The Effects Of Multicultural Music Instruction On The Perception Of [PDF]

Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations

The Graduate School

2012

The Effects of Multicultural Music Instruction on the Perception of Authenticity and Preference for Teaching Multicultural Music David Harrison Knapp

Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected]

THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MUSIC

THE EFFECTS OF MULTICULTURAL MUSIC INSTRUCTION ON THE PERCEPTION OF AUTHENTICITY AND PREFERENCE FOR TEACHING MULTICULTURAL MUSIC

By DAVID HARRISON KNAPP

A Dissertation submitted to the College of Music in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2012

  David Knapp defended this dissertation on June 20, 2012.

The members of the supervisory committee were:

Steven Kelly Professor Directing Dissertation

Christopher Moore University Representative

Clifford Madsen Committee Member

Alice-Ann Darrow Committee Member

The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements.

 

ii 

 

To Katie Doyle, whose life has meant so much to so many. For all you have given me, I would like to give you this page.

 

iii 

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to first and foremost thank Steve Kelly who has guided my research through two degrees. From philosophical questions about the connections between research and practice, to concerns about methodology, you have been a great resource and mentor. Thank you for your dedication and care for graduate research. I am also gracious for my other committee members. Dr. Madsen, your support of my doctoral work relating to world music pedagogy has given me a tremendous opportunity to develop my teaching craft and explore methods for preparing culturally mindful music teachers. Dr. Darrow, in addition to being a wonderfully critical reader, your generous offer to collaborate with me on community engagement projects has broadened and enlivened my research in ways I only dreamed. Dr. Moore, thank you for your generosity of time and interest in my research. Thank you to the university faculty who helped facilitate my research: Jessica Napoles, James Byo, Frank Diaz, Jill Sullivan, and Jason Silveira. I know class time is precious, and I hope my work has contributed in some small way to evidence-based teaching. Thanks also to Jeffrey Jones and Robbie Fry for your consultations. I would also like to thank the many individuals who have nurtured me over the years. Judy Arthur for teaching me the joys of making and teaching music; John Geringer for demonstrating his love of asking questions; Judy Bowers for assisting me throughout graduate school; Bill Fredrickson for his advice and helping facilitate much of my work. Finally, to my family and friends who have been a tremendous source of strength. My deepest thanks to my parents, Ann and David, who have always been supportive of my interests and goals. Vita Bakker, I am fortunate to have a friend as loving as you. Adam Grisé, thank you for our musical partnership over the last decade. It has been a rewarding experience to navigate the complexities of multiculturalism with you. Olivia Yinger, it has been wonderful sharing coffee with you during graduate school. You are brilliant and kind. And finally to Brett Brown and Bonnie Blass who let me use the second floor of their Victorian Philadelphia home to finish this document.

 

iv 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... viii Abstract............................................................................................................................................x 1.

INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................1 A Multicultural Society .......................................................................................................2 Multicultural Education .......................................................................................................4 Multicultural Music Education ............................................................................................6 Development of Multicultural Music Education .................................................................9 Rationales for Multicultural Music Education ..................................................................11 Multicultural Music Curriculum and Authenticity ............................................................13 Multicultural Music Teacher Education ............................................................................15 Purpose ..............................................................................................................................16

2.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE................................................................................................17 History of Multiculturalism and Internationalism in Music Education.............................18 Multicultural Education .....................................................................................................27 Multicultural Music Education ..........................................................................................29 Rationales and Learning Objectives for Multicultural Music Education ....................31 Curricula and Resources ..............................................................................................34 Teacher Training and Multicultural Music..................................................................35 Authenticity and Multicultural Music ...............................................................................39 Musical Preference ............................................................................................................41 Familiarity ...................................................................................................................42 Musical Characteristics................................................................................................44 Style .............................................................................................................................46 Nonmusical Characteristics .........................................................................................46 Multicultural Music .....................................................................................................48 Response Mode............................................................................................................52 Summary............................................................................................................................53

3.

METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................56 Universities ........................................................................................................................57 Students .............................................................................................................................57 Multicultural Music Training Questionnaire .....................................................................58 Stimulus .............................................................................................................................58 Authenticity .................................................................................................................59 Stimulus Questionnaire................................................................................................59 Controlled Variables....................................................................................................60 Order ......................................................................................................................61 Major .....................................................................................................................62

 

v 

  Procedures .........................................................................................................................62 Measurements ....................................................................................................................63 4.

RESULTS..............................................................................................................................65 Data Analysis.....................................................................................................................65 Qualitative Analysis ....................................................................................................65 Results ...............................................................................................................................66 Research Question 1 ....................................................................................................66 Research Question 2 ....................................................................................................68 Research Question 3 ....................................................................................................69 Research Question 4 ....................................................................................................70 Research Question 5 ....................................................................................................71 Research Question 6 ....................................................................................................72 Research Question 7 ....................................................................................................73 Research Question 8 ....................................................................................................74 Research Question 9 ....................................................................................................83 Research Question 10 ..................................................................................................85 Research Question 11 ..................................................................................................86

5.

DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................94 Implications of Findings ....................................................................................................94 Research Question 1 ....................................................................................................94 Research Question 2 ....................................................................................................97 Research Question 3 ....................................................................................................97 Research Question 4 ....................................................................................................98 Research Question 5 ....................................................................................................99 Research Questions 6 and 7.........................................................................................99 Research Question 8 ..................................................................................................100 Research Question 9 ..................................................................................................101 Research Question 10 ................................................................................................102 Research Question 11 ................................................................................................103 Limitations of the Present Study .....................................................................................104 Sample Size ...............................................................................................................104 Controlled Variables..................................................................................................104 Authenticity Categories .............................................................................................105 Suggestions for Future Research .....................................................................................106 Conclusions .....................................................................................................................106

Appendices ..................................................................................................................................108 A. Categories of Authenticity .............................................................................................108 B. Selected Universities......................................................................................................109 C. Instructions for Facilitators ............................................................................................110 D. Multicultural Music Training Questionnaire (MMTQ) .................................................112 E. World Music Authenticity Questionnaire (WMAQ) .....................................................114 F. Summary of Selected Excerpts.......................................................................................124

 

vi 

  G. Authenticity Ratings of Reliability Observers...............................................................125 H. World Music Authenticity Questionnaire Orders..........................................................126 I. Perceptions of Authenticity of Selected World Music for Participants in Two Random Questionnaire Orders ..........................................................................127 J. Preferences for Teaching Selected Multicultural Music for Participants in Two Random Questionnaire Orders ..........................................................................129 K. Free Response Data .......................................................................................................131 L. Human Subjects Approval Memorandum......................................................................143 M. Participant Consent Form..............................................................................................145 References ...................................................................................................................................147 Biographical Sketch.....................................................................................................................159

 

vii 

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1

Multicultural music experiences of undergraduate music education students at selected universities .............................................................................67

Table 2

Mean authenticity ratings for undergraduate music education students by excerpt and authenticity category ..........................................................................68

Table 3

Authenticity scores for students who have and have not taken a world music course ..........................................................................................................70

Table 4

Mean preference ratings of undergraduate music education students for selected multicultural music ..................................................................................70

Table 5

Effects of multicultural music instruction on mean preferences for selected multicultural music ................................................................................................72

Table 6

Mean rank results of a Kruskal-Wallis test for the effects of perceived authenticity on preference for teaching selected multicultural music ...................73

Table 7

Results of a univariate ordinal logistic regression with authenticity as the predictor and preference as the outcome variable .................................................74

Table 8

Concepts and frequencies from participants/ free responses.................................75

Table 9

References to the concepts authenticity and instrumentation................................76

Table 10

References to the concepts authenticity and rhythm or percussion.......................78

Table 11

References to the concepts authenticity and language ..........................................79

Table 12

References to the concepts authenticity and other musical qualities.....................81

Table 13

References to the concepts authenticity and performance.....................................82

Table 14

References to the concepts authenticity and vocal quality ....................................83

Table 15

References to the concepts authenticity and preference ........................................84

Table 16

References to the concepts authenticity and training ............................................85

Table 17

References to the concept westernization..............................................................87

Table 18

References to the concept commercialization .......................................................88

 

viii 

  Table 19

References to the concept cheesy ..........................................................................89

Table 20

References to the concept statement about authenticity ........................................90

Table 21

References to the concept statement about multiculturalism ................................92

Table 22

References to the concept representation ..............................................................92

 

ix 

 

ABSTRACT The purpose of this mixed-method study was to examine the relationship between undergraduate music education students’ multicultural music training, perceptions of authenticity of multicultural music, and preferences for teaching multicultural music. Students from selected universities (N = 71) listened to 16 excerpts of multicultural music and rated their perception of authenticity on a 4-point scale, and their preference for teaching the excerpt on a 7-point scale. Results demonstrated no differences in the perceptions of authenticity or preferences for teaching multicultural music between students who had taken a world music course and those who had not. Authenticity and preference responses were examined for a relationship. An analysis of variance demonstrated significant differences in preference ratings between excerpts of different authenticity ratings. Additionally, the perception of authenticity was found to be a significant predictor of preference. Qualitative data generally supported quantitative results. Students believed authenticity affected their preferences for teaching multicultural music and that they lacked the multicultural training necessary to make decisions about authenticity. Free response data also revealed that students relate authenticity to several other characteristics, including instrumentation, rhythm, language, performance, and other musical qualities. These characteristics are similar to those outlined by Volk (1998) in her four categories of authenticity.

 

x 

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION The United States has historically been a nation of many cultures and is becoming increasingly diverse (U.S. Census, 2008). As American society continues to diversify, educators have responded by adopting multicultural perspectives (Banks, 1999; Spring, 2004). Like education in general, the field of music education has become increasingly multicultural. To provide relevant musical experiences for all students, some music educators have broadened their curricula to include music from many cultures (Campbell, 2004; Elliott, 1995; Reimer, 2002b; Schippers, 2010; Volk, 1998). For example, music educators in the southwest use mariachi ensembles to attend to the distinct cultural needs of Mexican-American students in their classrooms (Clark, 2005). In other instances, such as choral arrangements of Balinese gamelan, instrumental performances of Korean folk songs, and the growth of steel bands throughout the United States, music educators have intended to expose all students to broad musical and cultural perspectives. Despite the growth of multicultural music education, the music predominantly taught in schools represents a narrow slice of America’s cultural diversity (KindallSmith, McKoy, & Mills, 2011; Wang & Humphreys, 2009). Music from minority cultures remains largely untaught. As in other areas of education, the inclusion of curricular content within music classes that reflects students’ culture is necessary for achieving student equality (Banks, 1999). If minority students are taught only the music of the dominant culture group, they become divested of cultural knowledge, such as performance skills, aesthetic knowledge, and folklore. Palmer (2002) described the relationship between musical knowledge and cultural knowledge, saying, “the music of a people will contain their answers to fundamental questions of existence, that is, the truths of their experience” (p. 39). Elliott (1989) also explained the role of music in interpreting our social environment, saying, “musical processes become metaphors for life activities, and life is learned by making music” (p.13). In essence, music is culture, and learning music is learning culture. The paired tuning system of a Balinese gamelan is not just a

 

1 

  sonic phenomenon, but represents the importance of the female and male genders in sustaining the universe. The polyrhythms of many West African musics are not simply examples of polyphony, but reflect communal beliefs in social interdependence. Music education teaches students how to interact with and interpret the world. What can be made of a music education system that limits its curricular content to the musical systems of the Western world? By excluding other musics, the values of other cultures—other “metaphors for life activities”— are ignored. Moreover, students from diverse backgrounds who lack opportunities in school to make music from their culture are denied opportunities to learn “the truths of their experience.” In contrast to the diversity of students in our schools, the narrowness of American music education promotes a colonial perspective of musical heritage in a post-colonial, pluralistic American society (Campbell, 2004; Kindall-Smith, McKoy, & Mills, 2011). Further, by limiting the musical diversity of the classroom, all students are denied access to experience other cultures. Banks (1999) argued that students “who know the world only from their own cultural and ethnic perspectives are denied important parts of the human experience and are culturally and ethnically encapsulated” (p.1). By learning about other cultures, students are able to learn more about themselves in relation to this greater diversity. A Multicultural Society From its beginning, the United States has been a culturally diverse nation. Before Europeans visited North America, Native Americans, numbering between 80 and 110 million before Columbus’ 1492 voyage, belonged to several hundred diverse tribes (Nies, 1996). By the end of the 17th century, French, Dutch, Spanish, English, Scottish, German, and Swedish colonies had been established in North America for economic and religious purposes (Dinnerstein & Reimers, 2009; Wright, 2008). The first Africans arrived in Jamestown in 1619, likely journeying from present-day Angola in transit to the West Indies to be sold as slaves before being captured by a Dutch privateer (Rein, 2006; Rose, 1976). Before slavery’s abolition, 645,000 more African slaves would be brought to the United States. The first American census in 1790 showed a US population of 3.9 million people, mostly of British heritage, and included over half a million slaves (U.S. Census Bureau, 1793).

 

2 

  After American independence in 1776, the newly formed government defined citizenship as a “free white person” of “good character” (Naturalization Act, 1790). This definition was expanded to include African-Americans following the Civil War by the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868. During the 19th century, most immigrants to the United States came from northern European countries, especially Ireland and Germany (Dinnerstein & Reimers, 2009; Wright, 2008). Toward the end of the 19th century, the rate of immigration increased. In the last decade of the 19th century, approximately 3.7 million persons immigrated to the United States. In the first decade of the 20th century, this figure increased to 8.2 million. In 1907 alone, 1.285 million persons immigrated to the United States. Also increasing was the number of immigrants coming from southern and eastern European countries (Wright, 2008). With the changes in immigration patterns, public sentiment toward new immigrants became negative as some citizens felt the ethnic identity of America was threatened (Halter, 2006). Politicians responded by passing a series of laws prohibiting immigration from specific ethnic groups. The Emergency Quota Act of 1921 established a quota system that favored immigrants from northern Europe, while reducing the number of incoming immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, as well as Asia. Though revised over the years, the quota system remained in effect until the Immigration and Nationalization Act of 1952, which removed race as a factor in immigration. A common belief during the first half of the 20th century was that America was a melting pot society, where members from distinct cultures would be absorbed into American society by learning the values and behaviors of mainstream culture (Lewis, 1929). Policies such as English language mandates were enacted to promote this perspective (Carnevale, 2006). These policies sought to reduce diversity by having individuals assimilate to the dominant culture. Though immigrants undoubtedly were acculturated by their new experiences in America, ethnic groups, such as ItalianAmericans, Mexican-Americans, and African-Americans, retained many of their original cultural practices. These diverse cultural practices remain in many of America’s ethnic communities and this pluralism is perceived by some to be an asset within our society because of the diverse perspectives it brings (Fischer, Gerber, Guitart & Seller, 1997).

 

3 

  Current American demographics demonstrate a multicultural society that is diverse and becoming increasingly diverse. The 2010 United States Census shows a nation that is mostly white. However, non-Whites make up 27.6% of the U.S. population (U.S. Census, 2011). By 2050, the minority population is expected to become the majority (U.S. Census, August 14, 2008). The most expected growth of the minority population is due to an increase of the Hispanic population. Currently at 16.3%, the Hispanic population is expected to increase to 30% by 2050. The black population is expected to increase marginally from 14% to 15%. Meanwhile, the white population is expected to decrease from 72.4% to 46% (U.S. Census, August 14, 2008). Multicultural Education The term multicultural education may have a variety of meanings relating to students, curricula, or methodology. In some instances multicultural refers to an attempt to increase equity in classrooms by diversifying content to include perspectives of minority populations. In other instances multicultural refers to the ethnic diversity of students themselves. The term may also refer to student diversity beyond ethnicity, including religion, sexual orientation, intelligence and ability. Additionally, multicultural may also describe the kinds of methods used to teach diverse students, or methods intended to teach students about diversity. Though multiculturalism is a prevalent feature of contemporary education, its history is limited to social movements of the 20th century. The common school model advanced by Horace Mann beginning in the 1830s promoted a common education for all eligible children to instill common societal values and provide equal opportunity (Spring, 2004). The common school became the dominant model for education adopted by all states and continues to describe education in the United States. Though the common model provided opportunities for whites from different social classes, it did not provide opportunities for people of color (Spring, 2004). As society became more aware of pluralism in the United States, education responded with efforts to adapt its goals and methods. The progressive education agenda of John Dewey specifically sought to integrate immigrant perspectives in curricula and teaching methods (Eisele, 1975). Dewey’s pedagogy focused on the individual lives of students, including the diverse lives of immigrant students. In response to popular

 

4 

  assimilationist agendas of the early 20th century, Dewey spoke on behalf of American diversity. Though his progressivism did not result in multiculturalism being immediately adopted in any substantive way, Dewey was perhaps the first educator to advocate for cultural diversity within schools. Speaking to the National Conference of Social Work in 1923, he said: As we need a program and a platform for teaching genuine patriotism and a real sense of the public interests of our community, so clearly, we need a program of international friendship, amity, and good will. We need a curriculum in history, literature, and geography which will make the different racial elements in this country aware of what each has contributed and will create a mental attitude toward other people which will make it more difficult for the flames of hatred and suspicion to sweep over this country in the future, which indeed will make this impossible, because when children's minds are in the formative period we shall have fixed in them, through the medium of the schools, feelings of respect and friendliness for the other nations and peoples of the world (Dewey, 1923, p. 452, as cited in Eisele, 1975). According to Pak (2006), perhaps the first educational movement in the United States to focus on the role of students’ culture was the Intercultural Movement of the 1930s and 1940s. Following the Harlem and Detroit race riots of this time, educators began to look at schools to help ease racial tensions. In reaction to political developments overseas, Americans saw their nation as a bastion of democracy against a backdrop of fascism. It was believed the classroom could be used to achieve the democratic goals of racial and religious tolerance. Organizations, such as the National Education Association and the Progressive Education Association, published materials promoting the teaching of cultural understanding in schools. The educator Davis DuBois developed scores of materials that were intended to instruct students on the accomplishments of individuals from racial groups, including African-Americans, Chinese, Japanese, and Jews. Beginning in 1947, the San Diego City School district began a district-wide intercultural education program. Its goals were to promote “(a) respect for one’s own culture, (b) respect for the cultures of others, and (c) (encourage) the development of a cross-cultural, collaborative community” (In Pak, 2006, p. 14).

 

5 

  The civil rights and feminist movements of the 1960s and 1970s pushed for greater equality for women and people of color throughout all of society’s institutions, including education. This led to a greater awareness of and respect for diversity, as well as a wave of policy achievements. Following Brown v. Board of Education in 1957, Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights act prohibited discriminating against a student based on their race, color, religion or national origin. Title VII of the 1968 Elementary and Secondary Education Act called for equal access to education for students with limited English proficiency. Students with disabilities were also granted new rights under the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act, requiring schools to mainstream students with disabilities wherever possible. The nature of multicultural education varies depending on the objectives of the teacher and the values of the school community. In general, approaches to multicultural education follow a continuum from assimilationist to pluralist. Multicultural education theorists believe approaches that focus on assimilation divest students of their cultural experience, which leads to student inequality (Banks, 1999; Gibson, 1976; Grant & Sleeter, 2007). Conversely, approaches that incorporate and celebrate students’ diverse cultural experiences are more equitable for minority students and are able to instruct all students in the diversity experienced in society. Beyond incorporating multicultural content in the curriculum, Grant and Sleeter (2007) described a “multicultural social justice approach” that teaches students to realize the inequities in their lives and empowers students to change their circumstances toward something more just. The philosophical background of this approach is the writings on critical pedagogy of Paolo Freire (1993, 2005). Freire’s seminal works are based on his experiences teaching marginalized, lower-class individuals in Brazil. Central to this pedagogy is teaching students to understand the world in their own terms. By doing so, students become decolonized from dominant epistemologies. Students “name the world” in their own terms, and are then free to act upon the world as liberated individuals. Multicultural Music Education The term multicultural music is often used to describe the incorporation of music from diverse cultures in school music curriculum. Other similar terms include world music and multiethnic music (Miralis, 2006). The differences between these terms are the

 

6 

  subject of discussion among some music educators (Campbell, 1994; Miralis, 2006; O’Flynn, 2005; Volk, 1998). Miralis (2006) argued that the lack of clarity of these terms, and the ambiguity between them creates confusion over the nature and purposes of addressing cultural diversity in music education. The term multicultural implies a diversity of cultures. However, when educators employ this term, they may be describing culture differently from one another. For example, Banks (1999) defines multicultural education as a reform movement focused on “diverse social-class, racial, and ethnic groups—as well as both gender groups” (p. 116). This emphasis describes the traditional categories of culture. Yet, social scientists and anthropologists have also recognized age, sexual orientation, religion and ability as cultural categories. Even so, educators have only recently begun to include these cultural categories in their research (Bower, 2008; Cuyjet, Howard-Hamilton & Cooper, 2011; Leistyna, 2001; Zieghan, 2001). Like education in general, music educators using the term multicultural often focus on a narrow range of cultural categories, such as race, ethnicity and nationality. Volk (1998) said multicultural music education “tends to refer to the music of ethnicities and/or other cultures” (p. 196). Similarly, Volk’s (1993) survey of multicultural music education in the Music Educators Journal revealed that ethnicity and nationality were the common cultural categories evoked when discussing multicultural music education. For this reason, Miralis (2006) argued that many music educators using the term multicultural music education are actually referring to multiethnic music education. Instead, multicultural music education implies the examination of culture at all levels, broad and narrow. This broad definition does not only include race, ethnicity, and nationality, but also gender, age, ability, sexual orientation, and the complex ways by which these categories overlap and interact (Fung, 1995; O’Flynn, 2005; Slobin, 1992). Additionally, the term multicultural may also imply a host of educational goals, including teaching the culturally different, teaching about diversity, and a critical pedagogy oriented toward social reconstruction (Banks, 1999; Sleeter & Grant, 1987). Discussing music education, Miralis (2006) believed multiculturalism “is often unsuitable and misleading, since it does not include an examination of such complex issues as culture, diversity, racism, equal distribution of income and power, or equality and equity both within the context of

 

7 

  schooling and in society at large” (2006, p. 60). Though a truly multicultural approach could be useful for music educators, it seems that music educators typically invoke multiculturalism for narrow purposes mostly relating to the ethnic and national origins of repertoire (Koza, 1996, p. 264; Miralis, 2006). The other term commonly used to describe diverse musical cultures is world music. In Thinking Musically (2009), Wade explained the early use of the term by ethnomusicologists to describe non-Western musical traditions. Later, the record industry adopted the term world music, along with world beat, as a convenient label to market music perceived as indigenous, authentic and exotic. Considering the influential affects of globalization, Wade criticized the term world music for the arbitrary distinction in creates between music of the West and the rest of the world. Because of “global culture,” Wade argued, “in the twenty-first century there are no completely isolated musical communities any longer; something connects all musical production and permits music to be simultaneously global and local” (2009, p. 165). The artificial distinctions created by the term world music reinforce rigid categories of ethnicity and nationality that seem to be no longer relevant. In an issue of TIME dedicated to the topic of global music, Farley (2001) reminded readers that one of America’s biggest rock stars, Dave Matthews, is a white South African, and Japan’s biggest pop star, Utada Hikaru, is from Manhattan. Farley argued that the term’s use reinforces an inaccurate and ethnocentric view of music and culture: “the old-school term world music is a joke, a wedge, a way of separating English-language performers from the rest of the planet… in 1967 Frank Sinatra recorded an album of songs by Brazilian composer Antonio Carlos (Tom) Jobim… Such music became world music only when darker-skinned folks sang it” (2001). Though the term world music benefits from being easily understood—“nonWestern music”—its definition seems to fall apart under critical examination. If it is understood by its constituent words, then it refers to all music from the world. This definition is so broad that is loses all utility. If the term is to be understood by its common connotation of “non-Western music,” then the term defines a vast array of cultural practices by describing what these musics lack, specifically not being from the West. As Wade (2009) argued, at best this term is guilty of exoticism. Worse, this term

 

8 

  contains implicit hierarchies that privilege the music of the West over other human musical systems. It would seem that there are problems with almost any term used to describe incorporating diverse cultures into the music classroom. As Miralis (2006) argued, multicultural music education does not accurately describe what most music educators do or want to do. Wade (2009) and Farley (2001) believe world music is an antiquated term that reinforces arbitrary and inaccurate cultural distinctions. The present study adopts the term multicultural music education to describe any music education activity that acknowledges cultural diversity in the classroom. This term may refer to curricula, such as musical repertoire from diverse cultures. It may also refer to pedagogical processes that take into account the diverse culture of students. Additionally, it may refer to learning objectives, such as those outlined by Banks (1999) and Sleeter and Grant (1987), as well as teaching the culturally different, teaching about diversity, and a social reconstructionist critical pedagogy. Though Miralis’ (2006) criticisms of the use of multicultural in music education are accurate, I do not believe we should reject the term. Instead, her criticism provides our field the opportunity to deepen our understanding of multiculturalism, and work toward understanding more fully how culture affects our students, our repertoire, our classrooms, and ourselves. The term world music is occasionally used when describing college-level courses in multicultural music. Development of Multicultural Music Education Early music educators in the United States looked to Europe for model curricula. Lowell Mason’s famous text series The Song Garden (1864) consisted almost entirely of German hymns and folk songs (Volk, 1998). Mason chose these songs because he believed they could instruct students physically, intellectually and morally. However, at times Mason changed the lyrics of the folk melodies in order to “exalt, ennoble, and purify the thoughts, feelings, and associations of the young” (1854, Preface). Mason’s liberties with lyric content removed the original lyrical meaning and context of these songs in order to achieve educational objectives. In other instances, he ignored specific music. Earlier, Mason advised music teachers to “avoid Negro melodies and comic songs for most of their tendencies is to corrupt both musically and morally” (as cited in

 

9 

  Cowell, 1985). The purpose of music education for many pedagogues during the 19th century was to instruct children on being moral members of society. Mason, like many others in society, thought only a narrow selection of music was able to accomplish this purpose. As America’s ethnic identity changed, so did its music curricula (Volk, 1993; 1994; 1997; 1998). Émigrés brought their culture to the United States, and the pluralism of American culture surfaced as cultural institutions, such as settlement houses, recreation clubs and schools, began to showcase the ethnic diversity of their communities within their programs (Volk, 1998). Because music has historically been a symbol of ethnic identity, music was one way by which America’s pluralism was manifest (Volk, 1998). The Intercultural Movement and a changed social climate also resulted in more diverse music curricula. A 1936 text series, The World of Music, included a substantial amount of music from Eastern Europe (Volk, 1998). Throughout the 1930s and 1940s music was also used in the “correlated curriculum” to instruct other subjects, including world geography. Music materials were developed for teachers that included Native American, Arab, and Chinese selections (Volk, 1998). In 1942 the U.S. State Department sponsored a visit from Latin American musicians and music educators. The Music Educators National Conference invited the musicians to attend the biennial conference and participate in the conference’s policy presentation of “American Unity through Music.” A collection of folk songs from the Americas were collected by ethnomusicologist Alan Lomax and presented to conference attendees (Volk, 1998). Society and education became more aware of America’s cultural diversity throughout the second half of the 20th century and the inclusion of multicultural music within school curricula gradually moved toward the mainstream of music education philosophy and policy. In 1967, prominent music educators convened at the Tanglewood Symposium to assess the state of music education following a decade of a back to basics movement. The product of the symposium was the Tanglewood Declaration, which asserted a consensus of core values for music education. In the Declaration, the authors stated the need for diverse music within education:

 

10 

  Music from all periods, styles, forms, and cultures belongs in the curriculum. The musical repertory should be expanded to involve music of our time in its rich variety, including currently popular teenage music and avant-garde music, American folk music, and the music of other cultures (Choate, 1968, p. 139). These sentiments were reiterated a few decades later in The National Standards for Arts Education, which called for arts curricula to “attend to issues of ethnicity, national custom, traditions, religion and gender” (Consortium of National Arts Education Associations, 1994, p. 14). This call led to the adoption of the ninth standard within the National Standards for Music Education, which established “understanding music in relation to history and culture” (Consortium of National Arts Education Associations, 1994). In 1999, The Housewright Symposium concluded, “all music has a place in the curriculum,” and that music educators “need to be aware of other music that people experience and be able to integrate it into classroom music instruction” (Madsen, 2000, p. 219). As American society continues to diversify, evidenced by U.S. Census projections, the sentiments behind the Tanglewood and Housewright declarations will become even more relevant for the future of music education. Curricula, music and otherwise, will need to adapt in order to present a view of American society that is consistent with the diverse lives of students and their communities (Elliott, 1996; Spearman, 2000; Volk, 1998). Rationales for Multicultural Music Education There is considerable consensus regarding the rationales for including diverse musical cultures in the school curriculum among multicultural music educators and ethnomusicologists (Anderson & Campbell, 1996; Fung, 1995; Volk, 1998). Fung (1995) believed there are three principal rationales for teaching world music: social, musical and global. The social rationale described students learning about and learning to accept the beliefs and practices of people different from them. Because of the diversity students inevitably face in social environments, music can be an effective tool in teaching students tolerance, open-mindedness, and unbiased thinking. The idea that multicultural music may affect students’ perceptions of other cultures is similar to Banks’ (1997) multicultural education goal of prejudice reduction, which seeks to modify students’

