world.
A further and crucial question arises as to the nature of the spe
cific theories and practices to be used. Praxis construed descriptive
(that which is actually happening) and normatively (in the sense o
what should be happening) has the potential not only for good bu
also evil. It cannot be assumed that praxis is benign or always yield

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
348 JORGENSEN

positive results. Sometimes, this evil can be terrible. One need look
no further than the Holocaust engendered by Hitler's Final Solution
or, as I write, the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York
City, resulting from militant Islamic extremism. A dialectical
approach permits choices to be made concerning the particular the-
ories and practices to be used. This raises a nest of questions. How
are educational "goods" to be construed or defined? What is to be
done when a theory or practice does not constitute "a good" or when
one person's normative view of praxis is not necessarily seen by oth-
ers as in the public interest? In justifying and defending educational
theories and practices, as Scheffler (1991, pp. 126-139) shows, cer-
tain "deadly educational sins" can be "redeemed" and throwing his
argument on its head, some educational "goods" may turn out to be
evil. Even well-meaning efforts for the benefit of a given group, insti-
tution, or society may turn out to be limited or oppressive. Witness
Paulo Freire's (1994, pp. 65-68) attempt to articulate a notion of lib-
eratory (in the sense of bringing about individual and collective
freedom) or dialogical education, which was seen as too limited or
oppressive by those he intended to help.
Dewey (1938/1963, pp. 25-50) suggested applying empirical tests
to education to determine whether it benefited individual growth
and the public good. In this view, one would need to wait and see
what the effects of education are before one would know whether it
is good or evil, and by then the damage would be done. Such an
option is ethically unacceptable because it makes an insufficient
attempt to ensure that there is adequate planning ahead of time for
attaining educational "goods." Also, the risk that well-meaning efforts
may result in unintended consequences that turn out to be highly
undesirable requires that educators remain vigilant.
Clearly, questions of which practice or theory is to be advocated
and by what means are crucial in determining appropriate music
education theory and practice. Relying on basic ethical assumptions
warrants a careful analysis and defense of educational ends before
theory is translated into practice, insofar as possible.3 A dialectical
approach necessitates a close examination of these among other
questions, and it is impossible to do justice to them here. None of
these detractions, however, suffices to defeat the general proposition
that teacher and researcher likewise confront theory and practice in
dialectical relation. A way needs to be found to work through this
dialectic.

Dialogue as Dialectic and Strategy

How can teachers and their students creatively use the theory-prac
tice dialectic, among all the other dialectics they encounter in music
and education? In suggesting that dialogue constitutes one means
engaging dialectics, I first propose that dialogue is dialectical. Th
reasons are several. First, in the sense in which I wish to use the word
dialogue, a conversation is carried on between two people who ar

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 349

each respected by the other. Each participant approaches the

exchange as a learner seeking to understand the other's perspective
and to better know one's own. The points of view each embraces may
be similar or different, yet each converses in humility, as a fellow
learner respectful of the other's views. Others have elucidated the
nature of this exchange. For example, Martin Buber's I and Thou
relation (1923/1970) between fellow subjects who both contribute
importantly and in various ways to a conversation readily springs to
mind. Partners in the dialogue recognize the inherent flaws in their
own and the other's perspectives and practices, but see the other
beyond these flaws with empathy, open-mindedness, open-hearted-
ness, and generosity of spirit. Each values the other because she or he
also seeks to know wisdom, learn from, teach, share with, and com-
mune with, the other. One need not necessarily agree with or accept
the other's position, but may seek to persuade the other of the value
of one's own views and practices.
For conversation partners to extend mutual regard, honor, and
value to each other is more easily said than done. In an imperfect
world, tensions potentially arise from prejudices, habits, attitudes,
beliefs, and practices on the part of those who might wish to dia-
logue. Imperfect knowledge on all their parts also opens possibilities
of misunderstandings that may subvert the dialogue. When one sees
the other's position as evil and destructive, and moral claims out-
weigh one's willingness to grant the other's perspectives credence,
the conversation may cease. Short of this point, the partners in dia-
logue need to accept the fallibility of their views, possess the humili-
ty, integrity, and willingness to change their perspectives and prac-
tices if necessary, respect differences where they cannot be resolved,
and grant the other the freedom to disagree if agreement cannot be
reached.
Second, there is a dialectic between each participant's and t
communal perspective. David Bohm (1996) observes the way in
which individual perspectives come to be shaped by one's participa-
tion in a group such that the group develops its own shared under-
standings. An individual contributes to the collective understanding
that emerges out of the conversation and the conversation also feeds
back into the individual participants' views. In this way, the resulting
group consensus becomes a means for action. Each individual adds
to yet is affected or changed by the dialogue, and a sense of person-
al investment in the resulting communal understanding is forged
that provides impetus for action to which all are more-or-less com-
mitted. A critic might charge that dialogue is all talk and no action.
It isn't practical. Bohm would respond, and I think correctly, that in
the process of conversation, the individual participants are energized
by the collective commitment to particular ideas and practices. In
short, dialogue tends toward action of a sort to which the individual
participants in the dialogue become committed.
Bohm's ideas resonate with those of Freire, Greene, and Palmer to
which I have already referred. Freire (1993) argues that the way to

