XIII and XIV Colloquiums: June 19 - 22, 2003:
The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
"Music Curriculum Challenges in Elementary and Secondary Schools
and Taking Stock after Ten Years: Next Actions for the MayDay Group"

The Future of the MDG: Suggestions for Change
Thomas A Regelski

I Action for change of the MDG [for the next 10 years]:

1. Time is upon us to ‘get into action’ in more tangible ways.


2. Time for working toward closure; i.e., in the pragmatic sense of advancing hypotheses for action by which existing habits of music education can be re-constructed along more fruitful lines—not unlike the Action Research process by which hypotheses are altered and improved according to local conditions and according to results produced.


3. Time to make concerted attempt to push, prod, and cajole music education and educators out of old habits and into new ones.


4. A key focus should be praxis because:

a. Results are tangible;

b. Impact is social and therefore noticeable;

c. Such consequences can “make a difference” that counts for students, society and the field.


II Some immodest proposals:

5. Re-organization that engages the energies and actions of more members throughout the year as a sense of professional growth and commitment.

a. Study and work groups cooperating to produce policy and content documents as bases for action: e.g., for use in teacher training, etc.

b. Web site provides more content, of all kinds, but particularly concerned with teaching change at both the university and public school levels.

c. New emphasis/sections of web site devoted for use in teacher preparation, and by in-service teachers.

d. Attempt to recruit more teachers; to get more pre-service teachers to consult web site for ideas, information, criticism, inspiration, etc.

e. Possibility of separate listserv for pre- and in-service teachers.

f. Idea of pairing “pen pals” on existing listserv, just to get dialogue underway as a background for change: Banish assumption that, either, (1) I am alone, or (2) Everyone more or less agrees with me/does it my way.

g. Individuals volunteer to be in charge of segments of the web site to develop content, monitor up-to-date status of what is there, etc.

h. Enough “formality” of the MDG (by whatever name) that, e.g., letters of recommendation can be supplied to active members in support of promotion, tenure, etc.

i. Time for more ‘new blood’ at the top, willing to take on professional responsibility and participation comparable to what others commit to MENC, ISME, state organizations, etc.—although this need not be either/or.


6. New focus for group on social theory, social issues, social consequences of music education.

a. Group should become in effect an “International Association for the Study of Social Issues and Consequences of Music Education” that promotes (1) greater awareness of social consequences, (2) inspires research along such lines (that ACT can publish), (3) specific projects undertaken by aforementioned study/research groups within the MDG, such as policy statements.

b. It would be best to have a fixed “home” or “Center” attached to a university, but the MDG should function as a sponsoring “agency” for such research, applications, and change—but that may come only when we have some up and running establishment that might be attractive to a music, sociology, cultural studies department somewhere.

c. Work, at least, toward building a network of connections between such departments based on the affiliations of present (and future) members: departments who might affirm an “affiliation” with us, and vice-versa.

d. Philosophy and psychology have dominated music education theory and foundations to the detriment of concern with social (pragmatic) consequences. The history of music education demonstrates this, but aside from pointing out the history of the institution or field, it has too often ignored the relation of the field to either the various other fields of music, or to society and culture in general.

e. We have a journal now that can serve as an outlet for such research, while continuing to stimulate ideas from philosophy, psychology, history and other disciplines of interest and relevance to music educators.

f. Future colloquia should concentrate on a particular social issue/consequence with a view to making recommendations for action.


7. A second new focus should be on the curriculum theory and practice.

a. This topic is, like social theory, moribund in music education; few know much about it and current ideas are woefully outdated or wrapped up in the idea that the method is the curriculum.

b. Beyond curriculum theory, the group should begin to work towards some tentative conclusions/recommendations/hypotheses concerning actual curriculum content, goals, assessment, accountability—in line with the social consequences criteria emerging from the other changes recommended above—posited as action or guiding ideals that teachers (and methods classes) can use as models, not as recipe documents.

c. ACT should also become central in advancing such research and thinking.


8. A third new focus should be comparative education—namely a concerted effort to learn more about music education practices internationally and what they might offer or inspire concerning praxis elsewhere.

a. We cannot but profit simply from knowing more about what is going on elsewhere.

b. Again, ACT is well placed to advance this.

c. But, again, study groups, listserve dialogue, etc., can also advance this: consider, e.g., a general music teacher in North America communicating with a general music teacher in Sweden or Finland.


9. Finally, a decided focus on inter-disciplinary studies, particularly from ethnomusicololgy, sociomusicology, cultural studies, evolutionary musicology, and the like that can inform or critique music education theory and praxis in terms of the broader perspectives thus promoted.

a. In particular, we need to encourage, find and use far more experts from outside music education to keep us (music education) honest!

b. Finding on our local campuses, experts who can critique and contribute to the current theory and praxis of music education.

c. Providing such content on the website and in ACT to promote greater understanding in music education of developments in other fields.