 

11 

  attitudes about race through teaching methods and materials. Citing Reimer (1991), Fung described the process of learning about the experiences of other musical cultures as a journey from “selfness” to “otherness” as students gradually begin to incorporate the experiences of others. Music especially can be a valuable tool in the development of “otherness” because of music’s ability to transmit cultural values (Jorgensen, 1997). Another rationale Fung provided was the musical benefits of multicultural music. By learning about other musical systems, students can become more perceptive, critical and sensitive to a greater diversity of musical expression. Anderson and Campbell (1996) believed exposure to diverse music allows students to be more receptive to new music (Western, or non-Western) because of their broad experiences. Additionally, the exposure allows them to reflect on their own musical traditions in the new light of diverse experiences. Banks (1997) similarly discussed the benefits of multiculturalism in expanding students’ frame of knowledge, saying, “individuals who know the world only from their own cultural and ethnic perspectives are denied important parts of the human experience and are culturally and ethnically encapsulated” (Banks, 1997, p. 1). Further, students “can get a full view of (their) own backgrounds and behaviors only by viewing them from the perspectives of other racial and ethnic cultures” (Banks, 1997, p. 1). When students learn music of other cultures, they gain a wealth of diverse musical knowledge and are also better able to understand the context of their own musical experiences (Anderson & Campbell, 1996). Lastly, Fung described a global rationale for world music. Due to the exponential growth of global travel and communication during the 20th century, and compounded by the advent of the Internet and the ubiquity of digital media in the 21st century, musical cultures have become exchanged, transmitted and syncretized more so than in any other time in history (Slobin, 1992). To understand the complexity of cultural experiences in a world with a high degree of cultural exchange, individuals must also understand the musics that people make are informed by a complex web of influences including traditional influences and the media. Volk (1998) expressed rationales similar to Fung, calling them social, worldmindedness and global. She argued these rationales are not specific to music, but general to multicultural education. However, Volk believed music has the added ability to

 

12 

  instruct students on important societal functions, such as communication, emotional expression, accompanying religious rituals. Drawing on Merriam’s (1964) functions of music, Volk explained that because of the central role music plays in many aspects of society, music could be an entry to understanding values and beliefs expressed in another culture. Anderson and Campbell (1996) also listed the rationales for teaching music from a multicultural perspective. In addition to the rationales presented by Fung, they also described the ability of music to instruct in cultural relativism. By studying the music of other cultures, students begin to understand an array of musical sophistication around the world, including, but not limited to, classical music. When students become familiar with the musical complexities of other cultures, they begin to shed prevalent biases of the superiority of Western art music. Once this ethnocentric hierarchy is removed, students are then free to explore the equally valid ways that music from other cultures is constructed (Anderson & Campbell, 1996). Finally, some authors believe music education has the potential to address issues of sociocultural inequality. Kindall-Smith, McKoy and Mills (2011) described a curriculum where music educators respond to social injustice by critically engaging students in knowledge construction. They argued that because the contributions of African-American musicians has been neglected in the traditional American folk cannon, the music classroom can be a place where students are taught about the contributions of African-Americans, as well as explore the ways in which this neglect is the result of power relationships in society. This kind of music teaching connects to the critical pedagogy of Paulo Freire (1993) in a manner similar to some authors within the education field (Giroux, 1983; McLaren, 2006; Sleeter & Grant, 1987; Sleeter & McLaren, 1995). Multicultural Music Curriculum and Authenticity In addition to the rationales for multicultural music education, music educators have also explored the challenges for teaching multicultural music. One of the most important issues discussed is the authentic teaching of music from other cultures (Campbell, 2004; Fung, 1995; Palmer, 1992; Schipper, 2010; Volk, 1998; Wade, 2009). Because teachers are often asked to teach music from cultures with which they are

 

13 

  unfamiliar, selecting classroom repertoire that accurately represents a culture can be challenging. Additionally, the treatment of the music, including performance style, instrumentation, can be a challenge to music educators (Volk, 1998). Volk (1998) categorized multicultural repertoire into hierarchical categories according to how closely they approximately music from the original culture. Focusing on repertoire, Volk’s four categories of authenticity provide useful guidelines for assessing the authenticity of music in the classroom: Category 1: Pieces whose only connection to the authentic music of another culture is in their titles. These are often very good compositions inspired by another place and time, but they may not even contain a melody from that culture… Category 2: Pieces that essentially employ Western art music forms, but which incorporate melodies from other cultures… Category 3: Pieces that make a conscious effort to incorporate melodic and rhythmic elements from the music of another culture. These compositions often include the use of traditional percussion instruments or accurate instrumental substitutions, and sometimes include the harmonic structure and timbres from that culture… Category 4: Pieces that are either original compositions by composers from that culture, or arrangements that are close approximations of the original music of the culture. These pieces include the use of authentic timbres, instrumentation, form…harmony, and accompaniment (p. 178). The devotion of many music educators to authenticity is inspired by a desire to be historically accurate and avoid unfair stereotypes (Schippers, 2010; Volk, 1998). However, the notion of authenticity is complicated by the context in which music educators teach. Volk explained, “the entire issue of authenticity comes into question when considering that the very act of transferring music out of its cultural context and into the classroom destroys its authenticity” (1998, p. 9). Fung (1995) similarly cautioned that absolute authenticity is not achievable because the context of the classroom, as well as the educational reasons for performing music from another culture, which necessarily differ from the original reasons for the music’s performance. Even

 

14 

  more, music is not a static entity and is always changing. Trying to define what is authentic according to cultures that are always in flux may lead to inappropriate canonization of repertoire, while neglecting newer music from a culture (Schipper, 2010). In his critique of the term world music by the record industry, David Byrne attacked the notion of authenticity: What is considered authentic today was probably some kind of bastard fusion a few years ago. An all-Japanese salsa orchestra's record (Orquestra de la Luz) was No. 1 on the salsa charts in the United States not long ago. Did the New York salseros care? No, most loved the songs and were frankly amazed. African guitar bands were doing their level best to copy Cuban rumbas, and in their twisted failure they came up with something new. So let's not make any rules about who can make a specific style of music (Byrne, 1999, October 3). Nevertheless, many multicultural music educators agree that the issue of authenticity is important as music educators seek to represent the music and culture of diverse people (Campbell, 2004; Fung, 1995; Palmer, 1992; Schipper, 2010; Volk, 1998; Wade, 2009). Fung (1995), Palmer (1992), Schippers (2010), and Volk (1998) argued that the value of a multicultural music education should direct music educators to negotiate between the needs of their classroom and culturally informed music learning. Multicultural Music Teacher Education Multicultural training is a required component of certification for the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) and NASM accreditation (NASM, 2010; NCATE, 2008). The NASM Handbook states, “teachers should be prepared to relate their understanding of music with respect to styles, literature, multiple cultural sources, and historical development” (p. 99). Implementation of multicultural training is left to individual music schools. Miralis (2002) and Montague (1988) found universities typically employ strategies that include world music survey courses, geographic area courses, performance ensembles, or the inclusion of multicultural issues in other courses. Campbell (2004) argued preservice music teachers need experience in performing and listening to music from other cultures. Volk (1998) and Robinson (2002) advocated for a multicultural music pedagogy course for music education majors.

 

15 

  Purpose Due to the increasing diversity of American society, many music educators believe music education should incorporate multicultural music. To promote multicultural music education, and to meet NASM and NCATE standards, music teacher education programs have incorporated multicultural music courses in their curricula. A primary objective of these multicultural courses is to instruct preservice teachers in the music of other cultures. Many multicultural music educators also believe fostering the ability to discern authentic music from other cultures is a desirable objective for preservice teachers. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity and preference for teaching multicultural music.

 

16 

 

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE Beginning in the later part of the 19th century and through the first half of the 20th century, the topic of multicultural music became a part of academic discourse through what was then called comparative musicology. Early scholars, such as Ellis (1885) and Gilman (1891) collected data on musical systems from cultures around the world. The interest of these particular scholars and others during this time was to collect and catalog as much ethnic music as possible in order to make comparative assessments between music cultures, and especially between Western and non-Western music (Rhodes, 1956). As comparative musicology evolved, scholars within the field began to criticize their research goals. Many believed the comparative approach did not do an adequate job of explaining the relationship between music and the culture of those making the music (Merriam, 1977). Research gradually began to reflect an emic perspective and comparative approaches fell out of favor. In 1950, Jaap Kunst first coined the term “ethnomusicology” to reflect this perspective, which came to define the field as the Society for Ethnomusicology was formed in 1955 (Kunst, 1950). During the second half of the twentieth century, music institutions in the United States began to incorporate multicultural music in their programs. Specifically, Mantle Hood at the University of California in Los Angeles created ethnic ensembles, including Javanese gamelan. The purpose of this ensemble was to develop bi-musicality, where performers became proficient in the music of another culture, in addition to the art music of Europe and North America (Hood, 1960). Alongside the growth of ethnomusicology within institutions of higher learning, music education began to incorporate a more critical perspective of multicultural music. Earlier research on multicultural music in music education explored philosophical and practical considerations of teaching music from other cultures (Elliott, 1984; Palmer, 1975; Schwadron, 1984). Soon, scholars began to contemplate specific issues of teaching multicultural music, such as learning objectives (Abril, 2006; Elliott, 1989; Fung, 1995;

 

17 

  Shehan, 1985; 1988), authenticity (Palmer, 1992; Volk, 1996) and preference (Demorest & Schultz, 2004). Additionally, music education researchers began to incorporate the work of multicultural education theorists, such as Banks (1999), Gibson (1976), Freire (1993), and Sleeter and Grant (1987). In applying the work of these theorists to the field of music education, researchers have begun to explore the relationship between music education and diversity education. The following literature review is organized into six sections. The first discusses the historical development of multiculturalism and internationalism in music education. Next, I briefly summarize the work of principal multicultural education theorists. The third section explores multicultural music education in general, and its rationales and curricular resources in particular. Next, literature related to the independent variable of teacher training and how it pertains to multicultural music is discussed. Finally, the dependent variables of authenticity and preference are reviewed. History of Multiculturalism and Internationalism in Music Education The history of multiculturalism in music education has been explored in a series of articles by Volk (1993; 1994; 1997), and compiled into a chapter in her text Music education and multiculturalism (1998). Volk (1993) specifically examined the growth of multiculturalism as evidenced by the Music Educators Journal. McCarthy (1993; 1995; 1997) addressed multiculturalism and internationalism leading up to and following the formation of the International Society of Music Education (ISME). These articles by Volk and McCarthy detail how institutions, namely the Music Teachers National Association (MTNA), Music Supervisors National Conference (MSNC), Music Educators National Conference (MENC), International Society for Music Education (ISME) and other international organizations, fostered a global view of music education throughout the twentieth century. Additionally, Volk (1994; 1998) and Heller (1983) provided insight into non-European music in the absence of a history of minority music education in the United States during the first half of the twentieth century. Finally, similar to Volk (1993), Brett (1990) examined the development of multiculturalism as evidenced by a popular elementary music series.

 

18 

  McCarthy (1993) chronicled the birth of internationalism in music education beginning at the end of the nineteenth century. With the foundation of the Internationale Musikgesellschaft (International Music Society; IMG) in Berlin in 1899, McCarthy described the development of exchange between European and American musicians, musicologists and music educators. The IMG publication Zeitschrift der Internationale Musikgesellschaft discussed a broad range of topics relating to music education written in German, English and French. In 1907 the IMG’s North American section held a joint conference with the Music Teachers National Association (MTNA). The IMG was disbanded in 1914 as World War I began in Europe. McCarthy (1993) explained as World Was I ended, an era in intercultural exchange began in Europe and the United States. The common philosophical belief in music as the universal language prompted musicians and music educators to seek international goodwill through music. At the 1925 Music Supervisors National Conference (MSNC), Frances Clark said, “Music is the one common language, the common chord uniting all peoples. A world-wide singing of the folk songs of all lands will do more to secure world peace than disarmaments or courts” (McCarthy, 1993, p. 5). Following the First World War, the music education method created by Emile JaquesDalcroze method grew in popularity, and connected educators across Europe and the United States. According to McCarthy, the Dalcroze method became the first internationally organized music education method. The British music educator Percy Scholes had sought to foster international connections, particularly between England and the United States. He had already attended conferences for the MTNA in 1914 and for the MSNC in 1928. Following the 1928 MSNC conference, Scholes met with Frances Clark to plan a future conference between the two nations. In 1929, the first Anglo-American Conference for Music Educators was held in Lausanne, Switzerland with 429 participants. Topics included “Music, a Universal Language, and Its Place in Education,” and “Good and Bad in Music–An attempt to Solve One of the Educationists Biggest Problems” (McCarthy, 1993, p. 8). A second Anglo-American Conference for Music Educators was held again in Lausanne in 1931 with 500 attendees. At the second conference, there was a greater emphasis on expanding the conference’s international connections. There were a greater

 

19 

  number of participants from outside England and the United States, and plans were made to expand the conference to include German, Polish and Scandinavian colleagues. However, the work of Scholes was interrupted as economic and political developments unfolded in Europe, and no future Anglo-American conferences were held. While the Anglo-American conference ended, the efforts of Leo Kestenberg of Germany began to take root. Like Scholes in England, the work of Kestenberg was impeded by political developments in Europe. Kestenberg, a prominent music educator in Germany, helped begin the German Committee of the International Music Conference. However, following the National Socialist Party’s election to power in 1933, Kestenberg fled to Prague because of the anti-Semitic campaign. In Prague, Kestenberg worked with Czechoslovakian Minister for Foregin Affairs Kamil Krofta in establishing the Society of Musical Education in 1934. In 1936, the society hosted the First International Congress in Music Education held in Prague. Twenty-two countries, including the United States, sent delegations. The Second International Congress in Music education was held in Switzerland in 1938. Topics discussed at these two conferences included European art music, folk music, contemporary music, and music education for handicapped children. As the realities of war continued in Europe, Kestenberg fled once again to Tel Aviv. Before he left, he wrote a letter to the MTNA asking for assistance in preserving the society’s work and archives by having them transferred to the United States. McCarthy (1993) found no evidence these materials were ever transferred. Volk (1994) chronicled the development of multiculturalism in American music education at the turn of the twentieth century. Her investigation demonstrated that music education, like society in general, was influenced greatly by the changing patterns of immigration between 1900 and 1916. Some members of society, as well as policy makers, saw immigration as a threat to America’s national character. These nativists pursued policies that restricted immigration from certain geographic areas, especially China and Japan. Other restrictions were placed on immigration, such as literacy tests, to keep out undesired immigrants. Yet, other members of society thought that America was a place where immigrants could learn to become American, adding their own national and racial characteristics to the mix to create “a fusion of all races” (Zangwill, 1969). Others, such as William James and W.E.B. DeBois at Harvard University, believed in the

 

20 

  value of cultural diversity. Instead of “the melting pot,” proponents of cultural pluralism used expressions, such as “salad bowl,” and “mosaic,” to describe the diversity of American society. Volk (1994) also described the role of the settlement houses in New York City and Chicago in introducing American society to immigrant culture. Decrying the lack of immigrant students’ home culture in the schools, Volk explained, social worker Jane Addams advocated for settlement houses to create culture centers that would instruct in the arts, dances and songs of immigrants’ cultures. Along with John Dewey, Addams also argued that schools should include ethnic studies for first- and second-generation immigrants. At his teaching lab at the University of Chicago, Dewey correlated foreign language and cultural instruction to other academic areas, such as history, geography, and literature. The Henry Street Settlement in New York City sponsored Italian and Jewish cultural festivals that included music and dancing. Volk (1994) described that these festivals included the crafts, songs and dances from many cultures, but that “a typical finale for these festivals gathered together all the participants to sing “America” with the audience” (p. 289). Folk dancing began to enter the schools through the physical education curriculum. In 1908, New York City schools included folk dancing in their programs. Taking advantage of contemporary technology, The Victor Talking Machine company enlisted the help of leaders in music and physical education to produce recordings of ethnic music suitable for classroom use. At the 1913 Music Supervisor’s National Conference (MSNC), Frances Clark attested these materials to be “genuine, authentic, and cultural” (Clark, 1913, p. 73, as cited in Volk, 1994). Clark’s advocacy for folk music within the classroom paralleled some of the same arguments used by proponents of multicultural music throughout the twentieth century: “no reason why our children should not know the music of the world just as well as its history and its literature…They must know the songs [of various countries]…to properly understand these people" (Clark, 1911, as cited in Volk, 1994). Volk’s (1994) examination of this early period revealed the musical material used in schools by the turn of the century represented a narrow selection that consisted primarily of art and folk music from Germany. The first MSNC meeting in 1907

 

21 

  included no information on folk musics. Yet there were texts available that included music from other cultures. Folk Songs of Many Nations, written by Louis Elson, a cofounder of the Music Teachers’ National Association (MTNA), instructed on both the musical characteristics and lyrics of songs from many countries (Elson, 1905). Within a few years, professional organizations, such as the MSNC, MTNA and the National Education Association, increasingly included materials on folk music and dancing. With the advent of the Vitrola, music appreciation courses became popular during the early twentieth century. Folk music was a feature of many recording series for music appreciation classes. An early series, What We Hear in Music (Oberndorfer & Victor Talking Machine Company, 1921), cited Native American and African American sources for several arrangements. Musicologists during this time, such as Alice Fletcher and Frances Dinsmore, had also begun to record and catalog Native American music. According to Volk’s (1994) examination of this time period, work from these musicologists were incorporated into at least a few music classrooms and school pageants. Heller (1983) criticized the written histories of music education in the United States by Birge (1966) and Tellstrom (1971) for their lack of information about the music education of Native Americans and African-Americans during and after the colonial period. According to Heller, these histories reflected a Eurocentric view of music education in the United States that ignored the musical participation of minorities. In the early 1920s, this perspective began to change as MSNC incorporated more minority perspectives. At the 1922 conference, performances by black musicians took place, as did a session titled “Jazz in the proper light” (Engel, 1922, as cited in Heller, 1983, p. 36). Citing the presidential addresses at the 1923 and 1924 MSNC conventions, Heller argued the rhetoric of music education, such as “music for every child,” was beginning to reflect a philosophy of inclusiveness. Volk (1997) examined music textbooks during the 1930s and 1940s and found an increasing amount of multicultural music. According to Volk, nearly one quarter of the 1936 text The World of Music contained music from Eastern Europe. Music from North and South America, as well as Africa, Asia and the Middle East remained underrepresented during this era. However, some texts, such as The American Singer

 

22 

  (Beattie, Wolverton, Wilson, & Hinga, 1954), New Music Horizons (McConathy, 1944), Singing School (Anderson, Dykema, & Pitcher, 1941), and The World of Music (Glenn, 1936), began incorporating more diverse music selections. The content of the folk songs in these texts were often altered to suit the needs of the classroom. Original texts were translated into English, often with changed meanings. The music, like Lowell Mason’s earlier texts, was often altered to suit the objectives of the teacher. Volk (1997) also described the effects of increasing internationalism during the 1940s on cultural diversity in music education. In conjunction with the United States State Department, MENC partnered with music educators in Latin America in an exchange program named “American Unity Through Music.” In 1942, Latin American musicians traveled to MENC’s biennial conference to present a program of diverse music from the Americas. McCarthy (1995) described the inter-American movement as a “new world partnership,” born in the collapse of old world partnerships during World War II. Following World War II, there was an emphasis on world-mindedness. Volk (1997) reported MENC’s 1946 Declaration of Faith, Hope and Action, asking the U.S. Congress to ratify participation in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The declaration read: A world at peace is the dearest hope of the millions of people in every country on earth. Music is the universal language and should be utilized at its highest potential power to help win and sustain worldwide peace (Morgan, 1947). With World War II over, connections between the Americas and Europe were reestablished. McCarthy (1995) noted that in the post-war years, the MENC biennial conference saw increased attendance from non-American colleagues. Themes of these conferences included “Music in a World at Peace,” and “World Fellowship through Music.” McCarthy (1995) and Volk (1997) reported that UNESCO was a pivotal force in shaping cultural exchange between post-war nations, and MENC responded to each move by UNESCO with its own. In 1950, UNESCO published its Declaration of Human Rights, included provisions for educational and cultural freedoms. MENC quickly followed suit by outlining the role of music education in its bill of rights (McCarthy, 1995).

 

23 

  In 1953, UNESCO would help establish the charter for the International Society for Music Education (ISME), with the support of MENC (McCarthy, 1995; Volk, 1997). The First International Conference for Music Education (ICME) was held in Brussels in the summer of 1953. Twenty-nine countries sent official delegates. Unlike previous international music education conferences, the first ICME was not strictly a EuropeanAmerican affair, and was attended by delegates from Latin America and Asia (McCarthy, 1995). The role of ISME in promoting multiculturalism was explored by McCarthy (1997). She noted the contributions of ISME in helping shape the philosophical development of multicultural music education, as well as providing a forum to discuss materials and resources for multicultural education. Her analysis divides the history of ISME into three periods. McCarthy characterized the first period, from 1953 to 1969, as a shift away from a theory of music as a universal language, to music as a cultural universal. She described the second period from 1970 to 1982 in response to the fear of losing indigenous musics, and the “need to protect, maintain, and increase the diversity of traditional cultures in an effort to counteract the impact of mass media and Westernization” (1997, p. 84). If the second period was primarily concerned with the preservation of local musics, the third period, from 1982 to 1996, was concerned with tradition and change. Conferences during this time continued to reaffirm the importance of preserving local musics, but there was a growing recognition of the “world as a global village and all nations as interdependent communities in that village” (1997, p. 87). An interesting parallel exists between McCarthy’s (1997) divisions of these three periods of multiculturalism within ISME and scholarly developments within the Society for Ethnomusicology (SEM). Wade (2006) noted that during the history of SEM, the society moved from “a nearly-insistent emphasis in our studies on musical continuity, to acceptance of the inevitability of musical change” (p. 196). Volk (1993) explained the role of MENC and the Music Educators Journal (MEJ) in promoting the growth of multicultural music education. Her historical analysis of MENC conferences and issues of MEJ demonstrated a growing coverage of multicultural issues following the Tanglewood Symposium. Between 1967 and 1972 there was an increase in articles about music from other cultures, including articles by renowned

 

24 

  musicologists Zoltán Kodály and Kwabena Nketia. Multicultural articles during this period largely provided information about music from other cultures, including AfricanAmerican music, music from India, and Native American music. Following Tanglewood, there was also an increase in coverage of multicultural issues at the biennial MENC conferences. At the 1968 conference in Seattle there was a presentation about the folk musics and dances of Hawaii. The 1970 conference in Chicago hosted an “Ethnic Music Institute” with sessions on multicultural music presented by specialists and concluding with a session devoted to teaching resources. Multicultural music was present at each conference following. The content of the sessions included discussion of specific music genres, pedagogical concerns of multicultural music, or concerts of multicultural music. In 1971, the MEJ published an entire issue devoted to African-American music. At the end of the issue, there was a list of resources for studying African-American music. This was the first time the MEJ issued a resource list for any kind of multicultural music. The following year, in 1972, the MEJ published the “Music in World Cultures” special issue. Unlike the African-American special issue, this issue contained information on music from a wide variety of cultures, including Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Oceania, Europe, and the Americas. Articles in the issue provided arguments for multicultural music, suggestions for multicultural curricula, and provided resources for teachers, including a glossary, bibliography, discography, and filmography for music from different cultures. The issue also included two sound sheets (thin phonographs issued in magazines) containing multicultural music accompanied by listening guides. Volk’s (1993) analysis revealed that outside of the special issues, multicultural topics were increasingly covered during the 1970s. Articles of this kind included “A Practical Introduction to African Music” (Inniss, 1974), “Illeagosuik! Eskimo String Figure Games” (Johnston, Nicolai, & Nagozruk, 1979), and “Tribal Music in North America” (Parthun, 1976). The content of these articles continued to vary between explanations of music genres and essays about multicultural pedagogy. Advertisements in the MEJ during this time also reflected an increased attention to multicultural music. Special issues of the MEJ pertaining to multicultural music were also published in 1983, “The Multicultural Imperative,” and in 1992, “Multicultural Music Education.”

 

25 

  These issues continued to discuss the philosophical need for multicultural music education, introduce readers to specific multicultural genres of music, and provide resources for classroom implementation. Prominent authors in these issues were William Anderson (1983; 1992a; 1992b), Anthony Seeger (1992), Patricia Shehan Campbell (1992), and Judith Tucker (1992). In 1990, MENC, in conjunction with the Society for Ethnomusicology (SEM) and the Smithsonian Institution, held the Multicultural Symposium in Washington, D.C.. The symposium was held immediately prior to MENC’s biennial conference and presented sessions and concerts about various music cultures. At the end of the symposium, it was resolved that “there are many different but equally valid forms of musical expression,” “multicultural approaches to teaching music will be incorporated into every elementary and secondary music curriculum,” and “multicultural approaches to teaching music will be incorporated into all phases of teacher education in music” (Anderson & Campbell, 1996, p.3-4). Beginning in 1994, Patricia Shehan Campbell edited a series of articles in the MEJ titled “Music in Cultural Context.” The series was developed by the SEM Education Committee as an effort to provide music educators with information and resources on multicultural musics. The eight articles in the series consisted of interviews Campbell conducted with prominent ethnomusicologists, such as Bruno Nettl, Terry Miller, Anthony Seeger, and David McAllister, about their particular area of study. These interviews were later compiled and published by MENC as a separate book (Campbell, 1996). In 1994, MENC, along with a consortium of others arts education advocacy organizations, adopted the National Standards for Arts Education. These standards called for arts curricula to “attend to issues of ethnicity, national custom, traditions, religion and gender” (Consortium of National Arts Education Associations, 1994, p. 14). This led to the adoption of the ninth standard within the National Standards for Music Education, which established “understanding music in relation to history and culture” (Consortium of National Arts Education Associations, 1994). The same year, ISME adopted the Declaration of Beliefs for Worldwide Promotion of Music Education (ISME,

 

26 

  1994) at their biennial conference in Tampa, FL. The declaration stated the society believed: •

That all learners should have the opportunity to study and participate in the music(s) of their own culture(s) and the other cultures of their own nations, and of the world.

•

In the validity of all musics of the world, and respects the value given to each particular music by the community that owns it. The Society believes that the richness and diversity of the musics of the world is a cause for celebration, and an opportunity for intercultural learning for the improvement of international understanding, cooperation and peace (ISME, 1994).

Several years later in 1999, music educators met in Tallahassee, FL at the Housewright Symposium to discuss the future of music education. At the end of the symposium, the authors declared: •

All persons, regardless of age, cultural heritage, ability, venue, of financial circumstance deserve to participate fully in the best music experiences possible.

•

All music has a place in the curriculum. Not only does the Western art tradition need to be preserved and disseminated, music educators also need to be aware of other music that people experience and be able to integrate it into classroom music instruction (Madsen, 2000, p. 219). Multicultural Education

Throughout the second half of the twentieth century, and into the twenty-first, the question of how to teach an increasingly diverse student population has been a central concern to educators. As Spring (2004) put it, “a central conflict will continue between those who want to maintain the supremacy of English and European American traditions and dominated cultures whose members want to protect and maintain their cultural traditions” (p. 142). Though an extensive survey of research on multicultural education is beyond the scope of this section, Banks and Banks (2007) have produced a useful summary. Multiculturalism has long thought to include the issues of race and ethnicity.