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
350 JORGENSEN

liberate oppressed people is through a cellular approach in which

conversation groups explore and name the forces that confront them
and through this conversation come to find particular ways in which
they can collectively change their realities. More than this, the dia-
logue fosters active resistance on their part to their oppression and a
sense of shared purpose and solidarity with, and support from, val-
ued others. Greene (1988, 17) suggests that the importance of this
community is such that if it were not for the group, individuals would
not "think" of how they might "break free" from their constricted
ideas and practices and achieve freedom of thought and action. For
her, creating spaces in which every individual perspective is valued,
where all can speak and genuinely hear the other conversationalists,
creates the opportunity for freedom to "sit down" (p. 86). The col-
lective ideas arise out of and help frame individual perspectives in
ways that would not otherwise have been possible. Doing this
requires time and space to gather and reflect, and planning on the
part of educational policy makers and cultural workers. And in
describing the dialectical character of teaching, Palmer (1998) maps
a dialogical classroom as one in which teacher and students gather
around a subject of "great" or inherent worth. As they do this, con-
versation groups of like-minded teachers and students can become
the basis for forging collective action for transforming education.
My own approach is to suggest that such a "bottom-up" or grass-
roots approach to educational change through means of dialogue
may be insufficient alone to evoke or provoke systemic educational
change. Dialogue may go some way towards laying a framework for a
widespread agreement that change is needed among educators,
musicians, and the public at large, but this conversation probably will
be insufficient to carry it off successfully. There is also the important
role of the establishment, the other powerful institutions, groups,
and individuals who are in the position to enact systemic change.
Without their direct involvement or acquiescence, pervasive change
is unlikely to occur. In music education, for example, there is the
case of Sarah Glover who invented a simple, movable, seven-syllable
system for sight-singing music (Rainbow, 1967). Lacking a public
platform from which to advocate widespread change in music
instructional methods, she was eclipsed by John Curwen and his
tonic sol-fa movement notwithstanding that he essentially "borrowed"
(or less charitably, stole) her system. Curwen, on the other hand,
mounted a national movement that contributed importantly to ama-
teur involvement in choral music. This movement also led to the sup-
port of professional orchestras in England and abroad, and consti-
tuted the basis for one of the aspects of the music educational system
developed subsequently by Zoltin KodRily and his followers interna-
tionally. Whereas Glover was a relatively obscure figure who thought
up the idea and cultivated it in her fairly small community, Curwen
was in the position to create a national community and public plat-
form from which to promulgate change.
Third, a dialogue requires that ideas and practices be interrogat-

