Broad Context of Music Pedagogy

Just what is a “pedagogy,” and how might it relate to “music teaching philosophy,” “learning theory,” and “methodology”? In music teacher discourse, these terms are often conflated. One way of unpacking them is to consider a hierarchy that moves from philosophy through to the practice.

Philosophy.Philosophical discourse about the nature of learning falls traditionally under the realm of epistemology (Fumerton, 2009). One way to think about and understand this branch of philosophy is to imagine the quest for what is knowledge and justification. To seek the personal answers to what music pedagogy to practice is to start with epistemological questions that music education philosophers face.

In the opening pages of Bowman and Frega’s (2012) Oxford handbook of philosophy of music education, the purpose of education philosophy as it is practiced in this contemporary era is explained as:

Not so much to identify timeless or universal truths as to develop and refine theoretical perspectives that are provisionally useful: hypothesized relationships between beliefs and actions. The validity of such orientations must be continuously tested and revised in light of emerging (and often unforeseen) circumstances. Philosophy’s truths are contingent and contextual—for the time being, under present circumstances, until further notice. That may be all philosophy can reasonably aspire to achieve; but perhaps it is all we really need. (p. 22)

Music education philosophy and the scholars that form it take on the big picture of teaching and learning, often drawing on the work of the major thinkers who proceeded them. Many of our finest philosophers have contributed greatly to the endorsement of creative music experiences, especially music composition (e.g., Reimer, 2003/2022; Jorgensen, 2003; Elliott & Silverman, 2014; and Allsup, 2016). Each has positioned creativeness and its consequence in slightly different ways but always as a primary concern.

Learning Theories.Learning theories, growing in part from a philosophical base and epistemological roots, provide a strong foundation for effective teaching strategies. Taetle and Cutietta (2002) offered a review ofbroad-based learning theories that included the perspective ofbehav- iorist, cognitive, and constructivist approaches. Highlighted were specific contributions by Edwin Gordon, Howard Gardner, and Jeanne Bamberger among others.

In more recent work, Senyshyn and O’Neill (2011) contributed a detailed orientation to selected learning theories. Stressed was the important role of a psychological orientation in helping to define learning strategies and the importance of a pluralistic and “reflexive” approach to understanding learning theory—meaning an engagement of our own experiences teaching music and our awareness of the changing landscape of music and culture. They characterized music learners and their relation to learning theory as a likely combination of the following: (1) a skilled performer (behaviorism), (2) a collaborator (constructivism), (3) an explorer (pragmatism), and (4) an authentic music being (existentialism) (pp. 18-28).

Both general and music-specific learning theories support creative engagement in music experiences (especially those related to constructivism, pragmatism, and existentialism).

In a broad sense, learning theories aim to achieve some form of understanding about how learners gain knowledge, understanding, and skills and how educational structures and practices evolve or develop particular perceptions, visions, or strategies for the transfer of communication of knowledge. In educational contexts, learning theories are especially concerned with discovery and invention (i.e., recognizing, creating, or exploring new knowledge; manipulating knowledge and understanding to generate new ideas or concepts; facilitating changes in behavior). (Senyshyn & O’Neill, 2011, p. 5)

Methodologies.Most educators would agree that philosophy and learning theory are powerful conceptual frames that help to guide a teacher’s chosen methodology to the point where a solid pedagogy (see below) of instruction can be realized. For example, the notion of blending knowledge and skills with personal creative experiences in music may be seen as a meaningful methodical activity leading from chosen philosophies and learning theories. Precious class time is devoted to making a methodology of this sort work. However, for some, this pathway from theory to practice is less clear and decisions about methods are not always systematically considered in planning. There are likely others who are aware of the pathway from theory to practice but have not decided to endorse pedagogies that feature creative work because of concerns related to unpredictability, risky outcome, time, or personal skill in leading such activities.

There are some reasons why this diversity exists that may be traceable in part to how we prepare music teachers. In many teacher education programs, a set of traditional “methods courses”² may or may not be designed to make the connection with theory and practice. Widely known methodologies for general music instruction for grades pre-K to middle school are summarized by Mark and Madura (2014, pp. 97-133). Some of these are founded by famous pedagogues such as Dalcroze, Orff, Kodaly, and Gordon. Some may be associated with significant curriculum projects such as Manhattanville and Comprehensive Musicianship. These methodologies and their collegiate instruction may result in meaningful connections to philosophy and learning theory including creative work blended with knowledge and skills, but many may not.

Instrumental/choral teacher education instruction is anchored by student methods books exemplars.³ Use of these traditional and highly regarded publications may or may not contain or have been constructed with a philosophical base or learning theory in mind.

Complicating the picture further are private instrumental and voice instruction, together with music theory and history classes that are often engineering by well-meaning instructors that follow long-established approaches for knowledge about music and technical mastery. The master-apprentice model that is often at work may or may not be informed by philosophy or learning theory.

All of this points to teaching practices that may not be consistent with carefully crafted teaching philosophy, well-chosen theories of learning, and culturally relevant methods of teaching today’s youth who experience a world of music that is multi-dimensional.

Pedagogies.Classic, dictionary-like definitions of pedagogy often include such ideas as “science of teaching," “theory and practice of teaching," or “didactical thinking." Pedagogies represent the sum total of what teachers do on a daily basis to help students acquire knowledge and skills. It is the act of teaching itself on a daily basis over time that involves decisions about teaching strategies influenced by methodologies “in action" that are formed by learning theories and philosophies. For examples of pedagogies in action, return to the opening vignettes that start this chapter and the building blocks of the changing landscape that support the construction of creative experiences.

Murphy (2008) offers some nuance about “pedagogy" from a postmodern perspective:

The redefinition of pedagogy as an art follows from the view that pedagogy is about the integrations between teachers, students and the learning environment and learning tasks. . . . Pedagogy cannot be disembedded from the wider educational system. So, in order to address what is effective pedagogy, we must be agreed on the goals of education. [italics in original, p. 35]

The notion of pedagogy as an “art" underscores the dynamic process of designing teaching structures that are flexible and responsive to the students themselves, the times in which students live, and—in the case of music teaching and learning—a sensitivity to the power of music as an expressive medium coming from the blend of the technical with the creative. For example, the recognition of pedagogies that endorse the “teaching moment" and other techniques of carefully managed improvisation (Sawyer, 2011) are highly valued in this context.

Informed pedagogies that are reassessed and recalibrated routinely by teachers in working with students in today’s contemporary world of music-making move us closer to what is often referred to as “culturally-responsive" and “critical-based" approaches to teacher action leading on from philosophy and theory (Abrahams, 2005); Lind and McCoy, 2016). Allsup’s (2016) powerful notions of remixing music education combined with Jorgensen’s (2003) pleas for transformation and Schmidt and Colwell’s (2017) collected essays on the importance of informed policy all help to construct a new level of pedagogical thinking.

This chapter argues for an emphasis to be placed on student compositional voice to understand music better and to complement other music experiences such as music improvisation, performance of others’ music, and active engagement in music listening (Kerchner, 2013). The blend of the technical with the creative in this context can help to form a more grounded pedagogy. Put another way, we should consider moving away from uninterrogated methodology to a more dynamic and artful pedagogy that is supported by theory and philosophy.