 

27 

  Contemporary thinking about multiculturalism also includes issues such as, social class, religion, gender, exceptional ability, language, and sexual orientation (Banks and Banks, 2007). Of particular interest to multicultural music education theorists have been the various curricular models used by multicultural education theorists. Volk (1998) discussed the five approaches to multicultural education posited by Gibson (1976). Gibson’s first four models, including benevolent multiculturalism, cultural understanding, cultural pluralism, and bicultural education, seek to increase social justice among diverse students. However, these approaches often equate education with schooling, and ignore the effects of social life outside of school, including home life, on the education of minority students. Also, these categories reinforce the separation of students into distinct cultural categories, even when students in separate cultural groups may share common characteristics, and when students in the same cultural group might demonstrate differences. On the other hand, Gibson argued, an approach that treats multiculturalism as the normal human experience creates parity between school life and everyday life. This approach is based on the multiple cultures lived by students and would socialize all students to operate in an American society characterized by cultural pluralism. Banks (1999) offered two models for viewing multicultural curricula. The first, Dimensions for Multicultural Education, explained five dimensions in which multiculturalism has influenced schooling (1999, p. 14). The content integration dimension described what many people think multicultural education to mean, namely the incorporation of examples and content from diverse cultural groups. Second, the knowledge construction process detailed how teachers help students understand the ways knowledge is culturally constructed and affected by bias. Next, prejudice reduction explained the efforts of teachers to use diversity education in reducing negative racial attitudes. An equity pedagogy is discussed as attempting to create educational equity for all students by modifying teaching methods in ways that are consistent with a wide range of cultural groups and learning styles. Finally, the dimension of empowering school culture and social structure illustrated the ways school policies, such as scheduling and

 

28 

  grouping, can be altered to empower all students to fully participate in opportunities at school. Banks (1999) also described four levels for multicultural curricular reform. The first level is the contributions approach, which involves incorporating cultural elements, such as important holidays and cultural heroes. Next, the additive approach instructs in the content, concepts, historical events and themes of a culture. The transformation approach is similar to the additive approach in content; however, the structure of the curriculum is changed to allow students to view the content from the perspective of the cultural group. Finally, the social action approach empowers students to use their cultural knowledge to make critical choices about social problems and take social action to solve them. Critical pedagogy is another avenue of multicultural education research that has had an interesting, if limited, contribution to music education (Kindall-Smith, McKoy, & Mills, 2011). Though critical pedagogy can be traced back to the progressive philosophy of Dewey (1903), it is most notably associated with the works of Freire (1993, 2005). Working among lower-class adult students in lower-class, urban neighborhoods in Brazil, Freire sought to teach literacy while also advancing his progressive educational agenda. By teaching his students how to understand the world in their own terms—by teaching them how to name the world—he believed he could decolonize them from dominant social and political epistemologies that served to oppress them. The poor could learn more about their poverty, and the social, political, and historical reasons that have led to their poverty. Consequently, Freire believed, this new understanding of the world would lead students to make positive choices that would unlock them from their colonization and allow for greater freedom. In North America, Freire’s critical pedagogy—sometimes called social justice pedagogy—has been advanced by Giroux (1983, 1988), Grant and Sleeter (2007), and McLaren (2006). Multicultural Music Education The role of multicultural music in the American music education system has been discussed at length by music educators and philosophers. Multicultural music was a topic at the Yale Seminar (Volk, 1998), Tanglewood Symposium (Choate, 1968), and the Housewright Symposium (Madsen, 2000). It has also been a topic of discussion among

 

29 

  music education philosophers (Elliott, 1984; 1989; 1990; 1995; 1996; Jorgensen, 1997; Reimer, 1991; 2002a; Schippers, 2010). While many contemporary authors believe in the value of a multicultural music education, there is not consensus on its role in American music education. Elliott (1995) argued against the predominant aesthetic music education philosophy. He charged that aesthetic music education philosophers’ preoccupation with musical objects limited their ability to understand the ways in which music lives in and is experienced by people. By considering music as an aesthetic object, Elliott believed, it becomes distanced from the individual; music becomes something elevated on a pedestal, not to be interacted with by students. Instead, Elliott (1984; 1990; 1995; 1996) advocated for a praxial music education that focuses on the ways individuals interact with music. He explained, “the term praxial emphasizes that music ought to be understood in relation to the meanings and values evidenced in actual music making and music listening in specific cultural contexts” (1995, p. 14). In this critique of the aesthetic philosophy, he created a space for understanding music rooted in the context of culture. Elliott (1996) further explained the connections between culture and praxial music education, saying, “In this praxial view, music education is a matter of inducting students into musical ways of life: of deepening students’ involvement in selected music cultures through listening that is grounded in authentic, artistic and critically reflective musicmaking” (p. 2). Rather than teaching specific music, Elliott (1995; 1996) believed students should be instructed in the broad range of musical practices that humans engage in, activities that Elliott labeled MUSIC (upper case). According to this philosophy, music education should be characterized by curriculum-as-practicum, where students learn by doing (1995; 1996). Students learn inductively by participating in authentic musical practices. These practices, Elliott believed, should include the diverse range of music practiced by humans: “If MUSIC consists in a diversity of music cultures, then MUSIC is inherently multicultural. And if MUSIC is inherently multicultural, then music education ought to be multicultural in essence” (1995, p. 207). This claim may seem to put music education in the precarious position of incorporating a vast diversity of musics, while also attending to students’ specific curricular needs. Elliot cautioned,

 

30 

  “while no Music is innately superior to any other, some musical practices may be educationally more appropriate than others. In other words, music education does not occur in a vacuum but in relation to a variety of constraints—practical, moral, social, cultural, ideological, political and so on. Thus difficult choices must be made” (1995, p. 8). Reimer (2002b) collected papers from the second biennial Music Education Leadership Seminar at Northwestern University, titled “Issues of Multiculturalism in Music Education.” Volk (2002) explored the philosophical history of multicultural music education, including Reimer’s (2002a) aesthetics, Schwadron’s (1973) comparative aesthetics, and Elliott’s (1995) praxial music education. Volk (2002) and Palmer (2002) both wondered what the goals and learning objectives of multicultural music education should be, and how the goal of bi- or multi-musicality could be realized. Authenticity was a topic among many authors (Burton, 2002; Klinger, 2002; McCullough-Brabson, 2002; Palmer, 2002; Quesada, 2002; Volk, 2002), as was the need to reform teacher training (Burton, 2002; Klinger, 2002; Robinson, 2002; Quesada, 2002; Volk, 2002). Fung (2002) outlined principals for multicultural music education that he extrapolated into guidelines for curricular planning. Finally, Seeger (2002) and Quesada (2002) offered their thoughts on multicultural music education from an ethnomusicological perspective. In Facing the Music, Schippers (2010) explored issues of multicultural music education in a manner useful for inservice music teachers. Issues considered include authenticity, transmission and curricula. Schippers’ conversation about these issues culminated in his Twelve continuum transmission framework, a series of continua that help music educators decide on the best way to implement multicultural music curricula. Rationales and Learning Objectives for Multicultural Music Education The reasons for including multicultural music in the music education system in the United States have been part of the multicultural discussion since its beginning. In the early decades of the twentieth century, advocates for multicultural music education had to develop a rationale that they could communicate to others (McCarthy, 1993; Volk, 1994; 1998). As this review of literature explains, much of the early focus on multiculturalism was oriented toward internationalism and policies of goodwill to the

 

31 

  cultures of other nations (McCarthy, 1993; 1995; Volk, 1997). As multicultural music education developed, philosophers and educators sought guiding philosophies that responded to contemporary perspectives (Elliott, 1995; Fung, 1995). Fung (1995) summarized the philosophical literature on multicultural music education and identified three principal rationales. The social rationale, Fung described, is the belief that cultural diversity in music education instructs students in accepting people from other cultures, reduced intolerance, and cultivated open-mindedness. This is especially important in the United States due to the nations’ cultural heterogeneity. The argument that the music education system in the United States should reflect the cultural and ethnic diversity of American society is commonly made by other advocates of multicultural music education (Boyer-White, 1990; Glenn, 1988; Shehan, 1988). Fung (1995) cited the work of Banks (1988), Jorgenson (1997), and Reimer (1991) for providing a model for multicultural social learning that extends from the self. This concentric-circles model begins with the learners own self and musical identity, and extends outward to national and global identities. Or, as Reimer said, from “egocentrism” to “allocentrism” (1991). Related to the justification for a multicultural music education rooted in the diversity of cultures in the United States is the understanding of the diversity of cultures around the world. This rationale, which Fung (1995) called the global rationale, is shared by other advocates of multicultural music education (Shehan, 1988). This belief commonly stems from the international movement that followed World War II and the establishment of ISME in 1953 (McCarthy 1995; 1997). In 1967, Kraus argued for the role of multicultural music in teaching cross-cultural understanding: Foreign musical cultures can: (a) develop an interest in that which is foreign or unfamiliar, that is, cultivate open-mindedness and unbiased thinking, (b) abolish prejudice and national and racial resentments, as well as developing an understanding of the mentality of other peoples (p. 91). Fung (1995) also explained that due to technological and political developments during the second half of the twentieth century, the world is more interconnected than ever. This interconnectedness has led to a global transmission of culture, where cultural practices, including music, in one part of the world affect those elsewhere. The global

 

32 

  rationale, Fung explained, promotes students’ understanding of the world beyond their own lives, and helps them understand the complex ways cultures interact. Another reason for including multicultural music in music education according to Fung (1995) is the musical rationale. Because the Western musical traditions that dominate curricula in the United States reflect only a narrow range of musical possibilities, incorporating music from other cultures expands the opportunities for music learning. According to Fung, the benefits of learning a greater diversity of music include a greater knowledge of musical elements, increased aural skills, critical thinking, and increased sensitivity to familiar and unfamiliar musics. Campbell (1992) sought to dispel music teachers’ anxieties over teaching multicultural music. Addressing concerns, such as lack of time, lack of training, and lack of resources, she articulated the benefits of a multicultural music education, including the role of multicultural music in teaching students about their cultural heritage, as well as the heritage of those different from them. Campbell also argued that multiculturalism can be easily applied to an extant music curriculum. Because the methods in general music classes, such as Orff-Schulwerk, Kodály, and Dalcroze, focus on fundamentals developed from folk musics, using folk music from around the world in these classes is appropriate. Elliott (1989) argued against a music education system that relies on outmoded and narrow aesthetic sensibilities. He challenged: What values are projected by a musical culture that insists that students play what is written; listen with ’immaculate perception’; de-emphasize a music’s context of use and production; and follow the leader? At the very least, North American music education seems to sanction a hierarchical and, paradoxically, a rather undemocratic view of society (p. 13-14). Adapting Pratte’s (1979) model for multicultural education, Elliott created a hierarchy of curricular models for multicultural music education that moves from assimilationist to pluralist ideologies. Elliott explained the first three models, assimilation, amalgamation, and open society, ignore cultural diversity. An assimilation curricular model simply ignores music outside of the dominant musical culture, such as classical, romantic and baroque. An amalgamation model includes a limited range of music from other cultures, but these musics are only accepted if they are useful to the

 

33 

  dominant musical culture and are modified to fit the dominant musical mold. The open society curriculum ignores culture and tradition by only pursuing music that validates the ideology of the nation-state. Folk musics, in this model, are deemed suspect unless they promote social unity. The next three models represent to Elliott an attempt to preserve cultural diversity. The first of these is insular multiculturalism, which teaches a narrow musical culture that is different from the dominant musical culture. An example of this could be a middle school steel band in a non-Caribbean community. Modified multiculturalism seeks to incorporate a variety of musical styles into the classroom. This is similar in some ways to Banks’ description of content integration (1997). Elliott labeled this model modified because learning focuses on the musical culture and how it has been affected by the dominant culture of the classroom. However, this model is often limited because it is biased in its selection of musical cultures due to local convenience or the value orientation of the school community. Modified multiculturalism also often highlights characteristics of cultures and subcultures, while ignoring the role of the individual. On the other hand, a dynamic multiculturalism incorporates a pan-human perspective of human behavior that values the contributions of all members of the community. Dynamic multiculturalism encourages individuals to participate in a dynamic and diverse community. Individuals are motivated to participate in the community and address common problems, even when the community contains unfamiliar values and behaviors. All music, even styles that may be excluded in the modified multicultural model, is included as valid forms of human musical expression. Musical analysis also incorporates diverse perspectives and Western terms and musical ideas are replaced by those endemic to the culture. Curricula and Resources Along with the growth of multiculturalism in the discourse of music education, resource offerings pertaining to multicultural music have increased. This growth can be seen in the number of articles in the Music Educators Journal (MEJ) providing lessons and resources for multicultural musics (Volk, 1993). A substantial contribution has been made by The National Association for Music Education (NAfME, formerly MENC), who has published manuscripts specific to steel band (Tanner, 2007), India (Sarazzin, 2009),

 

34 

  mariachi (Gradante, 2008), and Irish music and dance (Farrell, 2010). Dekaney and Cunningham (2011) offered an interesting correlated curricular resource connecting Brazilian music to science, math, and ecology. In 1989, MENC published Multicultural Perspectives in Music Education, a 334-page collection of lesson plans organized geographically. The collection is now in its third edition, and has expanded to three volumes, 670 pages and covers 13 musicultures (Anderson & Campbell, 2010). In Lessons from the World, Campbell (1991) examined improvisation, aural training, and musical creativity, and offered strategies to realize these learning objectives through specific musicultural traditions, including Japan, China, India, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Additionally, Campbell (1994) provided music teachers access to the work of leading ethnomusicologists in her collection of articles in the MEJ Series. Each article covered a specific musiculture and included an overview, lesson plans, and discography. Teacher Training and Multicultural Music Many authors have discussed the role of teacher education in helping transition our music education system from one that is focused on Euro-American art music to one that is inclusive of music from diverse (Anderson, 1992b; Boyer-White, 1988; Campbell, 1994, 2004; Miralis, 2002; Montague, 1988; Schippers, 2010; Volk, 1998). Teacher training was a prominent topic among many of the authors in Reimer’s (2002b) collection of articles about multicultural music education. Several authors have examined different curricular models for multicultural music teacher instruction (Anderson, 1992b; Miralis, 2002; Montague, 1988; Volk, 1998). Others have investigated the effects of multicultural music instruction on preservice teachers attitudes for teaching multicultural music (Fung, 2007; Teicher, 1997). Volk (1993) offered a summary of teacher training articles in the MEJ about multiculturalism. Montague (1988) investigated the multicultural music education courses at selected universities. She surveyed syllabi and interviewed 22 music education and 8 ethnomusicology faculty about their course offerings. Her data indicated among the universities surveyed, 8 had required multicultural music courses specific to music education majors, 20 had required music education courses with a multicultural

 

35 

  component, 7 had elective multicultural music courses for music education majors, and 8 had required multicultural music courses taught by ethnomusicologists. Anderson (1992b) listed two basic curricular formats for multicultural music teacher education. The first introduces students to a few select musicultures through specialized geographic courses. These courses could broaden students’ experiences, while instructing on a musiculture relevant to students’ cultural environment. For example, preservice teachers in Hawaii could elect to take a course about Oceanic or Asian musics, while students in the American Southwest could elect to take courses on Latin American musics. Another curricular format mentioned by Anderson is one that infuses multicultural musics throughout the music literature sequence. In addition to covering Euro-American art music, a broad survey course that generalizes musical experiences around the world could instruct students in Western and non-Western musics. Anderson also discussed the opportunity for theory and performance courses to incorporate multicultural music. Finally, general music education methods classes should instruct in multicultural theory, philosophy, and practice. Similar to Montague, Miralis (2002) investigated multicultural music training among music educators at nine Big Ten schools through document analysis and faculty interviews. These data were used to categorize the course types into the following multicultural music teacher training categories: survey, geographic, interdisciplinary, ethnomusicological, performance, pedagogical, multicultural, and intracultural. Survey courses were defined by Miralis as a broad survey of musical practices around the world, without extensive investigation into any one musiculture. These courses were typically taught by an ethnomusicologist, and had names including “Introduction to World Music,” and “Music and Culture.” Of the nine schools surveyed, there were 16 survey courses in total; 7 were designed for music majors (44%), 4 were for non-majors (25%), and 5 were for both music majors and nonmajors (31%). According to Miralis, Geographic courses were those that focused on a specific country or geographic region and were typically taught by an ethnomusicologist. Most of these courses were primarily concerned with folk music, though several dealt with popular music. Of the 70 geographic courses found, 17 focused on North America

 

36 

  (24%), 12 on Asia (17%), 8 on Europe (11%), 5 on Africa (7%), 3 on Latin America (4%), and 3 on the Caribbean (4%). Miralis described interdisciplinary courses as music courses that dealt with other sociocultural phenomenon, such as identity, gender, and politics. Course titles in this category included “Music, Politics and Identity,” and “Music, Media and Popular Culture.” Of the 28 interdisciplinary courses found, 8 dealt with music and gender (29%), 6 with music and media (21%), 2 with music and politics (7%), and 2 with music and ethnicity (7%). Miralis also identified 19 ethnomusicological courses in her survey. These courses dealt with ethnomusicological theory and practice and had names including “Foundations of Ethnomusicology,” and Seminar in Ethnomusicology.” The majority of these courses were graduate level. Performance courses were a popular course type in Miralis’ survey. These courses were broadly defined as courses concerned with the performance of music from around the world. Of the 59 courses identified, 30 were jazz ensembles (51%), 7 focused on Asian music (12%), 5 on African musics (9%) and 5 on African-American vocal music (9%). Course titles in this category included “Gospel Choir” and “Javanese Gamelan.” These courses were taught by music education, ethnomusicology, and choral faculty. Pedagogical courses were another type identified by Miralis. These were music education methods courses that contained a component relating to multicultural issues or the inclusion of diverse music in education. These courses were taught by music education faculty and dealt with issues ranging from philosophical to practical. Of the 53 identified as pedagogical, 33 were core music education courses that contained a unit on multiculturalism (68%). An example of this kind of course was “Teaching General Music in Elementary School.” Nine courses dealt with multicultural issues (17%). A course of this kind was “Multicultural Principles in Music Education.” Eight courses focused on the pedagogy of diverse music (15%). An example of this kind of course was “Teaching World Music in the Classroom.” Of these courses, 6 were concerned with jazz music, one with American folk music, and one with non-American musicultures. Additionally, 3 broadly dealt with diversity (6%) and 3 with special education (6%).

 

37 

  Miralis’ survey also identified multicultural courses taught by faculty within the School of Education. These were nonmusic courses intended to instruct broadly on issues related to multiculturalism, diversity, and equality. Ten courses were identified within this category, and included courses with titles such as, “Teaching in a Pluralistic Society” and “Diversity in Education.” Finally, Miralis included courses that focused on American music genres, such as jazz, blues, rock and pop under the category of intramusical courses. Of the 87 courses in this category, the vast majority were concerned with jazz (73, or 84%). Additionally, six focused on rock (7%), 4 on popular music (5%), 2 on blues (2%), and one course each on hip-hop (1%) and popular music (1%). Wang and Humphreys (2009) analyzed the time spent in undergraduate music education courses according to Western, multicultural and popular music content. Surveying courses taken by the entire population of preservice teachers at one university (N = 80), they found that students spent 92.83% of their time on Western art music, 6.94% on Western non-art music, .54% on popular music, and .23% on non-Western music. The authors conclude that even though the university examined in the study recently underwent curricular changes meant to enhance opportunities for learning about multicultural and popular music, these changes were quite modest and led to little, if any, substantive changes to preservice music teachers’ training in these areas. Several scholars have investigated music teachers’ attitudes about teaching multicultural music. Teicher (1997) found students in an elementary methods course (N = 60) had more positive attitudes about teaching multicultural music after lesson planning activities in multicultural music. Fung (2007) investigated the relationship between personal preference, familiarity, and external preferences, defined as the belief that music should be studied by K-12 music students and known by music professionals. Using Chinese traditional, popular, and Western-orchestrated excerpts, Fung found that among preservice music teachers (N = 119), there were positive modest relationships between personal preference and external preference for K-12 students (r = .24 to .48), and between personal preference and external preference for professional musicians (r = .28 to .47).

 

38 

  Authenticity and Multicultural Music The question of the authenticity of multicultural music offerings has been the subject of considerable discussion within music education and ethnomusicology (Campbell, 1995; Elliott, 1995; Fung, 1995; Labuta & Smith, 1997; Palmer, 1992; Schippers, 2010; Volk, 1998; Wade, 2009). The growth of critical discourse in music education, coming primarily from the field of ethnomusicology, has led music educators to question the quality and veracity of multicultural music materials (Palmer, 1992; Volk, 1998). As an example of the central place authenticity holds in the discourse, in Reimer’s (2002b) collection of articles about multicultural music education, half of the articles investigated the “A-word.” Ethnomusicologist Bonnie Wade (2009) discussed the nature of authenticity in Western musicological thought. Authenticity, she explained, was originally thought to reflect a collective consciousness coming from folk culture; the true nature of a people could be found in its folklore and in its folk music. This is often thought to exist as a product, within a musical work. A piece of music or a specific performance may be evaluated as possessing or lacking the quality of authenticity. Additionally, authenticity may reside within a performer who possesses the knowledge, background, or authority granting him or her authenticity. Wade also problematized notions of authenticity, calling into question the orthodoxy of tradition. She believed tradition is advanced against the forces of commercialization, mass media, and globalization by cultural advocates yearning for past that is perceived as disappearing in the wake of modernity. The old becomes a static model. Wade explained, “a musical genre is an ‘authentic’ item, in that it is expected to adhere to a model in which there is consensus and bears meaning around which a group can form” (p. 185). Yet, this idea of authenticity neglects the realities of how music is experienced by individuals in our contemporary world. As Tony Mitchell explained, “notions of musical purity and authenticity are an idealistic form of colonialist nostalgia” (1993, p. 335). Musician and producer David Byrne also took issue with the notion of authenticity in relation to world music: The issue of "authenticity" is such a weird can of worms. Westerners get obsessed with it. They agonize over which is the "true" music, the real deal… What is considered authentic today was probably some kind of bastard fusion a

 

39 

  few years ago. An all-Japanese salsa orchestra's record (Orquestra de la Luz) was No. 1 on the salsa charts in the United States not long ago. Did the New York salseros care? No, most loved the songs and were frankly amazed. African guitar bands were doing their level best to copy Cuban rumbas, and in their twisted failure they came up with something new. So let's not make any rules about who can make a specific style of music (Byrne, 1999, October 3). Palmer (1992) framed the matter of authenticity in music education around the dialectic of authenticity and compromise. He proposed “absolute authenticity” requires these five conditions: 1. performance by the culture’s practitioners, recognized generally by the culture as artistic and representative; 2. use of instruments as specified by the composer or group creating the music; 3. use of the correct language as specified by the composer or group creating the music; 4. for an audience made up by the culture’s members; and 5. in a setting normally used in the culture. (p. 32-33) Palmer was careful to make the point that compromise is a necessary byproduct of teaching multicultural music in an education setting. He stated, “That compromise will occur is not the question. The primary question is how much compromise can be allowed before the original is lost” (p. 38-39). Factors, including setting, language translations, instrumental substitutions, and didactic considerations, lead to a musical experience that is different in the classroom than in the original cultural context. Though the conditions for “absolute authenticity” are important for the music educator to consider, they are not sine qua non for the inclusion in the music classroom. Instead, Palmer recommended, music educators should consider these conditions in when incorporating multicultural music. Volk (1998) suggested that music is more authentic if performed by a member of the musiculture. Palmer (1992) agreed, saying, an authentic performance is a “performance by the culture’s practitioners, recognized generally by the culture as artistic

 

40 

  and representative” (p. 32). This definition stated that the performance must be deemed as “representative” by members of the culture. This begs two questions. First, can a performance be authentic if it is by a member of the culture, but is not considered representative by others? Second, is it possible for a performance to be authentic if it is performed by a cultural outsider, yet considered representative by cultural insiders? Volk (1998) also proposed guidelines for categorizing the authenticity of multicultural music. Her four categories of authenticity (Appendix A) begin with Category 1, which is characterized by music that bears little resemblance to music from the original culture, and may only contain a reference to a culture within the title. In contrast, Category 4 is a piece composed by a member of the musiculture, and contains musical elements that are a close approximation to original music from that culture. Volk cautioned that these categories “are not intended to be strict codifications, since some compositions may contain elements of more than one category” (p. 177). Volk’s warning seems valid, especially considering the complex nature of music and culture that resists oversimplification. However, she believed these categories might be useful in providing “a perspective for determining the degree of authenticity of school music materials” (p. 177). Her cautions not withstanding, Volk’s categories are the basis of the independent variable authenticity used in the present study. Authenticity has been the subject of at least two music education studies. Pembrook and Robinson (1993) demonstrated sixth-grade students that learned multicultural music on authentic instruments had a more positive attitude and greater musical achievement than students who learned on inauthentic instruments. Demorest and Schultz (2004) found that elementary students preferred arrangements of multicultural music to authentic performances. Musical Preference Preference and taste are similar terms used to describe a person’s choice for music and other sensory stimuli, like food or art (Radocy & Boyle, 2003). Within music, taste generally refers to a long-term commitment to a genre or category, whereas preference is more often used to describe an immediate and specific choice (Abeles, 1980). The topic of preference and taste has received much attention from music researchers since the early twentieth century. The music psychologist Paul Farnsworth pioneered research in

 

41 

  musical preference beginning with his manuscript Musical taste: Its measurement and cultural nature, published in 1950 (LeBlanc, 2001). Throughout his career, Farnsworth examined preferences for chords and melodies (1925, 1926a, 1926b), effects of repetition on preference (1926b), changes in musical taste (1939) and perceived eminence of composers (1949, 1966, 1969). Albert LeBlanc is another pioneering researcher in the area of musical preference. In 1979, LeBlanc published his Proposed model of sources of variation in musical taste, which detailed how properties of music, social characteristics of the listener, as well as physiological and psychological determinants interact to effect judgments of musical taste. Over the following two decades, LeBlanc conducted many studies examining some of the elements within his model, including tempo (LeBlanc, 1981; LeBlanc & Cote, 1983; LeBlanc & McCrary, 1983; LeBlanc et al., 1988; LeBlanc et al., 2001), style (1981), performance medium (LeBlanc, 1981; LeBlanc & Cote, 1983), rhythmic beat (LeBlanc et al., 2002), country (LeBlanc et al., 1999; LeBlanc et al., 2001; LeBlanc et al., 2002), and gender (LeBlanc et al., 1999). Researchers in music preferences have also examined the effects of familiarity (Fung, 1994; Fung, 2007; Hargreaves & Lee, 2008), authenticity (Demorest & Schultz, 2004), adult approval (Dorow, 1977; Greer et al., 1973), language background (Abril & Flowers, 2007), race (Killian, 1990; McCrary, 1993), and sex (Killian, 1990). The idea that musical preferences can be altered has also been a subject of examination (Finnäs, 1989; Gregory, 1994; Shehan, 1985). Because measuring preferences requires participants to provide a response that reflects a value or belief, the effects of participant response mode on preference ratings has been investigated (Britten, 1996; Geringer & Madsen, 1995) Familiarity An early study by Hargreaves, Messerschmidt, and Rupert (1980) examined the effects of familiarity on “liking” and “quality.” After listening to four popular and four classical excerpts, undergraduate participants rated the excerpts on a 7-point Likert scale from “Dislike” to “Like,” and “Poor Quality” to “Good Quality.” Though participants were asked about liking and quality, and not preference, these labels may in many ways

 

42 

  reflect music preferences. Results indicated a significant and positive correlation between familiarity and both liking and quality. Fung (1994) examined the relationship between familiarity and preference for multicultural music among nonmusic majors. Participants were asked to correctly identify the geographic region of excerpts and rate their preferences for 32 excerpts from eight geographic regions. No significant correlation was found between identification and preference. However, Fung warned that because excerpts were rarely correctly identified, a correlation would not be present. Fung (1996) examined the effects of familiarity on preference for multicultural music among music majors and nonmajors. This study controlled for geography by choosing 26 excerpts from nine geographic areas, as well as selected musical characteristics. Results showed that familiarity was significantly and positively correlated with preference (r = .47). Additionally, 14% to 24% of variance in preference is attributed to familiarity, depending on geographic region. Fung (2007) further investigated the effects of familiarity on preference by examining Chinese music that reflected traditional, popular and Western-orchestrated styles. Excerpts of Chinese music in Fung’s previous studies (1994, 1996) yielded positive correlations between familiarity and preference. Fung (2007) demonstrated a modest correlation (r = .24) between familiarity and preference for the popular Chinese piece only, and no correlations were found for the traditional and Western-orchestrated Chinese pieces. Siebenaler (1999) explored the relationship between familiarity and preference among elementary school students. Students in 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades were asked to rate their familiarity and preference for 10 songs selected from the Music Educators National Conference’s (now the National Association for Music Education) list of 42 songs that “every American should know.” Mean ratings among all grades and songs demonstrated a significant correlation (r = .57). Additionally, after rehearsing each song for 10 minutes, students’ preferences for the selected songs generally increased. Hamlen and Shuell (2006) examined the effects of familiarity and preferences for classical music among 7th grade students. Participants rated 12 classical music excerpts on a 4-point Likert-type scale from “I really don’t like this music” to “I really like this music” and were asked to describe their familiarity with the excerpts on a 4-point Likert-