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 351

ed. Rather than a comfortable chat among like-minded friends, or a

discussion in which some control and others follow passively, this
conversation engages all as active participants in thinking coopera-
tively, critically, and constructively. Acknowledging fallibility need not
imply that the conversation partners are willing to give up their ideas
easily. This is not an invitation to laziness or timidity, to letting others
do one's thinking or abandoning one's position hastily or because it
is being criticized. Instead, recognizing one's fallibility simply under-
scores one's limitations and helps guard against unwarranted arro-
gance. In addition, it allows one to think critically and constructively
without the necessity to be right for all times and places. As such, it
permits all participants in the dialogue the freedom to examine ideas
and practices carefully, and see wherein they may be flawed as well as
insightful, limited as well as useful. And it prompts open-mindedness,
values ambiguity and challenge, and draws on the varied experiences
of those in conversation.
Fourth, dialogue is imaginative and intuitive, felt as well as know
intellectually. Extending the borders of human rationality bey
logical reason to include what Langer (1957) would descri
"non-discursive" ways of expression opens up other means of c
munication that go beyond ordinary speech. These include the
religions, rituals, myths, and dreams that express felt life. Be
verbal discourse, musical dialogue takes place through making
taking music among the members of a musical community. Op
critical and constructive thinking in this manner brings dial
closer to the arts and artistic ways of knowing. It also fosters ima
native thought and action on the part of individual and commu
alike.
Imagination, intuition, and feeling are complex ideas, multifac
eted and interconnected. Reichling (1990, 1992) envisages inter-
connections between perception, intuition, reason, and feeling as
facets of musical imagination. She sees musical imagination inte-
grating sensory perceptions of sound and sight, and immediately
grasping the whole. Music makers and takers rationally work out and
through musical ideas and bodily feeling in ways that are fresh an
divergent. Whether discussed or enacted, musical ideas and activi
ties provide means of expressing and activating imaginative, intu-
itive, and felt dialogue. Among the educational writers to explor
aspects of musical dialogue, Deanne Bogdan (2001)-a self-styled
musical amateur in the sense of a lover of the musical art--describes
her performing experiences in dialogical terms. Her writing re
onates with other claims within the musical literature that think
"in" a music, for example, as one might think in jazz (Berliner,
1994), is profoundly dialogical. And the social nature of the musi
event is premised on common understandings and practices in
musical community. These provide spaces and times in which all t
actors-whether composer, improviser, performer, or listene
engage in musical rituals that are dialogical in character.4

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
352 JORGENSEN

How the Dialogue Works Practically

How does dialogue function as a means of working through the

dialectics of theory and practice? Among the ways in which it is help-
ful for the practitioner and theorist alike, dialogue develops habits of
thought. These enable one to analyze and evaluate ideas and prac-
tices, formulate alternatives when necessary, carry ideas into practice,
trace the theoretical roots of practices and the practical roots of the-
ory, lay better theoretical foundations for practice, and make theory
more applicable in practice. Given its dialectical character, dialogue
draws on critical thinking, imagination, intuition, perception, and
feeling. When taken together, these ways of thinking foster diversity
rather than uniformity, inclusiveness rather than exclusiveness,
equality rather than hierarchy, and freedom rather than oppression.
These dispositions of thought are empowering to theorists and prac-
titioners alike because they provide the necessary means for evaluat-
ing "what is," that is, the ideas and practices currently in vogue. They
enable envisaging the "what if," or the alternatives that might or
could exist but have yet to be tried or tested, conceptualizing alter-
native theoretical plans and practical projects, and applying theory
practically and practice theoretically. Imagination is an especially
important intellectual disposition because through its exercise break-
throughs are made not only in science but in other artistic and edu-
cational realms. To this end, it is essential that a community of schol-
ars in music education be broadened and fostered. Ongoing conver-
sations of the sort I have described can foster such qualities of mind
as incisiveness, the ability to separate oneself from one's argument or
one's practice, take criticism gracefully as one also criticizes con-
structively, and develop a love of the questions themselves. Such dis-
positions of thought developed within an ongoing dialogue in and
between scholarly and practical communities, and softening the
boundaries between theory and practice, are essential to music edu-
cation. Without them, the field suffers not only in terms of the rigor
of its theoretical framework but in the validity of its practice.
An array of skills are also developed dialogically ranging from
habits and critical thinking to practical skills, and from relatively low
levels of competency through to exemplary or expert performance.
Conceived of as cultivating artistry, music education involves teach-
ing and learning about, and how to go on in, music. Building on
Gilbert Ryle's (1942) ideas concerning "knowing that" and "knowing
how," Howard (1982, chap. 3) shows how the skills of doing or being
in music or actively engaging in its practice constitute part of the skill
profile possessed by the accomplished artist, both as teacher and per-
former. These music-making skills are legion. In musical dialogue,
they involve such diverse abilities as spinning out the various musical
ideas in composition or improvisation, listening to and cooperating
with other performer(s) in making music, working out the musical
ideas into a live performance, producing a musical performance,
and hearing the different musical voices as they ebb and flow

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 353

throughout a musical event. All of these practical skills necessitate

that musicians and their communities listen as well as see, appreciate
as well as criticize, understand as well as take pleasure in, and partake
of as well as participate in the musical ritual. Along the way, whether
in the realms of composition, performance, or listening, such practi-
cal skills necessitate hearing and responding, evaluating and adapt-
ing, and making and receiving. The group improvisations led by June
Boyce-Tillman are based on poems she has written. They move from
musical idea to idea, from one participant to another, as each refines,
extends, creates, and responds to instrumental and vocal sounds and
movements that emerge within the group. In such a musical dia-
logue, the group develops an improvisation that is collectively shared
and generated, different from, even beyond the capacity of any one
individual to create. The experience of this musical dialogue or 'jam-
ming session" impacts on the individuals within the group. Hearing
and interacting with the creations of one's colleagues, it extends
one's array of practical and theoretical skills and develops one's
musical imagination.5
Beyond the practical skills that are the stuff of music making are
those involved in sharing ideas about music and education. A dia-
logue about music opens practical and theoretical possibilities to stu-
dents and teacher alike. After a particular lesson they have observed
together (for example, an ensemble rehearsal or a master class6),
teacher and students can share ideas about what the teacher did or
might have done, what the students did or might have done
things went as they did, what went right and wrong, and how fu
improvements might be made. They can then play-act their own
tions to the problems identified or imitate the teacher's strate
different situations. As they practice teaching skills that may be
ful in the future, teacher and students can transfer their knowle
from this situation to other specific contexts, and work out w
strategies might work in specific situations. In this way, each "re
tive practitioner" can hone skills (both practical and concept
that can be put to work within music education.
Skills of diagnosing what needs to be improved or fixed as w
providing remedies that enable the student to master a practic
vitally important for the teacher. Amy Fay (1880/1965) comm
that in her musical study in Germany during the mid-nineteenth
tury she studied with teachers who possessed skills of criticizing
inspiring their students but were unable to analyze the specific p
lems that were getting in the way of their students' performance
offer solutions that made a difference. It was only when she s
with Ludwig Deppe (after studies with Karl Tausig and Franz L
that she felt that she began to make significant progress as a pian
And I suspect that these diagnostic and remedial skills on the
teacher's part, at once theoretical and practical, remain among the
most significant factors in improving musical performance.
Dialogue also helps forge collective perspectives on music educa-
tion that translate into practice. Among the important issues con-