 

43 

  type scale from “I never heard this music before” to “I know this music very well.” Similar to Siebenaler (1999), 7th grade students demonstrated a significant relationship between familiarity and preference. Teo, Hargreaves, and Lee (2008) investigated the relationship between familiarity and preference among students in the United Kingdom and Singapore. Secondary students listened to Malay, Chinese and Indian excerpts and reported their familiarity and preferences on a 7-point Likert scale. Results indicated a strong correlation between familiarity and preference (r = .65) and familiarity represented 43% of the overall differences in preference ratings. By examining students in Singapore and the United Kingdom, the researchers were able to conduct a cross-cultural examination of familiarity and preference. Students in Singapore reported higher familiarity and preference for Malay and Chinese music than students in the United Kingdom, the authors argue, because they have more exposure to this type of music. Similarly, they said, Indian music was rated the lowest for familiarity and preference because Indians are a minority within both countries. However, students’ country does not explain other differences in results. For example, in addition to Indians, Malay and Chinese are also minorities in the United Kingdom. Yet, differences between the ratings for all three styles of music were not adequately explained by the degree of cultural representation within Singapore and the United Kingdom. Though these cross-cultural comparisons by the authors are interesting, the connection between students’ country and cultural representation within each country was not addressed within the research design. Musical Characteristics The effects of musical characteristics on preference have also been widely examined. An early study by McMullen (1974) looked at the effects of melodic complexity on preference among fourth, eighth and twelfth grade students by examining the number of pitches and melodic redundancy of original, randomly generated melodies. Results indicated melodies constructed from 5 and 7 pitches were preferred over melodies from 12 pitches, and melodies with low to intermediate redundancy were preferred over highly redundant melodies. Beginning in 1979, LeBlanc explored the relationship between musical characteristics and preferences. His Proposed model of sources of variation in musical

 

44 

  taste (LeBlanc, 1979) created an eight-level model for examining the effects of preference, beginning with the musical stimulus, and continuing through the background and psychology of the listener. At the lowest level, LeBlanc addressed “physical properties of stimulus,” including “frequency, intensity, duration and waveform” (1980, p. 30). Also in the eighth level was the “complexity of stimulus.” Echoing McMullen’s (1974) results, LeBlanc conjectures that “a certain level of complexity is optimum for each respondent,” and, “excessive complexity can lead to frustration and the opposite extreme promotes boredom” (1980, p. 30). The first experiment conducted by LeBlanc about his model explored the effects of tempo and performing medium, defined by instrumental versus vocal music, on music preference (LeBlanc, 1981). Results from fifth-grade students indicated a preference for faster tempi and instrumental music. LeBlanc and Cote (1983) again explored the effects of tempo and performing medium on the music preferences of fifth- and sixth-grade students. Student responses on a 7-point Likert scale indicated significant effects for tempo and performance medium. Similar to LeBlanc (1981), there was a negative correlation (r = -.14) for excerpts with a slow tempo, and a positive correlation (r = .29) for excerpts with a fast tempo. Instrumental excerpts were preferred over vocal. However, when the effects of both independents variables were combined, they only accounted for 5% of the total preference variance. LeBlanc and McCrary (1983) isolated the variable tempo for examination, and found a positive strong correlation (r = .78) between tempo and music preference with faster excerpts preferred over slower excerpts. LeBlanc, Colman, McCrary, Sherrill, and Malin (1988) extended previous research about tempo and preference beyond fifth- and sixth-graders in a comprehensive study (N = 926) among students from third grade through college. Results among all age levels confirmed previous findings (LeBlanc, 1981; LeBlanc & Cote, 1983; LeBlanc & McCrary, 1983) and showed faster excerpts were preferred over slower excerpts. Similarly, LeBlanc, Jin, Chen-Hafteck, Oliviera, Oosthuysen, & Tafuri (2001) duplicated the effects of tempo on preference in a comprehensive study (N = 914) among listeners in five countries in different geographic regions.

 

45 

  Style In addition to tempo and performance medium, LeBlanc (1981) also explored the effects of style, or genre, on music preference. Even more than tempo and performance medium, style had the greatest impact on music preferences, with popular genres preferred over jazz and art music. Though LeBlanc’s model does not explicitly mention style, it seems that style exists somewhere on the lowest level of the model and is related to the interactions between what LeBlanc called “the environment” and “the music” (LeBlanc & Sherrill, 1986). Rock music, for example, could be characterized by instrumentation and form. However, the musical qualities of rock music interact with sociocultural phenomena in the eighth level of LeBlanc’s model, such as “referential meaning of stimulus,” as well as socialization agents, including “media,” “peer group,” “family,” and “educators and authority figures.” Nonmusical Characteristics Examining the social effects on music preference, Greer , Dorow, Wachhaus, and White (1973) found that fifth-grade students preferred music genres that were reinforced by adult approval. Students were more likely to prefer specific music after hearing adults approve the music, and less likely to prefer specific music adults disapproved. Further, students’ preference transferred from specific pieces to overall style genres. These findings were replicated in Dorow (1977), who demonstrated the effects of approval on increased music preference. Additionally, students who received approval for a piece of music showed more on-task behavior during a concert of the same music than did students who received disapproval. Shortly after LeBlanc published his Proposed model of sources of variation in musical taste (LeBlanc, 1979), he added “ethnic group” to the fourth level of the model that pertained to characteristics of the listener (LeBlanc, 1981). Researchers began exploring the effects of listeners’ country on preferences, as well as interactions between listeners’ country and the ethnic origin of the music. Country was found by several studies to have a significant effect on music preference. Darrow, Haack, Kuribayashi (1987) found that even though both Japanese and American students preferred Western music, Japanese students preferred Japanese music more than American students. It was believed by the authors that both of these results are attributed to exposure, and that

 

46 

  Japanese students preferred Western music due to cultural influences following World War II. These results were echoed in Morrison and Yeh (1999), which showed students in the United States and China preferred music from their own country over music from outside their country. Additionally, the study compared verbal responses to Likert-type ratings. Written responses from Chinese and Hong Kong students demonstrated more metaphorical comments than students from the United States, which made more analytical statements. LeBlanc , Jin, Stamou, McCrary (1999) found significant differences for music preferences between students from Greece, South Korea an the United States. There were also significant interactions between country and age, and country and gender. LeBlanc, Jin, Chen-Hafteck, Oliviera, Oosthuysen, and Tafuri (2001) found that when examining the effects of tempo, country and age, country accounted for 12% of the total variation of music preferences. LeBlanc, et al. (2002) examined the effects of beat strength in music on preferences among students in Brazil, Greece, Japan, Portugal and the United States. Results showed some main effects for country, as well as significant interactions between beat strength and country. Killian (1990) demonstrated that middle-school students preferred to sing songs identified with same-race performers. McCrary (1993) investigated the effects of performer and listeners’ race on music preference. Results showed that middle-school and university students preferred music they perceived as being performed by a member of their own race. Black students in the study demonstrated greater effects for same-race effects than did white students. Additionally, music style was a strong force in identifying the race of the performer. For example, Charley Pride, a black country music singer, was often perceived as being white. Abril and Flowers (2007) explored differences in focus of attention to and preferences for English-language, Spanish-language and instrumental versions of a song among English speaking and English/Spanish-speaking bilingual students. No significant differences were found for focus of attention between student groups. However, bilingual students preferred the Spanish-language version more than monolingual English-speaking students. The effects of age on music preference have also been examined. LeBlanc, Colman, McCrary, Sherrill and Malin (1988) compared preferences for jazz music of

 

47 

  different tempi among students from elementary school through college. Results indicated a U-shape relationship between age and preference, with the highest ratings among third-grade students, decreasing until seventh-grade, and rising again among college students. Students of all ages preferred faster music to slower music. Hargreaves, comber and Colley (1995) showed a general trend of decreasing preference with age between younger (ages 11-12) and older (ages 15-16) adolescents across a wide variety of styles. LeBlanc, Jin, Stamou, McCrary (1999) examined the effects of age among listeners in different countries and found preference to increase with age in the United States, but decrease with age in Greece and Korea, indicating possible interactions between age and country. Gender is another listener variable that has been examined. While investigating vocal vibrato, LeBlanc and Sherrill (1986) found that both male and female listeners preferred performances by male singers to female singers. Killian (1990) showed that middle-school students preferred to sing songs identified with same-sex performers. This was especially true for male students, and female students chose other-sex songs more than male students. Hargreaves, Comber and Colley (1995) found significant main effects for gender with specific music styles, with male students preferring heavy metal and rock more than females, and female students preferring reggae, pop, jazz, classical folk and opera more than males. Multicultural Music Preferences for multicultural music among students in the United States have been investigated by researchers. Fung (1996) took an approach similar to LeBlanc’s studies during the 1980s and 1990s by examining the musical characteristics of multicultural music. Similarly, Demorest & Schultz (2004) examined differences between arranged and authentic multicultural music. The purpose behind these two studies was to examine what characteristics of multicultural music students prefer the most. Once those characteristics are determined, teachers can make choices about the kinds of multicultural music to expose to students. As Fung said, “using the concentriccircle idea…teachers who are introducing world musics might start with the musical styles with which students are most familiar, and then gradually introduce musical styles from more distant geographic and cultural sources” (1996, p. 80).

 

48 

  Fung (1994) compared undergraduate nonmusic majors’ preferences for multicultural music to their multicultural attitudes. Students (N = 50) listened to 32 vocal and instrumental excerpts from eight geographic regions and rated their preference on a seven-point Likert scale. Excerpts were 40 seconds long and ranged in tempo from 48 bpm to 112 bpm. Preference responses indicated that music from China was the most preferred, followed by Indonesia, Japan, Africa, Middle East, India, Thailand, and Korea. Students were also administered a Multicultural Attitudes Inventory (MAI) developed from Giles and Sherman (1982), Ohio State University (1988), and Ziegler (1980). Questions on the MAI related to social behaviors with people outside of their ethnic group and preferences for social diversity. Preference responses to world music significantly correlated to scores on the MAI (r = .43), and results on the MAI accounted for 18.91% of the variance for preference. Multicultural music preference also correlated to the number of foreign languages studied (r = .46), which explained 21.24% of the variance. The data indicate a relationship between preferences for multicultural music and multicultural behaviors and attitudes in other domains. The data also demonstrated higher preference ratings for instrumental rather than vocal excerpts. Fung (1996) conducted an extensive survey of multicultural music preferences among undergraduate music majors and nonmusic majors (N = 449).

Similar to

LeBlanc’s studies of the effects of musical characteristics on preference, this study explored nine musical characteristics in order to develop an effects hierarchy: tempo, pitch redundancy, tonal centeredness, consonance, brightness in timbre, percussiveness, loudness, textural complexity, and richness in embellishment. Both musicians and nonmusicians showed significant effects for musical characteristics on multicultural music preference, with a generalized preference for music that was fast, loud, tonally centered, mad many different pitches, consonant, moderately embellished, smoothsounding, and bright in timbre. Training also had a significant effect on multicultural music preference, with music majors preferring multicultural music more than nonmusic majors. There were also interactions between training and musical characteristics, with nonmusic majors showing a greater effect magnitude for musical characteristics. However, the effects of musical characteristics were similar for both music majors and nonmusic majors.

 

49 

  Fung (1996) also examined the effects of music excerpts’ country on listener preferences. Results showed a preference rank order similar to Fung (1994) for music majors and nonmajors. Listeners most preferred music from Mexico, followed by Peru, Nigeria, Congo, China, Cuba, and Malawi. The last rank orders were reversed for the two training levels, with music majors preferring Japanese excerpts to Korean, and nonmusic majors preferring Korean excerpts to Japanese. Fung believed that students might have less exposure to Korean and Japanese music and the musical characteristics within the Korean and Japanese excerpts, as compared to music from Latin America and Africa, and would require longer periods of listening to gain higher preferences. This seems reasonable, considering the correlation between familiarity and preference in this study (r = .47). Demorest and Schultz (2004) conducted two studies about multicultural music preference among fifth-grade students. In the first study, two classes listened to 19 excerpts of multicultural music under either the arranged or authentic conditions. The arranged excerpts were selected from prominent elementary music texts, while the authentic excerpts were selected from performers who were representatives of each culture. No differences in preference were detected between the two listening conditions. In the second study, students were asked to make side-by-side selections between the arranged and authentic excerpts. Fifth-grade students preferred the arranged versions at a rate of nearly three to one to the authentic versions. In both studies, there was a significant correlation between familiarity and preference (r = .87 for Study 1, r = .92 for Study 2). Fung (2007) investigated multicultural music preferences among preservice music education majors. The listening stimulus consisted of three selections of Chinese music that were traditional, orchestral, or popular. Preservice music educators preferred the orchestral piece the most, followed by traditional and popular. Participants in this study rated their preference on a seven-point Likert scale as well as made forced choices between the selections. Rank order results were the same for each response mode. Though these results indicate a preference for Western-orchestrated Chinese music over traditional and popular Chinese music, Fung warns that because the stimulus consisted of only three listening examples, results may not reflect a general preference between these

 

50 

  style categories. This study also examined the relationship between preference for each selection and participants’ perceived value and external preferences for the music. Perceived value was determined through a series of Likert questions, such as “This is good quality music” (p. 72). External preferences were defined as whether the music was preferred for reasons external to the listener, such as, “All licensed/certified music teachers should know about this type of music” (p. 72). Positive correlations were found between personal preference and perceived value (r range = .52 to .73 for the three selections) and between personal preference and external preference (r range = .24 to .47 for the three selections). Finally, participants were asked to provide their reasons for preferring one selection to the others. Musical characteristics were the most common type of written response, followed by emotional responses. Shehan (1984) examined the effects of instruction method on sixth-grade students preferences for and knowledge of Indonesian gamelan music. The two experimental conditions were didactic instruction via lectures, films, and listening, and heuristic instruction through performance experiences. A pretest/post-test equivalent design was used to assess differences between groups and before and after treatment. Results demonstrated greater performance on a knowledge test in the heuristic group than the didactic group. Both groups performed better on the knowledge test following treatment. Neither treatment group demonstrated changes in verbal preference for gamelan music. However, operant preference, measured by listening choices between gamelan, Western classical, and popular music, showed increases following treatment, with the heuristic group showing a significantly greater increase in operant listening behavior than the didactic treatment group. Following treatment, the heuristic group showed greater operant preference for gamelan than Western classical music, but preferred popular music to gamelan. Shehan (1985) explored the possibility of cognitive transfer theory, applied to multicultural music preference. Sixth-grade students (N = 36) were taught twelve pieces of multicultural music from Africa, India, Japan and Latin America, as well as Western classical and popular music over a five-week period. Excerpts were between 43 and 65 seconds, and between 170 to 250 M.M.. A pretest/post-test listening test was administered asking students their preference on a seven-point Likert scale. Results

 

51 

  indicated greater preferences for popular and Western classical music excerpts than for the multicultural music excerpts. Though Shehan found evidence that instruction in specific multicultural music selections increased preferences for those selections, this preference was not transferred to unfamiliar selections within the same genre. Response Mode Madsen and Geringer (1990) examined differences in focus of attention between musicians and nonmusicians listening to instrumental excerpts. This study used the Continuous Response Data Interface (CRDI) to collect information on what musicals aspects participants were focusing. Data indicated significant differences between musicians and nonmusicians for focus of attention. The authors also replicated the study using a static Likert scale as the dependent measure (Geringer & Madsen, 1995). These results generally reflected the results of the previous study (Madsen & Geringer, 1990). Because the excerpts in both studies were approximately 30 seconds in duration, a general consistency between the two response modes in the two studies is not surprising. This consistency, the authors suggested, indicated the validity of a static response for short perceptual tasks, where a continuous response should be used for longer listening tasks (Geringer & Madsen, 1995). Response mode was also the subject of Britten and Sheldon (1995), who examined preferences for instrumental excerpts. Like Madsen and Geringer (1995), there was no significant difference in preferences between response modes for music majors. Excerpts in this study were between 30 and 48 seconds in duration. The authors controlled for tempo by choosing an equal number of fast and slow excerpts. Interestingly, no significant differences for preferences were found between fast and slow excerpts, contradicting previous research (LeBlanc, 1981; LeBlanc & Cote, 1983; LeBlanc & McCrary, 1983; LeBlanc et al., 1988; LeBlanc et al., 2001). Britten (1996) examined response mode and preference for multicultural music. Unlike the conclusions drawn by Geringer and Madsen (1995) and the results of her earlier study on Western art music (Britten & Sheldon, 1995), these results indicated a significant difference in preference scores based on response mode for music majors, with participants in the continuous response group (CRDI) giving higher ratings than the static (Likert) group. The study controlled for tempo, using excerpts between 92 and 112

 

52 

  beats per minute. The study also controlled for performance medium and used only instrumental selections. One possible reason for the outcome discussed by Britten was giving a continuous response demanded more active listening by participants than a static response, and could lead to higher preference ratings. Considering the samples in her study were relatively longer than those used in previous studies, between 96 and 122 seconds, the role of active listening seems to be a plausible explanation for differences between response modes. Summary Beginning in the early twentieth century, multiculturalism grew as a philosophical topic within music education in the United States. This is evidenced by the increased coverage of multiculturalism in the Music Educators Journal, at music education conferences, and by policy statements from music education organizations. The National Association for Music Education currently publishes a broad range of books devoted to multicultural music education. The purposes of multicultural music education mirror in many ways those of multicultural education. Similar to multicultural educators, some music educators have advocated for a more diverse curriculum that better reflects the musical backgrounds of the student population. Others have articulated the ability of music to instruct in diversity education by teaching students about foreign music and cultures. Another rationale for multicultural music education is the musical benefit to students who have explored a greater diversity of musical expression. Among multicultural music educators, a concern has been the quality of curricula and materials. Primarily, the notion of authenticity has been a source of criticism, as some music educators believed multicultural music offerings in schools did not accurately reflect the musical practices of those cultures. Though multicultural music educators understand the complexity of authenticity in a globalized world and the difficulties in performing authentic music from other cultures in the classroom, some have provided advice for negotiating authenticity in the classroom. Another important topic among multicultural music educators has been training teachers to teach multiculturally. Though there are NASM and NCATE mandates for the inclusion of multicultural training in music teacher education programs, it is left to the

 

53 

  institutions to decide how to implement multicultural training. A few studies have investigated how tertiary music programs have implemented multicultural music mandates, showing world music survey courses, geographic area courses, and world music performance ensembles to be a popular strategy. The greatest amount of research on multicultural music education has been related to preference. Fung (1994) investigated how multicultural music preferences related to multicultural attitudes. Shehan (1985) examined how multicultural music preferences may be transferred. Like many of LeBlanc’s preference studies, Fung (1996) explored the relationship between preference and musical characteristics for multicultural music. Like preference studies in general, these studies indicate that preference for multicultural music appears is related to familiarity (Fung, 1996; Fung, 2007; Teo, Hargreaves, & Lee, 2008). The present study seeks to connect widely held beliefs in the importance of authenticity to multicultural training methods for music educators by examining how multicultural music training effects preservice music educators perceptions of authenticity. Additionally, it builds upon previous research to explore how multicultural music training effects preferences for teaching multicultural music. Finally, it explores the relationship between perceptions of authenticity and preferences for teaching multicultural music. Specific research questions were: 1. What curricular multicultural music experiences do undergraduate music education majors have at selected universities? 2. Are undergraduate music education majors able to assess the authenticity of selected excerpts? 3. What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity? 4. What are undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? 5. What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music?

 

54 

  6. What are the effects of undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity on their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? 7. To what extent do students’ perceptions of authenticity predict their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? 8. What are students’ thoughts about authenticity? 9. What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and their thoughts about preferences for teaching multicultural music? 10. What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and thoughts about their multicultural music training? 11. What are students’ other thoughts about multicultural music?

 

55 

 

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY This study explored the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity and preferences for teaching multicultural music. Specific research questions were: 1. What curricular multicultural music experiences do undergraduate music education majors have at selected universities? 2. Are undergraduate music education majors able to assess the authenticity of selected excerpts? 3. What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity? 4. What are undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? 5. What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? 6. What are the effects of undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity on their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? 7. To what extent do students’ perceptions of authenticity predict their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? 8. What are students’ thoughts about authenticity? 9. What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and their thoughts about preferences for teaching multicultural music? 10. What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and thoughts about their multicultural music training? 11. What are students’ other thoughts about multicultural music?

 

56 

  Universities Participants were drawn from selected universities throughout the United States. Universities were selected as a convenience sample based on the availability of faculty at universities to facilitate the research. However, the sample was restricted to only universities with membership in the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) under the category of undergraduate degree granting institutions and whom the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching designated as Research Universities (RU/VH, RU/H and DRU). Because selected universities were comprehensive research institutions, which typically have a broad and diverse student base, it was believed the student sample at these universities reflected a wider demographic than universities and colleges that were not research institutions. Selected universities varied in geographic location (Appendix B). Universities were not selected on the basis of their multicultural music training. By not including multicultural music training in the selection process, it was believed the universities reflected a diverse sample of multicultural music training and were representative to a certain extent of multicultural music training at comprehensive research institutions. Students Student participants were undergraduate music education students (N = 71), including instrumental (n = 41), choral (n = 26), and general (n = 4) music education students. In order to examine the effects of undergraduate music training, participants were selected from upper-level courses in music education. By selecting from upperlevel courses, participants were believed to be nearing the end of their undergraduate coursework and were more likely to have received their multicultural music training. The majority of participants were female (n = 41), with nearly as many males (n = 30). Participants ranged in age between 19 and 40 (M = 23.3, SD = 3.89). The great majority of participants were white (n = 58), followed by other (n = 6), and Hispanic (n = 4). By chance, no participants only circled black for their race, though several circled black and white. In these instances, students were categorized as “other” for race.

 

57 

  Multicultural Music Training Questionnaire The multicultural music training of each participant was assessed through the Multicultural Music Training Questionnaire (MMTQ), a questionnaire created to determine the multicultural music experiences of undergraduate students’ (Appendix D). The MMTQ included a list of course types developed from extant literature on multicultural music training (Anderson & Campbell, 2011; Miralis, 2002; Montague, 1988). The categories included survey courses, area courses, performance courses, and multicultural music pedagogy courses. The questionnaire also included a brief definition of each course type. For example, World Music Survey Course was defined for participants as “a lecture-based course that focuses on music from a variety of cultures around the world, without focusing on any one specific culture.” Participants were also asked how many semesters they were enrolled in each course type. For some course types that focused on specific music cultures, such as area courses and performance ensembles, participants were asked to provide the specific geographic area or genre for the course. A pilot study was conducted to determine the reliability of the MMTQ (n = 12). Participants in the pilot were senior undergraduate music education majors. Students were administered the pilot in class, using the same script used by survey facilitators (see Appendix C). Students were once again administered the questionnaire one week later. Test-retest reliability was very high (r = .92). Stimulus To assess perceptions of authenticity and preferences for teaching selected multicultural music, an author-created audio stimulus was administered. The stimulus contained sixteen test excerpts from performances of multicultural music (Appendix F), and an additional excerpt at the beginning to acclimate participants to the process. Excerpts were selected from the Internet web sites of publishers of choral music and were listed as either “multicultural music” or “world music.” In almost every case, performances were downloaded from the web sites of the publishers. In one instance, the audio from the publisher’s web site was too slow to use, and a faster performance was downloaded from the Internet web site YouTube. In most cases, recordings appeared to be produced in studios. In a few cases, they appeared to be of live staged performances.

 

58 

  Previous research indicated participants might begin to lose focus of attention during longer excerpts, so excerpts were limited in duration (Geringer & Madsen, 1995). Representative excerpts between 23 and 47 seconds were selected from each performance. Excerpts were selected to contain at least one principal section of the piece, such as a theme, verse, or other formal section. In instances where changes in the musical elements were believed to affect perceptions of authenticity, such as instrumental accompaniment or language of the lyrics, excerpts were chosen to best reflect the overall character of the piece. Authenticity Performances were chosen according to the four categories of authenticity outlined by Volk (1998). Excerpts were coded by the author with an authenticity scale of 1 through 4 according to Volk’s categories. Four excerpts for each authenticity category were selected for a total of sixteen excerpts. Two reliability observers also rated the authenticity scale of each excerpt. These observers each held doctorate degrees in ethnomusicology and were university music faculty. Additionally, these observers held undergraduate degrees in music education and worked for several years with high school students. Observers were provided the definitions of each authenticity category, as described by Volk (1998), as well as the excerpt descriptions provided on the publishers’ web sites and asked to rate each excerpt on the four-point authenticity scale. Interjudge reliability of the authenticity scale of all excerpts was moderate (r = .61). Both reliability observers expressed uncertainty about their evaluation of the authenticity of several of the excerpts. These doubts often related to interpreting the definitions of each category outlined by Volk. For example, one observer wrote of the composers of the Haitian piece Twa Tanbou, “If Celestin or Guillaume (the composers) are Haitian, then it’s a four. If not, then a very cool three.” Though overall interjudge reliability was not high, there was considerably higher agreement between authenticity categories and the observers’ ratings, and less agreement between the two judges (Appendix G). Stimulus Questionnaire Accompanying the audio stimulus was the World Music Authenticity Questionnaire (WMAQ) asking participants to rate each excerpt’s authenticity and their

 

59 

  preference for teaching each piece (Appendix E). Accompanying each excerpt were the composers or arrangers for each piece, as well as a description of the piece from the publisher’s web site. This information was included in the WMAQ because it was believed this reflected the information music teachers are likely exposed to when making repertoire decisions (Volk, 1998). For rating authenticity, a four-point Likert-type scale, with “4” corresponding to high authenticity, was chosen to correspond to Volk’s (1998) four categories of authenticity. For preference, a seven-point Likert-type scale was chosen, with “7” corresponding to high preference. Likert-type response mode was used because of its ability to reliably measure many students simultaneously (Geringer & Madsen, 1995). The WMAQ also asked students to write their thoughts about each excerpt, as well as their overall thoughts about authenticity and world music. In the same pilot study used for the MMTQ, test-retest reliability for the WMAQ was also assessed (n = 12). Test-retest reliability across a one-week time span was moderate for authenticity (r = .79) and preference ratings (r = .73). Controlled Variables According to previous research, performance medium, such as instrumental or choral, may affect musical preference (Darrow, Haack, & Kuribayashi, 1987; Fung, 1995; LeBlanc, 1981; LeBlanc & Cote, 1983; Shehan, 1981). To control for performance medium, only choral pieces were chosen for the audio stimulus. Previous research also indicated other important characteristics affecting musical preference—for multicultural music specifically, as well as music generally—were tempo and intensity (Fung, 1996; LeBlanc & Cote, 1983). To attempt to control for these factors, excerpts were selected for similar tempo and intensity. Tempo was measured by the researcher by listening to excerpts, while measuring the tempo on a metronome to determine the metronome marking. With the exception of Esta es el Tiempo, all excerpts were moderate in tempo, between 88 and 108 M.M.. Esta es el Tiempo was measured at 144 M.M., however the beat could have easily been interpreted in cut time at 72 M.M.. Excerpts were selected that were moderate in intensity. However, because excerpts from publishers’ web sites and YouTube were from different audio sources, excerpts were processed through a dynamic equalizer in the audio editing software Logic. Excerpts were expanded and compressed using the same equalizer settings and normalized at 0 dB to create a more

 

60 

  uniform intensity between excerpts. The study’s reliability observers were used to assess intensity. Excerpts were judged by observers to be “moderate intensity,” on a three-point scale between “low,” “moderate,” and “high” intensity (r = .92). Because of any possible differences in quality between studio and staged performances, reliability observers were also asked to assess whether or not recordings were good quality versus bad quality. Excerpts were deemed to be good quality recordings (r = .88). The variable of music’s country has been shown to affect preference (Fung, 1994; Fung, 1996). Because of the need to select excerpts that met the criteria for authenticity, while also mitigating the effects of tempo and intensity, compounded by the limited number of examples of multicultural music, it was difficult to select excerpts that also controlled for country. However, excerpts within each category were chosen from a variety of countries (see Appendix F). Order To mitigate any order effects, two random orders of the excerpts were created (Appendix H). Though it may have been useful to control for order effects more stringently, it would have been unhelpful to create separate orders for each university because any differences detected between universities could have been attributed to order effects or multicultural music training. Therefore, two orders were randomly generated and each university was assigned an order. An additional multicultural music excerpt of authenticity level 2 was included at the beginning of each order to acclimate participants to the stimulus. Quantitative data from this excerpt were disregarded. Differences in perceptions of authenticity between orders were tested by examining authenticity ratings for each excerpt in both orders. Results of Mann-Whitney U tests showed no differences for authenticity ratings between the two orders for 14 of the 16 excerpts (Appendix I). Two excerpts, Maquerúle and Can You Hear? showed significant differences in authenticity ratings between the two orders. Similar to the perception of authenticity, preferences for the excerpts were tested for differences between the two orders. Results of Mann-Whitney U tests showed no differences for preference ratings between the two orders for 14 of the 16 excerpts (Appendix J). Interestingly, the same two excerpts that showed order differences for authenticity ratings, Maquerúle and Can You Hear? also showed significant order

 

61 

  differences for preference ratings. Because these two excerpts showed significant differences between the two orders for both authenticity and preference ratings, data from these excerpts were excluded from any further statistical examination. Major Differences for authenticity and preference due to participants’ major were tested because this study only used choral excerpts. Differences between instrumental and choral majors were examined. General music education majors were not examined against instrumental and choral majors because there were too few (n = 4) for statistical tests. Differences for authenticity between instrumental and choral majors were tested using participants’ authenticity score. Unlike the Mann-Whitney U tests used to measure order effects, which examined differences for each excerpt, this test examined participants’ overall perception of authenticity. Results demonstrated no significant differences in authenticity score between instrumental and choral music education majors, z = -.36, p = .72. Similarly, differences for participants’ overall preferences due to major were tested by examining participants’ mean preference ratings for the 14 excerpts. Results demonstrated no significant differences in mean preferences between instrumental and choral music education majors, z = -.28, p = .78. Because no significant differences were found for authenticity score or preference means between instrumental and choral music education majors, all further statistical tests combined these two groups along with the few general music education majors. Procedures The study was administered in a classroom setting by faculty at selected universities between April 9 and May 14, 2012. The number of students within each class ranged from 3 to 20. Cooperating faculty at each university administered the study using a script written by the author that consisted of an introduction for participants about the study, instructions for participants on completing the MMTQ, instructions for the administrator on playing the stimulus compact disc, and instructions for participants on completing the WMAQ (Appendix C). To comply with Institutional Review Board (IRB) procedures, participants were told about the nature of the study and their role as participants (Appendix M). Consent from participants was obtained at this time.