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
354 JORGENSEN

cerning music teachers and their students in a diverse world are the
objectives of music education. These objectives embody value systems
that require considerable philosophical attention. The recently pub-
lished Vision 2020 statement and Housewright Symposium Declar-
ation (Madsen, 2000) do not move far from the Tanglewood
Declaration in the Documentary Report of the Tanglewood Symposium
(Choate, 1968, pp. 139) published three decades earlier. The ques-
tion, now, is to address the validity of other postmodern and feminist
perspectives on the nature of music and music education, and decide
whether, in what form, or to what degree the aims of music education
need to be revised. My own essay, "The Aims of Music Education"
(orgensen, 2002a), and forthcoming book, Transforming Music
Education (orgensen, 2002c), still leave open the defense of ethical
and artistic values that ought to be exemplified in music education.
The philosophical work in music education on values by David Elliott
(1993), Mary Reichling (1993), Constantijn Koopman (1997),
Arnstine (2000), and Frede Nielsen (2000) is a welcome develop-
ment. When philosophers, practitioners, and all interested in the
work of music education converse about questions of value, a collec-
tive perspective can emerge that provides well-founded bases for the-
ory and practice in the music education of our time. Without the sort
of dialogue I have suggested, the field may fragment, and this would
be a significant loss to the work of music educators worldwide. In the
past, music educators have relied on the thinking of too few to do the
work of too many. I am calling for a radical shift in the profession's
thinking and practice that involves every music teacher in reflecting
about and practicing the work of music education within a commu-
nity of other music- and freedom-lovers.
Notions of "musicianship" and "music appreciation" are resilient
in music education. These terms imply that the music teacher's
objective is to offer a broad array of musical materials and events.
Such events provide students (both individually and collectively) the
opportunity to develop abilities to listen, compose, perform, impro-
vise, value doing and being in music, and grasp its role and place in
wider culture and ordinary life. As a means of human expression,
wonder, and delight, music affords opportunities for teachers and
their students to work together cooperatively, emphasize ways of
knowing that are "subjugated" in ordinary life (Boyce-Tillman, 2000,
p. 11), and thereby develop more of their potential than might oth-
erwise be possible. And in experiencing moments of excellence, tran-
scendence, and imminence, the musical community can have what
Abraham Maslow earlier described as "peak experiences," moments
of wonder and awe or a sense of the extraordinary beyond ordinary
lived existence (Choate, 1968, pp. 70-73).
The cultural interconnectedness with music and awareness of the
social constructedness of knowledge framed within postmodern
notions of relativism is a pervasive theme of our time. Dissolving such
dualities as self/other, theory/practice, and music-making/music-
taking suggests broadening the purview of music study toward cornm-

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 355

parative and relativist perspectives that eschew universalism and

essentialism. As I have indicated earlier, however, postmodernist
views may turn out to be deeply flawed, seeing that they, like their
predecessors, comprise only a part of a larger reality. The ambiguities
and ambivalences inherent in working through the dialectics rather
than binaries between self and other, theory and practice, and music
making and taking are, as I see it, part and parcel of the work of
music education. Still, being guided by ethical and artistic principles
to which one as part of the wider musical community is committed
provides a way to work through and figure out the directions in
which music education ought to head and the approaches that
should characterize its work. And, it is heartening to see instances of
music educators tackling these themes.
It also seems necessary to maintain links with other artists and edu-
cators generally. Although the idea of integrative approaches to the
arts has been tried and failed in the past, it is important to maintain
active dialogue among musicians and artists in other media. One
cannot turn back the clock to a time before the arts developed as
specialties. Still, the fact of this specialization makes it even more
urgent that artists find ways to engage in an ongoing dialogue to fos-
ter awareness of their commonalities as well as their differences.7
Even among musicians, the specialization and fragmentation of gen-
res necessitates ongoing conversations between specialists about
their wider cultural ends and shared purposes. And, musicians also
need to be an integral part of conversations among teachers of all
fields about their shared commitments to education broadly con-
strued. These shared musical, cultural, and educational perspectives
provide ways to enlarge the community of those committed to
enriching culture in all of its forms, and within this larger communi-
ty, speak and listen to myriad perspectives that need to be heard and
seen.

Conclusion

In sum, I have suggested a view in which theory and practice

in dialectic, or tension one with the other. Neither is more importa
than the other, and each feeds into, is implicit, and to some ext
explicit in the other. While discontinuous and ambiguous, theo
and practice are interrelated practically speaking. Situating
music teacher and student in the "eye of paradox," open to
ambivalence that conflicting tensions may suggest, and necessita
imaginative approaches to forging theoretical paradigms and
grounded practices necessitates developing ways in which these
dialectics can be worked through. One solution is encouraging com-
munities in which dialogue provides a way of individually and collec-
tively thinking about issues and energizing the participants to act to
change their situations.
Providing teachers and policymakers with the tools and approach-
es to dealing with the dialectic between theory and practice opens

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
356 JORGENSEN

ways for all to move more effectively between theory and practice or
practice and theory in ways that meet the challenges of their individ-
ual situations. This approach does not offer the one right or best way
to resolve all matters in dispute or tension. More modestly, it offers a
means (however messy and challenging) of thinking through and
acting in ways that benefit the specific situations in which music
teachers and their students work and play.

NOTES

1. The cyclical character of curricular swings in music education

United States during the 20th century between an emphasis on
making and taking, performance and appreciation, instrument
artistic purposes, illustrates this ambiguity. For an overview, see Mi
Mark and Charles L. Gary, A History of American Music Education
York: Schirmer Books, 1992), and Michael L. Mark, Contemporary M
Education, 3rd ed. (New York: Schirmer Books, 1996).

2. In a paper titled "Theory into Practice and Practice into Theo

Philosophical Conversation," with Estelle R. Jorgensen, Presented t
Research in Music Education Conference, University of Exeter,
Kingdom, April 2001, Iris M. Yob raised this possibility by referring
still-lingering specter of bifurcations of theory and practice a
insights of recent holistic approaches to music and education. Yob
that the dancer is a whole person rather than separate parts of mi
body or theory and practice. She then went on to note that, where
metaphor of the dancer as a whole person relates to the nature
teacher or researcher, my dialectical perspective on theory and pra
describes what the researcher or teacher is up to or doing. The for
ontological, whereas the latter is epistemological.

3. Among the recent published attempts to examine these knotty

sophical problems, one thinks of the work of Donald Arnstine (200

4. Christopher Small (1998) suggests that symphony hall rituals in whi

dialogue has broken down or diminished need to be transformed to
again become dialogical.

5. Such jamming sessions took place at Collins Living Learning

Indiana University, Bloomington, and in the School of Music,
University, in February 2001.

6. For a description of a master class, see chapter 8 of Donald A.

Educating the Reflective Practitioner. Toward a New Design for Teach
Learning in the Professions (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1

7. A special issue of the Finnish Journal of Music Education, 5 (1, 2)

consisted of papers presented at the joint Mayday Group and Artist,
of Art and Experience Symposium in Helsinki, Finland, June 2000,
featured dialogue among artists from various disciplines.

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 357
REFERENCES

Allsup, R. E. (1997). Activating self-transformation through improv

instrumental music teaching. Philosophy of Music Education Revie
80-85.

Arnstine, D. (2000). Teaching what's dangerous: Ethical practice in

education. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 8 (1), 3-13.

Berliner, P. F. (1994). Thinking in jazz: The infinite art of improvisation. C

University of Chicago Press.

Bogdan, D. (2001). Musical listening and performance as embodied

gism. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 9 (1), 3-22.

Bohm, D. (1996). On dialogue (L. Nichol, Ed.). London: Routledge.

Boyce-Tillman, J. (2000). Promoting well-being through music educ

Philosophy of Music Education Review, 8 (2), 89-98.

Buber, M. (1970). I and thou. (W. Kaufmann, Trans.). New York: Cha
Scribner's Sons. (Original work published 1923)

Choate, R. A., Ed. (1968). Documentary report of the Tanglewood Sympo

Washington, DC: MENC: The National Association for Music Educa
[formerly Music Educators National Conference].

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philoso

education. New York: Macmillan.

Dewey, J. (1938/1963). Experience and education. repr., New York: Macmilla

Elliott, D. J. (1993). On the values of music and music education. Educat

Review, 1 (2), 81-93.

Fay, A. (1965). Music-study in Germany, from the home correspondence

Amy Fay. Reprint. New York: Dover Publications. (Original publishe
1880)

Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed: New revised 20th-anniversary ed.

B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum.

Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed (R. R.

Barr, Trans.). New York: Continuum.

Giroux, H. A. (2000). Impure acts: The practical politics of cultural studies. New
York: Routledge.