 

62 

  Participants completed the MMTQ first, followed by the stimulus questionnaire. Participants were given 20 seconds between excerpts to record their authenticity and preference ratings, as well as record their thoughts about each excerpt. After the stimulus was completed, participants were given three minutes to provide their thoughts on authenticity and world music in general. The entire process was designed to take approximately 25 minutes. Measurements Participants’ perceptions of authenticity were compared to excerpts’ authenticity categories (Question 2). A Wilcoxon matched pairs test was conducted between excerpts’ authenticity categories and the authenticity ratings to each excerpt from every participant. From the 71 participants and fourteen excerpts, this resulted in a data set of 992 samples (two pairs of data were discarded because a participant did not circle a preference). The purpose of this test was to determine if participants’ perceptions of authenticity were significantly different from excerpts’ authenticity categories. The effects of multicultural music training on the perception of authenticity were also measured (Question 3). Participants’ responses to each excerpts’ authenticity were compared to each piece’s authenticity category by calculating the absolute difference between them. This calculation resulted in a possible difference between 0 and 3, where 0 represented a response identical to an excerpt’s authenticity scale. For each participant, an authenticity perception score was calculated by adding the differences between their responses and the authenticity scale for each excerpt. The range of possible authenticity perception scores for each participant ranged between 0 and 34, where 0 represented a perception of authenticity identical to all excerpts’ authenticity categories. A MannWhitney U test was conducted with participants’ multicultural music training as the independent variable and participants’ authenticity score as the dependent variable. The purpose of the Mann-Whitney U test was to measure any differences in authenticity perception between participants who had or had not taken a world music course. Similarly, the effects of multicultural music training on the preference for teaching selected multicultural music were measured (Question 5). A Mann-Whitney U test was conducted with participants’ multicultural music training as the independent variable and participants’ preference responses as the dependent variable. The purpose of

 

63 

  the Mann-Whitney U test was to measure any differences in multicultural music teaching preferences between multicultural music training categories. The effects of participants’ perceptions of authenticity on their preferences for teaching multicultural music were measured (Question 6). Authenticity and preference responses from every participant for every excerpt were compared (n = 992). A KruskalWallis one-way analysis of variance was conducted with the perception of authenticity as the independent variable and preference for teaching multicultural music as the dependent variable. The purpose of this test was to determine if the perception of authenticity had an effect on participants’ preference for teaching multicultural music. An additional examination of the relationship between participants’ perceptions of authenticity and their preference for teaching multicultural music was conducted (Question 7). Using the same data set in the previous Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (n = 992), a univariate ordinal logistic regression was conducted using perception of authenticity as the predictor and preference for teaching multicultural music as the outcome. The purpose of the ordinal regression was to determine to what extent participants’ desire to teach a piece of multicultural music could be predicted by their perception of excerpts’ authenticity.

 

64 

 

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS Data Analysis Data from the Multicultural Music Training Questionnaire (MMTQ) and the World Music Authenticity Questionnaire (WMAQ) were collected from 71 music education undergraduate students. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics 20 for the Macintosh operating system. All statistical tests were analyzed at the .05 alpha level. Participants’ responses on the MMTQ indicated the world music courses they had taken, the names of the courses and how many semesters in each course. In almost every case, responses were clear and did not appear to conflict with the a priori definitions of course categories provided on the questionnaire. However, in two cases participants listed course titles they had taken that did not appear to match the course category. For example, one student listed “History of Western Music” as a World Music Area Course. However, considering participants were provided with definitions of each course category, as well as a definition of the term “world music” on the questionnaire, it was decided to accept all participants’ responses on the MMTQ rather than making decisions about which participants’ responses were valid. The majority of participants correctly completed the WMAQ. In three instances participants circled authenticity ratings between numbers. These responses were rounded down (e.g. 3.5 was recorded as 3). In two instances participants did not circle an authenticity or preference response for an excerpt. These blank responses were not recorded, and these cases were ignored during statistical analysis. However, responses for their other excerpt ratings were recorded. Qualitative Analysis Participants’ thoughts about each excerpt were evaluated qualitatively using their free responses. Of the 71 participants, 17 (24%) provided 86 responses after excerpts. Though quantitative data for the excerpt Jenga Imani Yako were ignored, and those for

 

65 

  Can You Hear? and Maquerúle were discarded, free response data for these excerpts were included in qualitative analysis. Participants were also given 3 minutes to write their final thoughts about authenticity, preference and the questionnaire itself. Free responses at the end of the questionnaire were provided by 48 participants (68%). Participants’ responses were transcribed into the qualitative data analysis software NVivo 9 for the Windows operating system. Using a qualitative research method based in grounded theory, responses were coded according to emergent concepts and the a priori concepts of authenticity, preference, and training (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). This coding process consisted of three primary steps. Data were first read in an exploratory manner, where I brainstormed about possible concepts from the data. Then, I went through the data and coded free responses according to concepts generated from my first read, as well as new concepts that emerged from the second reading. Finally, data were examined once more for relationships. To examine the reliability of the concept coding, 10% of the 134 free responses (n = 13) were randomly selected to be coded by the study’s reliability observers (Madsen & Kelly, 2002; Madsen & Kelly, 2007). Observers were provided a table of data, along with the list of concepts generated during the coding process, and asked to code each data from the list of concepts, or provide a new concept. Reliability among the observers was high (r = .90). Results Research Question #1 What curricular multicultural music experiences do undergraduate music education majors have at selected universities? Results from the MMTQ yielded categorical data on the kinds of multicultural music courses students have taken, as well as the name of the courses and number of semesters in each course. The majority of participants had taken at least one course from the four categories of multicultural music courses (see Table 1). A few students had taken courses in more than one course category. The most popular world music course category was the world music survey. In a few instances, student responses seemed to contradict the a priori definitions for each category. However, because the MMTQ provided participants definitions for world music, as well as definitions for each course

 

66 

  type, all student responses about their training were accepted and included in further analysis.

Table 1 Multicultural music experiences of undergraduate music education students at selected universities Number of Students

Years (M)

SD

Course Titles

WM Survey

31

1.10

.40

Comparative Cultures Music as Culture Intro to Ethnomusicology Intro to World Music Music in World Cultures Music Instruments of the World World Music

WM Area

4

1.5

1.0

History of Western Music Middle Eastern Music Music of India

WM Performance

5

3.4

3.36

Javanese Gamelan Latin Marimba Steel Band Trinidadian Steel Band West African Dance and Drumming

WM Pedagogy

11

1.18

.04

African Music in the Classroom Teaching Music in Diverse Settings

None of the Above

28

Course Category

 

67 

  Research Question #2 Are undergraduate music education majors able to assess the authenticity of selected excerpts? To test for differences between participants’ authenticity ratings and excerpts’ authenticity category, a Wilcoxon matched pair test was conducted between every authenticity rating from all participants and the authenticity category of each excerpt (n = 992). Significant differences were found between authenticity ratings and excerpts’ authenticity categories, Z = -6.34, p < .00. This finding demonstrated that students’ overall perceptions of excerpts’ authenticity differ from excerpts’ authenticity categories. Table 2 shows mean authenticity ratings for each excerpt, and overall mean ratings for each authenticity category.

Table 2 Mean authenticity ratings for undergraduate music education students by excerpt and authenticity category n

M

SD

213

1.49

.72

African Alleluia

71

1.13

.45

Cantamos Juntos

71

1.54

.67

Comes the Rain With Me

71

1.80

.84

282

1.81

.82

Above the Plain

70

2.21

.90

Esta es el Tiempo

71

1.39

.62

Furaha!

70

1.84

.77

Tuimbe

71

1.80

.79

Category 3

284

2.82

.83

Doraji

71

2.87

.84

In This Ancient House

71

2.25

.69

Ka Hia Manu

71

3.20

.79

Category 1

Category 2

 

68 

  Table 2 (Cont.) n

M

SD

71

2.96

.69

213

3.12

.77

Gabi Gabi

71

3.15

.73

Jai Bhavani

71

3.14

.78

Janger

71

3.07

.80

Twa Tanbou

Category 4

Research Question #3 What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity? The MMTQ collected data on the kinds of multicultural music courses students had taken. Participants indicating they had taken any courses within the four course categories were categorized as having taken a world music course. Participants indicating having not taken any course within the four course categories were categorized as having taken no world music course. Authenticity scores for each participant were calculated by adding the differences between participants’ authenticity rating and the excerpts’ authenticity category. From the 14 excerpts, this calculation created the possibility of authenticity scores ranging from 0 for ratings identical to all excerpts’ authenticity categories, to a maximum score of 34. Results demonstrated a range of authenticity scores between 4 and 18 (see Table 3). A Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to measure any differences in authenticity scores between participants who had taken a world music course and those who had not. Results indicated no significant differences in authenticity scores between students who had taken a world music course and those who had not, z = -.72, p = .47, demonstrating no effects in the perception of authenticity based on multicultural training.

 

69 

  Table 3 Authenticity scores for students who have and have not taken a world music course n

M

SD

WM Course

42

11.19

3.56

No WM Course

28

10.61

2.74

Total

70

10.96

3.25

Research Question #4 What are undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? Participants were asked about their preference to teach each excerpt. Preference ratings were recorded on a Likert scale from 1 to 7, where 7 indicated high preference. African Alleluia was the least preferred piece (M = 1.89, SD = 1.42). Twa Tanbou was the most preferred (M = 5.11, SD = 1.33).

Table 4 Mean preference ratings of undergraduate music education students for selected multicultural music n

M

SD

African Alleluia

71

1.89

1.42

Cantamos Juntos

71

2.58

1.37

Comes the Rain With Me

71

3.24

1.66

Category 1

 

70 

  Table 4 (Cont.) n

M

SD

Above the Plain

70

3.36

1.66

Esta es el Tiempo

71

2.18

1.48

Furaha!

70

2.53

1.43

Tuimbe

71

3.13

1.59

Doraji

71

4.55

1.53

In This Ancient House

71

3.44

1.54

Ka Hia Manu

71

4.83

1.47

Twa Tanbou

71

5.11

1.33

Gabi Gabi

71

4.85

1.49

Jai Bhavani

71

3.39

1.55

Janger

71

4.21

1.65

Category 2

Category 3

Category 4

Research Question #5 What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? Similar to Question 3, the effects of multicultural music training on preferences for teaching selected multicultural music were examined. Mean preference scores for participants who had taken a world music course were compared to those who had not. Results indicated no significant difference in mean preference ratings between students who had and had not taken a world music course, z = 1.01, p = .31, indicating no effects on preference for teaching multicultural music due to multicultural training.

 

71 

  Table 5 Effects of multicultural music instruction on mean preferences for selected multicultural music n

M

SD

WM Course

43

3.32

1.03

No WM Course

28

3.63

.84

Total

71

3.45

.96

Research Question #6 What are the effects of undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity on their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? The effects of perceived authenticity on undergraduate music education students’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music were examined. Data from all participants’ ratings of authenticity and preference for all excerpts were compared (n = 992). A Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance was conducted with perceived authenticity as the independent variable and preference as the dependent variable. Results demonstrated significant differences for preference among authenticity categories, χ2(3, n = 992) = 454.25, p < .000. These results indicated students’ perceptions of authenticity affect their preference for teaching multicultural music. Excerpts rated within authenticity category 1 were rated the lowest for preference, and those rated within authenticity category 4 were rated the highest for preference (see Table 6).

 

72 

  Table 6 Mean rank results of a Kruskal-Wallis test for the effects of perceived authenticity on preference for teaching selected multicultural music Authenticity

n

Mean Rank

Category 1

274

238.4

Category 2

278

444.66

Category 3

296

658.99

Category 4

144

753.68

Research Question #7 To what extent do students’ perceptions of authenticity predict their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? To measure what extent students’ perceptions of authenticity were predictive of their preferences for teaching the selected multicultural music, a univariate ordinal logistic regression was conducted with perception of authenticity as the predictor and preference as the outcome variable. Results indicated a linear model that was moderately predictive (rN2 = .46). This model was significantly predictive, χ2(3, n = 992) = 590.45, p < .000, as compared to an empty model. This indicated that perception of authenticity explained 46% of the variance for preference. A test of parallel lines in this model demonstrated there were significant differences in the model’s ability to predict equally across the ordinal categories for preference, χ2(15, n = 992) = 55.77, p < .000. It should be noted that the r2 value for ordinal logistic regressions are not identical to those for linear regressions because the data for ordinal logistic regressions are non-parametric. However, the r2 value produced for ordinal logistic regressions closely approximate those for linear regressions (Menard, 2002).

 

73 

  Table 7 Results of a univariate ordinal logistic regression with authenticity as the predictor and preference as the outcome variable

Authenticity

Regression Coefficient B

Standard Error

Wald

df

Significance

-4.60

.228

406.27

1

< .000

Note: n = 992. Model summary: -2 log-likelihood = 130.99; Nagelkerke’s r2 = .46; Cox and Snell’s r2 = .45.

Research Question #8 What are students’ thoughts about authenticity? Free-response data came from participants’ responses after each excerpt, as well as their final thoughts provided at the end of the questionnaire. Of the 71 participants, 17 (24%) provided 86 free-responses after excerpts. Forty-eight (68%) participants provided free responses at the end of the questionnaire. Authenticity was the most common concept that emerged from the free responses. Other prominent concepts were instrumentation, language, other musical qualities, westernization, preference, percussion, and performance. Table 8 shows all the concepts that emerged from the free responses, along with their frequencies.

 

74 

  Table 8 Concepts and frequencies from participants/ free responses Concept

Frequency

Authenticity

59

Instrumentation

18

Language

18

Other musical quality

16

Westernization

15

Preference

12

Percussion

11

Performance

11

Rhythm

10

Commercialization

9

Survey Process

9

Composer or Arranger

8

Statement about Authenticity

8

Lack of Training

7

Vocal Quality

7

Cheesy

6

Arrangement

4

Hybridity

4

Musical Quality

4

Representation

4

Style

4

Generalization

3

Accompaniment

2

Africa

2

Statement about Multiculturalism

2

Bad

1

 

75 

  Table 8 (Cont.) Concept

Frequency

Contrived

1

Familiarity

1

Fun

1

Pedagogical Appropriateness

1

Religion

1

Using NVivo, data were queried for all references to authenticity that also referenced other concepts. Concepts were selected from this list based on salience to the research question and further explored. This included the concepts instrumentation (n = 11), rhythm/percussion (n = 11), language (n = 8), other musical qualities (n = 6), and performance (n = 6), and vocal quality (n = 5). These concepts are explained in detail below. In instances where a third concept was often mentioned, this was noted and detailed in the tables.

Authenticity and Instrumentation Instrumentation was a common concept (n = 18). Of all references to instrumentation, 11 (61%) were also coded for authenticity. Of these, four referenced percussion. Table 9 lists all references coded for authenticity and instrumentation.

Table 9 References to the concepts authenticity and instrumentation Source

Free Response

Comes the Rain With Me

The flute was the only authentic-sounding part.

Doraji

The bells and piano diminish the authenticity of this piece.

 

76 

  Table 9 (Cont.) Source

Free Response

Jai Bhavani

Authentic instrumentation and rhythms!

Janger

They are imitating instruments. I feel an instrumental version would be more authentic.

End responses

The instrumental accompaniment, piano, or percussion, created the feel or not of an authentic world music experience.1 The instruments also play a big role in the authenticity. Would it be considered more authentic to use traditional instruments such as gamelan, native American flute, etc? If so, a 4 cannot be circled unless these instruments are used. However, it is unrealistic to expect secondary level choirs to have access to these instruments. So, through no fault of the performers/directors, I felt that I couldn’t say it was as authentic as possible. A common theme throughout was that the addition of instruments not characteristic to some of the cultures represented greatly diminished the authenticity of the piece. I would have liked to hear more authentic pieces. I liked the songs that had drums the best. I wonder if drums make songs more authentic, or if that only happens sometimes.1 It seems like percussion with limited instrumental accompaniment is what sounds authentic to me in the African realm. The pieces that don’t sound authentic have too many instruments, with a sound of Western US / or Disneyland.1 It’s important to include not just authentic languages within pieces, but use authentic instruments. Especially percussion!1

Note. 1 = also coded for the concept percussion.  

77 

 

Authenticity and Rhythm/Percussion Rhythm and percussion were distinct concepts, where rhythm described a musical quality and percussion described an instrument. In some cases, the term percussion was used, yet the meaning of the word was ambiguous and could have described either the instrument or musical quality. Because of these similarities, rhythm and percussion were analyzed together. Together, rhythm and percussion were a common concept (n = 21). Of these references, 11 (52%) were also coded for authenticity. Table 10 lists all references coded for authenticity and rhythm or percussion. The ones coded for rhythm and percussion are denoted.

Table 10 References to the concepts authenticity and rhythm or percussion Source

Free Response

Doraji

Uses scales and percussion somewhat better than the others in being accurate.2

Gabi Gabi

The vibrato and lack of syncopation hurt the authenticity.1 What kind of South African style is it supposed to imitate? It sounds vaguely like isicathimiya but that wouldn’t have percussion.2

Jai Bhavani

Percussion sounds authentic.2 Percussion makes sense and use of unison (or octaves) makes it believable.2

Jenga Imani Yako

The singers didn’t sound authentic, but the rhythms did.1

Maquerúle

Feels very ethnic with varied percussion rhythms.1 2

Tuimbe

Not rhythmical to Swahili.1

 

78 

  Table 10 (Cont.) Source

End responses

Free Response

The instrumental accompaniment, piano, or percussion created the feel or not of an authentic world music experience.2 It’s important to include not just authentic languages within pieces, but use authentic instruments. Especially percussion!2

Note: 1=coded for rhythm. 2=coded for percussion.

Authenticity and Language Another common concept was language (n = 18). Of all references to instrumentation, 8 (44%) were also coded for authenticity. Of these, 5 referenced hybridity. The concept hybridity was defined as the combination of two distinct elements. Table 11 lists all references coded for authenticity and language.

Table 11 References to the concepts authenticity and language Source

Free Response

Can You Hear?

The English doesn’t sound authentic.

Esta es el Tiempo

Use of Spanish here almost seems like an afterthought.

End responses

Inclusion of English text in native language automatically takes authenticity down a point.1 Personally, I feel as if a bit of the authenticity is taken away when they throw English into the song, but that is of course not the only element that defines authenticity.1

 

79 

  Table 11 (Cont.) Source

Free Response

End Responses

I feel that authentic works must reflect the language and musical styles of the culture for a piece to be fully authentic (minimal mixing).1 The majority of these pieces were not authentic. If a choir is going to perform a piece that signifies culture, it should adhere to it. Added English to the text does not help this authenticity.1 Pieces that include texts from 2 (or more) languages seem to feel the most contrived or artificial.1 It’s important to include not just authentic languages within the pieces, but use authentic instruments. Especially percussion!

Note. 1 = also coded as the concept hybridity.

Authenticity and Other Musical Qualities Other musical qualities were a common concept (n = 16). This was a general concept for data referencing musical qualities not defined by other concepts. Of all references to other musical qualities, 6 (38%) were also coded for authenticity. Table 12 lists all references coded for authenticity and other musical qualities.

 

80 

  Table 12 References to the concepts authenticity and other musical qualities Source

Free Response

Doraji

Uses scales and percussion somewhat better than the others in being accurate.

Jai Bhavani

Percussion makes sense and use of unison (or octaves) makes it believable.

Ka Hia Manu

Very simple, believable for Polynesian tribe.

Twa Tanbou

It seems too choral to be authentic.

End responses

Size of ensemble has a lot to do with it. If the size matches the style of the piece, then it makes it more authentic. I was unsure how to rate authenticity due to the differences in musical background and vocal lines. Parts of pieces seemed authentic and parts didn’t.

Authenticity and Performance Another common concept was performance (n = 11). This concept was defined as any data referring to the performer, performance, or audio recording. Of all references to performance, 6 (55%) were also coded for authenticity. Table 13 lists all references coded for authenticity and performance.

 

81 

  Table 13 References to the concepts authenticity and performance Source

Free Response

Maquerúle

Too clean and perfect to be completely perfect.

End responses

The quality of the performers determined my decision on the authenticity of the piece as well as my decision to use these pieces in a concert. The quality of performance plays a part in the rating of the authenticity. Better sounding choir equals more authentic. I was really influenced by the recording and effects (or lack thereof). The “sappy” white demographic sound really turned me off. I want to hear world music that is more authentic, gritty, culturally appropriate, etc. Forcing world music into a “white choir” sound is hard to listen to. I feel that if those arrangements were performed differently, they would have been more moving. Some of the recordings were obviously phony and poor quality. It is difficult to determine authenticity when the recording is so studio enhanced. Professional singers, whose diction could NOT be authentic, is a problem.

Authenticity and Vocal Quality Vocal quality was a common concept (n = 9). Of all references to vocal quality, 5 (56%) were also coded for authenticity. Table 14 lists all references coded for authenticity and vocal quality.

 

82 

  Table 14 References to the concepts authenticity and vocal quality Source

Free Response

Above the Plain

Czech music is usually sung with a much brighter sound.

Gabi Gabi

The vibrato and lack of syncopation hurt the authenticity.

Jenga Imani Yako

The singers didn’t sound authentic, but the rhythms did.

End responses

Most of the pieces were either not authentic-sounding at all or had very little authenticity. The main reason seems to be because there are many multicultural elements with American tone qualities and diction. Most seem very disjunct and the sounds do not “fit” with one another. It is difficult to determine authenticity when the recording is so studio enhanced. Professional singers, whose diction could NOT be authentic is a problem.

Research Question #9 What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and their thoughts about preferences for teaching multicultural music? The questionnaire was designed to ask participants’ about preference. Not surprisingly, the concept was often mentioned (n = 12). Of all references to preference, 11 (92%) were also coded for authenticity. Table 15 lists all references coded for authenticity and preference.

 

83 

  Table 15 References to the concepts authenticity and preference Source

End responses

Free Response

The quality of the performers determined my decision on the authenticity of the piece as well as my decision to use these pieces in a concert. Inclusion of English text in native language automatically takes authenticity down a point. Many of the authentic pieces would be appealing to me as a high school/middle school choir director. Personally, I feel as if a bit of the authenticity is taken away when they throw English into the song, but that is of course not the only element that defines authenticity. I think the more authentic the piece, the more likely I would be to perform it. It seems like percussion with limited instrumental accompaniment is what sounds authentic to me in the African realm. The pieces that don’t sound authentic have too many instruments, with a sound of Western US / or Disneyland. I much prefer the more authentic sounding pieces, and would likely do some of them. I believe when a song is authentic, you can feel like you’re in that country when you hear or sing or play an authentic piece. I could have a few of them performed. The more authentic, the more likely I would want to use the piece. Some of these works I would perform for their musical quality, regardless of world music authenticity (some of those composed, not arranged) by modern composers. Overall, these pieces seemed very contrived. There were a few that felt authentic, but mostly they seemed forced, cheesy, and in some cases just misnamed in style. Most of them I wouldn’t perform them as a general comment.

 

84 

  Table 15 (Cont.) Source

End Responses

Free Response

I would rather do an authentic work as opposed to one that is meant to imitate a culture. In general, the more authentic, the more likely I would be to have a group perform it. Before programming world music in my choir, I would like to study this subject in more depth. I have a difficult time distinguishing authentic music because I’ve never studied it.

Research Question #10 What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and thoughts about their multicultural music training? Though the WMAQ was not designed to solicit data on training, several participants commented on their lack of training (n = 7). Of all references to training, 4 (57%) were also coded for authenticity. Table 16 lists all references coded for authenticity and training.

Table 16 References to the concepts authenticity and training Source

End responses

Free Response

I found it difficult to give an accurate rating of authenticity due to the fact I haven’t studied these cultures in depth. It is difficult to describe the “authenticity” of a piece, especially never hearing the pieces.

 

85 

  Table 16 (Cont.) Source

End responses

Free Response

We have taken many lovely multi-ethnic pieces of music and westernized them. I wish there was more training available in music of other cultures, that way I would know better what is authentic. This survey reminded me I need to listen to more diverse areas of music and try to bring in diverse styles into my classroom. Before programming world music in my choir, I would like to study this subject in more depth. I have a difficult time distinguishing authentic music because I’ve never studied it.

Research Question #11 What are students’ other thoughts about multicultural music? Concepts not already discussed under Question 8 were examined for frequency and relevance. Of those, the concepts westernization, commercialization, and cheesy were further explored. A list of all references to these concepts are included below.

Westernization Westernization was mentioned by several participants (n = 15). The most common words used in this concept were western and American. In a few cases participants described the process of westernization without using the term. Table 17 lists all references to westernization.

 

86 

  Table 17 References to the concept westernization Source

Free Response

Comes the Rain With Me

Sounds western.

Doraji

Seems highly Anglicized.

Jenga Imani Yaho

Sounds very stylized to fit parents’ taste. Harmonies felt too westernized.2 Voice timbres sound more American.

Tuimbe

It’s very westernized and “sanitized.”

End responses

We have taken many lovely multi-ethnic pieces of music and westernized them. The pieces that don’t sound authentic have too many instruments, with a sound of Western US / or Disneyland.1 I have always been a bit on the fence about performing world music—I think it is too easy to Americanize cultures and their music into a simplified choral setting. It’s not that I think it shouldn’t be performed, it just should be done as correctly as possible. The pieces sound very Americanized due to instrumentation.1 Pretty much if English was involved, it killed the entire mood for me. That and the use of piano with traditional western harmonies and tonality.1 2 Most of these pieces sounded like Americanized versions of world music—why not just use real pieces from other cultures?

 

87 

  Table 17 (Cont.) Source

End responses

Free Response

Western art has influenced these world cultures so much that it is impossible for its music to be untouched by the influences and be “purely” authentic.

Note. 1 = also coded for the concept instrumentation. 2 = also coded for the concept other musical quality; in these cases, the specific quality was harmony.

Commercialization Commercialization was mentioned by a few participants (n = 9). Table 18 lists all references to commercialization.

Table 18 References to the concept commercialization Source

African Alleluia

Free Response

Sounds very commercialized. This sounds like Disneyland.

Cantamos Juntos

Sounds more like Disney music, not Spanish music. Sounds a little commercialized.

Esta es el Tiempo

That was written purely to make money. There is no quality music in this song. Very commercialized.

Tuimbe

 

Sounds a little commercialized.

88 

  Table 18 (Cont.) Source

End responses

Free Response

It seemed like many of these were overly stylized just to make money. Some composers did not necessarily seem to worry about sacrificing musicality. I found a lot of the music to be bland and commercialized, “sanitized” and boring.

Cheesy A few participants described the music as cheesy (n = 6). Table 19 lists all references to cheesy.

Table 19 References to the concept cheesy Source

Free Response

Cantamos Juntos

Really cheesy.

Esta es el Tiempo

Lyrics are quite corny.1

Furaha!

The words are quite cheesy.1 Cheesy. Percussion is very much in the style though.

End responses

 

The pieces with less sentimental/cutesy text was much more appealing to me.1

89 

  Table 19 (Cont.) Source

End responses

Free Response

Overall, these pieces seemed very contrived. There were a few that felt authentic, but mostly they seemed forced, cheesy, and in some cases just misnamed in style. Most of them I wouldn’t perform them as a general comment.

Note. 1 = also coded as the concept language.

Statement about Authenticity On occasion, participants made statements about authenticity (n = 8). This concept was defined as any statement that intended to define, frame, or comment about the idea of authenticity. Table 20 lists all statements about authenticity.

Table 20 References to the concept statement about authenticity Source

End responses

Free Response

Would it be considered more authentic to use traditional instruments such as gamelan, native American flute, etc? If so, a 4 cannot be circled unless these instruments are used. However, it is unrealistic to expect secondary level choirs to have access to these instruments. So, through no fault of the performers/directors, I felt that I couldn’t say it was an authentic as possible. I believe authenticity in world music is very important. Not only is it honoring the culture the music comes from, it is also (for many audience members) presenting the only glimpse they will have into another culture’s music.

 

90 

  Table 20 (Cont.) Source

End responses

Free Response

I have always been a bit on the fence about performing world music—I think it is too easy to Americanize cultures and their music into a simplified choral setting. It’s not that I think it shouldn’t be performed, it just should be done as correctly as possible. The majority of these pieces were not authentic. If a choir is going to perform a piece that signifies a specific culture, it should adhere to it. Added English to the text does not help this authenticity. I was really influenced by the recording and effects (or lack thereof). The “sappy” white demographic sound really turned me off. I want to hear world music that is more authentic, gritty, culturally appropriate, etc. Forcing world music into a “white choir” sound is hard to listen to. I feel that if those arrangements were performed differently, they would hav been more moving. I guess the thing about authenticity for me is that I would want to respect existing musical cultures that already exist when I expose my students to world music. There is a wide repertoire of existing music from these cultures—so lets perform authentically! There’s no need for “crossover” literature. Most of these pieces sounded like Americanized versions of world music—why not just use real pieces from other cultures?

Statement about Multiculturalism On two occasions participants made statements about multiculturalism (n = 2). This concept was defined as any statement that intended to define, frame, or comment about the idea of multiculturalism. Table 21 lists all statements about multiculturalism.  

91 

 

Table 21 References to the concept statement about multiculturalism Source

End responses

Free Response

The pieces with less sentimental/cutesy text was much more appealing to me. And I would be more likely to choose pieces based on what my choir needed pedagogically (versus fulfilling a multicultural checklist). I have always been a bit on the fence about performing world music—I think it is too easy to Americanize cultures and their music into a simplified choral setting. It’s not that I think it shouldn’t be performed, it just should be done as correctly as possible.

Representation Participants sometimes made references to representation (n = 4). This concept was similar to the concept authenticity. Authenticity, however, was defined as a quality. Representation was defined as a behavior or intention based on representing a music genre or culture authentically. Table 22 lists all references to the concept representation.

Table 22 References to the concept representation Source

Comes the Rain With Me

Free Response

Almost like romanticizing the culture more than representing it. Ignores the musical traditions of Navaho.

 

92 

  Table 22 (Cont.) Source

End responses

Free Response

I guess the thing about authenticity for me is that I would want to respect the existing musical cultures that already exist when I expose my students to world music. There is a wide repertoire of existing music from these cultures—so lets perform authentically! There’s no need for “crossover” literature. I would rather do an authentic work as opposed to one that is meant to imitate a culture.

 

93 

 

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION The purpose of this study was to examine undergraduate music education students’ multicultural music training, and its effects on perceptions of authenticity and preference for teaching multicultural music. Quantitative data demonstrated the majority of students had some training in multicultural music, though this training did not affect perceptions of authenticity or preferences for teaching multicultural music. Perception of authenticity was found to be a significant predictor of preference for teaching multicultural music (rN2 = .46). Qualitative data supported the results of statistical tests, and demonstrated a relationship between the perception of authenticity and preferences for teaching multicultural music. Additionally, qualitative data showed perceptions of authenticity were influenced by instrumentation, rhythm/percussion, language, performance, vocal quality, and other musical qualities. Many respondents believed they did not have enough training in multicultural music. Other concepts that emerged from the data were westernization, commercialization, cheesy, and representation. This chapter includes a more detailed discussion of the findings, limitations of the study, as well as suggestions for practice and future research. Implications of Findings Research Question #1 What curricular multicultural music experiences do undergraduate music education majors have at selected universities? Data showed the majority of undergraduate music education students had taken a world music course. The most popular world music course category was the world music survey. The frequency of courses taken, as well as their course names, corresponds to previous research on multicultural music and teacher training (Miralis, 2002; Montague, 1988).

 

94 

  Miralis (2002) explained that the world music survey course is a popular multicultural music course at universities. Though courses of this type may do an effective job in providing students with a broad scope of multicultural music, they are often criticized for not giving students thorough experience in any one particular musical genre. Many multicultural music educators believe the best way to provide students with a deep understanding of a musical genre is through performance (Campbell, 2004; Volk, 1998). Volk stated, “Educators tend to agree that what is currently missing, and is most needed for music students, at this point is performance opportunities in a wide variety of cultures. Performing the music of another culture is the only real gateway to understanding it” (1998, p. 162). These data show that few students had experiences in multicultural music performance ensembles. Without these multicultural performing opportunities, students are missing the opportunity to experience multicultural music more deeply as participants. This deficit may limit preservice teachers’ knowledge of particular multicultural genres. Additionally, performance experience in multicultural genres instructs students in an unfamiliar mode of musical expression. This bi-musicality may provide students with a deeper framework for understanding musical expression, as they are able to view music making from a pluralist perspective (Hood, 1960). Another concern among multicultural music educators is the role of world music courses in training preservice teachers to teach multiculturally (Anderson, 1992b; Robinson, 2002; Volk, 1998). Though survey courses provide a broad exposure to multicultural music, they are not intended to teach students how to teach multiculturally. In many cases, world music survey courses are the same for all music students, regardless of major. In these cases, course content that focuses on music education students by incorporating multicultural music pedagogy is difficult if not impossible. Though many students reported on the MMTQ taking courses that instructed in pedagogy and had multicultural content, the vast majority of these students were taking the course “Teaching Music in Diverse Settings.” Courses of this type are intended to generalize to the many facets of diversity and are not likely to include a significant amount of time on multi-ethnic music (Miralis, 2002). With the exception of the one student who reported taking “African Music in the Classroom,” these data indicate that the vast majority of students lack experiences that focus on multicultural music pedagogy. Without training

 

95 

  in implementing multicultural music in the classroom, it seems unlikely that students would feel comfortable making choices about multicultural music. This is also evidenced by the qualitative results of Question 10, where many students expressed a lack of confidence in their ability to critically assess the authenticity of multicultural music. The prevalence of the world music survey course and general diversity courses as the only multicultural course in undergraduate music education students’ training is an important finding of this study because it parallels the prevalence of these course types for more than two decades (Miralis, 2002; Montague, 1988; Volk, 1998). During this same period there have been many calls to reform undergraduate music education curricula to help develop a greater multicultural perspective (Anderson, 1992b; BoyerWhite, 1988; Campbell, 1994, 2004; Miralis, 2002; Montague, 1988; Schippers, 2010; Volk, 1998). This lack of curricular change parallels the findings of Wang and Humphreys (2009), which demonstrated that a particular undergraduate music program made insignificant changes to the degree of multicultural music opportunities even after extensive curricular changes in anticipation of an NASM review. It seems that even though these courses have not proven to adequately prepare music education students to effectively teach multiculturally, they are likely to remain. Possible reasons for this, according to Miralis (2002), may include the lack of financial resources necessary to develop and teach other courses, the lack of qualified faculty to teach multicultural music education courses, and the lack of time available in the music education professional sequence for undergraduate students to take courses. Considering the results of this study, how can undergraduate music education programs better prepare their students to teach multiculturally? A possible solution advocated by Volk (1998) and Robinson (2002) is a world music course for music education majors oriented around multicultural teaching methods. A course like this could include instruction in a diversity of musical genres, while also attending to various philosophical and practical considerations of multicultural music education. Like other methods courses, this course could include components on lesson planning, repertoire analysis, and teaching experiences. This course would not require many additional resources from undergraduate programs, and could be modified from extant world music survey courses.

 

96 

  Research Question #2 Are undergraduate music education majors able to assess the authenticity of selected excerpts? Literature on multicultural music education suggests that authenticity is of primary importance for effective multicultural curricula (Campbell, 2004; Fung, 1995; Palmer, 1992; Schipper, 2010; Volk, 1998; Wade, 2009). In the current study significant differences were found between undergraduate music majors’ perceptions of authenticity for selected excerpts and the authenticity categories for these excerpts. These data suggest that upper-level preservice music teachers are not prepared to effectively teach multicultural music. Though authenticity is subjective (Byrne, 1999, October 3), and the creation of hierarchical categories is admittedly problematic (Volk, 1998), multicultural music educators agree that there are differences in the degree to which music purporting to be from a place represents the musical behaviors of the people from that place. If preservice music teachers are unable to make accurate distinctions between authentic and inauthentic multicultural music available from publishers’ web sites, it seems likely that primary and secondary students will continue to be exposed to repertoire that does a poor job of providing an authentic multicultural experience. Palmer (2002) stated, “the music of a people will contain their answers to fundamental questions of existence, that is, the truths of their experience” (p.39). If the music chosen my music educators to expose students to other cultures’ is false, then the truths of their experience will be falsely represented.

Research Question #3 What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity? Results from Question 2 indicate students are unable to accurately perceive the authenticity of multicultural music. Advocates for multicultural music education often point to undergraduate training as a source for increasing teachers’ abilities to incorporate multiculturalism effectively (Anderson, 1992b; Boyer-White, 1988; Campbell, 1994, 2004; Miralis, 2002; Montague, 1988; Schippers, 2010; Volk, 1998). Miralis (2002) and Montague (1988) detailed common strategies for preparing multicultural music teachers.

 

97 

  Those strategies were found to also be common among participants in this study. Participants were categorized into two groups: those who had taken a world music course and those who had not. Data indicated no significant difference in the accurate perception of authenticity between these groups. These multicultural courses, it seems, do not improve students’ abilities to make discriminations between authentic and inauthentic multicultural music. Because these courses are typically the only training students will receive in multicultural music, it is important they do an adequate job of preparing music educators to make critical choices in multicultural repertoire. It is possible that certain course types may effectively instruct students, while others may not. By combining all students who had taken a world music course of any kind, this study did not examine differences between course types (see suggestions for future research below). However, data from Question 9 demonstrated that students generally felt unprepared to make authenticity judgments, regardless of their training.

Research Question #4 What are undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? The preferences for teaching selected multicultural music were examined. Results generally demonstrated low mean preferences, ranging from 1.89 to 5.11, with the majority of pieces below the central rating of 4. These data show lower preferences for teaching multicultural music than found in Fung (2007). Comparisons between these data and those found by Fung can only be speculative because his excerpts were limited to three Chinese pieces, and his research questions about teaching preference were phrased differently. These data were also lower than the results of Teicher (1997), who examined preferences for teaching multicultural music in general, not preferences for teaching specific pieces. It is interesting that when Teicher asked students about their overall preferences for teaching multicultural music, they were generally positive. Yet, when, as in the present study, students were asked to rate their preferences for teaching specific pieces of multicultural music, they were generally negative. As Questions 6 and 7 indicate, there is a positive relationship between the perception of authenticity and preference for teaching a piece of music. Because this study reflected a diverse range in

 

98 

  levels of authenticity, it seems reasonable that students’ overall preferences were lower than those found by Teicher because participants in her study were rating their general— perhaps ideal—preference for multicultural music.

Research Question #5 What are the effects of multicultural music instruction on undergraduate music education majors’ preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? Like Question 3, multicultural music training had no significant effect on preferences for teaching multicultural music. In fact, mean preferences were slightly lower for those having had a world music course. This seems to indicate that multicultural music training has no effect on promoting the teaching of multicultural music. The university is often relied upon to change educational practices in the field. However, similar to the discussion for Question 4, it may also be true that students having had multicultural music training are more discriminating of multicultural music, and were critical of the excerpts used in this study. Yet, even for pieces considered to be more authentic, many participants demonstrated low teaching preferences. If the multicultural music experiences of undergraduate music education students fail to increase preference for teaching multicultural music, then it is unlikely there will be any substantial change in the proclivity for teaching multicultural music of teachers entering the field.

Research Questions #6 and #7 What are the effects of undergraduate music education majors’ perceptions of authenticity on their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? To what extent do students’ perceptions of authenticity predict their preferences for teaching selected multicultural music? In Question 6, the perception of authenticity was found to significantly affect students’ preferences for teaching multicultural music. This strongly suggests that preservice music teachers prefer to teach authentic multicultural music. These results were supported by the results of Question 7, which found authenticity to be a moderate and significant predictor of preference for teaching multicultural music. Results of the

 

99 

  logistic ordinal regression found that though the perception of authenticity predicted preferences for teaching multicultural music, the model did not demonstrate parallel lines. This indicated that the different categories of authenticity have differing effects on preference. In conjunction with Question 4, these results demonstrate a need for authentic multicultural music. Because preservice music educators prefer to teach authentic multicultural music, it is important that more authentic multicultural music be made available. Yet, if the results to Question 2 are considered, making more authentic multicultural music available to teachers will only be effective in increasing the teaching of authentic multicultural music if teachers are able to discriminate between authentic and inauthentic pieces. Though these results clearly indicate a strong relationship between authenticity and preference for teaching multicultural music, the nature of the survey task should be kept in mind when drawing conclusions about the implications of these findings. Because the questionnaire focused solely on authenticity and teaching preference, participants’ may have been biased toward drawing connections between their ratings for authenticity and teaching preference. Qualitative results to Question 9 also supported a connection between authenticity and teaching preference. Yet, free responses indicate that students attend to other qualities in determining teaching preference, including instrumentation, language, rhythm, and pedagogical appropriateness. To determine the role of authenticity in a more holistic context, it would be important to measure authenticity alongside other musical qualities.

Research Question #8 What are students’ thoughts about authenticity? Because the WMAQ was designed to measure students’ perceptions of authenticity, it is no surprise that authenticity emerged as a dominant theme in the free responses. The prevalence of this concept in the free responses does not necessarily indicate the prevalence of authenticity within students’ everyday thoughts about world music. It is reasonable to believe students over-reported authenticity because the free response section specifically asked the about authenticity.

 

100 

  However, the connections students made between authenticity and other concepts, including instrumentation, rhythm, language, performance, vocal quality and other musical qualities, were entirely unsolicited. These varied responses were shared by several participants and indicated a complex framework for students’ evaluation of authenticity. Though some multicultural music educators believe the notion of authenticity is complicated and problematic, these results indicate the possibility of a commonality in what influences students’ perceptions of authenticity. Furthermore, the list of concepts that were coded along with authenticity resembles in many ways the ideas outlined by Volk (1998) in her categories of authenticity (see Appendix A). In particular, her categories included references to language, instrumentation, rhythm, and other musical qualities. Palmer (1992) similarly mentioned instrumentation , performance context, and language as factors in considering multicultural music’s authenticity. An overlap in the concepts mentioned by students, Volk, and Palmer offers validity to the connection between these concepts and the perception of authenticity of multicultural music. This connection is further supported in the conclusions drawn from Question 11. If these concepts are believed to affect the authenticity of multicultural music, then methods for instructing preservice teachers in multicultural music should instruct students to be able to discriminate between authentic and inauthentic multicultural music based on these concepts. Additionally, inservice music educators should attend to these concerns when making repertoire decisions, and in deciding how to perform multicultural pieces. These results have further implications for publishers of sheet music and those maintaining repertoire lists. Publishers and editors of repertoire lists should evaluate the authenticity of music purporting to be multicultural. These specific concepts could be used to assist in this evaluation.

Research Question #9 What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and their thoughts about preferences for teaching multicultural music? Students overwhelmingly expressed a preference for teaching music that was more authentic. Of the 11 references to authenticity and preference, 10 expressed a positive relationship between the two concepts. These qualitative results are similar

 

101 

  to the quantitative results from Questions 6 and 7. One participant disagreed with the relationship between authenticity and preference, saying, “Some of these works I would perform for their musical quality, regardless of world music authenticity.” Like Questions 6 and 7, these results should be examined within the nature of the questionnaire. Because the WMAQ was designed to collect data on authenticity and preference, students may have been biased toward drawing positive relationships between these two concepts. It would be interesting to evaluate the role of authenticity on preference alongside other musical qualities. Data from Question 8 indicate the presence of other musical factors in making judgments on authenticity. Fung (1996) examined the role of musical characteristics in undergraduate students’ preferences for multicultural music. Perceived authenticity, though different from the acoustic variables examined by Fung, may also contribute to students’ preferences.

Research Question #10 What is the relationship between students’ thoughts about authenticity and thoughts about their multicultural music training? Though the MMTQ mentioned training, the WMAQ did not. Yet, seven participants expressed the belief that they did not have enough training in world music to make decisions about authenticity. Of these, 4 made explicit references to authenticity. The other 3 did not explicitly reference the concept authenticity, but they were written on the WMAQ and were therefore in response to authenticity. No participant expressed the belief that they had enough training to make decisions about authenticity or in multicultural music in general. These results differ from the results of Teicher (1988), which demonstrated a generally positive attitude in students’ preparedness to teach multicultural music. After examining the qualitative data, it seems likely that at least some participants would have believed they had enough training to make decisions about authenticity. One participant, for example, had taken the courses Introduction to Ethnomusicology, Music in World Cultures, Music Instruments of the World, Music of India, and African Music in the Classroom. Her responses to excerpts generally expressed a negative perception of

 

102 

  the music and its authenticity. For example, in response to Gabi Gabi, she said, “What kind of South African style is it supposed to imitate? It sounds vaguely like isicathimiya, but that wouldn’t have percussion.” In response to Jai Bhavani, she said, “It sounds nothing like and of either the North Indian or South Indian music I’ve studied.” This participant was an exception due to her training. The specificity of many of her comments were different from most other participants’ comments. Though the sample size of this survey prevents any conclusions drawn from the qualitative data, it seems likely that the more training in multicultural music students have, the more specific and critical they will be in their evaluation of multicultural music. Overall, these qualitative results, along with the quantitative results from Questions 2 and 3, demonstrated a general inability of students to make discriminations between authentic and inauthentic multicultural music due to a lack of training. Even students who had taken a world music course felt unprepared. If selecting authentic music to teach is necessary for effective multicultural music experiences, as many multicultural music educators believe, then undergraduate training for music educators needs to specifically address the notion of authenticity in multicultural music in order to adequately prepare preservice teachers.

Research Question #11 What are students’ other thoughts about multicultural music? The results from Question 11 generated loose concepts relating to multicultural music and multiculturalism. Of the loose concepts that emerged, westernization, commercialization, and cheesy seem to be similar concepts to describe the quality of music that has been changed to fit new contexts outside of its original (“authentic”) context. In the case of westernization, this change was due to cultural expectations about how music should sound in a western cultural context. For commercialization, this was due to a perceived economic benefit to “sanitizing” the music in order to sell more music. It is interesting that cheesy emerged as an in vivo concept from several participants. Though similar to westernization, cheesy seemed to describe more the changed quality of the music, and less the process of change. Additionally, the term “Disneyland” was used by two different participants to describe inauthentic music.

 

103 

  Participants’ statements about authenticity, statements about multiculturalism, and references to representation, convey an overall positive disposition toward multicultural music. Most students conveyed a positive attitude toward performing music authentically and the need for music educators to take seriously the performance of authentic multicultural music. As a typical example of attitudes toward multicultural music, one participant said, “There is a wide repertoire of existing music from these cultures—so lets perform authentically!” These positive statements about authenticity and multiculturalism, and the negative attitudes toward inauthentic music, convey a real desire from preservice music educators to incorporate multicultural music into their classrooms in a meaningful way. Yet, this desire is in opposition to the training they believe they are lacking, as indicated by Question 10. Additionally, though students may want to be effective in their use of authentic multicultural music, results from Questions 2 and 3 show they are unable to do so. Several students were critical of the reasoning behind performing multicultural music (Table 21). One student called into question the need to perform multicultural music, at the expense of performing pedagogically appropriate music. Another questioned whether or not multicultural music could be performed well enough to justify its inclusion in the curriculum. These qualitative data demonstrate a critical awareness of some of the issues that face the development of multicultural music curricula. Limitations of the Present Study Sample Size The present study received data from 71 participants at 5 universities. Though this sample size is enough to meet the assumptions of the statistical tests used in this study, the small number of participating universities makes generalizing to all universities less valid. The sample size also prevented a more detailed analysis of the qualitative data. If qualitative data had been received from more participants, stronger conclusions may have been possible between concept relationships. Controlled Variables Though the audio stimulus attempted to control for several variables, including tempo, intensity, and performance medium, it did not control for the country of the

 

104 

  excerpts. Previous literature demonstrated preference effects for country (Fung, 1994; Fung, 1996; LeBlanc et al., 1999; LeBlanc et al., 2001; LeBlanc et al., 2002). An attempt was made to control for country by selecting diverse excerpts within each authenticity category. However, due to the limited amount of published multicultural music, it was impossible to also control for country in the present research design. Familiarity has also been shown to affect preference (Fung, 1994; Fung, 2007; Hargreaves & Lee, 2008). Though the WMAQ recorded data about participants’ familiarity with the excerpts, the statistical tests used in this study did not account for the effects of familiarity on preference. The racial diversity of participants in this sample was also limited. Though participants were selected from universities in diverse locations, white students were overwhelmingly represented and black students, surprisingly, were overwhelmingly underrepresented. Though there is no evidence that race affects the ability to accurately perceive the authenticity of multicultural music, it is possible that minority populations may be more sensitive to ideas related to cultural representation. The audio stimulus used in this study was created using the audio from publishers’ web sites. Efforts were made to control for audio quality by using a dynamic equalizer to compress and expand the audio excerpts. However, because some excerpts were live recordings, while others were studio produced recordings made for the purpose of marketing the music, there may have been effects for recording quality on perceptions of authenticity and preference. Qualitative data collected in this study supports these effects. Authenticity Categories The excerpts used for the audio stimulus were carefully categorized for authenticity using Volk’s (1998) category definitions. Reliability observers also categorized the excerpts for authenticity and there was moderate interjudge reliability (r = .61). Though this reliability is not particularly high, achieving consensus among experts on this task is difficult considering the subjectivity of making discriminations based on authenticity. As one observer noted, “there is a lot of wiggle room within and between each category.” Volk also cautioned about the subjectivity of these categories, saying:

 

105 

  The following categories are intended to provide a perspective for determining the degree of authenticity in school music materials. They may prove especially helpful when selecting music for large performing organizations, but can be applied both to general music materials and to instrumental compositions at any level of difficulty. They are not intended to be strict codifications, since some compositions contain elements of more than one category. Neither are they intended to be a criticism of any specific piece or composer (p. 177). Even though the task is subjective, it would be possible to obtain more valid authenticity categories if more experts were used to rate the categories. These excerpts could then be categorized according to expert consensus. Suggestions for Future Research The effects of specific course types were not examined in this study. An experimental design that measured difference in pre- and post-test results for desired multicultural knowledge could be conducted. Also, the differences between common strategies for instructing in multicultural music, such as world music survey courses and world music area courses, could be investigated. From the qualitative data in this study, it emerged that there were common elements that affect authenticity, such as language and instrumentation. These were similar to the qualities described by Volk (1998) and Palmer (2002). Future research could examine the relative importance of these different elements in the perception of authenticity. Like Fung (1996), these characteristics could be examined alongside the perception of authenticity. Differences in these results could be compared between music education students, inservice music teachers, and ethnomusicologists. Conclusions The United States is indeed a pluralistic society. Perhaps the greatest demonstration of this is the diversity of students in our classrooms. Music, like every sector within education, has been called to embrace this diversity. Yet, even though the promotion of multiculturalism has become an accepted value of music education, many preservice teachers are unprepared to teach multiculturally. The quantitative and qualitative data in this study demonstrate that preservice music teachers, regardless of training, lack the ability to make distinctions between authentic and inauthentic

 

106 

  multicultural music. Even so, music teachers by and large want to teach multicultural music, and they prefer to teach multicultural music that is authentic. As one student put it, “There is a wide repertoire of existing music from these cultures—so lets perform authentically!”

 

107 

 

APPENDIX A

CATEGORIES OF AUTHENTICITY Category 1: Pieces whose only connection to the authentic music of another culture is in their titles. These are often very good compositions inspired by another place or time, but they may not even contain a melody from that culture. Instrumental selections in this category are often of the type “Impressions of…” Choral compositions in this category sometimes focus on brotherhood or world peace, or are contemporary compositions sung in another language. Category 2: Pieces that essentially employ the Western art music forms, but which incorporate melodies from other cultures. Often these melodies are credited in the score or in the composer’s notes. These compositions sometimes carry titles with phrases like Theme and Variations on a Folk Song from (fill in country), Rhapsody, or Folk Song Suite. Choral compositions may also be folk melodies but with English translations without including the original language text, or newly composed texts designed to fit the melody. Category 3: Pieces that make the conscious effort to incorporate melodic and rhythmic elements from the music of another culture. These compositions often include the use of traditional percussion instruments or accurate instrumental substitutions, and sometimes include the harmonic structure and timbres from that culture. They are often arrangements of folk songs or dances. Choral works in this category use the original language. Category 4: Pieces that are either original compositions by composers from the culture, or arrangements that are a close approximation of the original music of the culture. These pieces include the use of authentic timbres, instrumentation, form (such as call and response as opposed to sonata allegro), harmony and accompaniment. Choral literature frequently presents transcriptions that are close to the original folk musics.

 

108 

 

APPENDIX B SELECTED UNIVERSITIES University

Participants

Arizona State University

12

Louisiana State University

20

Oregon State University

20

University of Oregon

16

University of Utah

3

 

109 

 

APPENDIX C INSTRUCTIONS FOR FACILITATORS Thank you so much for taking class time to facilitate this study! Your help is greatly appreciated. In addition to helping my research, I hope your students find this task interesting. Included in this packet are questionnaires for students to complete, as well as the audio stimulus for the questionnaire. Below are simple instructions to follow for facilitating this survey. 1. Pass out survey packets. 2. Read IRB script below, and ask students to complete consent form. 3. Have students turn the page to the “Multicultural Music Training Questionnaire” (MMTQ) and complete the questionnaire. If students have questions about the questionnaire, simply tell them to follow the instructions. Please do not aid them in answering the questions. 4. Once students have completed the MMTQ, have them turn the page and read the instructions to the “World Music Authenticity Questionnaire” (WMAQ) as you read the script below out loud. 5. Once you have read the script, begin playing the stimulus CD. If students have questions about the questionnaire, simply tell them to follow the instructions. Please do not aid them in answering the questions. 6. Once the stimulus CD has finished, give students 3 minutes to complete the final page of the WMAQ. 7. Collect questionnaire packets. 8. Place questionnaire packets in self-addressed Priority envelope and mail back. IRB Script: “You are being asked to participate in a research study about world music. The enclosed survey will last approximately 20 minutes. Your participation is voluntary. Please read the consent form at the beginning of your packet. If you have any questions about participating in this study, please ask me.” WMAQ Script: “On the following pages are the titles and descriptions of 17 pieces of multicultural music. You will hear 17 audio excerpts that correspond to each piece. These excerpts and descriptions have been taken from various choral publishers’ web sites. Following each excerpt you will be asked A) about the piece’s authenticity, B) how likely you would be to perform the piece, and C) how familiar you are with the piece. You will be given 20 seconds to circle your answers after each excerpt is played. You are also encouraged to write any thoughts you may have about each specific excerpt in the margins. After listening to all the audio excerpts, you will be given three minutes to provide any comments you may have about authenticity and world music in general. For  

110 

  questions about authenticity, please use the following definition: Authenticity–the degree that a piece of music accurately reflects the music of a certain culture. I will now begin playing the excerpts.” Thank you once again! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at xxx-xxxxxxx, or via email at [email protected].

 

111 

 

APPENDIX D

MULTICULTURAL MUSIC TRAINING QUESTIONNAIRE (MMTQ) Basic Information Sex:

Male

Female

Race:

White

Black

Hispanic

Asian

Other

Age: Are you a music education student: Major:

Choral

Instrumental

Yes

No

General

Multicultural Music Training Instructions: • • • •

Considering the courses you’ve taken during your undergraduate degree, please answer the following questions about world music courses. Include courses you have taken or are currently taking. Do not include courses you have taken under more than one course type. When answering these questions, please consider this definition of world music: World Music – a category of music that describes any music not belonging to European or American art traditions, but does include European and American folk music.

1. World Music Survey Course A world music survey course is a lecture-based course that focuses on music from a variety of cultures around the world, without focusing on any one specific culture. An example of this might be “Introduction to World Music Cultures.” Have you ever taken this type of course?!!

"#$!

If so, please indicate the number of semesters you’ve taken this type of course:

If so, please list the names of the courses:

 

112 

%&!

 

2. !"#$%&'()*+&,#-.&/"(#)-! A world music area course is a lecture-based course that focuses on a specific world music genre and typically pertains to a specific geographic area. An example of this might be “Music of West Africa.” Have you ever taken this type of course?!!

"#$!

%&!

If so, please indicate the number of semesters you’ve taken this type of course:

If so, please list the names of the courses:

3. World Music Performance Course A world music performance course is a performance-based course that focuses on a specific genre of music. An example of this might be “Trinidadian Steel Band.” Have you ever taken this type of course?!!

"#$!

%&!

If so, please indicate the number of semesters you’ve taken this type of course:

If so, please list the names of the courses:

4. World Music Pedagogy Course A world music pedagogy course is a world music course that includes a component about teaching world music and is intended for music education students. An example of this might be “Teaching World Music in the Classroom.” Have you ever taken this type of course?!!

"#$!

If so, please indicate the number of semesters you’ve taken this type of course:

If so, please list the names of the courses:

 

113 

%&!

 

APPENDIX E

WORLD MUSIC AUTHENTICITY QUESTIONNAIRE On the following pages are the titles and descriptions of 17 pieces of multicultural music. You will hear 17 audio excerpts that correspond to each piece. These excerpts and descriptions have been taken from various choral publishers’ web sites. Following each excerpt you will be asked A) about the piece’s authenticity, B) how likely you would be to perform the piece, and C) how familiar you are with the piece. You will be given 20 seconds to circle your answers after each excerpt is played. You are also encouraged to write any thoughts you may have about each specific excerpt in the margins. After listening to all the audio excerpts, you will be given three minutes to provide any comments you may have about authenticity and world music in general.

For questions about authenticity, please use the following definition: Authenticity–the degree that a piece of music accurately reflects the music of a certain culture. World Music Authenticity Questionnaire Form 1

Jenga Imani Yako Israel Kagaruki Composed in the Kwaya music tradition of Tanzania, this vibrant Swahili song means "build your faith" and encourages people to keep moving forward and never to give up, even though they may face hard times. Claves, shaker and drum provide the only accompaniment, and the performance notes offer suggestions for adding movement. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

114 

 

Maquerúle Traditional Colombian Folksong, Arranged by Julián Gómez Giraldo This energetic Colombian folksong tells the tale of a friendly baker who learns the hard way to collect the cash upfront! Strong syncopation and a staccato singing section add to the fun. Includes suggestions for using optional percussion. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

Esta es el Tiempo (This is the Time) By Jay Althouse This is the time to add this multicultural gem to your concert program. It's part Spanish, part English, but all fresh, fun, and sizzling! "Listen to the music, the sweet, sweet music." How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

115 

 

Tuimbe (Let There Be Music) By David Waggoner This African-style original is a celebration of the music inside us and all around us. "Let there be music, music that lives inside of me. Let music ring from sea to sea..." is proclaimed and layered over a rhythmic Swahili text-chant, creating a buoyant, textured cross-cultural feature for choirs at all levels. This really gets a groove going and keeps it going. You don't want it to stop! Highly recommended! How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

Twa Tanbou By Louis M. Celestin & Sydney Guillaume Fasten your seatbelts for this showstopper! From Haiti, this piece is an excellent festival selection for good high school choirs and beyond. It tells a tale about three drums in playful competition. The rhythms are handled with ease, repeated patterns help quick learning, and there is a complete pronunciation guide for the Haitian language. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

116 

 

Comes the Rain With Me By Neil Ginsberg This creative setting of a Navaho text speaks to our deep connection with nature. The piano and flute converse with each other while creating a gentle pulse and vivid imagery. Like a summer storm, the piece builds to an appealing climax and then ends as peacefully as it began. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

Doraji Traditional Korean folk song, Arranged by Audrey Snyder This traditional Korean folk song sings about the doraji – a beautiful white wildflower that grows on the shady slopes of Korean mountains. This accessible setting is charming in its simplicity with canon and countermelody and accompanied by flute and bells. Parts for flute and bells included. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

117 

 

Cantamos Juntos (We Sing Together) By Greg Gilpin "If we sing in musical harmony, why can't we live the same?" This charming original uses English and Spanish lyrics to convey a meaningful message for today's world. Solo opportunities, a rhythmic descant, and parts for flute, shakers, high drum and low drum all enhance the performance of this gentle, expressive work. A Spanish pronunciation and translation guide is included. "We sing together, our hearts unite us..." How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

Gabi Gabi Traditional South African, Arranged by William Powell This a cappella setting of a traditional South African praise song just bursts with joyful energy. Dynamic contrast, percussion and a wide range of layered vocal textures make this an appealing concert choice. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

118 

 

Ka Hia Manu Polynesian texts, chants & melodies, Arranged by Stephen Hatfield Ka Hia Manu (Little Birds) pulls together chants and texts from various Polynesian and Micronesian islands. A metallic, brassy edge to the sound sets this Stephen Hatfield original apart from much of the standard choral repertoire. Think of the spontaneity of kids singing on a bus. Think of hand-woven fabric rather than cashmere. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

Jai Bhavani Sanskrit prayer, Arranged by Ethan Sperry An Indian song in praise of Durga, the supreme incarnation of motherhood in the Hindu religion, in this case a divine representation of mother earth. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

119 

 

African Alleluia By Jay Althouse Bongo and hand drum accompaniment highlight this intensely rhythmic African-styled work. The simple "alleluia" text allows the melodic and rhythmic ideas to take center stage. With exciting vocal layering, a soaring descant, and a powerful finish, this really sparkles! How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

Furaha! (Joy!) By Sally K. Albrecht This rhythmic African-style number is joyous from beginning to end! The text alternates between English and Swahili: "We wish you joy each and every day." It's a healthy dose of cross-cultural fun for choirs at all levels! How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

120 

 

Above the Plain Traditional Czech, Arranged by Audrey Snyder This wonderful Czech folksong, with its beautiful and simple melody, will allow you to develop phrasing, blend and balance in your choir, making it a perfect concert piece! How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

In This Ancient House (Momoshiki Ya) By Ruth Morris Gray With its haunting melody and open fourth and fifth harmonies, this gentle setting of a traditional Japanese poem captures the mystery of ancient Japan. The Japanese text alternating with the English translation is easy to learn and evokes images of ages past. A pronunciation and translation guide is included. The finger cymbals complement the distinctly Asian flavor of this delightfully evocative piece! How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

121 

 

Can You Hear? By Jim Papoulis & Francisco Nunez "Can you hear my cries? I am calling out to you." The global community of children speaks together in this dramatic call for a better future that uses worldbeat sounds, unified chordal harmonies, and occasional solos for a stunning effect. This is an inspiring way to close your concert or festival, or to set a tone for a dynamic new beginning for a season of music-making. Highly recommended! How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

Yes

Janger By Budi Susanto Combines traditional marcato and legato singing with sounds that imitate the traditional Balinese gamelan & monkey chant. How authentic is this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 Not Very --------------------------- Very As a high school choir director, how likely would you be to perform this piece? (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not Very ------------------------------------------ Very Have you ever heard this piece of music before? (circle one) No

 

Yes

122 

  Finally, do you have any comments about authenticity, how likely you would be to perform these pieces, or about this survey in general?

 

123 

  Hal Leonard (48004978) Heritage Music (15/2725H) Heritage Music (15/2637H)

Can You Hear?

Cantamos Juntos

Comes the Rain with Me

124  Walton Music (1101)

Alfred (31025)

Hal Leonard (216281)

Note: 1=Beat could also be felt in cut time (M.M.=72)

Twa Tanbou

Tuimbe

Maquerúle

Boosey & Hawkes (M051471379)

Earthsongs (S-207)

Janger

Ka Hia Manu

Earthsongs (S-307)

Heritage Music (15/2407H)

Jai Bhavani

In This Ancient House

Hal Leonard (8703357)

Alfred (28593)

Furaha!

Gabi Gabi

Alfred (33170)

Esta es el Tiempo

Hal Leonard (8749932)

Alfred (27114)

African Alleluia

Doraji

Hal Leonard (8552111)

Publisher

Above the Plain

Title

Haiti

South Africa

Columbia

Polynesia

Bali

India

Japan

South Africa

South Africa

Latin America

Korea

Navaho

Latin America

—

Africa

Czech

Region

36

38

29

37

46

46

34

38

36

33

38

37

44

23

36

47

Duration

106

92

94

98

90

88

96

102

98

1441

100

92

100

104

108

88

Tempo

 

APPENDIX F

SUMMARY OF SELECTED EXCERPTS

 

APPENDIX G

AUTHENTICITY RATINGS OF RELIABILITY OBSERVERS

Authenticity Category

Judge #1 Rating

Judge #2 Rating

African Alleluia

1

3

1

Can You Hear?

1

1

1

Cantamos Juntos

1

1

3

Comes the Rain With Me

1

1

1

Above the Plain

2

2

2

Esta es el Tiempo

2

1

1

Furaha!

2

3

1

Tuimbe

2

3

1

Doraji

3

3

3

In This Ancient House

3

3

1

Ka Hia Manu

3

3

4

Twa Tanbou

3

4

3

Gabi Gabi

4

3

4

Jai Bhavani

4

3

3

Janger

4

4

3

Maquerúle

4

4

3

Excerpt

Note: Interjudge reliability = .62; Authenticity Category by Judge #1 = .74; Authenticity Category x Judge #2 = .67; Judge #1 by Judge #2 = .43.

 

125 

 

APPENDIX H

WORLD MUSIC AUTHENTICITY QUESTIONNAIRE ORDERS Order 1: Jenga Imani Yako Maquerúle Esta es el Tiempo (This is the Time) Tuimbe (Let There Be Music) Twa Tanbou Comes the Rain With Me Doraji Cantamos Juntos (We Sing Together) Gabi Gabi Ka Hia Manu Jai Bhavani African Alleluia Furaha! (Joy!) Above the Plain In This Ancient House (Momoshiki Ya) Can You Hear? Janger Order 2: Jenga Imani Yako Tuimbe (Let There Be Music) Jai Bhavani Cantamos Juntos (We Sing Together) Twa Tanbou African Alleluia Ka Hia Manu Esta es el Tiempo (This is the Time) Maquerúle Above the Plain Furaha! (Joy!) Janger Can You Hear? Comes the Rain With Me In This Ancient House (Momoshiki Ya) Gabi Gabi Doraji

 

126 

 

APPENDIX I

PERCEPTIONS OF AUTHENTICITY OF SELECTED WORLD MUSIC FOR PARTICIPANTS IN TWO RANDOM QUESTIONNAIRE ORDERS

Excerpt

n

M

SD

African Alleluia Form 1

32

1.09

.30

Form 2

39

1.15

.54

Can You Hear? Form 1

32

2.28

.89

Form 2

39

1.62

.71

Cantamos Juntos Form 1

32

1.56

.72

Form 2

39

1.51

.64

Comes the Rain With Me Form 1

32

1.75

.76

Form 2

39

1.85

.90

Above the Plain Form 1

31

2.10

.91

Form 2

39

2.31

.89

Esta es el Tiempo

 

Form 1

32

1.44

.67

Form 2

39

1.36

.58

127 

z

p

-.16

.88

-3.18

.001

-.18

.86

-.27

.79

-1.01

.31

-.42

.68

 

Furaha! Form 1

31

1.90

.83

Form 2

39

1.79

.73

Tuimbe Form 1

32

1.97

.78

Form 2

39

1.67

.77

Doraji Form 1

32

2.81

.90

Form 2

39

2.92

.81

In This Ancient House Form 1

32

2.41

.67

Form 2

39

2.13

.70

Ka Hia Manu Form 1

32

3.00

.80

Form 2

39

3.36

.74

Twa Tanbou Form 1

32

3.00

.67

Form 2

39

2.92

.70

Gabi Gabi Form 1

32

3.09

.69

Form 2

39

3.21

.77

Jai Bhavani Form 1

32

3.09

.86

Form 2

39

3.18

.72

Janger Form 1

32

3.09

.69

Form 2

39

3.05

.89

Maquerúle

 

Form 1

32

2.56

.72

Form 2

39

3.44

.64

128 

-.45

.65

-1.85

.07

-.57

.57

-1.75

.08

-1.92

.06

-.37

.71

-.92

.36

-.27

.79

-.03

.98

-4.61

< .000

 

APPENDIX J

PREFERENCES FOR TEACHING SELECTED MULTICULTURAL MUSIC FOR PARTICIPANTS IN TWO RANDOM QUESTIONNAIRE ORDERS

Excerpt

n

M

SD

African Alleluia Form 1

32

1.97

1.49

Form 2

39

1.82

1.37

Can You Hear? Form 1

32

3.97

1.94

Form 2

39

2.97

1.82

Cantamos Juntos Form 1

32

2.63

1.62

Form 2

39

2.54

1.14

Comes the Rain With Me Form 1

32

3.22

1.58

Form 2

39

3.26

1.74

Above the Plain Form 1

31

2.97

1.60

Form 2

39

3.67

1.66

Esta es el Tiempo

 

Form 1

32

2.38

1.58

Form 2

39

2.03

1.39

129 

z

p

-.27

.79

-2.25

.02

-.35

.73

-.01

.995

-1.74

.08

-.86

.39

 

Furaha! Form 1

31

2.52

1.48

Form 2

39

2.54

1.41

Tuimbe Form 1

32

3.28

1.73

Form 2

39

3.00

1.47

Doraji Form 1

32

4.88

1.50

Form 2

39

4.28

1.52

In This Ancient House Form 1

32

3.59

1.54

Form 2

39

3.31

1.54

Ka Hia Manu Form 1

32

4.81

1.45

Form 2

39

4.85

1.51

Twa Tanbou Form 1

32

5.00

1.52

Form 2

39

5.21

1.15

Gabi Gabi Form 1

32

4.84

1.51

Form 2

39

4.85

1.50

Jai Bhavani Form 1

32

3.28

1.75

Form 2

39

3.49

1.39

Janger Form 1

32

3.88

1.66

Form 2

39

4.49

1.60

Maquerúle

 

Form 1

32

3.34

1.36

Form 2

39

4.56

1.39

130 

-.12

.90

-.59

.56

-1.64

.10

-.79

.43

-.02

.98

-.25

.81

-.03

.98

-.52

.60

-1.61

.11

-3.26

.001

 

APPENDIX K

FREE RESPONSE DATA Participant 1 Jenga Imani Yako

Rhythms could be more varied.

Jai Bhavani

Authentic instrumentation and rhythms!

Cantamos Juntos

Sounds more like Disney music, not Spanish music.

Twa Tanbou

Great polyrhythms in imitation of the percussion.

Esta es el Tiempo

Lyrics are quite corny.

Maquerule

Feels very ethnic with varied percussion rhythms.

Furaha!

The words are quite cheesy.

Gabi Gabi

I like the percussion part.

End response

The performers make a big difference. When their sound was more ethnic, the songs felt more authentic. The instrumental accompaniment, piano, or percussion, created the feel or not of an authentic world music experience.

Participant 2 End Response

The quality of the performers determined my decision on the authenticity of the piece as well as my decision to use these pieces in a concert.

Participant 3 End Response

In some of the musical selections I found that the quality of the performers affects the perception of the music. The instruments also play a big role in the authenticity.

Participant 5 African Alleluia

 

This hurt my soul.

131 

  End response

The pieces with less sentimental/cutesy text was much more appealing to me. And I would be more likely to choose pieces based on what my choir needed pedagogically (versus fulfilling a multicultural checklist).

Participant 7 End response

I found it difficult to give an accurate rating of authenticity due to the fact I haven't studied these cultures in depth. I just went with my first reaction.

Participant 8 Jenga Imani Yako

This is a professional group.

Jai Bhavani

I have met him [Ethan Sperry]. He does a lot of research and investigates languages well.

Cantamos Juntos

Sounds like a children's song. Where was the Spanish?

African Alleluia

This sounds like contemporary church music.

Esta es el Tiempo

May be multicultural, but not in the traditional Spain feel.

Furaha!

[about "African-style"] Broad.

Can You Hear?

[about "global community of children"] Who are they?

Comes the Rain With Me

Sounds Western.

In This Ancient House

Sounds good, but not an arrangement.

Gabi Gabi

This song is over used.

End response

I believe you could have found some higher quality performances—also, I would have liked to hear them longer as well as have a bio of composer/arranger.

Participant 9 End response

Would it be considered more authentic to use traditional instruments such as gamelan, native American flute, etc? If so, a 4 cannot be circled unless these instruments are used. However, it is unrealistic to expect secondary level choirs to have access to these instruments. So,

 

132 

  through no fault of the performers/directors, I felt that I couldn't say it was as authentic as possible. Participant 10 Jenga Imani Yako

Sounds very stylized to fit parents' taste.

Jai Bhavani

The accompaniment gives this piece an Indian sound.

Twa Tanbou

Sparse instrumental accompaniment makes this one more authentic.

African Alleluia

Those synthesized drums are not good.

Esta es el Tiempo

That was written purely to make money. There is no quality music in this song.

Comes the Rain With Me

There should be some sort of hand drum if it is based on a Navajo text.

Doraji

The bells and piano diminish the authenticity this piece.

Cantamos Juntos

Elementary/Middle School.

End response

A common theme throughout was that the addition of instruments not characteristic to some of the cultures represented greatly diminished the authenticity of this piece. It seemed like many of these were overly stylized just to make money. Some composers did not necessarily seem to worry about sacrificing musicality.

Participant 11 End response

Inclusion of English text in native language automatically takes authenticity down a point. Many of the authentic pieces would be appealing to me as a high school/middle school choir director. The quality of performance plays a part in the rating of the authenticity. Better sounding choir equals more authentic.

Participant 12 End response

I believe authenticity in world music performance is very important. Not only is it honoring the culture the music comes from, it is also (for many audience

 

133 

  members) presenting the only glimpse they will have into another culture's music. Participant 13 Jenga Imani Yako

Harmonies felt too westernized.

End response

We have taken many lovely multi-ethnic pieces of music and westernized them. I wish there was more training available in music of other cultures, that way I would know better what is authentic. This survey reminded me I need to listen to more diverse areas of music and try to bring in diverse styles into my classroom.

Participant 14 End response

Personally, I feel as if a bit of the authenticity is taken away when they throw English into the song, but that is of course not the only element that defines authenticity. I think the more authentic the piece, the more likely I would be to perform it.

Participant 15

 

Jenga Imani Yako

Captures the upbeat feel.

Tuimbe

Sounds a little commercialized.

Jai Bhavani

Percussion sounds authentic.

Cantamos Juntos

Sounds a little commercialized.

Twa Tanbou

I like the active parts.

African Alleluia

Sounds very commercialized.

Ka Hia Manu

I like its simplicity.

Esta es el Tiempo

Very commercialized.

Maquerúle

I like the drum beat!

Above the Plain

Sounds too legato.

Furaha!

The backup instruments ruin the effect.

Janger

I prefer songs to have little instrumentation like this one.

Gabi Gabi

Again, I like the a cappella ones.

134 

  End response

I would have liked to hear more authentic pieces. I liked the songs that had drums the best. I wonder if drums make songs more authentic, or if that only happens sometimes. I found it interesting that the song I knew well and had performed, Jai Bhavani, I was far more likely to perform again.

Participant 16 End response

I feel that authentic works must reflect the language and musical styles of the culture for a piece to be fully authentic (minimal mixing).

Participant 17 Jenga Imani Yako

The singers didn't sound authentic, but the rhythms did.

Twa Tanbou

It seems too choral to be authentic.

African Alleluia

This sounds like Disneyland.

Ka Hia Manu

Men's choir.

Can You Hear?

The English doesn't sound authentic.

Comes the Rain With Me

The flute was the only authentic-sounding part.

Gabi Gabi

The vibrato and lack of syncopation hurt the authenticity.

Doraji

Women's choir.

End response

It seems like percussion with limited instrumental accompaniment is what sounds authentic to me in the African realm. The pieces that don't sound authentic have too many instruments, with a sound of Western US/or Disneyland. I much prefer the more authentic sounding pieces, and would likely do some of them.

Participant 18 Jenga Imani Yako

I haven't had enough training in world music to make the best decision about this.

 

Jai Bhavani

A bit simple.

Above the Plain

I have very little knowledge of this culture!

135 

  Furaha!

Never been a big fan of the dual language pieces.

Janger

[referring to imitating Balinese gamelan and money chant] They are imitating instruments. I feel an instrumental version would be more authentic.

Comes the Rain With Me

Almost like romanticizing the culture more than representing it.

End response

I have always been a bit on the fence about performing world music--I think it is too easy to Americanize cultures and their music into a simplified choral setting. It's not that I think it shouldn't be performed, it just should be done as correctly as possible.

Participant 19 Cantamos Juntos

It sounds more English than Spanish

African Alleluia

Sounds fun to have high school sing.

End response

I believe when a song is authentic, you can feel like you're in that country when you hear or sing or play an authentic piece. I could have a few of them performed. It was enjoyable trying to determine what I think authentic music is.

Participant 22 End response

This was a great survey.

Participant 24 End response

The more authentic, the more likely I would want to use the piece.

Participant 25 End response

Size of ensemble has a lot to do with it. If the size matches the style of the piece, then it makes it more authentic.

Participant 26 End response

 

It seems like most of these aren't very authentic.

136 

  Participant 27 End response

The pieces sounded very Americanized due to the instrumentation.

Participant 29 End response

Some of these works I would perform for their musical quality, regardless of world music authenticity (some of those composed, not arranged) by modern composers.

Participant 31 End response

Where did the suggestions come from? An ad?

Participant 34 End response

Completely subjective nothing to say.

Participant 36 Jenga Imani Yako

Voice timbres sound more American.

Maquerúle

Also too clean and perfect to be completely authentic.

Tuimbe

Sounds VERY Americanized.

End response

Most of the pieces were either not authentic-sounding at all of had very little authenticity. The main reason seems to be because there are many multicultural elements with American tone qualities and diction. Most seem very disjunct and the sounds do not "fit" with one another."

Participant 37 End response

The majority of these pieces were not authentic. If a choir is going to perform a piece that signifies a specific culture, it should adhere to it. Added English to the text does not help this authenticity.

Participant 38 End response

Many of these pieces seem like they were thrown together by Western composers who did nothing more than add foreign text before declaring their piece as

 

137 

  "multicultural." Some, however, are great and truly capture their respective culture's attitudes and sounds. Participant 39 End response

I was really influenced by the recording and effects (or lack thereof). The "sappy" white demographic sound really turned me off. I want to hear world music that is more authentic, gritty, culturally appropriate, etc. Forcing world music into a "white choir" sound is hard to listen to. I feel that if those arrangements were performed differently, they would have been more moving.

Participant 40 Jenga Imani Yako

[possibly referring to authenticity] Arrangement is, but style isn't.

Twa Tanbou

American sounding with vowels and timbre.

End response

The catalogue information sometimes gave away the authenticity. Also, some of the recordings were obviously phony and poor quality.

Participant 41 End response

This was fun! Watch out for Althouse! Pretty much if English was involved it killed the entire mood for me. That and the use of piano with traditional Western harmonies and tonality.

Participant 42 End response

I would perform the pieces I liked. Many of these just weren't good arrangements or weren't performed very authentically in general.

Participant 43 Esta es el Tiempo

Use of Spanish here almost seems like an afterthought.

Tuimbe

The mix of languages here is different because the music style applied to both countries.

 

138 

  Comes the Rain With Me

Ignores the musical traditions of Navaho.

Doraji

Seems highly Anglicized.

End response

I guess the thing about authenticity for me is that I would want to respect the existing musical cultures that already exist when I expose my students to world music. There is a wide repertoire of existing music from these cultures—so lets perform authentically! There's no need for "crossover" literature.

Participant 44 End response

It is difficult to describe the "authenticity" of a piece, especially never hearing the pieces.

Participant 45 Maquerúle

Has an arranger, so stays closer to authentic style

Esta es el Tiempo

Definitely contrived.

Tuimbe

Not rhythmical to Swahili.

Comes the Rain With Me

Too tonal.

Doraji

Uses scales and percussion somewhat better than the other in being accurate.

Cantamos Juntos

Really cheesy.

Gabi Gabi

Somewhat better. Wouldn't be so chordal, more unison.

Ka Hia Manu

Very simple, believable for Polynesian tribe.

Jai Bhavani

Percussion makes sense and use of unison (or octaves) makes it believable.

African Alleluia

Nowhere close to African style piece. Not African.

Furaha!

Cheesy. Percussion is very much in the style though.

Above the Plain

Simple and folkish. Could use more eastern influences to be truly authentic.

End response

Overall, these pieces seemed very contrived. There were a few that felt authentic, but mostly they seemed forced, cheesy, and in some cases just misnamed in

 

139 

  style. Most of them I wouldn't perform them as a general comment. Participant 46 End response

It is difficult to determine authenticity when the recording is so studio enhanced. Professional singers, whose diction could NOT be authentic is a problem.

Participant 47 End response

I was unsure how to rate authenticity due to the differences in musical background and vocal lines. Parts of pieces seemed authentic and parts didn't.

Participant 48 End response

Most of these pieces sounded like Americanized versions of world music—why not just use real pieces from other cultures?

Participant 50 End response

There are hundreds of different African cultures, and most of these just stereotype Africa as one large country. The descriptions give the imposters right away.

Participant 51 End response

I would rather do an authentic work as opposed to one that is meant to imitate a culture. It is also hard in public schools to do works tied with any religion or religious figure, no matter what culture.

Participant 54 End response

Pieces that include texts from 2 (or more) languages seem to feel the most contrived or artificial.

Participant 60 End response

It's important to include not just authentic languages within pieces, but use authentic instruments. Especially percussion!

 

140 

  Participant 61 End response

It's hard to talk about authenticity when most of the music is based on "assumptions" on how the music should sound!

Participant 62 Tuimbe

It's very Westernized and "sanitized."

Jai Bhavani

It sounds nothing like any of either the North Indian of South Indian music I've studied.

African Alleluia

It sounds like everything else Jay Althouse writes...

Ka Hia Manu

[in reference to "various Polynesian and Micronesian islands] That's really broad...

Above the Plain

Czech music is usually sung with a much brighter sound...

Gabi Gabi

What kind of South African style is it supposed to imitate? It sounds vaguely like isicathimiya but that wouldn't have percussion...

End response

I found a lot of the music to be bland and commercialized, "sanitized" and boring.

Participant 63 End response

In general, the more authentic, the more likely I would be to have a group perform it.

Participant 64 African Alleluia

"African-styled" NEVER authentic.

Participant 65 African Alleluia

Sounds like a church worship song.

Participant 66 End response

Because a culture is constantly changing and evolving, it is difficult to classify an arrangement of a melody as not authentic. Western art has influenced these world cultures so much that it is impossible for its music to be untouched by the influences and be "purely" authentic.

 

141 

  Participant 67 End response

I have no expertise on authenticity. I based it off of the sound of the recording, the name of the piece, and the name of the composer.

Participant 68 End response

Before programming world music in my choir, I would like to study this subject in more depth. I have a difficult time distinguishing authentic music because I've never studied it.

 

142 

 

APPENDIX L

HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL MEMORANDUM Human Subjects To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Office of the Vice President For Research Human Subjects Committee Tallahassee, Florida 32306-2742 (850) 644-8673 · FAX (850) 644-4392

Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 11:08 AM

APPROVAL MEMORANDUM Date: 2/22/2012 To: David Knapp Address: xxxx xxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx Dept.: MUSIC SCHOOL From: Thomas L. Jacobson, Chair Re: Use of Human Subjects in Research The Effects of Selected Training Variables on Undergraduate Music Education Majors' Perceptions of Effective World Music Teaching The application that you submitted to this office in regard to the use of human subjects in the proposal referenced above have been reviewed by the Secretary, the Chair, and one member of the Human Subjects Committee. Your project is determined to be Expedited per per 45 CFR § 46.110(7) and has been approved by an expedited review process. The Human Subjects Committee has not evaluated your proposal for scientific merit, except to weigh the risk to the human participants and the aspects of the proposal related to potential risk and benefit. This approval does not replace any departmental or other approvals, which may be required. If you submitted a proposed consent form with your application, the approved stamped consent form is attached to this approval notice. Only the stamped version of the consent form may be used in recruiting research subjects. If the project has not been completed by 2/18/2013 you must request a renewal of approval for continuation of the project. As a courtesy, a renewal notice will be sent to

 

143 

  you prior to your expiration date; however, it is your responsibility as the Principal Investigator to timely request renewal of your approval from the Committee. You are advised that any change in protocol for this project must be reviewed and approved by the Committee prior to implementation of the proposed change in the protocol. A protocol change/amendment form is required to be submitted for approval by the Committee. In addition, federal regulations require that the Principal Investigator promptly report, in writing any unanticipated problems or adverse events involving risks to research subjects or others. By copy of this memorandum, the Chair of your department and/or your major professor is reminded that he/she is responsible for being informed concerning research projects involving human subjects in the department, and should review protocols as often as needed to insure that the project is being conducted in compliance with our institution and with DHHS regulations. This institution has an Assurance on file with the Office for Human Research Protection. The Assurance Number is FWA00000168/IRB number IRB00000446. Cc: Steven Kelly, Advisor HSC No. 2011.7185

 

144 

 

APPENDIX M

PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM FSU Behavioral Consent Form Project: The Effects of Selected Training Variables on Undergraduate Music Education 0DMRUV¶3HUFHSWLRQVRI(IIHFWLYH:RUOG0XVLF7HDFKLQJ You are invited to be in a research study on world music teaching. You were selected as a possible participant because of your training in music education. I ask that you read this form and ask any questions you may have before agreeing to be in the study. This study is being conducted by David Knapp from the College of Music at Florida State University. Background Information: The purpose of this study is to understand PXVLFHGXFDWLRQVWXGHQWV¶SHUFHSWLRQVRI teaching world music. Risks and benefits of being in the Study: There are minimal risks to you for participating in this study. There are no benefits to you for participating in this study. Compensation: There is no compensation for participating in this study. Confidentiality: The records of this study will be kept private and confidential to the extent permitted by law. In any sort of report we might publish, we will not include any information that will make it possible to identify a subject. Research records will be stored securely and only researchers will have access to the records. Voluntary Nature of the Study: Participation in this study is voluntary. Your decision whether or not to participate will not affect your current or future relations with this class or the university. If you decide to participate, you are free to not answer any question or withdraw at any time without affecting those relationships. Contacts and Q uestions: The researcher conducting this study is David Knapp. You may ask any question you have now. If you have a question later, you are encouraged to contact him at 646-2469133, or Dr. Steve Kelly at 850-644-4069.

FSU Human Subjects Committee approved on 2/20/2012 Void after 2/18/2013 HSC # 2011.7185

 

145 

 

If you have any questions or concerns regarding this study and would like to talk to someone other than the researcher(s), you are encouraged to contact the FSU IRB at 2010 Levy Street, Research Building B, Suite 276, Tallahassee, FL 32306-2742, or 850-6448633, or by email at [email protected]. You will be given a copy of this information to keep for your records. Statement of Consent: I have read the above information. I have asked questions and have received answers. I consent to participate in the study.

__________________________________________ Signature

_________________ Date

FSU Human Subjects Committee approved on 2/20/2012 Void after 2/18/2013 HSC # 2011.7185

 

146 

 

REFERENCES Abeles. H. F. (1980). Responses to music. In D. A. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 105-140). Lawrence, KS: National Association for Music Therapy. Abril, C. R. (2004). Learning outcomes of two approaches to multicultural music education. International Journal of Music Education, 24, 30-42. Abril, C. R., Flowers, P. J. (2007). Attention, preference, and identity in music listening by middle school students of different linguistic backgrounds. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(3), 204-219. Anderson, W. M. (1983, May). The teacher as translator of culture. Music Educators Journal, 69(9), 32. Anderson, W. M. (1992a, May). Multicultural music education. Music Educators Journal, 78(9), 25. Anderson, W. M. (1992b, May). Rethinking teacher education: The multicultural imperative. Music Educators Journal, 78(9), 52-55. Anderson, W. M., & Campbell, P. S. (Eds.). (1996). Multicultural perspectives in music education (2nd ed.). Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference. Anderson, W. M., & Campbell, P. S. (Eds.). (2010). Multicultural perspectives in music education (3rd ed.). (Vols. 1-3). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Armitage, M. T., Dykema, P. W., & Pitcher, G. (1941). Merry music: A singing school: book of accompaniments. Boston: C.C. Birchard. Banks, J. A. (1988). Multicultural education: Theory and practice (2nd Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Banks, J. A. (1997). Multicultural education: Characteristics and goals. In J. A. Banks And C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (pp. 3-31). Hoboken, N. J. Wiley. Banks, J. A. (1999). An introduction to multicultural education (2nd Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. G. (Eds.). (2007). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (6th Ed.). Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Beattie, J. W., Wolverton, J., Wilson, G. V., & Hinga, H. (1954). The American singer. New York: American Book Co. Birge, E. B. (1966). History of public school music in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference.

 

147 

  Bower, L. A. (2008). Standing up for diversity: Lesbian mothers' suggestions for teachers. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 44(4), 181-183. Boyer-White, R. (1988). Reflecting cultural diversity in the music classroom. Music Educators Journal, 75(4), 50-54. Brett, C. E. (1990). A Study of Trends and Developments in Multicultural Music Education (1960-1989) and their Manifestation in Silver Burdett Music Series. (Master's thesis). Britten, R. V. (1996). Listeners’ preference for music of other cultures: Comparing response modes. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44(4), 328-340. Burton, B. (2002). Weaving the tapestry of world musics. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 161-185). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Byrne, D. (1999, October 3). Crossing music’s borders: “I hate world music.” New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.davidbyrne.com. Campbell, P. S. (1991). Lessons from the world. New York: Schirmer Books. Campbell, P. S. (1992, May). Cultural consciousness in teaching general music. Music Educators Journal, 78(9), 30-36. Campbell, P. S. (1994). Multiculturalism and the raising of music teachers for the twentyfirst century. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 3, 21-29. Campbell, P. S. (1995). “Authentic” vs. “Traditional.” Music Educators Journal, 82(1), 6. Campbell, P. S. (1996). Music in cultural context: Eight views on world music education. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference. Campbell, P. S. (2004). Teaching music globally. New York: Oxford University Press. Carnevale, N. C. (2006). Immigration and language. . In R. Ueda (Ed.), A companion to American immigration (pp. 471-491). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Choate, R. (Ed.). (1968). Documentary report of the Tanglewood Symposium. Washington, DC: MENC. Clark, S. (2005). Mariachi music as a symbol of Mexican culture in the United States. International Journal of Music Education, 23(3), 227-237. Consortium of National Arts Education Associations. (1994). The National Standards for Arts Education. Retrieved January 16, 2012, from http://www.menc.org/ resources/view/national-standards-for-music-education Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

 

148 

  Cowell, R. J. (1985). Program evaluation in music teacher education. The Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 81, (18-64) Cuyjet, M. J., Howard-Hamilton, M., & Cooper, D. L. (2011). Multiculturalism on campus: Theory, models, and practices for understanding diversity and creating inclusion. Herndon, VA. Stylus Publishing. Darrow, A. A., Haack, P., & Kuribayashi, F. (1987). Descriptors and preferences for Eastern and Western musics by Japanese and American nonmusic majors. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35(4), 237-248. Dekaney, W. M., & Cunningham, D. A. (2011). Travel On and On: Interdisciplinary Lessons in the Music of World Cultures. Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Demorest, S. M., & Schultz, S. J. M. (2004). Children’s preferences for authentic versus arranged versions of world music recordings. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52(4), 300-313. Dewey, J. (1903). Democracy and education. The Elementary School Teacher, 4(4), 193204. Dinnerstein, L., & Reimers, D. M. (2009). Ethnic Americans: A history of immigration (5th Ed.). New York: Columbia University Press. Dorow, L. G. (1977). The effect of teacher approval/disapproval ratios on student music selection and concert attentiveness. Journal of Research in Music Education, 25, 32-40. Eisele, J. C. (1975). John Dewey and the immigrants. History of Education Quarterly, 15(1), 67-85. Elliott, D. J. (1984). The role of music and musical experience in modern society: Toward a global philosophy of music education. International Journal of Music Education, 4, 3-8. Elliott, D. J. (1989). Key concepts in multicultural music education. International Journal of Music Education, 13, 11-18. Elliott, D. J. (1990). Music as culture: Toward a multicultural concept of arts education. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 24(1), 147-166. Elliott, D. J. (1995). Music matters: A new philosophy of music education. New York: Oxford University Press. Elliott, D. J. (1996). Consciousness, culture and curriculum. International Journal of Music Education, 28, 1-15. Ellis, A. J. (1885). On the musical scales of various nations. Journal of the Society of Arts, 33, 485-527.

 

149 

  Elson, L. C. (1905). Folk songs of many nations. Cincinnati, OH: The John Church Company. Engel, C. (1922). Jazz in the proper light. Music Supervisors National Conference Proceedings, 137-144. Farnsworth, P. R. (1925). Ending preferences and apparent pitch of a combination of tones. Dissertation Abstracts Online, No. AAG0127870. Farnsworth, P. R. (1926a). Ending preferences among three positions of the tonic chord. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 6, 95-102. Farnsworth, P. R. (1926b). The effect of repetition on ending preferences in melodies. American Journal of Psychology, 37, 116-122. Farnsworth, P. R. (1939). Changes in musical taste. Journal of Musicology, 1, 1-4. Farnsworth, P. R. (1949). Agreement with the judgments of musicologists as a measure of musical taste. Journal of Psychology, 28, 421-425. Farnsworth, P. R. (1950). Musical taste: Its measurement and cultural nature. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Farnsworth, P. R. (1966). Musicological attitudes on eminence. Journal of Research in Music Education, 14(1), 41-44. Farnsworth, P. R. (1967). The phenomenon of musical taste. Psychology Today, 1(4), 1419, 40-43. Farnsworth, P. R. (1969). The social psychology of music (2nd Ed.). Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. Ferrell, R. E. (2010). Across the water: Teaching Irish music and dance at home and abroad. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Finnäs, L. (1989). How can musical preference be modified? A research review. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 102, 1-58. Fisher, W. C., Gerber, D. A., Guitart, J. G., & Seller, M. S. (Eds.). (1997). Identity, community, and pluralism in American life. New York: Oxford University Press. Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed (2nd Ed.). New York: Continuum. Freire, P. (2005). Education for critical consciousness (2nd Ed.). New York: Continuum. Fung, C. V. (1994). Undergraduate nonmusic majors’ world music preferences and multicultural attitudes. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(1), 45-57. Fung, C. V. (1995). Rationales for Teaching World Musics. Music Educators Journal, 82(1), 36-40.

 

150 

  Fung, C. V. (1996). Musicians’ and nonmusicians’ preferences for world musics: Relation to musical characteristics and familiarity. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44(1), 60-83. Fung, C. V. (2002). Experiencing world musics in schools: From fundamental positions to strategic guidelines. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 187-204). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Fung, C. V. (2007). Preservice music educators’ personal preferences for Chinese orchestral, traditional, and popular pieces in relation to familiarity, perceived value, and external preferences. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 171, 67-79. Gibson, M. A. (1976). Approaches to multicultural education in the United States: Some concepts and assumptions. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 7(4), 7-18. Giles, M. B., & Sherman, T. M. (1982). Measurement of multicultural attitudes of teacher trainees. Journal of Educational Research, 75, 204-209. Gilman, B. I. (1891). Zuñi Melodies. Journal of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Giroux, H. (1983). Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy for the opposition. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey. Giroux, H. A. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Granby, Mass: Bergin & Garvey. Glenn, M. (1936). The world of music. Boston: Ginn and Company. Glenn, K. (1990). Music education in tune with the times: Greeting the 1990s. Music Educators Journal, 77(1), 21-23. Gradante, W. (Ed.). (2008). Foundations of mariachi education: Materials, methods, and resources. Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Grant, C. A., & Sleeter, C. E. (2007). Race, class, gender, and disability in the classroom. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (pp. 63-83). Hoboken, N. J. Wiley. Greer, R. D., Dorow, L. D., Wacchaus, G., & White, E. R. (1973). Adult approval and students’ music selection behavior. Journal of Research in Music Education,21(4), 345-354. Gregory, D. (1994). Analysis of listening preferences of high school and college musicians. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(4), 331-342. Halter, M. (2006) Ethnic and racial identity. In R. Ueda (Ed.), A companion to American immigration (pp. 161-176. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

 

151 

  Hamlen, K. R., & Shuell, T. J. (2006). The effects of familiarity and audiovisual stimuli on preference for classical music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 168, 21-34. Hargreaves, D. J., Comber, C., & Colley, A. (1995). Effects of age, gender, and training on musical preferences of British secondary school students. Journal of Research in Music Education,43(3), 242-250. Hargreaves, D. J., Messerschmidt, P., & Rubert, C. (1980). Musical preference and evaluation. Psychology of Music, 8, 13-18. Heller, G. N. (1983, May). Retrospective of multicultural music education in the United States. Music Educators Journal, 69(9), 35-36. Hood, M. (1960). The challenge of bi-musicality. Ethnomusicology, 4(2), 55-59. Inniss, C. L. (1974, February). A practical introduction to African music. Music Educators Journal, 60(6), 50-53. International Society for Music Education (1994). Declaration of Beliefs for Worldwide Promotion of Music Education. International Journal of Music Education, 24, 49. Johnston, T. F., Nicolai, M., & Nagozruk, K. (1979, March). Illeagosiik! Eskimo string figure games. Music Educators Journal, 65(7), 54-61. Jorgensen, E. (1997). In search of music education. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Killian, J. N. (1990). Effect of model characteristics on musical preference of junior high students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 38(2), 115-123. Kindall-Smith, M., McKoy, C. L., & Mills, S. W. (2011). Challenging exclusionary paradigms in the traditional musical canon: Implications for music education practice. International Journal of Music Education, 29(4), 374-386. Klinger, R. (2002). A materials girl in search of the genuine article. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 205-217). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Koza, J. E. (1996). Multicultural approaches to music education. In C. A. Grant & M. L. Gomez, (Eds.), Making schooling multicultural: Campus and classroom (pp. 263–287). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kraus, E. (1967). The contribution of music education to the understanding of foreign cultures, past and present. Music Educators Journal, 53(5), 30-32,99. Kunst, J. (1950). Musicologica: A study of the nature of ethno-musicology, its problems, methods, and representative personalities. Amsterdam: Indisch Instituut. Labuta, J. A., & Smith, D. A. (1997). Music education: historical contexts and perspectives. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

 

152 

  LeBlanc, A. (1979). Generic style music preferences of fifth-grade students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 27(4), 255-270. LeBlanc, A. (1980). Outline of a proposed model of sources of variation in musical taste. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 61, 29-34. LeBlanc, A. (1981). Effects of style, tempo, and performing medium on children’s music preference. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29(2), 143-156. LeBlanc, A. (2001). Paul Farnsworth: Pioneer scholar of music listening preference. Bulletin of the Council of Research in Music Education, 149. 3-12. LeBlanc, A., Colman, J., McCrary, J., Sherrill, C., & Malin, S. (1988). Tempo preferences of different age listeners. Journal of Research in Music Education, 36(3), 156-168. LeBlanc., A., & Cote, R. (1983). Effects of tempo and performing medium on children’s music preference. Journal of Research in Music Education, 31(1), 57-66. LeBlanc, A., Fung, C. V., Boal-Palheiros, G. M., Burt-Rider, A. J., Ogawa, Y., Oliviera, A. J., & Stamou, L. (2002). Effect of strength of beat on preferences of young music listeners in Brazil, Greece, Japan, Portugal, and the United States. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 153/154, 36-41. LeBlanc, A., Jin, Y. C., Chen-Hafteck, L., Oliviera, A. J., Oosthuysen, S., & Tafuri, J. (2001). Tempo preferences of young listeners in Brazil, China, Italy, South Africa, and the United States. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 147, 97-102. LeBlanc, A., Jin, Y. C., Stamou, L., & McCrary, J. (1999). Effect of age, country and gender on music listening preferences. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 141, 72-76. LeBlanc, A., & McCrary, J. (1983). Effects of tempo on children’s music preference. Journal of Research in Music Education, 31(4), 283-294. Leistyna, P. (2001). Extending the possibilities of multicultural professional development in public schools. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 16(4), 282-304. Lewis, W. (1929). Paleface: The philosophy of the ‘melting-pot.’ London: Chatto & Windus. Madsen, C. K. (Ed.). (2000). Vision 2020: The Housewright Symposium on the future of music education. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference. Madsen, C. K., & Kelly, S. N. (2002). First remembrances of wanting to become a music teacher. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(4), 323-332.

 

153 

  Madsen, C. K. & Kelly, S. N. (2007). First remembrances of wanting to become a music teacher. In Kenneth H. Phillips (Ed.). Exploring Research in Music Education and Music Therapy. New York: Oxford University Press. Mason, L. (1854). The song-book of the school-room. Boston: Rice & Kendall, Late Wilkins, Carter & Co. Mason, L. (1864). The song-garden: A series of school music books, progressively arranged: each book complete in itself. Boston: Oliver Ditson & Company. McCarthy, M. (1993). The birth of internationalism in music education 1899-1938. International Journal of Music Education, 21, 3-15. McCarthy, M. (1995). Canticle to hope: Widening horizons in international music education, 1939-1953. International Journal of Music Education, 25, 38-49. McCarthy, M. (1997). The role of ISME in the promotion of multicultural music education, 1953-96. International Journal of Music Education, 29, 81-93. McConathy, O. (1944). New music horizons. New York: Silver Burdett. McCrary, J. (1993). Effects of listeners’ and performers’ race on musical preferences. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41(3), 200-211. McCullough-Brabson, E. (2002). Passing the cultural baton of music. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 119-137). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. McLaren, P. L. (2006). Life in schools: Introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education (5th Ed.). NY: Longman. McMullen, P. T. (1974). Influence of number of different pitches and melodic redundancy on preference responses. Journal of Research in Music Education, 22(3), 198-204. Menard, S. (2002). Applied logistic regression analysis (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Merriam, A. (1964). Anthropology of music. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press. Merriam, A. (1977). Definitions of “comparative musicology” and “ethnomusicology”: An historical-theoretical perspective. Ethnomusicology, 21(2), 189-204. Miralis, Y. C. (2002). Multicultural world music education and music teacher education at the Big Ten schools: Identified problems and suggestions. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from Proquest. (3053780) Miralis, Y. C. (2006). Clarifying the terms “multicultural,” “multiethnic,” and “world music education” through a review of literature. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 24, 55-66.  

154 

  Mitchell, T. (1993). World music and the popular music industry: An Australian view. Ethnomusicology, 37(3), 309-338. Montague, M. J. (1988). An investigation of teacher training in multicultural music education in selected universities and colleges. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from Proquest. (8821622) Morgan, H. B. N. (1947). Music education source book: A compendium of data, opinion, and recommendations. Chicago: Music Educators’ National Conference. Morrison, S. J., & Yeh, C. S. (1999). Preference responses and use of written descriptors among music and nonmusic majors in the United States, Hong Kong, and the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(1), 5-17. National Association of Schools of Music (2010). Handbook 2010-11. Reston, VA: Author. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2008). Professional standards for the accreditation of teacher preparation institutions. Washington, DC: Author. Naturalization Act. 1st Cong., 2nd sess., ch. 3, § 1 (1790). Nies, J. (1996). Native American history: A chronology of the vast achievements of a culture and their links to world events. New York: Ballantine. Oberndorfer, A. F., & Victor Talking Machine Company. (1921). What we hear in music: A course of study in music history and appreciation. Camden, N.J: Educational Dept., Victor Talking Machine Co. O’Flynn, J. (2005). Re-appraising ideas of musicality in intercultural contexts of music education. International Journal of Music Education, 23(3), 191-203. Ohio State University. (1988, January). Results from a survey of multicultural attitudes and competencies among students completing student teaching from the College of Education at The Ohio State University, 1985-1986. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov. Pak, Y. (2006). Multiculturalism matters: Learning from our past. In V. O. Pang (Ed.). Race, ethnicity, and education: Principles and practices of multicultural education (pp. 3-22). Westport, CT: Praeger. Palmer, A. J. (1975). World musics in elementary and secondary music education: A critical analysis. Dissertation Abstracts International, Palmer, A. J. (1992). World musics in music education: The matter of authenticity. International Journal of Music Education, 19, 32-40. Palmer, A. J. (2002). Multicultural music education: Pathways and byways, purpose and serendipity. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 31-53). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference.

 

155 

  Parthun, P. (1976, January). Tribal music in North America. Music Educators Journal, 62(5), 32-45. Pembrook, R. G., & Robinson, C. R. (1997). The effect of mode of instruction and instrument authenticity on children's attitudes, information recall, and performance skill for music from Ghana. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 133, 115-120. Pratte, R. (1979). Pluralism in education: Conflict, clarity and commitment. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Quesada, M. A. (2002). Teaching unfamiliar styles of music. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 139-159). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Radocy, R. E., & Boyle, J. D. (2003). Psychological foundations of musical behavior (4th Ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Reimer, B. (1991). Selfness and otherness in experiencing music of foreign cultures. The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning, 2(3), 4-13. Reimer, B. (2002a). A philosophy of music education: Advancing the vision (3rd Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Reimer, B. (Ed.). (2002b). World musics and music education. Lanham, MD: National Association for Music Education. Rein, L. (2006, September 3). Mystery of Va.'s first slaves is unlocked 400 years later. Washington Post, pp. A1. Rhodes, W. (1956). On the subject of ethno-musicology. Ethnomusicology, 1(7), 1-9. Robinson, K. (2002). Teacher education for a new world of musics. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 219-236). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Rose, W. L. (Ed.). (1976). A documentary history of slavery in North America. New York: Oxford University Press. Sarazzin, N. (2009). Indian music for the classroom. Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Schippers, H. (2010). Facing the music. New York: Oxford University Press. Schwadron, A. A. (1973). Comparative music aesthetics: Toward a universality of musicality. Journal of Musicological Research, 1(1), 17-31. Schwadron, A. A. (1984). World musics in education. International Journal of Music Education, 4, 9-12.

 

156 

  Seeger, A. (1992, May). Celebrating the American music mosaic. Music Educators Journal, 78(9), 26-29. Seeger, A. (2002). Catching up with the rest of the world: Music education and musical experience. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 103116). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Shehan, P. K. (1981). Student preferences for ethnic music styles. Contributions to Music Education, 9, 21-28. Shehan, P. K. (1984). The effect of instruction method on preference, achievement, and attentiveness for Indonesian Gamelan music. Psychology of Music, 12(1), 34-42. Shehan, P. K. (1985). Transfer of preference from taught to untaught pieces of nonWestern music genres. Journal of Research in Music Education, 33(3), 149-158. Shehan, P. K. (1988). World musics: Windows to cross-cultural understanding. Music Educators Journal, 75(3), 22-26. Siebenaler, D. J. (1999). Student song preference in the elementary music class. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(3), 213-223. Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (1987). An analysis of multicultural education in the United States. Harvard Educational Review, 57(4), 421-444. Sleeter, C. E., & McLaren, P. L. (1995). Multicultural education, critical pedagogy, and the politics of difference. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Slobin, M. (1992). Micromusics of the West: A comparative approach. Ethnomusicology, 36(1), 1-87. Spearman, C. E. (2000). How will societal and technological changes affect the teaching of music? In C. Madsen (Ed.), Vision 2020: The Housewright Symposium on the future of music education (pp. 153-184). Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference. Spring, J. (2004). American education (11th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Tanner, C. (2007). The steel band game plan. Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Teicher, J. M. (1997). Effect of multicultural music experience on preservice elementary teachers’ attitudes. Journal of Research in Music Education,45(3), 415-427. Tellstrom, T. (1971). Music in American education: Past and present. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Teo, T., Hargreaves, D. J., & Lee, J. (2008). Musical preference, identification, and familiarity: A multicultural comparison of secondary students from Singapore and the United Kingdom. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(1), 18-32.

 

157 

  Tucker, J. C. (1992, May). Circling the globe: Multicultural resources. Music Educators Journal, 78(9), 37-40. U.S. Census Bureau (2008, August 14). An older and more diverse nation by midcentury. Retrieved December 8, 2011, from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/ archives/population/cb08-123.html U.S. Census Bureau (2011). Overview of race and Hispanic origin: 2010. Washington, D.C.: Author. U.S. Census Bureau. (1793). Return of the whole number of persons within the several districts of the United States. Philadelphia: Author. Volk, T. M. (1993). The history and development of multicultural music education as evidenced in the Music Educators Journal, 1967-1992. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41(2), 137-155. Volk, T. M. (1994). Folk musics and increasing diversity in American music education, 1900-1916. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(4), 285-305. Volk, T. M. (1997). “Music speaks to the hearts of all men:" The international movement in American music education: 1930-1954. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 133, 143-152. Volk, T. M. (1998). Music education and multiculturalism. New York: Oxford University Press. Volk, T. M. (2002). Multiculturalism: Dynamic creativity for music education. In B. Reimer (Ed.), World Music and Music Education (pp. 15-29). Lanham, MD: Music Educators National Conference. Wade, B. (2006). 50 years of SEM in the United States: A retrospective. Ethnomusicology, 50(2), 190-198. Wade, B. (2009). Thinking musically. New York: Oxford University Press. Wang, J., & Humphreys, J. T. (2009). Multicultural and popular music content in an American music teacher education program. International Journal of Music Education, 27(1), 19-36. Wright, R. O. (2008). Chronology of immigration in the United States. Jefferson, NC: McFarland Publishers. Zangwill, I. (1969). The works of Israel Zangwill. New York: AMS Press. Zieghan, L. (2001). Considering culture in the selection of teaching approaches for adults (Report No. EDO-CE-01-231). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED459325) Ziegler, S. (1980). Measuring inter-ethnic attitudes in a multi-ethnic context. Canadian EthnicStudies/EtudesEthniquesau Canada, 12(3), 45-55.  

158 

 

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Name:

David Harrison Knapp

Date of Birth:

January 8, 1980

Birth Place:

Tallahassee, Florida

Higher Education:

The Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida Major: Music and Anthropology Degree: B.A. (2002) The Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida Major: Music Education Degree: M.M.E. (2007) The Florida State University Tallahassee, Florida Major: Music and Anthropology Degree: Ph.D. (2012)

Experience:

 

Leon High School Tallahassee, Florida Director of Steel Bands, 2004–2009

159