Greene, M. (1988). The dialectic offreedom. New York: Teachers College Press.

Green, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and
social change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
358 JORGENSEN

Greene, M. (2001). Variations on a blue guitar: The Lincoln Center Institute lec-
tures on aesthetic education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Haroutunian-Gordon, S. (2001). Estelle Jorgensen's vision of transforma-

tion, A response to "What does it mean to transform education?" In L.
Stone (Ed.), Philosophy of education, 2000 (pp. 253-257). Urbana, IL:
Philosophy of Education Society.

Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New

York: Routledge.

Howard, V. A. (1982). Artistry: The work of artists. Indianapolis: Hackett.

Jorgensen, E. R. (1997). In search of music education. Urbana: University of

Illinois Press.

Jorgensen, E. R. (2001). What are the roles of philosphy in music education

Research Studies in Music Education, no. 17, 19-31.

Jorgensen, E. R. (2002a). The aims of music education. Journal of Aesthetic

Education, 36 (1).

Jorgensen, E. R. (2002b). Philosophical issues in curriculum. In R. Colwe

(Ed.), New handbook of research in music teaching and learning. New York
Oxford University Press.

Jorgensen, E. R. (2002c). Transforming music education. Bloomington: India

University Press.

Keene, J. A. (1982). A history of music education in the United States. Hanove

NH: University Press of New England.

Koopman, C. (1997). Aims in music education: A conceptual study

Philosophy of Music Education Review, 5 (2), 63-79.

Langer, S. K. (1957). Problems of art: Ten philosophical lectures. New York:

Charles Scribner's Sons.

Langer, S. K. (1967). Mind: An essay on human feeling, Vol. 1. Baltimore, M

Johns Hopkins Press.

Madsen, C. K. (Ed.). (2000). Vision 2020: The Housewright Symposium on the

Future ofMusic Education. Reston, VA: MENC: The National Association for
Music Education.

Mark, M. L., & Gary, C. L. (1992). A history of American music education.

York: Schirmer Books.

Mark, M. L. (1996). Contemporary music education, 3rd ed. New York: Schirme
Books.

Martin, J. R. (2000). Coming of age in academe: Rekindling women's hopes an

reforming the academy. New York: Routledge.

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 JRME 359

Nielsen, F. V. (2000, November). Quality and value in the interpretation of

music from a phenomenological point of view--A draft. Arbekdpapirer, 38.
Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedagogiske Universitet.

Nussbaum, M. C. (1997). Cultivating humanity: A classical defense of reform in lib-

eral education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a

teacher's life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Parr, N. C. (1999). Towards a philosophy of music teacher preparation.

Philosophy of Music Education Review, 7 (1), 55-64.

Rainbow, B. (1967). The land without music: Musical education in England,

1800-1860, and its Continental antecedents. London: Novello.

Rainbow, B. (1989). Music in educational thought and practice: A survey from 800
B.C. Aberystwyth, Wales: Boethius Press.

Reichling, M. J. (1990). Images of imagination. Journal of Research in Music

Education, 38, 282-293.

Reichling, M. J. (1992). Imagination and musical understanding. The

Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning, 3 (4), 20-31.

Reichling, M. J. (1993). On the question of values in music education.

Philosophy of Music Education Review, 1 (2), 115-127.

Ryle, G. (1942). The concept of mind. London: Hutchinson.

Scheffler, I. (1973). Reason and teaching. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.

Scheffler, I. (1991). In praise of the cognitive emotions and other essays in the phi-
losophy of education. New York: Routledge.

Sch6n, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for
teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Small, C. (1998). Musicking: The meanings of performing and listening. Hanover,

NH: University Press of New England.

Yob, I. M. (1997). Can the justification of music education be justified? In F.

Margonis (Ed.), Philosophy of education, 1996 (pp. 237-240). Urbana, IL:
Philosophy of Education Society.

Submitted May 18, 2001; accepted November 5, 2001.

This content downloaded from

12.203.131.2 on Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:27:52 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms