University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Major Concerns Of Music Education: Content Analysis Of The Music Educators Journal, 1957-1967

(USC Thesis Other)

Major Concerns Of Music Education: Content Analysis Of The Music Educators Journal, 1957-1967

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 70-5213 HOOPER, Maureen Dorothea, 1927- MAJOR CONCERNS OF MUSIC EDUCATION: CONTENT ANALYSIS OF THE MUSIC EDUCATORS JOURNAL, 1957-1967. University of Southern California, Ed.D., 1969 Music University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan <c) Copyright by MAUREEN DOROTHEA HOOFER 1 1 970! MAJOR CONCERNS OF MUSIC EDUCATION: CONTENT ANALYSIS OF THE MUSIC EDUCATORS JOURNAL, 1957-1967 A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of Education The University of Southern California In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education by Maureen Dorothea Hooper June 1969 This dissertation, written under the direction of the Chairman of the candidate's Guidance Committee and approved by all members of the Committee, has been presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the School of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education. D ate. Dean Guidance Commiftee <\ Chairman TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ..................... Purpose of the Study Delimitations of the Study Assumptions of the Study Limitations of the Study A Definition of Music Education The Music Educators National Conference The Music Educators Journal Summary II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . Bibliographic Sources for Music Education Historical and Philosophical Foundations of Music Education Aesthetic Education The Psychology of Music Sociology and Music Education The Teaching-Learning Process in Music Education III. PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY ..... Selection of the Research Design Chapter Page Selection of the Content Material Examination of the Content Material Formulation of the Hypotheses Selection of the Content Units Development of the Categories Organization of the Information Sheet Construction of the Rater's Instruction Sheet Validity of the Study Reliability of the Study Collection of the Data Treatment of the Data Summary IV. FINDINGS OF THE SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS . . 44 Prologue ^sic in an Age of Science Music as an Academic Discipline Music as an Aesthetic Experience Musicality in the Individual Music in the American Society Summary Hypotheses V. FINDINGS OF THE OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS . . 99 The Raw Score Data Word Frequency Scores Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Primary Factors Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Ancillary Factors Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Covariate Factors iii Chapter Page Multiple Partial Correlation VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS..................... 142 Summary Conclusions Implications Recommendations BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................... 171 APPENDICES...................................... 214 APPENDIX A. Additional Forms and Charts .... 215 APPENDIX B. Word Frequency Chart............... 222 APPENDIX C. Mean Frequency Scores and Standard Deviations for Selected Categories.......................... 239 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Inter-rater Reliability Correlation Coefficients ....................... 38 2. Intra-rater Reliability Correlation Coefficients ....................... 41 3. Professional Affiliations, Responsibi lities, and Positions of the Selected Authors ................... 101 4. Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus the Eight Primary Factors.............................. 122 3. Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Professional Affiliation................ 128 8. Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Professional Responsibilities in the Music Educators National Conference .... 130 7. Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Positions Held in the Schools.......................... 133 8. Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus the Source of the Article 135 9. Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus the Covariate Factors.............................. 138 v Table Page 10. Multiple Partial Correlation Coef ficients for Selected Categories Versus Primary Factors and Ancillary Factors................... • 140 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Mean Frequency Scores for Category I: Music in an Age of Science.. 104 2. Mean Frequency Scores for Category II; Music as an Academic Discipline .... 106 3. Mean Frequency Scores for Category III: Music as an Aesthetic Experience . . . 108 4. Mean Frequency Scores for Category IV: Musicality in the Individual. 110 5. Mean Frequency Scores for Category V: Music in the American Society . 112 6. Mean Frequency Scores for Category I: Music in an Age of Science and Category V: Music in the American Society................................ 114 7. Mean Frequency Scores for Category I: Music in an Age of Science and Category II: Music as an Academic Discipline ........ ........... 116 8. Mean Frequency Scores for Category II: Music as an Academic Discipline and Category III: Music as an Aesthetic Experience .......... 118 9. Mean Frequency Scores for Category II: Music as an Academic Discipline and Category IV: Musicality in the Individual............................ 119 vii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Consider whence each thing comes, of what it consists, and into what it changes, what it will be like when changed, and that it will sustain no ham. Marcus Aurelius The Music Educators National Conference celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of its founding in 1957. In that year, leaders in the field, looking back over the years of struggle and accomplishment, acknowledged that music education had at last found its place in the American curriculum. It was a place that had been won through the dedication of its membership to the importance of music in the life of every child. Even as music educators spoke with pride of the past successes, however, they were aware that many problems were still unsolved. Leaders warned that the years to come would bring new challenges to test 1 2 the maturity and stature of the profession. The next ten years, indeed, proved the validity of this prophesy. The American society engaged in the most dramatic developments of its history in this new decade. Rapidly developing technological advances contributed signifi cantly to a new affluence for some citizens and a new poverty for other members of the society; these advances brought the promise of security and at the same time threatened the American way of life; they inspired a changing morality that was based on new freedoms and fears. American education, faced with the growing pressures of the times, engaged in a vast evaluation of its nature and purpose. The new age brought with it the problems of a tremendous increase in the body of know ledge, skills, and attitudes requisite to life in the contemporary society. It seemed imperative to find a means whereby the educative process could more economi cally and effectively prepare young people for the challenges of this society. As music education began the second half century of its professional organization, it was aware of the ■ approaching necessity for a careful and comprehensive i evaluation of its program. It was apparent that music ; education would soon be forced to justify its value in the j life of contemporary man and to subsequently give evidence ; of its place in the crowded curriculum. In the decade to follow, music education did indeed conduct an extensive investigation of its old assumptions and a thoughtful consideration of new ideas. This examination has not been completed as yet nor has the; place of music in the schools been fully defined. Never* i theless, it seemed appropriate to stop and look back over the discussions of the profession in the hope of finding an understanding of the progress that has been made in this endeavor. Purpose of the Study : I i The purpose of this study was to investigate selected professional literature in an effort to identify i the nature of topics discussed by music education in its j i attempt to define the new role of music in the contempo- j rary curriculum. I f Four major questions set the goals for this j investigation: 1. What topics were frequently discussed in the selected professional literature during the period defined by the study? 2. What was the nature of the discussion of these; defined topics? 3. What social, economic, cultural, and profes sional factors appeared to influence the discussions of these defined topics? 4. What segments of the music education profes sion or agencies outside the music education profession participated in the discussion of the defined topics? Delimitations of the Study This study was based on an analysis of articles taken from the Music Educators Journal, Vol. XLIV (1957- 1958) through and including Vol. LI1I (1966-1967). The articles were selected from this magazine according to an established criteria based on the purpose of the study. Assumptions of the Study The following assumptions seemed necessary to this study: 1. It Is possible to ascertain the extent and manner to which an article deals with a selected problem. 2. Because o£ common definitions held by members of the profession, the selected content material will provide a sufficient consistency of communication to allow for analysis. Limitations of the Study The following limitations seemed applicable to this study: 1. The articles in the Music Educators Journal are written for general reading by the profession. This factor may tend to dilute and diffuse the ideas presented. However, in sight of the fact that the magazine serves as a wide influence on the profession and covers every facet of music education, it was decided that the advantages of using the journal far overbalanced this possible limita tion to the study. 2. While every effort was made to check the reliability of the selection and analysis of the content material, there is a possibility that the subjective analysis of the selected content material, the subsequent 6 formulation of the hypotheses, and the preparation of the statistical analysis were subject to the bias of the investigator. 3. The articles found in the Music Educators Journal may reflect the biases of the editorial board rather than the thinking of the profession at large. A Definition of Music Education The following definition of music education was used by the study: Music education is the practice of, participation in, and the study of the process involved in the teaching and learning of music within the elementary and secondary school in order to fulfill three fundamental objectives, namely, the transmission of the cultural heritage in music, the acculturation of the individual to his music environment as a participant, and the develop ment of the individual's aesthetic sensitivity (439). The term music education is also given to the organized profession responsible for fulfilling the above objectives.^" ^The term profession will be used interchangeably with music education throughout the study to describe the organized music education profession. 7 The Music Educators National Conference The Music Educators National Conference is the official organization representing music education in the 2 United States. The conference has its headquarters in Washington, D.C. Organized in 1907, the conference has grown from a 3 membership of sixty-seven to over 60,000 by 1967. The | conference is divided into several administrative levels, i.e., national, regional, and state. Heading the entire organization is a nine-member executive board led by the national president. In the period defined by this study, i the following men have served as president to the i conference: (1) William B. McBride (1956-1958); (2) Karl Ernst (1958-1960); (3) Allen P. Britton (1960-1962); (4) Wiley L. Housewright (1962-1964); (5) Alex H. Zimmerman (1964-1966); (6) Louis 6. Wersen (1966-1968). o The term conference will be used interchangeably with Music Educators National Conference throughout the remainder of the study. 3 -'Readers interested in a more complete discussion of the origins of the Music Educators National Conference I should refer to History of Public School Music in the United States by Edward Bailey Birge (303). The task of the conference is threefold: (1) the consideration of problems relating to music education; (2) research in music education; (3) the communication of i developments in the field to the conference membership. The findings and proceedings of the conference are communicated to the membership through a series of ; publications including the Music Educators Journal, and 4 I through the national biennial conventions, regional J conventions, and state conventions. i j The Music Educators Journal ! ! The Music Educators Journal is to serve as the j ------------------------ | source for the content material selected for analysis in 5 : this study. It seems important, therefore, to present a i : description of its origin, structure, purpose, and policies. In 1914, just seven years after the founding of the Music Supervisors National Conference, the first A1 The terra national convention will be used inter changeably with national biennial convention throughout the remainder of the study. c JThe terms journal and magazine will be used interchangeably with Music Educators Journal throughout the remainder of the study. publication of the official organ of the conference was printed and circulated to 6,000 music educators throughout! the country. The Bulletin, as the magazine was titled in that first year, stated as its major purpose the communi cation of conference activities and the presentation of the varied opinions of its constituency. In the years to follow, the Music Supervisors Journal, as it was later called, grew in size, in circula-; tion, and in importance as' a vehicle of changing ideas and concepts. By 1923, the magazine had a circulation of over 12,000 issues and by 1930 the journal had grown to such a size that the makeshift surroundings and the volunteer editor would no longer suffice. It was in that year that the journal moved to new headquarters in Chicago. The , administration of the publication was given to an execu tive editor and an editorial board. In 1934, following the change of the conference . title to Music Educators National Conference, the magazine: became the Music Educators Journal. Under the guidance of outstanding leaders in the field of music education, the journal has continued to grow in size and to maintain its ; policy to reflect the conference in print. The editorial board for the Music Educators Journal is appointed by the national executive board of the conference. Beginning in 1963, the members of the | editorial board were appointed for four-year terms. Prior to that time, members had been appointed on a yearly basis. i The editorial board is made up of leaders in the field of j music education and other related fields of education and music. The editorial board reads and selects the articles published in the journal. The quality of the editorial board has determined the high quality of the publication throughout its history. The following men have served as chairmen of the editorial board of the Music Educators Journal during the period defined by this study: (1) Karl Ernst (1957-1958); (2) Wiley L. Housewright (1958-1966); (3) William C. Hartshorn (1967- ). Today, with a circulation of over 60,000 subscrip tions, the journal continues to play an important role in : the professional life of its subscribers. If one were to j survey current issues of the magazine, one would see its j varied purposes reflected in its structure and content. ! Conference business and announcements, reviews of new literature, the consideration of a variety of theoretical and practical topics are in evidence in each issue of the magazine. In 1964, the number of issues of the Music Educators Journal was increased from six issues a year to nine issues a year. This change served to increase its I effectiveness In dealing with the major concerns of the | times. Perhaps the words of Wiley L. Housewright, who was | Chairman of the Editorial Board for the Music Educators | Journal when it observed its fiftieth anniversary in 1964, j j best describe the purpose and nature of today's Music ; ; Educators Journal: ! i ' i The Journal is a national forum, through which j members exchange information, debate controversial issues, pose problems, report successes, examine issues, explore relationships, compare methodology, and occasionally engage in whimsy. (379) ! Summary The purpose of this study, then, was to examine the selected content material taken from the Music Educators Journal, Vol. XLIV through and including Vol. LIII, in order to identify theoretical topics that were of concern to music education during the period of 1957 to X967. An effort was made to describe the nature of the journal discussions in reference to factors that may have influenced their nature and development. In the following chapter, a review of the litera ture pertinent to this study will be found. Chapter III delineates the procedures of the investigation. Chapters IV and V give the findings of the study. Finally, Chapter VI summarizes and synthesizes the findings, makes conclusions in reference to these findings, and makes recommendations for further research in the field. CHAPTER XI REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE A review of the literature of music education and related fields is presented here in an effort to place this study in the proper context. Because of the breadth of the study as it attempts to define the theoretical concern of music education, a detailed analysis of the related literature falls far beyond the possibilities of this chapter. Therefore, this segment of the study proposes to briefly direct the reader to important bibli ographic sources in music education, to give cognizance to selected current publications, to refer to some basic literature from the past, and to suggest the nature of relevant research studies. This chapter is divided into the following sections: (1) bibliographic sources for music education, (2) historical and philosophical foundations of music education, (3) aesthetic education, (4) the psychology of music, (5) sociology and music education, and (6) the teaching-learning process in music education. Bibliographic Sources for Music Education I The Journal of Research in Music Education has i served since 1953 as the official research communication i | : for the Music Educators National Conference (383). It ! gives excellent reviews of selected current research ; studies in the field. Particular attention should be given to the listing of the doctoral dissertations in music and music education made periodically in the i magazine. L In more recent years, a bulletin published twice yearly by the Council for Research in Music Education through the University of Illinois has served to bring the profession additional information concerning the most out standing research in the field (366). Perhaps the most significant and comprehensive bibliographic source for research in music education is the publication by Schneider and Cady. This publication is a critical review of all research literature in music education for the period 1930 to 1962. In addition to a description of the project and the establishment of criteria for judging the competence of the research, a synthesis of the studies in music education and abstracts of the most pertinent investigations are given (439). For research in areas related to music education i | the Music Index (398), Education Ihdex (370), Psvchologi- I cal Abstracts (404), and Dissertation Abstracts (369) are the most adequate and expedient sources, j Bibliographic sources for periodical writings in ! music education may also be found in the Education Index i (370) and in indices of the various magazines dealing with j music education. One excellent compilation of recent ! articles is the Source Book III: Perspectives in Music Education (427). Finally, bibliographic sources for major publica tions in the field can be found in a publication edited for the Music Educators National Conference by Collins (416), Bibliographies from various books dealing ; with music education also offer valuable source materials. The following books are recommended for the selectivity and accuracy of their bibliographic listings: Leonhard and House (335), Jones (326), and the most recent publica tion by Cheyette and Cheyette (311). Historical and Philosophical Foundations of Music Education The apparent lack of major works dealing with the history of music education is noticeable in the litera ture. Since the writing of Birge (303), there has been very little effort to engage in a comprehensive study of the history of music education. Attention should be given to the doctoral study of Houlihan which investigated the history and nature of the Music Educators National Conference (436). With the exception of this work, most research studies have restricted themselves to the historical considerations of local school districts or local music organizations (439:247-264). An excellent overview of the history of music education is found in the writing of Leonhard and House (335:39-69). While the philosophical foundations of music education have always been of concern to the profession as evidenced by the early writings of Mursell (344) and Earhart (415), in recent years the most important con siderations of this nature are found in the publication Basic Concepts in Music Education (429). Here, three men from outside the field of music education discussed the teaching of music in the American curriculum from different philosophical viewpoints. McMurray, defining pragmatism as a theory about human action as guided by ; cognition of consequences, gave credence to the Intel- j : 1 i lectual goals of music education (429:30-61). Broudy, ' j | presenting a realistic philosophy of music education, i j viewed the emotional end product of music education as | j related to the degree of skill and loiowledge brought to | \ j i the experience by the individual. This brought emphasis i i j to the affective as well as the cognitive goals of the j 1 music program (429:62-87). Mueller, in his sociological approach to music education, emphasized the importance of a music program equipped to deal with the socialization of the child. Here, Mueller seemed to suggest a balance of the cognitive, affective, and social aspects of the music curriculum (429:88-122). Leonhard and House, a few years later, wrote a comprehensive chapter on the philosophical foundations of music education as they applied to the problems currently facing the profession (335:71-103). Schneider and Cady, in their discussion of research in the area of philosophical foundations for music education, noted a lack of research in this area. They named four studies as qualified philosophical i studies dealing with music education (439:237-240). Aesthetic Education I m , i . ^ I ■ ■ -> - I f j j The definition of aesthetics is as varied as the writers in their expositions of the nature and meaning of j j the arts. No attempt will be made here to describe the ] I ! history and development of the various fields of aesthetic! thought. The publication edited by Rader is recommended ! i i I j as a most concise review of the field of aesthetics (249). One school of thought seems to have played an important role in the thinking of music education in recent years and so reference to this particular aspect of aesthetics will be mentioned briefly. From the writings of Pratt (403), who seriously questioned the thought that music could convey human emotions, and the extensive works of Langer (333), music education seemed to draw an increased understanding of the ineffable nature of music as it deals with the human being at the very center of his existence. Langer, inspired by the teachings of Cassirer and Whitehead, defined the import or significance of music as its ability to deal in symbolic form with the very structure of human feelings in its rhythmic movement of tension and resolution. All art, she said, has the same import, the symbolic communication of what life really is.! | When insight into what life feels like comes through the perception of the sensual art object, the aesthetic mean- I j ing of music is experienced. Reimer, in a survey of the aesthetic and religious! writings of the times, gave an excellent discussion of thej writings of Langer (437). He later applied the findings of this study to the teaching of music as an aesthetic experience (406). Research in relation to aesthetic sensitivity is present in the literature to some extent. Primarily it deals with the taste and preference of the individual in relation to music (439:206-212). Little has been done to investigate the development of a program centered upon the aesthetic experience. Finally, reference should be made to the recent Music Educators National Conference publication on aesthetic education. This work, authored by Schwadron, presented an excellent overview of aesthetics in music education (432). The Psychology of Music The discussion of musical ability and competence is the most prolific segment of the professional litera ture in music education. The writings of Farnsworth (316), Kwalwasser (329), Lundin (338), and Seashore (352) must be given credit for their contribution to the field as a foundation for the many research studies done in this area (439:109-116, 149-172). Accompanying this interest in musical competence were studies that explored the cognitive and affective processes of the individual in relation to his responses to music. The early works of such people as Weld (413), Meyers (395), and Hevner (377), while failing to deal too effectively with this problem, nevertheless, built the basis for recent studies in this area. It is the writing and thinking of Meyer that has been an influential source to this area of research in recent times (340). Meyer quickly discounted most of the previous j research into the responsive act in music as dealing with i i opinions rather than fact. In close agreement with the thinking of Langer, Meyer presented the hypothesis that the manner in which the music satisfies or blocks the listener's expectations determines his reaction to the music. The understanding and enjoyment of music depends on the perception and response to tension and repose, instability and stability, ambiguity and clarity in music. : His writing gave emphasis to the idea that a relationship : exists between knowledge of music and the emotional response to music in the individual (340). There is only one study in music education that entered into an investigation of the Meyer hypothesis. Cowell recently reported the initiation of a study related! to the Meyer theory of response to music (367). i i \ I Sociology and Music Education j | While numerous discussions of the arts as they | i relate to the contemporary American society have appeared in recent years, only one major discussion of the role of music education in the development of the American culture 22 can be cited. Kaplan, in his perceptive analysis of music and music education in changing society contributed the basis for the profession's thinking in this area. In his exhaustive examination of music in relation to the social development of man, he justified the place of music and music education in the changing world by the fact that i social change requires that basic values remain to serve as anchors, unifying the known with the unknown. The | arts, Kaplan concluded, are an important source of know- ! ; ledge about the world, and, therefore, they are vital to | mankind (327). I Research in this area of music education, as ; reviewed by Schneider and Cady, has been limited to the : survey of existing community and social relationships i (439:232-235). It is research from other fields that has brought the greatest understanding of the socialization of the individual in relation to music (385). The Teaching-Learning Process in Music Education It is not the purpose of this section of the chapter to review literature that deals directly with the methods of teaching music but rather with the theory 23 behind this process. Neither is it the aim of the discussion to review literature coming from the behavioral sciences. It should be sufficient to say that the exten sive developments in the field of learning and evaluation have significantly influenced the thinking of music education. Five publications coming from the profession in recent years seem to present the thinking of music educa tion in relation to the theoretical foundations for the educative process in music education: (1) Basic Concepts in Music Education dedicated the entire second section to the delineation of theories of the educative process in music. It served as an important foundation for the thinking of the profession in the years following its publication (429:215-355). (2) Music for the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School served as a resource for the development of programs for the gifted as well as the total curriculum (424). (3) Music in General Education, published by the conference, was a significant statement of the expected educative experience for the music student. This book did much to bring a degree of unity to the objectives of the music curriculum throughout 24 the nation (421). (4) The recent publication of The Study of Music in the Elementary School: A Conceptual Approach promises to bring a greater depth to the teaching of music on this level of instruction (422). (5) Comprehensive Musicianship: The Foundation for College Education in Music, a report of a seminar sponsored by the Contemporary Music Project, was an important presentation of the projected educative process for music on the university and college campus (417). Research studies in this area of music education are numerous (439:183-215). Examination of many of these studies reveals a limited scope and restricted findings. There is every indication that more sophisticated methods of research are needed in the area of the teaching- learning process. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY As previously stated, it was the purpose of this study to identify the nature of the search carried on by music education as it moved toward a new definition of music in American education. This investigation focused its attention on discussions of a theoretical nature found in the Music Educators Journal during the period of September, 1957 through May, 1967. This chapter establishes the foundation for the research design for the study and delineates the proce dures followed in the administration of the investigation. Selection of the Research Design i Schneider and Cady, in their review and evaluation; j of research studies in music education, identified the 26 failure to select problems directly related to music education as a major factor restricting the significance of research in the field. The study listed four problem areas acceptable to research in music education: (1) study of previous developments in music education, (2) development of new theoretical foundations for practices in music education, (3) study of existing teaching and learning practices in music education, and (4) testing new ideas and practices in music education (439). After an investigation of studies in the four areas listed above, it was concluded that the present study falls within the first category and would be acceptable as a research study for music education. Document analysis was the method of research recommended by Schneider and Cady for this category. This recommendation served as the basis for the selection of the research design of this investigation. A study of research concerned with problems similar to the current study indicated three approaches to: document analysis. The subjective analysis of materials by persons with the training and knowledge requisite to 27 insightful conclusions was the most common approach found i in the literature. This method, while having much to recommend it, evidenced certain restrictions. The major concern was for the reliability of a research design that relied completely on the degree of intelligence and ; integrity of the investigator. Content analysis was the i second method of document analysis identified. A study of | this method indicated the strength of its objective nature. The improvement of the reliability in this j research procedure was observed. However, it was also i I noted that some critics of the method found the limited ! importance of the findings, resulting from the restrictive ! nature of the statistical procedures, a major factor in i their failure to recommend this research design. Garraty, in his discussion of historical research, suggested a three-step paradigm that would emphasize the positive aspects of both the subjective and the objective analysis of historical materials. He outlined a research design that would include: (1) the subjective analysis of materials by a qualified investigator, (2) the formulation : of hypotheses based on the original analysis, and (3) the statistical analysis of the content material in relation 28 | to the hypotheses. He concluded that by this means the £inal analysis of the material would serve to check the reliability of the subjective findings, to clarify any doubtful issues, and to gain new insights that were in obscurity during the subjective study (430:171-187). This : research design was selected for the present study. | Selection of the Content Material j The first task in the administration of the I : research study was the selection of the content material. | I As it was previously stated, the content material for the ! investigation was to come from the Music Educators J | Journal. The following criteria were established for the | ! selection of articles appropriate to the defined purpose ! of the study: 1. Each article selected for the study must be found in the Music Educators Journal, Vol. XLIV through and including Vol. LII1. 2* Each article selected for the study must be a major article in the magazine. An article was considered major if: (a) it had a separate title in the Table of Contents, (b) it was not a part of a regular department of 29 the magazine, and (c) it was 1,200 words or more in length.*" 3. The major portion (one-haIf or more) of the article selected for the study must deal with current topics of music education. 4. Each article selected for the study must deal with music education in the United States. The article must agree with the definition of music education used by the study and have no more than one reference to music education outside the United States. 5. Each article selected for the study must be theoretical in nature. Articles were considered theoretical if they made general references to music education as distinguished from practical suggestions or descriptions. No more than three paragraphs within an article could be devoted to the description of specific teaching-learning situations, teaching materials, or teaching techniques. ^The minimum length of the articles was determined by reference to the criteria for the selection of articles published in the Music Educators Journal found in Scholar's Quide to Journals of Education and Educational Psychology. L. Joseph Lins and Robert A. Rees (337). 30 ; Each issue of the Music Educators Journal, Vol. XLIV through and including Vol. LIII, was examined in light of the criteria. Articles dealing with the business of the Music Educators National Conference and regular departments of the magazine were eliminated from considera tion. Each of the remaining articles was examined i separately1 and accepted or rejected for the study accord- , j 1 i ing to the criteria. Finally 300 articles were selected I i for further examination in relation to the objectives of | I the research study. A complete listing of the articles i i selected for the study may be found in the Bibliography, ! j | Section A. ' Examination of the Content Material The 300 articles selected for analysis in the study were read in chronological order by the investigator. A complete discussion of the findings of this subjective analysis may be found in Chapter IV of the study. Formulation of the Hypotheses Following the subjective analysis of the selected ; content material, the hypotheses related to the findings were formulated by the investigator. These hypotheses may be found at the conclusion of Chapter IV of the study. Selection of the Content Units In preparation for the statistical treatment of the content material, it was necessary to transform the qualitative material into elements rendering it suscepti ble to quantification. The first step of this process was the selection of the size of the content unit. After j careful examination of the literature concerned with I ; ! j content analysis, it was decided that each article would ! I | be considered as a single unit for analysis. ! I Osgood suggested in his study of content analysis i i I i that the investigator should divide the material into [ j ; ! natural units where possible, e.g., the entry of a diary, a letter, or an article (430:33-68). Saporta and Sebeok found that the most appropriate unit was one with a structural unity (430:131-150). Berelson in a review of various content analysis studies concluded that, within reason, the size of the unit had very little or no effect upon the findings of a study (302). These findings seemed to justify the selection of the article as a natural and unified structure, 32 appropriate to the present study. It should be noted, however, that the matter of unit selection in content analysis still remains unsettled in the minds of many investigators. More evidence is needed before conclusive decisions can be made regarding the effect of unit selection upon the findings of the study. This point seems most obvious in these comments made by Fool: We leave the matter of basic units vague. . • . It is one of the problems of content analysis to which psycho-linguistics may help produce an answer. But as of yet it is not clear how one identifies a basic unit of meaning. (430:189-233) Development of the Categories Of crucial importance to the success of the study was the careful development of the categories that would serve as the basis for the objective analysis of the selected content material. It was imperative that the categories be selected and formulated in such a way as to best reveal the nature of the topics under discussion in the journal. The five topics identified by the subjective analysis of the content material were selected as the five 33 categories to be used in the objective analysis. Working from the major premise of classic content analysis that the greater the author's interest in a given topic the greater his use of terminology associated with that topic, key words were selected to define each category. The following criteria were established to aid in the selection of the key words: 1. The word must be important in the definition of the nature of the category as determined by the subjective analysis of the material. 2. The word must be of common English usage as determined by the Webster's New International Dictionary. Organization of the Information Sheet Following the selection of the key words for each of the five categories, a tentative information sheet was organized to facilitate the collection of the data. To check the workability of the words selected for tabula* tion, ten articles were selected from the content material and the frequency of word usage was tabulated for each of the articles. The findings of this pilot study were checked against the subjective findings for these 34 articles to determine the success with which each category was being defined by the selected words. Xt was decided from this preliminary investigation that, due to the varying context in which many of the words were used, the findings were not sufficiently definitive. It was concluded, therefore, that it would be necessary to define the context within which the words must appear. This was done by grouping the words in relation to the meaning that best defined the nature of the category. It was required that the words appear in sentences or paragraphs which agreed with the prescribed context described by means of subtitles found on the information sheet for each of the categories. The articles were examined again using the revised information sheet. The results appeared to be more definitive in nature. This method was selected for the final analysis of the content material. Additional space was provided for information about the article and the author in the final copy of the information sheet. The sheet was duplicated for use in the tabulation of the data. A copy of the information sheet may be found in Appendix A. 35 Construction of the Rater's Instruction Sheet A rater's instruction sheet was written to facilitate and regulate the analysis of the content material. It was decided, after reviewing rating instruc- ! tions from other content analysis studies, to include: ! (1) a brief statement of the purpose of the study, (2) a j i ! description of the research design, (3) a definitive j statement of the rater's responsibility, and (4) detailed ; : [ j instructions for the analysis of the content material. J ' | The rater's instruction sheet was then given to a j i graduate student in education. Xt was read and sugges- j tions were offered for changes in the instructions. Thesej revisions were made and the final copy of the rater's instructions was prepared for use. A copy of the rater's instruction sheet may be found in Appendix A. Validity of the Study The determination of the validity of this study 1 was essentially that of deciding whether or not the procedure did what it was meant to do in relation to the objectives of the study. Because this method employed 36 categories and evaluations that corresponded directly to the definable topics, it was concluded that it had a type of face validity which Mosier called validity by definition (396). It should be pointed out that ordinarily validity is established by comparison with previously validated external measures. However, because there were no previous data available in connection with the present study, it was necessary that the reliability of the procedure become the measure of its validity. This is, in essence, validity by definition. Validity by definition imposes certain restrictions on the interpretation of the results of the study by limiting them to the content materials under investigation. This, however, was not seen as a limiting factor in a study that was descriptive rather than predictive in nature. Reliability of the Study The reliability of the study was determined by whether or not the data secured was independent of the measuring instrument. In this situation the measuring instrument was the investigator. The reliability of the 37 study was determined by; (1) the degree to which the tabulation of the data by the major investigator could be replicated by other investigators working within the same framework, and (2) the degree to which the tabulation of data by the major investigator could be replicated in a repeated examination of the material by the same person. Two students in education were selected to test the inter-rater reliability of the study. After reading i I the rater's instructions and tabulating the data for a ' sample content unit, it was determined that the two ! students were prepared to begin the tabulation of the i ' i I ; | data. TWelve articles were selected from the content | i material for examination by the students and the major investigator. The articles were placed in random order. I ' ■ Each investigator then read the articles in the prescribed order and recorded the data on the data information sheets. Using the Student's t-test, the following tests for correlation were made for each of the five categories to determine the inter-rater reliability: (1) Investiga tor versus Student A, (2) Investigator versus Student B, and (3) Student A versus Student B. Table 1 shows the results of this test for inter-rater correlation. 38 TABLE 1 INTER-RATER RELIABILITY CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS Categories8 Investigator vs Student A Investigator vs Student B Student A vs Student B I. Science .976b .968b .971b II. Academic .929b .816b .914b III. Aesthetic • 836b .949b .837b IV. Musicality .967b .865b .793b V. Society . 922b ,658b ,668b a. A complete listing o£ the categories and a description of their nature Is found In Chapter IV of this study. ^Significant at the .01 level of confidence. 39 The findings show high correlation coefficients for all categories when comparing the investigator with the two students and comparing the students with each other. All of the correlation coefficients are signifi cant at the .01 level of confidence. Except for the correlation between the Investigator and Student B in : Category V (Society) and the subsequent low correlation i ; ; between Student A and Student B in the same category, the j ! findings were considered as highly satisfactory as an i I ! I ' ; indication of inter-rater reliability. An examination of | I ! Category V (Society) was made in an effort to account for the low correlation found in this area. It was noted that; I ! I i ! the correlation between the Investigator and Student A in i ! i this category was high. There seemed to be some indica- ■ tion that the problem was not with the definition of the I | : category or the selection of key words but rather the i • problem was with the degree of understanding in this topic held by Student B. It was decided that no change was justified in this category. The major investigator for the study repeated the twelve articles selected for the test of reliability during the final examination of the content material. The purpose of this procedure was to test the intra-rater reliability, or the degree to which the major investigator could replicate the tabulation of the data. Using the Student fs t-test, a test for correlation was made between the first and second examination of the content material by the investigator. Table 2 shows the results of the intra-rater reliability test. All findings are signifi cant at the ,01 level of confidence and seem to indicate an extremely high level of reliability in relation to the major investigator's ability to replicate the tabulation of data for the content material. As a result of the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability findings, it was decided to proceed with the study in the manner prescribed. Collection of the Data Information regarding the title, author, volume, and page number for each article was placed on the prepared information sheets and these 300 information sheets were arranged in random order according to a table of random numbers. The process of examination was then commenced. TABLE 2 INTRA-RATER RELIABILITY CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS First Examination versus Categories Second Examination I. Science .990a II. Academic .966a III. Aesthetic • 908a IV. Musicality .979a V. Society „913a Significant at the .01 level of confidence. 42 Facts concerning the professional affiliation, ; professional responsibilities in the Music Educators National Conference, position held in the schools, and the source of the article were recorded in the space provided on the information sheet. ThiB information was taken from : biographical descriptions found with the article. No out side source of information was used by the investigator. A tally was made each time a word listed on the | information sheet was accepted by the investigator as ■ meeting the requirements of the study. When the tabula- i j tion was completed for the article, the tallies were i | totaled for each category and the findings were placed in ! I the space provided on the information sheet. This I procedure was followed for each article until all of the , articles were examined and the information was recorded. Finally, all information was transferred to data I recording sheets and then to IBM cards for use by the 1 computer. Treatment of the Data The data collected from the 300 articles selected for the study were processed on the IBM 1130 computor. Summary This chapter attempted to describe the nature of the study and the procedures followed in its administra tion. In subsequent chapters, the findings of the subjective and objective examination of the content material will be described. Finally, the conclusions for the investigation will be given. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS OF THE SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS | I Five topics of concern to music education were ] ! ; identified through a subjective examination of the ! articles selected from the Music Educators Journal. It is| i i ■ ! the purpose of this chapter to describe the nature of i these topics and the factors that may have been influ- i i ! ential in their development. ! j It is important to indicate that no attempt was i i ! i made in the subjective analysis of the content material to I : i identify all of the topics that were under discussion in the journal during the decade, nor was there any effort made to prove the relative importance of the topics selected for examination. This study merely sought to select and describe those topics that appeared to receive i a significant amount of attention and may have in some degree contributed to the total picture of music education during the period under study. 44 I 45 Prologue Be£ore commencing with the major task of this chapter, it seems imperative to describe the year just prior to the beginning of the ten-year period selected for the study. The school year of 1956-1957 was the centen nial celebration of the Music Educators National | i Conference. Thus, it is an appropriate point of departure! i for the investigation. i Three themes were apparent in the journal articles! | throughout this year: (1) the importance of quality in i the music program, (2) the need for balance and diversity in the music curriculum, and (3) the search for the place > j of music in contemporary society. j A speech given by Schuman at the 1956 national convention served as a catalyst for much of the discussion about the quality of the music program that was presented during the centennial year. The speech lamented what Schuman termed as the mediocre performance standard of school music. He suggested that the problem centered around the willingness of teachers to accept a quality of performance that was somewhat less than the standards of 46 professional excellence. Schuman blamed the lack of quality in school music to the limited training and interest of the music teacher (408). Two men wrote in reaction to the Schuman article. Normann, reflecting the educationist's point of view, ' concluded that the quality of performance should be deter-i mined by the level of child and youth understanding. He | saw the amount of drill required for professional ; performance standards as a deterrent to the vitality, | i sincerity, and freshness of performance so necessary to young people. He labeled the stress upon professional [ standards as one of the gravest dangers inherent in the i i | teaching of music (401). LaBach, writing in a later issue i ! ; j of the journal, brought a little more balance to the I i discussion when he pointed out that the problem was not so| much one of quality versus the welfare of the student, as : it was a problem of bringing meaningful and valuable music: to the student on his level of experience. Music educa tion is responsible to both music and the student, LaBach concluded, and, therefore, there can be no excuse for trivial music and poor performances. There is valuable and meaningful music for every level of experience and for 47 every school purpose (387). Both Nbrmann and LaBach spoke of the Important part teacher training played in bringing quality to the music program. They, along with Boyle (360) and Snapp (410), engaged in an attempt to define the effective teacher training program. In addition to an innate sensitivity and responsiveness to music, these writers pointed to a broader experience in theory, history, and performance as prerequisite to music teaching. An interest in the problems of balance and diver sity in the music program was also evident during this year. Two writers were particularly vocal in this area of concern. These men, coming from outside the music educa tion profession, warned of the apparent dangers in the existing music program that was failing to serve the needs of all students. Mustard, writing of the place of music : in the junior high school, stressed the importance of diversity and balance in the curriculum. The spirit of : music and not just the technical aspects of music, he 1 observed, should serve as the guiding force in the music program of the junior high school (399). Sparling, emphasizing the necessity of music for the masses, encouraged the music educator to take more of an interest in the general education program. He proposed that a program dedicated to the enlightenment of all students would serve the specialized aspects of the music curricu lum as well. While bringing music to many students, he suggested, the talent of a few would most likely be found j ; where It otherwise would have lain dormant (411). | * | Also, there was evidence during this year of a ! i growing interest in the role of music in the contemporary society. Kaplan pointed to new types of labor, goods, and' i ! ! services that would most assuredly bring changes to the i culture. Music education, he warned, must be ready with a new philosophy and framework to help the music teacher | deal with his expanding role in the changing community j [ : (384). John, also demonstrating a concern for music in the new society, admonished the music profession to accept : the growing importance of science in the world. Science will take an ever-increasing place in the school curricu- : lum. If the education of the American citizen is to be a complete one, he concluded, music educators must come to 1 realize that music and science can and must take their i places side by side in the school (381). Lawler, executive secretary of the conference, attempted to project into the future of the profession as she wrote for the journal in the final month of the centennial celebration. She drew together much of the thinking of the times and presented with clarity the direction the profession would likely take in the years to follow. Lawler concluded that within the next decade music education would, of necessity, face its responsibi lity to the world community, the local community, and the school community. She conjectured that the profession would examine and resolve certain major conflicts exhibited by the varied thinking of its members, e.g., quality versus quantity in the materials and performances of music education, general education versus special education, intellectual objectives versus affective objectives for the music program. As she wrote, Lawler was hopeful for the future of the conference. She pointed with pride to the growing rapport among the members of the conference as they discussed the goals and practices of music education. With some degree of accuracy, she predicted a growing prestige for the conference and an ever widening contact with the greater music profession. Finally, she prophe sied that music education would move toward maturity through the influence of a number of seminars, meetings, clinics, and research projects dedicated to new ideas for the music curriculum (388). Thus, the examination of this year seemed to indicate that the profession, on the threshold of the new ; half century, was well aware of its problems and its i potential. The study now turns to an examination of the first decade of the new half century in the history of the Music; Educators National Conference to discover the directions i i I taken and the progress made. | The five topics discussed in the decade as identi fied by the subjective examination of the content material! are: (1) music in an age of science, (2) music as an academic discipline, (3) music as an aesthetic experience, (4) muslcality In the individual, and (5) music in the American society. The remainder of the chapter will describe the findings of the subjective analysis of the content material in reference to each of these topics. 51 Music In an Age of Science The Russian government placed a satellite into orbit in October, 1957 and changed the course of American education. The nation, filled with panic and disbelief in the failure of the country in the race for space, began an ! immediate search for the weakness in the American struc- i . ; ture that had allowed this crisis to develop. Lay leaders j 1 i ; I i turned critical eyes upon the American system of education. I With their accusations that the schools had failed to | I fully train American youth and their subsequent demands i for more learning experiences in the sciences, these men |seriously threatened the existing balance of the American | j I !curriculum. ; Music education was immediately aware of the probable threat to the music program in the schools. The examination of the place of music education as it served the rapidly changing society changed from one of complacency to one of urgency. This urgency was felt in the writing of the journal during the first years of the decade. The discus sions of music in this new space age were divided info 52 three major themes: (1) a concern for the imbalance of the curriculum through an overemphasis in the sciences, (2) a search for new justifications for music in the curriculum, and (3) an evaluation of the existing music education program. In the months following the national crisis, the examination of the major articles dealing with music in the technological society seemed to Indicate the important role played by leading educators outside the field of music education. Music educators, aware of the threat of music in the curriculum, seemingly turned to the leaders in American education for reassurance that a balanced curriculum would be maintained. In the months that followed, as school administrators spoke of the importance of music in a liberal education, this confirmation of curricular balance was realized. These men willingly agreed that certain weaknesses did exist in the American system of education, they, however, repeatedly objected to the irrationality of some lay criticism and they consistently refused to accept total blame for the national crisis. Warning the over emphasis in the sciences would be directly opposed to the 53 the development of citizens prepared for life in a democratic society, these educators argued for a continued balance in the curriculum. Engleman seemed to reflect the feeling of most administrators in education when he assured music educators that learning would remain "both balanced and comprehensive . . . both scientific and aesthetic" (54). Educators repeatedly reminded the nation that values were not developed through the sciences. Survival, they agreed, might be provided by a science- oriented curriculum but it would be survival at the cost of the moral and democratic values so basic to the American society (9). The American Association of School Administrators held a convention in the Spring of 1959 that centered its considerations on the theme of the creative arts in American education. The association passed a resolution at this convention that firmly supported the arts program in the schools. This statement of purpose was heralded by music education as a vote of confidence for the music program and a new guarantee of its continued place in the curriculum (420). With this confirmation, the crisis in music educa tion seemed to subside. While the threat of science to the music program was evidenced to some extent throughout the entire decade, never again was the urgency so great as it was in these early years of the period. In 1961, Britton, who was then president of the conference, exhibited the return of the profession to a calm state of mind when he said; The shock waves set off by the rise of the first Russian Sputnik into the skies above us are still to be felt. Nevertheless, they are now diminishing in strength . . . (67) j Leaders in music education soon followed those i I outside the profession with their discussion of music in the time of crisis. "The Russians compelled us to look at: ourselves," wrote Benn (20). Jarvis, in an article taken from a speech origi nally presented at the 1959 national convention, described! the task that lay ahead for music education: Those presently concerned with music education are face to face with the necessity of showing that music is an essential part of the kind of education which will encourage the thinking, responsible citizen; only subjects which prove their value can survive the competition for a place in the school curriculum. (17) 55 In the first examination of school music, writers , in the journal attempted to define the place of music in the curriculum by presenting the justifications that had served this purpose during most of the twentieth century. Music as a means to democratic living, health, profitable leisure, and human relations were once again reviewed by the profession in defense of the existing music program. i | However, some writers during this period displayed| a growing awareness that such arguments were obsolete. Reimer, for example, wrote with considerable clarity concerning the danger of extrinsic values as a justifica- tion of the music curriculum. He concluded that music education would place itself in an extremely tenuous posi-j tion if it continued to justify music by pointing to its i service qualities which other fields could serve as well, if not better* If it is to survive, Reimer offered, a discipline must make a unique contribution to a society. Music is capable of doing so. Any preoccupation with lesser values was seen by the writer as a threat to the place of music in American education (28). This article by Reimer seemed to reflect the feelings of many others in the field. Choate (62) and 56 Harris (112), in particular, wrote with some depth concerning the structure o£ music as the more adequate substantiation of its role in the society and in the school. Perhaps one of the most perceptive articles con cerning the problems of music education in the new tech nological age was written by Benn. Acknowledging the fearj and panic of the times, she emphasized the importance of man over his weapons. Fear, Benn suggested, should not be directed toward the weapon but rather toward the values of: men as users of these tools of destruction. The ability to live in this scientific age depends, not so much upon j the ability to pit technological advance against technolo-I gical advance, but rather the ability to make enlightened ! and human choices in relation to world goals. The schools, she concluded, must aim toward the development of a citizenry capable of dealing with more than the technical aspects of the age. Education must somehow develop the sensitivity and intelligence needed to make the decisions of the technological world. Then, in her effort to place music once again on a solid founda tion, Benn pointed to the very nature of music as being 57 such that it could carry a part of the responsibility of the schools toward the goals of creativity, imagination, discipline, discrimination, discernment, and concern (20). It was evident from the writing of the profession that the abrupt entry of the nation into the space age did serve as a catalyst for the changing of the music curricu lum. It is not possible for this section of the chapter to describe these changes in detail. This would, in fact, call for the inclusion of much of the information that is to be found in the remainder of the discussion. What should be noted here is the evidence that the Russian threat and the subsequent emphasis on mathematics and science did strongly influence the thinking of the profes sion in the area of curriculum development. Frequent references were made to the needs of the contemporary society and the implications for music education. Articles by Ernst (87), Andrews (105), and Sand (137) are but a few of the articles in the area of curriculum development that show the influence of the space age upon the thinking of the profession. Toward the end of the period, writers seemed to come to varied conclusions about the effect of the Russian 58 I satellite upon education. Harold Taylor seemed to convey . the rather pessimistic viewpoint of some leaders in educa tion as he said: . . . the American people [have turned] away from the true concerns which must engage us as persons, to those problems having to do with the effort to become invulnerable to approaches of political ideas other than our own, invulnerable, j in short to all experience which is in any way I dangerous or exciting, i j The effect of this concern, which in my judgment, has amounted to a kind of obsession, has been to drive the creative arts and the creative attitude out of the schools and i I colleges and to crowd our curricula with more j j and more requirements, more grades, and more i machinery for destroying the initiative and | spontaneity of the American student. (181) Other writers, however, pointed with optimism to 1 ! the influence that the space age threat had played in ! | ! I forcing the profession to strengthen its philosophical foundations and reform its practices and policies. Music as an Academic Discipline The American public, suddenly threatened by the technological advances of Russia, placed new premiums on the education of the capable student. Here, they con cluded, was the only hope for survival in the age of j space. 59 American education, in response to this national : pressure, initiated an extensive study of the educative processes geared to the intellectually able student. Music education was invited to join this project. In doing so, the profession entered into an examination of ; the academic phase of the music program that was to | influence the entire music curriculum. The academically talented student was indeed the | ! ■ I | educationally underprivileged of the first half of the j | twentieth century. One reason given for this neglect was j | the belief that the capable student could learn without i too much special attention. The deep seated fear of the i i American public for any kind of intellectual endeavor was j j also pointed to as a limiting factor in the progress made | i : j in this area (43). However, the entrance into the space race served to effect a sharp change in attitude on the part of both layman and teacher. The National Education Association, aided by the Carnegie Foundation of New York, sensing the needs of the society, organized the Project for the Academically ; Talented Student. The purpose of the project was the establishment of programs more suitable to the 60 capabilities of the nation's gifted students. Outstanding leaders in education and interested laymen were enlisted for this project. As a result of the first conference in February, 1958, a basic report, The Identification and Education of the Academically Talented Student in the American Secondary School, was published (425). Subsequently, committees representing the various subject areas of the secondary school convened for the purpose of preparing publications that would implement the principles established by the original publication. In June, 1960, a three member committee^ met to draft the report that was later published under the title Music for the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School. This report attempted to give to music educators a guide for the development of a music program designed for the upper 20 per cent of students attending the American secondary school. Acknowledging the emotional and physical similarities of all students, regardless of ability, the study proceeded to define the ^The three member committee Included: William C. Hartshorn, Wiley L. Housewright, and Eleanor Tipton. intellectual differences which would require a special program for the gifted student. The program was charac terized by a greater depth and breadth of content and a I teaching-learning situation that would permit the student j the freedom needed to develop Insights, to see relation ships, and to establish independent values (424). The first announcement and preview of this publication was made by Hartshorn in the September-October 1960 issue of the journal (43). A study of the content material in the period following the publication of this report seemed to evidence the influence that it had on the thinking and writing of authors in the journal. There were, for example, many references to the academically talented student and to the project itself. Articles written by Ernst (87) and Hood (90) are typical of these references. On a more subtle level, the influence of this j report was seen in the increased reference to the academic; facets of the music program. An article by Giaudrone i shows this growing consideration for the academic objec tives of music education (100). i The growing interest in the nonperforming student j j also seemed to stem from this report on the academically 62 talented student. Articles by Moses (55) and John (56) reflected the renewed interest In the general music class. In the February-March 1962 issue of the journal, Britton, then president of the conference, announced the theme of the national convention for that year: The Study of Music as an Academic Discipline (362). Here the conference acknowledged for the first time the growing importance of the academic aspect of the music program. Even at that time the profession seemed reluctant to identify music as an academic discipline. Although leaders had become increasingly aware of the intellectual demands of the changing curriculum, they had approached a total commitment to the idea of music as an academic discipline with some caution and misgivings. The conflict of the profession was especially noticeable in the words of Britton as he announced the theme for the 1962 national convention. He commented that the conference would spend its time in the consideration of: . . . how music can be taught in the schools in order to ensure Its right as an academic subject without being regarded as "theoretical," "impractical," "abstract," and at the same time without minimizing "theoretical" implications. (362) 63 Articles inspired by the national convention served as the second phase in the journal's consideration of the intellectual facet of the music program. The discussions were characterized by attempts to define and justify music as an academic discipline. Efforts were also made to find a balance between the academic and practical sides of the curriculum. In a speech given at the 1962 national convention, Hartshorn, who had continuously led the thinking in the area of academic goals for the music program, did much to clarify the meaning of music as an academic discipline. This speech emphasized that this definition of the music program was not meant to undermine or to weaken the performance aspect of the musical experience, but rather it was meant to suggest the possibility for strengthening this area of the program. The reorientation of the performance as an end product to performance as a means to learning, Hartshorn suggested, would ensure this segment of the music program a more vital position in the music curriculum, bfusic education must strive for a better balance, he argued. A balance that would come from more study of the history of music, the theory of music, and 64 the literature of music. The meaning, nature, and struc ture of music must move to the center of the program, Hartshorn concluded. Finally, as if to allay the criti cism that was already in evidence in the profession, he said: Music is a fine art. It is also a discipline. It both expresses and arouses feelings that are ! emotionally compelling. It also challenges the mind. What it communicates is felt. How it communicates must be understood. (116) I ! Many articles in the period following the conven- | j tion reflected the thinking of Hartshorn. Efforts were j I made to show the means whereby the performance class could bring a depth to the program through a better balance of I the technical with the academic aspects of the instruc- ! tional program. Chappie (110) and Deihl (192) wrote j ; ’ during this period to present the idea of the study of ; i ; I music and the performance of music as complimentary : aspects of the performance class. Even as late in the decade as 1966, Hoffer demonstrated a continuing concern for the study of music during class rehearsals (262). A growing interest in the study of music as a part: : of man's greater knowledge of his culture was evident in the latter part of the decade. Howerton (103), Peterson 65 and Borstand (172), Mitchell (195), Keller (213), Ivey (221), Karel (271), and Wilhelms (279) wrote in an attempt to de£ine and promote the related arts or humanities course in the secondary school. In spite of the number of music educators who accepted the validity of music as an academic discipline, many people were opposed to this avenue to music educa tion. Speaking at a regional convention in 1963, Zimmerman, who was then president of the conference, expressed the essence of the controversy when he said: There seemed to be some fear that music might lose its sanctity as an art, and musical expressiveness might suffer if we delve too deeply into the intellectual aspects of the arts. (154) Those opposed to the emphasis on the intellectual aspects of the music program were concerned that it would lead teachers, administrators, and laymen to conclude that teaching young people about music would be more productive than teaching them how to make music. Benn, for example, spoke out against the academic approach to music educa tion. While she wrote mainly from the viewpoint of the elementary school music program, Benn seemed to express the conclusions of many writers regarding the damage that 66 such an emphasis might make to the total instructional program. The study of music as an academic discipline is not appropriate to the elementary school, Benn concluded. She expressed her concern that such an idea would cause confusion within the profession: . . . music as an academic discipline must be reserved for those laymen or students who have sufficient maturity to realize the particular contribution which such an approach can make to their education. (109) Music education, as Benn pictured It, was an accurate and well-disciplined type of learning within a discipline that she preferred to call artistic or aesthetic rather than academic. Thus it was that some writers, threatened to some extent by the Increasing emphasis upon the academic within the profession, turned with equal vigor toward an examina tion of the aesthetic qualities of music as a possible foundation for the music experience in the schools. Music as an Aesthetic Experience Consideration of the aesthetic nature of music and its Influence on music education, as might be suspected, was evidenced to some degree throughout the entire period 67 under examination. In the latter part of the decade, however, a sharp change in the discussion of the aesthetic: : possibilities of music education was demonstrated. This change was seen in the definitive nature of the examina tion. Early references to the aesthetic qualities of the; i [ | music experience spolce in vague phrases regarding the ! vital role played by music in the spiritual life of man. There was little evidence of any attempt to define the i ; . aesthetic experience beyond these generalities. Perhaps I an article written by Hanson best typifies the nature of j these early discussions: i ! I believe that through the arts man can be helped not only to a realization of the beauty which surrounds him, but that through i this sensitization he may be helped to find his own soul. (1) In the first years of the decade one writer seemed an exception to this rule of generality. Reimer made a scholarly investigation of the aesthetic experience. As he challenged music educators to put aside nonmusical objectives as a basis for the music program, Reimer : pointed to the aesthetic qualities of music as the best defense of its place in the curriculum. He gave substance to his argument through his reference to the writings of Langer, Dewey, and Jung. His article was a forecast of i the type of thinking and writing that characterized the latter part of the decade (28). | It was difficult to identify the exact time in the I ten-year period when the concern for the aesthetic experi ence began to consume a greater portion of interest by writers in the journal. There was some indication, however, that the 1962 national convention of the confer ence served as the influence upon this growing interest. It was difficult to define the motivation for this increased concern for the aesthetic responsibilities of music education. There was some evidence, however, that it may have developed from the growing concern of some leaders over the validity of the academic approach to the music program. In the period following the 1962 national conven tion, the discussion of music as an aesthetic experience was divided into three themes: (1) the attempt to define the aesthetic qualities of music, (2) the description of the aesthetic experience, and (3) the identification of the aesthetic process. 69 Some writers during this period attempted a search into the nature o£ the aesthetic object in an effort to bring a greater insight to the aesthetic phase of the music program. Much of this writing appeared to reflect the thinking of Langer as it sought to define the contribu tion of the symbolic form of communication to the life of man. Music as an aesthetic object has a unique contribu tion to make to man, they reasoned. Music, in the very complexity of its communication, is able to expose the meaning of life with a depth that is impossible to other means of communication. D'Andrea described the aesthetic object in this manner: A great work of musical or visual art, as we well understand, embodies a view of life; it is an intense personal view, an emotionally charged interpretation of the human destiny; it gives form to some of man's highest moments of awareness; it is often the deepest kind of evidence as to the way man has thought, felt, and acted. A work of art becomes so by virtue of its being an expression of the innermost thinking, feeling, imagining of man about his great emotions and motives. (120) The true meaning of music, some writers offered, could be found, not in what is communicated, but in the actual act of expression. The import of music, i.e., its 70 meaning or significance, could be found in its communica tion of the very pattern of life itself. As Bencriscutto described the process: A musical phrase begins as life begins, then continues in time through dissonances (conflicts) | and consonances (resolutions), ultimately coming to rest and perfectly summarizing what had gone I before, causing a degree of dissatisfaction and sadness or satisfaction and joy depending on the quality of the phrase. This clearly periscopes life. (215) Thus, music was seen as a special kind of symbolic form that by virtue of its dynamic structure could express the forms of life experience. It was with this definition i i of music that these authors claimed the Importance of music in the life of man and, thereby, in his education. | This view of music, they urged, must be taken into i consideration in the process of determining the music program in the schools. Evidence indicated that some writers engaged in an investigation of the nature of the aesthetic experience. Reimer, once again, made a significant contribution to this discussion. His definition of the aesthetic experi ence was in keeping with that of many writers concerned with this topic. The aesthetic experience, Reimer stated, is the feelingful apprehension of the artistic content of 71 the aesthetic object (197). He, along with D'Andrea (120) i { and Cady (146), labeled this feelingful apprehension as I i | aesthetic sensitivity. Gaston viewed aesthetic sensitivity as mainly one of the senses. He pointed to the importance of the senses as a means for life enrichment. Man has always hungered for sensory experiences, he stressed. Man has always learned the music of his culture and he still finds it essential to his life. Because of man's basic need for tone and rhythm, Gaston concluded, children must have music for their healthy and normal development (132). 1 Duerkson, in an important contribution to the ! | thinking in this area, gave the definition of aesthetic I I ] sensitivity a broader base than the one established by Gaston. Aesthetic sensitivity can mean a responsiveness to many different facets of the aesthetic object, i.e., a sensitivity to the senuous qualities of sound, a sensi tivity to the response of the listener, a sensitivity to the expression of the composer and the performer, and a sensitivity to something communicated by the music (157). Reimer, however, pictured the problem as far more simple in nature. Regardless of what was sought from the 72 aesthetic object, the aesthetic sensitivity to this object was developed through a two-step process: (1) the percep tion of the artistic content of the work of art, and (2) the response to what was perceived. He emphasized the importance of the first step in the process. To experience music without fully perceiving its nature and meaning could at best be a superficial experience with the sound and excitement of the music. Reimer viewed the second stage of the process as a natural outcome of the act of perceiving. In his definition of the aesthetic experi ence, Reimer gave special attention to the thought that perception was an ability, and as an ability, he concluded, it could be developed and refined within the individual. Thus, this premise served as the basis for the further development of music education as aesthetic education (197). One of the earliest journal references made to aesthetic education was made by D'Andrea in 1963 (120). This term grew in popularity from this point and it was completely accepted in the profession by the end of the decade. The area considered by authors in the last years of the period was centered around the nature of a music program Chat could be called aesthetic education* | Writers, such as Reimer (197), Rossi (117), Mbnsour (171), | and Sigel (273), pictured the development of the intellec- 1 I tual side of the aesthetic experience as the major goal of | formal education* Reimer further divided the process of perceiving the aesthetic object into three stages: (1) the develop ment of concepts and knowledge that pertain directly to the music, (2) the analysis of the content of the music, and (3) the performance or active participation in the music. It should be noted that most writers placed their | emphasis upon the act of perception* Responsiveness was i to a large extent dismissed as unsuitable for formal instruction. Reimer, for example, said: Very little, If anything can be done to directly affect the other part of aesthetic sensitivity--the feelingful reaction to the aesthetic events in art. (197) I A few important authors, however, questioned this dismissal of the responsive act from the educative process. Broudy, writing in the November-December 1964 issue of the magazine, seriously questioned the premise that knowledge about music would foster a love for it (190). Sizer viewed the development of the creative and 74 aesthetic response as vital to the school curriculum. He saw the necessity of changing the structure of the educa tive experience to permit this responsiveness. You cannot regulate and schedule the creative act, he stressed. If, indeed, the aesthetic response is to take place in the schools, then the time and climate for creative endeavor must be provided (224). Perhaps the most significant discussion of the responsive aspect of the aesthetic experience was presented by Campbell in 1967. Campbell described the aesthetic object as one that contained four major quali ties: the technical, the formal, the expressive, and the sensuous. While he acknowledged the importance of the technical-formal qualities of the aesthetic object and the ease with which they are acquired, he questioned a program that failed to deal with the expressive and sensuous qualities of the arts. It was suggested that the true objective of aesthetic education should be to open the door of music for the student. The key word in aesthetic education should be exposure, exposure to the most expressive and the most sensuous of music. Only after students are aware of the possibilities of music in their 75 | lives can the development of intellectual understanding be i | achieved, the climate of the classroom, the attitude of the teacher, and the manner of learning can influence the degree to which the music program is aesthetic education (293). Musicality in the Individual There was an obvious and continual interest in the | development of musical competence throughout the decade. It was evidenced, however, that this discussion changed considerably in nature as the period progressed. i I The writing of the early years showed three major I characteristics: (1) an interest in the end product of ! | the music instruction, hence, the performance; (2) a consideration of group objectives; and (3) a concern for teacher competence. Articles by Lawson (19), Travelstead (5), House (49), and Tipton (70) are typical of the discussions in these years. At the midpoint in the ten-year period there was a change in emphasis from group development to the growth of the individual. Hie term musicality was used with increased frequency In association with a new view of musicianship as an independent process. ] There was some indication that the Yale Seminar on Music Education was influential in the shaping of the new definition of musical competence. This meeting, held in Spring, 1963, was sponsored by the United States Depart ment of Health, Education, and Welfare as a part of a project of the Arts and Humanities Branch. The seminar was made up of leading musicians, scholars, and teachers throughout the United States. While the recommendations of this group concerning the necessary changes in materials and the processes of music education were to ] have a long range influence upon the thinking of the pro fession, the most immediate result appeared to be the i I clarification of what was meant by musicality and the implications of this new definition to the music curriculum. A report of the Yale Seminar for Music Education was made available to the profession in 1964. It pointed to the failure of music education in the development of the creativity, originality, and individuality needed to deal with the rapid cultural development of the society. Musicality was identified as the prime objective of the 77 formal music program in the schools. Viewing musicality as the capacity of the individual to express a musical idea, the seminar listed activities that would lead the student toward these goals, i.e., performance, listening, ear training, rhythmic movement, and composing (346). An increased interest in musicality is reflected in the journal in the months that followed this meeting. The term musicality, used with some frequency by writers, | | expressed a new concern for the individuality of the musicj i process. Special emphasis was placed on the development of independence by the student when dealing with the i varied materials of music. Independence, some writers reasoned, was the only way that society, in the face of a j I rapidly multiplying body of music literature, could hope to develop a musically literate culture. Leonhard reflected this move toward musicality in his writing as he labeled musical understanding and knowledge as standing equally with technical competence in the music program (163). Numerous articles appear in the journal emphasiz- i ing the importance of changing the performance class to permit the development of the knowledge and skills neces- i sary to continued growth beyond the classroom. Articles by ’ Johnson (156) , Delhi (192), Hoffer (262), and House (269) are examples of this new emphasis for the performance class. The direct experience with music was also a matter of concern to those discussing the development of musi cality in this period. Broudy declared that musicality in |the student could only be developed by a direct involve ment with the materials of music. He discriminated ! ! 1 sharply between the merely academic approach and the | i i musical approach to learning. There are two ways of deal- | . i ing with music, Broudy commented. One way is to study j about music, its history, its developments, its instru- j jments, its form and styles; the other way is to make a i study of music through making music, hearing it, and j i studying its theory and structure. Both are important and compatible, he concluded, but the direct consideration of music is of primary importance (190). Evidence in the journal seemed to indicate that the publication The Process of Education (306) was quite influential in the development of the profession's thinking in the area of musicality. This book, authored by Bruner, was, in essence, a synthesis of important discussions conducted by a group o£ scientists, scholars, and educa- ■ tors at a 1959 conference sponsored by the National | Academy of Sciences. This group met for the purpose of | examining the ways and means of improving the study of the sciences in the schools. The results of this conference, as presented by Bruner, had important implications for the whole field of education. Three major premises presented by Bruner had particular influence upon the thinking of the profession. From the time of the first reference to the publication in the journal (109) until the end of the period under study, writers presented these hypotheses, examined them, and | applied them to the development of musicality within the I curriculum. i The premise that any subject could be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development appeared as the most i widely quoted statement from the Bruner publication. It seemed to inspire writers to suggest the possibility that children were far more able musically than had previously been accepted. Hughes saw the challenge in this hypothe sis. The problem for the profession, he offered, was the definition of the simple, underlying concepts of music | that in their simplicity could serve as a basis for a whole range of complex relationships. He urged, as did Bruner, that the profession examine the structure of music j and base its educative processes on this structure (247). i Two areas of the curriculum seemed to be indi rectly influenced by the Bruner statement. One area was creative music. Writers concluded that with an increased understanding of the structure of music on the part of the profession, the skills of composition could be taught at an earlier age and could aid in the development of the understandings and discriminations necessary to other areas of the music program. Ideas about music listening also appeared to change as a result of thought about the Bruner premise. A growing belief that the young listener could deal with music of a complexity far above that which had previously been thought possible opened numerous avenues to some authors. Bruner's interest in the spiral curriculum was also studied by some authors in the years following the publication of his book. His hypothesis, the same funda mental truths should be taught at different levels in the 81 curriculum with a progressive refinement and precision of these principles, was the basis of the spiral curriculum. i i This idea, while not new to music education, seemed to i ! catch the attention of some writers in their search for I f the educative process that would best meet the needs of musicality. i Finally, Bruner's emphasis on the act of discovery in the educative process was accepted by some writers as most appropriate for the development of independence in the music experience. Perhaps one sentence taken from an article written in 1964 will serve as the best example of the extent to which Bruner appeared to influence the writing in the i [ | journal during the last part of the decade: An appropriate device leading to the discovery of concepts regarding the musical structure might be the alteration of one of the simple tunes being sung in the class. (Italics mine.) (171) A discussion of the changing definition of the musical development of the Individual would not be complete without some reference to the movement toward the improvement in teacher training. As previously mentioned, the concern for teacher competence was present throughout the entire decade. However, it was apparent that with the: j changing definition of musical competence in the student there came new ideas for teacher preparation. Especially important to the thinking in this area was the Seminar in Comprehensive Musicianship, The Founda tion for College Education in Music. This seminar, meeting in April, 1965, was sponsored by the Contemporary i Music Project, a Ford Foundation program. Feeling the need for new programs in music on the college and univer sity level, leaders in the field of music and music educa tion joined together to define a new and comprehensive program in music training. A report of this seminar was made available to the conference in September, 1965. The recommendations made by the seminar in the area of compo- ! sition, analysis, history, literature, and performance were in keeping with the intellectual, aesthetic, and musical changes being made in the music education program j I as a whole. This can be clearly seen in the conclusions of the report of the seminar: i Students trained under the proposed program j of comprehensive musicianship should be capable ! of teaching well both theoretical and historical i studies, and of relating these studies to performance. (417) This seminar, coming so close to the end of the decade, may have had only a limited Influence on the writing of the profession. One important article relating to musicianship was written by Gilmore. He wrote with ! clarity on the developing college music program (286), Finally, two ideas concerning the profession's discussion of musicality became evident through the examination of the content material. First, it was observed that the interest in musicality was exhibited mainly by members in the profession. The writing on this topic apparently spread itself widely among the various | segments of the profession. Second, it was noted that i i many more writers seemingly found musicality a more 1 acceptable picture of the music curriculum as compared to the purely academic or aesthetic views offered by some members of the profession. Here, within the definition of musicality, many writers found a theoretical base that would provide a balance of the academic, the aesthetic, and the technical in the music program. A balance that seemed more in keeping with the qualities of music and to the place of music in the life of the individual. Music in the American Society In the £inal years of the decade, the profession turned to a discussion of music in the society. There is some indication that these considerations were to a large extent a synthesis and maturing of the thought exhibited in the journal throughout the decade. 'While most of the discussion of music in the American society is found in the last years of the period, an examination of the entire decade gives considerable insight into the directions taken by the profession in this area of concern. In the early years, as the profession struggled with the threats of the new space age, some interest in the relationship of music and society was displayed. These early articles, however, appeared to be different in nature from those written at the end of the decade. Society, in the early years was viewed as a two-headed serpent, on the one hand a threat to the survival of music and on the other hand a justification for music in the schools; a justification that was based almost entirely upon the extrinsic values of music to the society. Little effott was made during this time to define the music program in relation to the changing needs of contemporary j society. However, two men were notable exceptions in this i area of the discussion during these first years. Choate and Kaplan wrote with a depth of understanding and a real concern for the social responsibilities of the music program. It was interesting to note that these two authors: directed the profession's consideration of music in the American society during the last years of the decade. Choate, in this early article, was well aware of the changing forces of society and the demands these changes would place on music education. He urged the profession to begin a search for new ways to serve the musical needs of the nation (62). Kaplan also brought emphasis to the growing cul tural needs of the American society. He warned educators that the music program must be related to the changing j social institution if it hoped to fulfill its potential (127). In spite of these warnings, when the threat of the : | space age subsided to some degree in the middle years of the decade, writers turned with preoccupation to an \ examination of the intrinsic qualities of music, almost toi i the complete exclusion of the social responsibilities of the subject. While the journal did not evidence any dis- j cemible degree of interest in the theoretical discussion of music in society during these middle years, it did record a certain awareness of the changing cultural climate in the nation. This was chronicled, however, through the descriptive articles that fall outside the delimitations of the study. Nevertheless, because of the importance of this record of national change to the dis cussions of the final years of the decade, they are given j here for the purpose of reference. The formation of the Ford Foundation Composers Project was first announced in the February-March 1959 issue of the journal (372). This project, a plan which sent young composers into the schools, was initiated as a j i part of the Ford Foundation Program in the Humanities and Arts. The progress of the project was closely followed by the journal and the expansion of the program to the i Contemporary Music Project for Creativity was subsequently! acknowledged in 1963 (414). The importance of these I private fundings of the arts in America was most assuredly j ! 87 communicated through the reports of this significant i project. Kaplan, writing in 1963, pointed to the building of the Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts as an impor tant step in the development of the arts in America. Here, he emphasized, the profession can see for the first time in American life the conception of private, govern mental, and corporate wealth contributing to the cultural growth of the nation (127). The journal pointed to the growing interest of the federal government in the arts and humanities as it was initiated during the Kennedy administration and brought to S fulfillment under the guidance of Lyndon B. Johnson. An early reference made to the growing White House involve ment in the cultural development of the country was found in an article written by Britton. He called attention to the important contribution that was made by President and Mrs. John F. Kennedy as they encouraged the arts and humanities through their patronage and support (263). The announcement of the planned National Cultural Center in Washington, D.C. was made to the profession in the November-December 1962 Issue of the magazine. This ’ ' 88 report to the profession clarified the importance of this plan to the cultural enhancement of the capitol and to the place of the arts in American life (127). The intervention by Secretary of Labor Arthur Goldberg in the New York Metropolitan Opera strike of 1961 was also reported in the journal as a significant event. The profession acknowledged this action as further evidence of the growing concern for the arts on the part of the federal government (374). In 1962» the journal marked the appointment of August Heckscher as Special Consultant to the President in the area of the Arts and Humanities. This appointment, it i i i was acknowledged, moved the nation further toward an [ understanding of the value of the arts in American society (380). The profession took cognizance of President Kennedy's final contribution to the arts which was the appointment of the Advisory Council on the Arts* Here, the profession noted, was the first governmental body concerned exclusively with the arts, artists, and art institutions. 89 The Interest and support for the arts and humani ties continued under the Johnson administration. In 1965, the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act was passed by Congress (434). This act established a national endowment for the arts with grants that provided support for research and Improvement of education in the arts. The possible Implications of this act for music education were first discussed in the June-July 1965 issue of the journal (389). In April, 1965, Congress passed another piece of significant legislation. It was entitled the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (433). In the first discussion of this legislation by the profession in the i I September-October 1965 issue of the magazine, the act was described as having an enormous potential for the develop ment of music education (376). There was some evidence that this prophecy was quite accurate. From this point until the end of the decade, an interest by music education in its new position in the American society was quite noticeable in the journal. 90 In 1967, Wersen, who was then president of the conference, reflected the renewed Interest In the social responsibilities of music education when he said: Music is a social art. It exists because people need it. It plays a role in the social order. To talk about the role of music is to talk about man himself, the social structure he produces and the dynamics of social change. (296) The discussion of music as a social art was based on two premises: (1) in order to survive and meet its potential, a society must have a rich and rewarding cultural heritage; and (2) education in a society should serve as a formal means for the transmission, maintenance, and perpetuation of this cultural heritage. Working within the framework set by these two hypotheses, writers attempted to outline the responsibi lity of music education to the American society. These discussions, dealing mainly with the intrinsic qualities of music, turned toward the following definition of the role of formal education in the musical development of the society: (1) the student should be given the music which has proven valid in the culture; and (2) the student should be guided to develop the understandings needed to synthesize, to analyze, and to discriminate the music 91 which has been proven valid to contemporary needs and | beliefs. | Efforts were made to bring music education into better focus with the needs of society. The apparent dichotomy between what was being taught in the schools and the tastes of the American public was brought under close examination. It was evident to some writers that a more i practical view of the student as he exists within his culture had to be accepted by the profession. Stanton, remarking on the new opportunities for music in the society, concluded that "today's child comes to the school j for a postgraduate course in musical understandings." i ! | Music education, Stanton argued, could not afford to r ignore the influence of the popular culture on its students. For to Ignore the informal learnings of the community could only result in the confusion of the student and the further Isolation of the music program (274). Many writers, with similar convictions, emphasized the Importance of bringing the popular idiom into the classroom for examination, understanding, and discrimination. 92 The importance o£ the individual within the social i i structure was stressed during this final period. It was concluded by some authors that the responsibility of the music program could not stop with the intellectual and i aesthetic growth of the student. He must also come to know what part music can play in his everyday life and what he must do for music within his culture. The importance of the individual in the educative process within the social structure was best stated by Wersen: All people do not "need" music in the same 1 way, but there can be no doubt, however, that the way in which man "needs" music is closely related to the way in which he sees himself as ] an individual. (270) i Just as the federal government increasingly expressed new interest in the different segments of society during the final years of this period, so music education seemed to direct more of its attention toward the various social environments of the nation. Dejager asked that the profession adopt a more realistic view of music education in relation to the varying social and economic environments in which the students existed. The music educators must come to 93 realize that the individual deals with music in relation to a cluster of values, norms, attitudes, and opinions which surround it and not solely upon its intrinsic and aesthetic qualities (368). A growing awareness that the social and economic background of the student must be considered in the planning of the music program was apparent in the discus sion of music for the culturally disadvantaged student. Andrews, for example, reviewed the changes in learning and materials requisite to a music program planned to meet the needs of these young people. She pointed to the urgently needed training that would prepare the teacher for this difficult assignment(283). Final evidence of the profession's growing commit ment to the sociological phase of the music program is found in the announcement of the Tanglewood Symposium Project: Music in American Society. This announcement was made in the January 1967 issue of the journal. In this introduction to the Tanglewood Symposium Project, three major objectives of the program were listed: (1) to clarify and define music in the society and in education; (2) to explore the mutual concerns and possible means of 94 i cooperation with the social institutions responsible for the development of music within the society; and (3) to prepare statements and publications that would clarify j objectives and programs in music education and assist f j administrators, supervisors, and teachers to interpret and support effective programs in music education (392). Two factors concerning the changing nature of the profession's consideration of music in the society became apparent from an examination of the topics selected for study by the symposium: (1) music education's growing acceptance of the idea that organized institutions of the society could serve as a source of support in the develop ment of music within the culture, and (2) the profession's increased understanding of the responsibility of music to the society. The discussion of music in the American society as it appeared in the journal during the final months of the decade was, in essence, a synthesis of the many attempts to define the music program in the changing American society. Music education's growing concern for music in the society promised a continuing Interest in the indivi dual as a unique being within a music program that would allow him to examine all facets of his musical culture, would help him gain the skills necessary for musical participation, and would guide the development of the understandings necessary to perceive, respond, and evaluate the expressive meanings of music. Summary This chapter attempted to describe the nature of the five topics that were identified by the subjective analysis. These topics are: 1. Music in an age of science. 2. Music as an academic discipline. 3. Music as an aesthetic experience. 4. Musicality in the individual. 5. Music in the American society. Eight social, economic, cultural, or professional factors were identified by the subjective analysis as possible influences on the discussion of the selected topics. Each factor, along with the date of its first reference in the journal, is listed below in conjunction with the appropriate topic. 1. Music in an age of science; The launching of i the Russian satellite, January, 1958. i 2. Music as an academic discipline; Music for i the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School,' September, 1960 (424). 3. Music as an aesthetic experience: The 1962 i National Convention of the Music Educators National Conference, January, 1962. 4. Musicallty in the individual: The Process of i Education (306), November, 1962; the Yale Seminar on Music Education, September, 1963; the Comprehensive Musicianship Seminar, September, 1965. 5. Music in the American society: The Elementary1 and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (433), September, i 1965; the Tanglewood Symposium Project: Music in American; i Society, January, 1967. While the degree and nature of the influence of certain segments of the profession and agencies outside the profession were not ascertained by the subjective analysis, the findings did indicate the possibility that j professional affiliation, conference responsibility, j ; school position, and the purpose for writing the article j 97 may have influenced the discussion of the selected topics. Hypotheses Based on the subjective analysis, the following exploratory hypotheses were formulated to aid in the objective analysis of the content material: Hypothesis I Authors tended to use terms associated with the five identified topics with varying degrees of frequency throughout the period defined by the study. Hypothesis II Authors tended to use terms associated with designated topics with greater frequency in the period following the first reference in the journal to the selected social, economic, cultural, or professional influences selected for that topic than in the period prior to this reference. Hypothesis III Authors, when grouped according to their profes sional affiliation, their conference responsibilities, or their positions in the schools tended to use terms 98 associated with certain topics with greater frequency than I groups with contrasting characteristics. Hypothesis IV ] Authors, when grouped according to the original purpose for writing their articles, tended to use terms associated with certain topics with greater frequency than groups with contrasting characteristics. CHAPTER V FINDINGS OF THE OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS Based on the findings of the subjective analysis described in Chapter IV, an objective analysis of the selected content material was carried out as prescribed by the procedural chapter. It is the purpose of this portion of the report to present the findings of the objective investigation. The Raw Score Data lii the period defined by the study, 308 persons authored or coauthored the 300 articles selected for examination. Of these authors, thirty-three wrote two or more articles, while the remaining 295 authors contributed just one article each. William C. Hartshorn was the most prolific writer of the decade with five articles appearing in the journal under his name; Bennett Reimer and 99 I Oleta A. Benn followed with four articles each; and Karl ! Ernst, Stanley Chappie, Robert John, Allen Britten, and j I | Max Kaplan each authored three articles for the journal. I | | Table 3 reveals the distribution of authors within i i the various segments of the profession and agencies out- i side the profession. The findings show that the major portion of the articles written during the period were authored by persons coming from the general membership of the conference. Authors coming from outside music educa tion were responsible for the second largest number of articles, while authors elected or appointed to offices in | the Music Educators National Conference fell into the i third group. Among the authors identified as coming from inside the profession, professors on the college and university level, particularly professors from the general membership of the conference, appeared as the most common group contributing articles to the journal in the period defined by the study. Of the 300 articles selected for the study, 199 were written originally for publication in the journal, while 101 articles were written originally for speeches and later prepared for publication in the magazine. TABLE 3 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND POSITIONS OF THE SELECTED AUTHORS Description Number of Articles Authors outside Music Education Total 63 Authors inside Music Education Elected or Appointed Officials of the Music Educators National Conference Professors 42 Supervisory Personnel 8 Classroom Teachers 0 Other 2 Total 52 General Membership of the ftisic Educators National Conference Professors 130 Supervisory Personnel 18 Classroom Teachers 43 Unidentified 2 Total 193 I The length of the articles selected for the study I range from 1,200 to 7,350 words. The mean average length i | of the articles appearing in the journal is 2,707.05. An examination of the mean average length of articles from | each of the years under study reveals an increase of i approximately 800 words by the end of the decade. Word Frequency Scores i An examination of the word tabulations for the selected categories shows the following range for word frequency within a single content unit: Category I (Science) from zero to sixty; Category II (Academic) from zero to eighty-two; Category III (Aesthetic) from zero to seventy-five; Category IV (Musicality) from zero to seventy-six; and Category V (Society) from zero to fifty- seven.^ A complete listing of the word frequencies for each content unit may be found in Appendix B. To facilitate the discussion, each reference to a category will be accompanied by an identifying word from the complete title for the category. Refer to Chapter IV for the full titles of the selected categories. (Above, p. 95.) ... ^.... 103; i For each of the selected categories, mean 1 frequency scores and standard deviations were calculated ! for the eleven time periods, each period consisting of | i 2 one year in duration. A grand mean frequency score for each category was also figured. A table of the mean frequency scores, standard deviations, and the grand mean scores for the designated time periods may be found in Appendix B. It should be noted here that these findings are devoid of any control for factors identified as undesir able, i.e., length of the article and repeated writing by I 3 one author. Therefore, any interpretation of these scores must be given in an extremely tentative and quali- ■ tative manner. Hence, the findings are given as an indi- ; cation, rather than as proof, of the nature and direction | of the discussions found in the journal. Figure 1 gives a graphic account of the mean frequency scores for Category I (Science) during the The years 1957 and 1967 are not complete years because the volumes selected for this study begin and end j in the middle of the year. I It should be noted that the labeling of these factors as undesirable is made in reference to their I possible statistical influence upon the findings of the j study. | Word Frequencies 104 FIGURE 1 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY I: MUSIC IN AN AGE OF SCIENCE 15.0 i 14.0 13.0 J 12.0 11.0 10.0 H 9.0 8.0 A 7.0 6.0 5.0 - 4.0 3.0 2.0 A 1.0 Grand Mean — T" 1 — i 1 — T“ f “ 1“ « i 1 r- oi o .H 04 m ' C f in VD O' in m <o VO VO VO VD VD VO VO VO Ol l l 1 1 I i 1 1 I Cl iH co cn o rH 04 CO in VO i —i LD m VO VO VO VO VO vo vo Cl c r > C T l ci C T i Ol d oi 01 i —1 rH r- l i —1 1 —1 r - t i —i r —I 105 period under Investigation, The results show high j frequency scores In the first three time periods, a sharp i i decline in the period from 1960 to 1961, and mean frequency scores within close proximity to the grand mean during the remainder of the decade. The findings seem to suggest that, while authors were using terms found in Category 1 (Science) to some degree throughout the entire period, never again following the period of 1959 to 1960 were they used to the degree evidenced in those first years. The graphic profile of the mean frequency scores for Category II (Academic) is found in Figure 2. The results show a gradual but erratic movement upward over the entire period. The mean frequency scores rise above the 4 grand mean for the first time in the 1960 to 1961 period 5 and once again in the 1962 to 1963 period. These results seem to suggest that authors tended to use terms found in Category II (Academic) with some degree of instability but with increased frequency as the period progressed. ^It will be remembered that this was the year in which the publication of the report on the academically talented student was first mentioned in the journal. (Above, p. 60.) ' ’This year marked the national convention of the conference which was discussed earlier in reference to this topic. (Above, p. 62.) 106 FIGURE 2 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY II: MUSIC AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE 15.0— 14.0* 13.0- 12.0- 11.0- 10.0- u 9.0- 5 * 8.0- 6.0" 5.0- 4.0- Grand Mean — r-“ 7“ iT" 1 — r- i 1 — T “— r Ol o i —! (M n in VD [ " ■ r ~ - in in vd VO ID ID VD vo VO vD VD Ol l i 1 I 1 1 i 1 I Ol ■ —1 00 Ol o rH OJ m in VD < -I in in lO ID VO «D VD vO VD Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol h rH 1 —1 rH i —1 i —i ( —i i —i rH 107 Figure 3 shows the mean frequency score distribu tion for Category XXI (Aesthetic). In general, the i results show a downward movement in frequency scores during the first half of the period as contrasted to an upward direction in the remaining years of the decade. The mean frequency scores fall below the grand mean for the category early in the decade and continue a gradual 6 decline until the end of the 1961 to 1962 time period. The downward trend is then reversed and the scores remain above the grand mean for the remainder of the period as they continue to gradually move in an upward direction. i The findings would seem to suggest that authors j I tended to use terms found in Category III (Aesthetic) with declining frequency during the first half of the decade and with increasing frequency during the final portion of the period. The 1962 to 1963 time period appears as the turning point in the profession's growing interest in this topic of concern. In contrast to the downward movement of the mean f frequency scores for Category IXI (Aesthetic) during the ^The 1962 national convention, first announced in the journal in January, 1962, was also discussed in reference to this category. (Above, p. 68.) 108! FIGURE 3 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY III: MUSIC AS AN AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE 15.0 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 w 10 . 0 9.0 8.0 7.0 Grand Mean 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 1.0 in ID m o ID m ID in in CN ID in ID m Ol oi r* H Ol H 01 Ol Ol t —! Ol Ol 01 first years of the period, Category IV (Musicality) gives evidence of an upward move as shown in Figure 4. From an extremely low score in 1957, the mean frequency score is ! approximately six times greater by the 1960 to 1961 I 7 period. For the remainder of the decade the mean frequency scores are relatively high. They fall below the grand mean in the 1961 to 1962 period and the 1962 to 1963 8 period, but rise again during the 1963 to 1964 time 9 period. They remain high for the rest of the decade. These findings tentatively indicate that authors tended to use terms from Category IV (Mfasicality) with a sharply rising frequency during the first years of the i decade and with a relatively high frequency during the remainder of the period. The two years when authors appeared to use these terms with the greatest frequency 7 The subjective analysis gives no apparent reason for the increase of interest during this particular time period. o It will be remembered that this was the year when the first reference was made to the Bruner publication, an event that the subjective analysis identified as a pos sible influence on this topic. (Above, p. 78.) This year marked the first journal reference to the Yale Seminar on Music Education which was identified by the original analysis as a possible influence on this topic. (Above, p. 76.) no! FIGURE 4 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY IV: MUSICALITY IN THE INDIVIDUAL 15. Oi 14.0- 13.0 12.0, 11.0 t n 10 . 0 • 1 — r - — r — T --- 1 --- --- 1 ----1 --- — T “ — 1 r ~ - < T \ o r - t C M C O ID ID I-' n ~ in in ID ID I D ID ID ID ID ID ID O i 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I O l i — I 0 0 c n O r - 4 C M ro m ID r H in in ID ID ID ID ID ID ID < n O c n O Ol Ol Oi o c n t — i i — i T — I r - 4 t — 4 rH rH 1 — 4 1 — I G rand Mean [ I i i I I I I I~'~’ ~.......~ ’ 111 i were 1960 and 1964. The mean frequency scores for the final category i i are shown in Figure 5. The results show a gradual i j increase of the mean frequency scores for Category V I (Society) over the period. With the exception of the rise in mean frequency scores for the 1958 to 1959 time period, however, the scores remain well below the grand mean 10 during the first eight time periods. It is not until the 1965 to 1966 time period that the mean frequency scores rise above the grand mean and continue a sharp 11 upward movement until the end of the period. The findings seem to suggest that, while authors tended to use terms found in Category V (Society) to some I degree throughout the entire decade, authors tended to limit their use of these terms from 1960 through 1965 as compared to their use of the terms in the final years of the decade. ^This lack of Interest in the social aspect of the music program was discussed in the subjective analysis of this topic. (Above, p. 86.) 11 It was in this period that the passage of federal legislation related to the arts in education and the initiation of the Tanglewood Symposium Project were discussed in the journal. (Above, p. 93.) Word Frequencies FIGURE 5 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY V: MUSIC IN THE AMERICAN SOCIETY 112 15-0 14.0 13.0- 12 .0*i 11.0 10.0 9.0- 8 .0 - 6.0- 5.0- 3.0- 2 .0- Grand Mean , ---1-- > — T “ — 1 — — r — " 1 — “T “ r • ' — 1 r- 0 1 o rH CN m in VD t" I ' - in in in I D VO VO VO VD VO VO VD 1 i 1 1 I 1 l 1 1 Ol rH 00 Ol o rH N m in VO i — ( in in VO VD VD VD vo vo VO Ol Oi Ol OI Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol i —I rH rH 1 —1 rH rH 1 —i rH rH It was decided that additional information regard ing the direction taken by the profession in the discus- I sion of the selected categories would come from a compari son of certain categories. Again, it must be noted that the unadjusted nature of the statistical data precludes i any but the most tentative conclusions. No attempt is made here to establish relationships within or between the topics. Due to the implications of both Category I (Science) and Category V (Society) to the social responsi bilities of music education, the graphic profiles of these i | two categories are placed together in Figure 6. i | Category I (Science) shows an overall decrease in mean frequency scores throughout the period as contrasted to the general increase of frequency scores in Category V (Society) over the same period. It is also noted that both categories evidence their lowest scores during the middle years of the decade. The findings seem to Indicate that authors tended to use terms found in Category I (Science) in their dis cussions of music in society with greater frequency at the beginning of the period, while they tended to use terms 114 FIGURE 6 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEFORY I: MUSIC IN THE AGE OF SCIENCE AND CATEGORY V: MUSIC IN THE AMERICAN SOCIETY CATEGORY I CATEGORY V 15.01 13.0. 12.0- 11.0- 10.0- 8.0" 7.0- 6.0- 5.0- 4.0- 2 .0- 1 — < -----J— 1 ) 1 1 — r -— c— — T “ ~ 1 r- ci o rH CM C O in I D r " I- I D in V O I D I D I D I D I D I D I D V O C T I I 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 I 0 1 I — 1 00 C n o i — l CM m in V D 1 -1 in in I D 1 0 I D I D I D I D V D c n O l c n 0 1 c n c n c n O l O l i — i 1 —1 r — 1 i — 1 r —1 i — i r-1 H H from Category V (Society) with greater frequency toward the end of the period. The results also suggest that both | categories were referred to with the least frequency 12 during the middle years of the decade. [ The graphic illustration of Category X (Science) and Category II (Academic) is found in Figure 7. Perhaps most interesting are the frequency scores as they refer to the first years of the period. The decade begins with the peak frequency score for Category I (Science) and, con versely, the lowest frequency score for Category II (Academic). By the 1960 to 1961 period, however, the mean frequency score for Category I (Science) drops sharply to j a point below its grand mean, while Category II (Academic) score moves for the first time above its grand mean. The findings seem to suggest that authors tended to use terms found in Category I (Science) with a high degree of frequency from 1957 to 1960, followed by a sharp decrease in use during the 1960 to 1961 period. I x i contrast, findings for Category II (Academic) show that ^This would seem to substantiate the findings of the subjective analysis that the interest in the social aspects of music education were most prevalent in the first and last years of the decade. It also suggests a changing definition of this aspect during the period under examination. (Above, p. 94.) Word Frequencies 116 FIGURE 7 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY I: MUSIC IN AN AGE OF SCIENCE AND CATEGORY II: MUSIC AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE 15.0 CATEGORY I CATEGORY II 14.0 13.0 12.0. 10.0 9.0’ 8.0 6.0' 5.0- 4.0- 3.0 2.0' 1.0-1 i —i cn in o r- m cn i — i in o in cn in ID m cn cn cn cn cn cn cn i —( <n cn authors tended to use terms from this category with 13 increased frequency during the same time period. Figure 8 shows the mean frequency score profiles ; i for Category II (Academic) and Category III (Aesthetic). The latter begins the period with a relatively high score and proceeds to move downward during the next four time periods, while Category II (Academic) moves in the opposite direction during the same period. The findings seem to suggest that authors, writing i in the 1957 through I960 period used terms from Category II (Academic) with increasing frequency, while using terms 14 : from Category III (Aesthetic) with decreasing frequency. Category II (Academic) and Category IV (Musicality) are viewed together in Figure 9. A similarity in the general movement of the mean frequency scores is observed throughout the entire period. i ^This seems to indicate that the interest in the : academic phase of the music program was an outgrowth of pressures of society on the existing curriculum. (Above, p. 59.) t ^This would seem to substantiate the findings of j the subjective analysis that an overemphasis on the j academic phase of the music program did overshadow the aesthetic aspect of the curriculum during the first part i of the decade. (Above, p. 65.) i 118 i FIGURE 8 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY II: MUSIC ! AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE AND CATEGORY III: I MUSIC AS AN AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE 1 m O u G ( U 3 D* 0 ) k Ik •d k li 15.0 CATEGORY II CATEGORY III 14.0 13.0 12.0 11.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 0 1.0 04 0 I ■ —t < 0 I <0 1 m V0 in 01 01 rH 01 Ol i —I Ol Ol 01 r —1 Ol c — { 01 i - 4 FIGURE 9 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES FOR CATEGORY II: MUSIC AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE AND CATEGORY IV: MUSICALITY IN THE INDIVIDUAL 119 15.0^ 14.0- CATEGORY II CATEGORY IV 13.0- 12.0- 11.0- 10.0- 9.0- 7.0- 6.0- 5.0- 4.0— 3.0- " T " ( ~ T * r I " " 1 1 1 “ T " o i —i M rn in ID t - ' r- in in 10 10 ID ID VO ID VO 10 10 cn 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 cn i —i 00 c r > o r —) CM m in VO i —! in . in ID 10 vO ID 10 ID ID G\ C T i tn C T i cn C T i ( J i CT i i — i i —I i —I rH i —1 i —I i —1 1 — 1 i — 1 The findings seem to Indicate that authors tended | to use terms from Category II (Academic) and Category IV | (Musicality) with approximately the same pattern of increase and decrease of frequency throughout the 15 period. j Correlation Coefficients for Selected | i Categories Versus Primary Factors i i | In an effort to identify the social, economic, cultural, and professional factors that may have influ enced the discussion of the selected topic, first-order correlation coefficients were calculated for the five | categories versus the factors selected through the subjec- | tive analysis of the content material. Eight primary factors were selected for this examination. They are listed below with the date of the first reference to the particular event or publication in the journal: (1) launching of the Russian satellite, January, 1958; (2) the publication Music for the ^This similarity was not observed during the subjective analysis of the content material. Perhaps it can be accounted for by the growing cognitive emphasis found in the definition of musicality. Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School (424), September, 1960; (3) the 1962 national convention of the Music Educators National Conference, January, 1962;: (4) the publication The Process of Education (306), November, 1962; (5) the Yale Conference on Music Educa tion, September, 1963; (6) the Comprehensive Musicianship . Seminar, September, 1965; (7) The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (433), September, 1965; (8) the Tanglewood Symposium: Music in American Society, January,; 1967. Table 4 reveals the degree of correlation between the primary factors and the frequency scores for the appropriate categories. In each case the hypothesis being tested is: authors tended to use terms from the designated category with greater frequency in the period | following the date identified as the first journal refer ence to the selected primary factor than in the period prior to that date. It is important to point out that these findings are not controlled for such undesirable ; factors as length of the article or the repetitive writing! by some authors. Therefore, any interpretation of these findings must be made with a degree of caution. j TABLE 4 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES VERSUS THE EIGHT PRIMARY FACTORS Categories Jan. 1958 (1) Sept. 1960 (2) Jan. 1962 (3) Nov. 1962 (4) Sept. 1963 (5) Sept. 1965 (6) Sept. 1965 (7) Jan. 1967 (8) I. Science — -- — — -- -- -- II. Academic — .105 — -- — -- III. Aesthetic — -- . 128a -- -- IV. Musicality — -- a m M v .104 .051 -.001 -- — V. Society — - - — — ~ — — — — “ • 248a .242a A Significant at the .05 level of confidence. 122! . " """..... ” 123 Although the launching of the Russian satellite is designated as one of the primary factors in reference to Category X (Science) and is represented by column 1 in Table 4, it will be noted that no score is recorded for this factor. The event, coming so close to the beginning of the period, is eliminated from consideration at this point due to the limited amount of content material avail able for analysis of the period prior to the determined date. It is only possible, therefore, to ascertain the probable influence of this factor on Category X (Science) in a most general way through reference to the mean frequency scores as described in the previous section of this chapter. The findings for Category XI (Academic) in rela tion to the second primary factor is found in column 2 of Table 4. While some degree of correlation is evidenced, the relationship is not great enough to be considered significant. These findings indicate that authors did not tend to use terms found in Category XI (Academic) with any greater frequency in the period following September, I960 (the first journal reference to Music for the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School) (424) than in 124 I the period prior to this date. The correlation coefficient of .128 is found for | Category III (Aesthetic) in relation to the third primary j j | factor as shown in column 3 of Table 4. The score is i ] significant at the .05 level of confidence. ThiB finding i { permits the statement that authors fended to use terms from Category III (Aesthetic) with greater frequency in the period following January, 1962 (the first journal reference to the 1962 national convention) than in the period prior to this date. The three primary factors tested in relation to Category IV (Musicality) are represented by columns 4, 5, and 6 of Table 4. It can be seen that only a small degree of correlation is found for these three primary factors. | These findings show: (1) authors did not tend to use terms found in Category IV (Musicality) with any greater frequency in the period following November, 1962 (the first journal reference to The Process of Education) (306) than in the period prior to this date; (2) authors did not tend to use terms found in Category IV (Musicality) with any greater frequency in the period following September, 1963 (the first journal reference to the Tale Seminar on Music Education) than in the period prior to this date; (3) authors did not tend to use terms found in Category IV (Musicality) with any greater frequency in the period following September, 1965 (the first journal reference to the Comprehensive Musicianship Seminar) than in the period prior to this date. Finally, the findings for the correlation of frequency scores for Category V (Society) with the two remaining primary factors are shown in columns 7 and 8 of Table 4. Column 7 represents The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (433) and column 8 represents the Tanglewood Seminar Project; Music in American Society. The results show a correlation coefficient of .248 for the former primary factor and a correlation coefficient of .242 for the latter primary factor. Both of these find ings are significant at the .05 level of confidence. These results tentatively indicate that: (1) authors tended to use terms found in Category V (Society) with greater frequency in the period following September, 1965 (the first journal reference to The Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965) (433) than in the period prior to this date; (2) authors tended to use terms found in 126 Category V (Society) with greater frequency in the period ; following January, 1967 (the first journal reference to I I the Tanglewood Seminar Project: Music in American Society) than in the period prior to this date. I ! Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Ancillary Factors First-order correlation coefficients were calcu lated for the selected categories in relation to the professional affiliations and responsibilities of the 16 authors and the source of their writings. This was done in an effort to define the segments of the profession and agencies outside the profession that may have been respon- j ! sible for the development of the various topics appearing i in the journal. Again, it is important to note that the results discussed in this section are unadjusted for certain undesirable factors and, therefore, they must be considered as tentative in nature. Four ancillary factors were selected for examina tion: (1) professional affiliation, (2) professional ^To facilitate the discussion, these factors will be referred to as the ancillary factors. 127 responsibilities in the Mbsic Educators National Confer ence, (3) positions held in the school, and (4) source of the article. The correlation coefficients for the selected categories versus the professional affiliation of the i authors are shown in Table 5. When the authors of the selected articles are divided into two segments, i.e., authors inside music education and authors outside music education, certain relationships are revealed between the professional affiliation of the authors and the topics they considered in their writings. An examination of the findings for authors outside the profession reveals two correlation coefficients that are significant at the .05 level of confidence. One is in relation to Category I (Science) and the other is in rela tion to Category V (Society). These findings seem to indicate that authors coming from outside the profession tended to use terms found in Category I (Science) and Category V (Society) with greater frequency than those authors from inside music education. 128 TABLE 5 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES VERSUS PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATION Authors Inside Authors Outside Categories Music Education Music Education I. Science .267a II. Academic .039 III. Aesthetic .073 -- IV* Musicality ,136a -- V. Society — .222a Significant at the .05 level of confidence. ! The findings reveal only one significant correla- i j tlon for authors affiliated with music education as com- | pared to authors from outside the profession. This corre lation coefficient is found in reference to Category IV (Musicality). The relationship, significant at the .05 level of confidence, indicates that authors coming from inside music education tended to use terms found in Category IV (Musicality) with greater frequency than those authors coming from outside the profession. Table 6 gives the results of the correlation of the professional responsibilities of members in the Music Educators National Conference versus the selected categories. When the authors identified as affiliated with music education are divided into two segments, i.e., elected or appointed officials of the conference and general members of the conference, certain relationships are found. The results reveal two correlation coefficients that are significant at the .05 level of confidence for authors identified as elected or appointed officials of the conference. These significant results are found with Category II (Academic) and Category V (Society). These 130 TABLE 6 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES VERSUS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES IN THE MUSIC EDUCATORS NATIONAL CONFERENCE Categories Authors Elected or Appointed by the Conference General Membership of the Conference I. Science .083 -.271a • M l - l Academic . 195a -.169a III. Aesthetic .021 .024 IV. Musicality -.031 . 12 7a V. Society • 125a := i . :i"n imi, ,T.r " . hi. ■ r : -.270a Significant at the .05 level of confidence. 131 findings seem to indicate that authors identified as elected or appointed officials of the Music Educators National Conference tended to use terms found in Category II (Academic) and Category V (Society) with greater frequency than those authors from the general membership or authors outside the profession. One positive correlation of a significant degree is found between the general membership of the conference and the selected categories. The findings for Category IV (Musicality) versus the general membership of the confer ence seem to indicate that authors coming from the general membership tended to use terms found in Category IV i I (Musicality) with greater frequency than authors identi fied as elected or appointed officials of the conference and authors outside the profession. The three negative correlation coefficients in this area should be noted. These significant relation ships are found in reference to the general membership of the conference versus Category I (Science), Category II (Academic), and Category V (Society). The findings seem to suggest that authors from the general membership of the conference tended to use terms from Category 1 (Science), - - - 132 Category II (Academic), and Category V (Society) with less frequency than elected or appointed officials of the conference and authors outside the profession. The authors identified as music educators were also considered in relation to their positions in the schools, i.e., professors on the college or university level, supervisory personnel on the elementary school or secondary school level, and classroom teachers on the elementary school or secondary school level. The results are found in Table 7. The findings show no significant correlations for authors identified as professors on the college or univer sity level. There are two significant correlations for authors identified as supervisory personnel on the ele mentary school or secondary school level. These signifi cant correlations are found in relation to Category IX (Academic) and Category IV (Musicality). These findings seem to suggest that authors identified as supervisory personnel on the elementary school or secondary school level tended to use terms found in Category II (Academic) and Category IV (Musicality) with greater frequency than professors, classroom teachers, and those authors from TABLE 7 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES VERSUS POSITIONS HELD IN THE SCHOOLS Supervisory Classroom Categories Professors Personnel Teachers I. Science -.049 - .076 -.171 M H • Academic -.004 .137a -.127 III. Aesthetic .063 -.001 -.045 IV. Musicality .024 .120a .003 V. Society -.019 -.077 -.169 aSlgnl£icant at the *05 level of confidence. 134 outside the profession. i i Three significant correlation coefficients are j evidenced for the segment of the profession identified as ! classroom teachers on : the elementary school or secondary i i I j school level. In each case, however, the correlation is negative. The findings suggest that authors identified as classroom teachers tended to use terms found in Category I (Science), Category II (Academic), and Category V (Society) with less frequency than authors identified as professors, supervisory personnel, and authors from out side the profession. The last ancillary factor selected for study was the source of the article. It was the premise of the study that the original purpose of the article influenced the subject matter of the article. Thus, the content material was divided into two types, i.e., articles written originally as speeches and later published in the journal and articles written originally for the journal. Certain relationships are discovered between the source of the article and the topics considered by the author. Table 8 reveals the findings for this final ancillary factor. 135 TABLE 8 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES VERSUS THE SOURCE OF THE ARTICLE Categories Speech Original I. Science • 34la II. Academic ,122a III. Aesthetic .014 IV. Musicality --- .005 V. Society .167a --- Significant at the .05 level of confidence. 136 Significant correlation coefficients are found for | three of the categories in relation to articles written i j originally as speeches and later published in the journal. j j These categories are Category I (Science), Category II I ! (Academic), and Category V (Society). | There is no significant correlation evidenced between articles written originally for the journal with any of the selected categories. These findings would suggest that authors writing for the purpose of giving a speech tended to use terms from Category I (Science), Category II (Academic), and Category V (Society) with greater frequency than authors preparing articles for original publication in the journal. Correlation Coefficients for Selected Categories Versus Covariate Factors Certain factors, while not contributing to the total understanding of the problem defined by a study, may, nevertheless, exert considerable influence upon the findings of a study. It is important that these factors be eliminated or controlled in some manner. This investi gation Identified two factors that were possible undesirable influences upon the findings of the study: (1) length of the article as a possible influence on word frequency, and (2) repetitive writing of a few authors as a possible influence on the segments of the profession responsible for the development of the various topics 17 selected by the study* First-order correlations were calculated for these factors versus the selected cate gories. Table 9 shows the findings for the covariate factors. The results show significant correlation for the length of the article with all of the selected categories. These findings indicate that authors writing articles of greater length tended to use terms found in all categories with greater frequency than authors writing articles of lesser length. Table 9 also shows significant correlation coef ficients for the repetitive writing of authors with all selected categories except Category IV (Musicality). The findings seem to indicate that authors responsible for more than one article in the journal tended to use terms from To facilitate the discussion, these factors will be referred to as the covariate factors. TABLE 9 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES VERSUS THE COVARIATE FACTORS Author Categories Length Repetition I. Science .368a .236® II. Academic .365® ,245a III. Aesthetic .253® .139® IV. Musicality .265a .099 V. Society .335® .169® aSigni£lcant at the .05 level of confidence. all categories, with the exception of Category IV (Musicality), with more frequency than authors writing just one article In the journal. Multiple Partial Correlation I i F I I I In order to find a more precise and refined under standing of the relationships of the various influences on the development of the selected topics, a multiple partial correlation coefficient was obtained for each dependent variable (the selected category) when it was compared to the primary influence(s) and the seven common ancillary i j | factors, with the covariate factors held constant. ] I The results of the multiple partial correlation for each of the selected categories is revealed in Table 10. The multiple partial correlation coefficient (R) is shown in column 1 and the F analysis of variance test (F) on the multiple partial correlation coefficient as it differs from zero is found in column 2. The results of the multiple partial correlation for Category I (Science) and Category V (Society) with their designated influencing factors are shown in Table 10. The F test values for these two categories 140 TABLE 10 MULTIPLE PARTIAL CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES VERSUS PRIMARY FACTORS AND ANCILLARY FACTORS Categories and Primary Factors R (1) F (2) I. Science January, 1958 .358 5.307*5 II. Academic September, 1960 .245 2.319° III. Aesthetic January, 1962 .145 < 1 IV. Musicality November, 1962 .241 2.431° September, 1963 .245 2.308° September, 1965 .253 2.469° V. Society September, 1965 .315 b 3.954 January, 1967 .358 5.307b aFor a complete description of the primary factors refer to Page 120. ^Significant at the .01 level of confidence. cSignifleant at the .05 level of confidence. 1411 exceed the theoretical tabled F value of 2.5778 given for the .01 level of confidence, hence, the findings show that these multiple partial correlation coefficients are significantly different from zero. Table 10 shows the multiple partial correlation coefficients for Category II (Academic) and Category IV (Musicality) with their influencing factors. The F test values for these findings are greater than the 1.9711 F value given for the .05 level of confidence. This permits the conclusion that these multiple partial correlations are significantly different from zero. Category III (Aesthetic) versus its designated influencing factors falls to show a significant multiple partial correlation. The coefficient of .145 shows an F test value of less than one. Therefore, it is not sig nificantly different from zero. The findings for the multiple partial correlation show that for all categories, with the exception of Category III (Aesthetic), and the selected influences, when taken in combination and controlled for the covariate factors, are significant predictors of the selected topics. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter summarizes the procedures of the study and synthesizes the findings. In addition, it also presents the conclusions drawn from the findings of the investigation and a discussion of the implications of these findings in music education. The chapter concludes with recommendations for further research in the field. Summary Purposes of the Study The major purpose of this study was to investigate selected professional literature in an effort to identify the nature of the discussion carried on by music education as it attempted to define the new role of music in the contemporary curriculum. L 142 Procedures In accordance with the established criteria, 300 articles were selected from the Music Educators Journal, Vol. XLIV (1957-1958) through and including Vol. LIII (1966-1967). The first step of the investigation was the subjective analysis of the selected content material. As a result of this examination, five topics of concern to the profession were identified, the nature of the discus sion defined, and factors of possible influence to these topics established. From the conclusions made through the subjective analysis, hypotheses were formulated to serve as the basis for the objective analysis. The final step in the investigation was an objec- ] j tive analysis of the selected content material. Based on i the subjective findings, five categories representing the five topics were established and key terms defining these categories were selected and tested. Finally, the selected content material, divided into content units of an article in length, was examined in relation to the key terms. The frequency with which these terms appeared in the material was tabulated under the appropriate category. .............. 144 Four steps were taken In the statistical analysis o£ the data: (1) the tabulation and examination of the raw score data; (2) the calculation and examination of the unadjusted mean frequency scores for defined time periods within the decade; (3) the calculation of the first-order correlation coefficients for the five categories in rela tion to the appropriate primary influence, the seven common ancillary factors, and the covariate factors; and (4) the calculation of the multiple partial correlation of the selected categories with the primary and ancillary factors, while the covariate factors were held constant. Subjective Findings Selected topics. Five topics of concern to music education were identified in the subjective analysis as being frequently discussed in the Music Educators Journal during the period defined by the study. These topics are: 1. Music in an age of science. 2. Music as an academic discipline. 3. Music as an aesthetic experience. 4. Musicality in the individual. 5. Music in the American society. Nature of the discussion. The nature of the discussion of each of the five selected topics is described below: 1. Music in the age of science. The subjective findings indicated that the discussion of this topic was divided into three major areas: (1) a concern for the imbalance of the curriculum as a result of the over emphasis in the sciences, (2) a search for new justifica tions for music in the curriculum, and (3) an evaluation of the existing music education program in light of public pressures. While a concern for music in the technological age was present to some degree throughout the decade, the findings suggested that the greatest degree of interest in this topic was present in the first three years of the decade. A gradual decline in reference to this topic was apparent throughout the remainder of the period under examination. 2. Music as an academic discipline. The subjec tive findings indicated that the discussion of this topic was divided into two major areas: (1) a consideration of music as a body of knowledge requiring a defined course of ; study in the schools, and (2) a concern for the music : student as an intellectual being requiring a type of instruction that would permit the development of insight and values through direct and thoughtful experiences with the elements of music. The findings suggested that the interest in this topic was greatest in the middle years of the decade, apparently developing from growing public pressures for a more challenging system of American education. 3. Music as an aesthetic experience. The findings showed that the discussion of this topic was divided into three major areas: (1) the attempt to define the aesthetic qualities of music, (2) the description of the aesthetic experience, and (3) the identification of the aesthetic process. While an interest in the aesthetic aspect of the music program was in evidence throughout the entire period, the findings suggested an increase in the defini tive nature of the discussion during the final six years of the decade. The findings also seemed to indicate that a higher degree of interest in the application of growing knowledge regarding the aesthetic experience to the educative process was present during this final period. 4. Musicality in the individual. The findings ! indicated that the discussion of this topic was divided | into two major areas: (1) a definition of musicality and | the individuality of the music experience, (2) the educa- j tive process appropriate to the development of musicality | within the student and the teacher. | As would be suspected by the very nature of the i i j subject of this investigation, a high degree of interest | I in the musical competence of the student and the teacher i was evidenced throughout the entire period. The findings : indicated that a marked change in the definition of j musicality and the educative process required for its | development took place in the final years of the decade. | 5. Music in the American society. The findings I showed that the discussion of this topic was concerned i with the mutual responsibility of music education and the organized institutions of the society to the cultural development of the American citizenry. While the consideration of music in the society was present to some degree throughout the decade, the findings suggested that in the final two years of the period there was a maturing of thought concerning the responsibility of music education to the needs and desires of individuals within the various economic and social segments of the American society. Influential factors. Eight social, economic, cultural and professional factors of influence to the selected topics were identified by the subjective analysis of the content material. These factors, along with the date of their first reference in the journal, are listed below in connection with the appropriate topic. 1. Music in an age of science: The launching of the Russian satellite, January, 1958. 2. Music as an academic discipline: Music for the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School (424), September, 1960. 3. Music as an aesthetic experience: The 1962 national convention of the Music Educators National Conference, January, 1962. 4. Musicality in the individual: The Process of Education (306), November, 1962; the Yale Seminar on Music Education, September, 1963; the Comprehensive Musicianship Seminar Project, September, 1965. 5. Music in the American society: The Elementary i i | and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (433), September, | 1965; the Tanglewood Symposium Project: Music in American Society, January, 1967* i I j Selected authors. The subjective analysis identi fied the following segments of the profession and agencies outside music education as possible influences on the discussion of the selected topics: 1. Authors identified according to their profes sional affiliation, i.e., authors from outside music | education and authors from inside music education. i 2. Authors identified according to the profes- ! | sional responsibilities in the Music Educators National i Conference, i.e., elected or appointed officials of the ! | conference and the general membership of the conference. t 3. Authors identified according to the positions held in the schools, i.e., professors on the college or university level, supervisory personnel on the elementary school or secondary school level, and the classroom teacher on the elementary school or-secondary school level. Article source. The subjective analysis identi fied the following major sources for articles selected for examination: 1, Articles written originally for publication in the journal. 2. Articles written originally as speeches and later published in the journal. Objective Findings Raw score data. The raw score data revealed that 308 persons authored or coauthored the 300 articles selected for the study, with sixty-three authors coming from outside music education, fifty authors coming from the elected or appointed segments of the Music Educators National Conference, and 193 authors coming from the general membership of the conference. Of the 300 articles, 199 articles were identified as written origi nally for publication and 101 articles were categorized as written originally as speeches to be later published in the journal. The mean average length of articles selected for study was 2,707.05 words. The average length of articles increased approximately 800 words over the [ decade. i i j | Word frequency mean scores. An examination of the i word mean frequency scores for the five categories j | indicated the following: i ! 1. Authors tended to use terms found in each j category with some degree of frequency throughout the ' j period under examination. 2. Authors tended to use terms found in Category I (Science) with greater frequency in the early years of i the period as compared with the remainder of the decade. I j 3. Authors tended to use terms found in Category I i ! II (Academic) with a gradually increasing but somewhat ! erratic frequency throughout the period under examination. j 4. Authors tended to use terms found in Category j III (Aesthetic) with declining frequency during the first j half of the decade and with increasing frequency during the final portion of the period. 5. Authors tended to use terms from Category IV (Musicality) with a sharply rising frequency during the first years of the decade and with relatively high frequency during the remainder of the decade. 6. Authors tended to use terms from Category V (Society) with limited frequency throughout the major portion of the decade, with the greatest increase of frequency coming in the final two years of the period. 7. When comparing Category I (Science) with Category V (Society), the findings showed that authors tended to use terms found in the former category with greater frequency at the beginning of the period, while using terms from the latter category with greater frequency at the end of the period, 8. When comparing Category I (Science) with Category II (Academic), the findings indicated that authors tended to use terms found in the former category with a high degree of frequency in the early years of the decade, followed by a sharp decrease of frequency about 1960, while authors tended to use terms from the latter category with increasing frequency during the same period, 9. When comparing Category II (Academic) with Category III (Aesthetic), the findings showed that authors in the early years of the decade tended to use terms from the former category with increasing frequency and tended to use terms from the latter category with decreasing | 153 i i frequency. There was a similar frequency pattern i j evidenced for the two categories in the middle years and | erratic, but opposite, frequency patterns shown in the final years of the decade. 10. When comparing Category II (Academic) with Category IV (Musicality), the findings showed that authors tended to use terms from the two categories with approxi mately the same frequency patterns through the decade. Primary factors. The findings for the first-order correlation of the selected categories versus the primary factors indicated the following: Significant correlation coefficients were found for three of the eight selected primary factors with their designated categories. They were; 1. Category III (Aesthetic) with the first journal reference to the 1962 national convention of the Music Educators National Conference, January, 1962. 2. Category V (Society) with the first journal reference to The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (433), September, 1965. 3. Category V (Society) with the first journal reference to the Tanglewood Symposium Project: Music in ' .... " ........ ........ . ..~... 154 i i I { American Society, January, 1967. i I Ancillary factors. The findings of the first- order correlation of the selected categories versus the ancillary factors indicated the following: 1. Authors coming from outside music education tended to use terms found in Category I (Science) and Category V (Society) with greater frequency than those authors from inside music education. 2. Authors coming from inside music education tended to use terms found in Category IV (Musicality) with | greater frequency than those authors coming from outside i ! the profession. i i j 3. Authors identified as elected or appointed ! officials of the toisic Educators National Conference tended to use terms found in Category II (Academic) and Category V (Society) with greater frequency than those authors from the general membership of the conference and authors coming from outside the profession. 4. Authors Identified as belonging to the general membership of the Music Educators National Conference tended to use terms found in Category IV (Musicality) with greater frequency than authors identified as elected or 155 appointed officials of the conference and authors from i ! outside the profession, | 5. Authors identified as belonging to the general | membership of the Music Educators National Conference tended to use terms from Category I (Science), Category II (Academic), and Category V (Society) with significantly less frequency than elected or appointed officials of the conference and authors outside the profession. 6. Authors identified as supervisory personnel on the elementary school or secondary school level tended to | use terms found in Category II (Academic) and Category IV j | (Musicality) with greater frequency than professors, j j classroom teachers, and those authors from outside the I | profession. 7. Authors identified as classroom teachers on the elementary school or secondary school level tended to use terms found in Category I (Science), Category II (Academic), and Category V (Society) with less frequency than authors Identified as professors, supervisory personnel, and authors from outside the profession. 8. Authors writing articles planned originally as speeches that were later published in the journal tended | to use terms found in Category I (Science), Category II i ! (Academic), and Category V (Society) with greater frequency than authors writing articles planned originally j for the journal. | | Covariate factors. The findings for the first- order correlation of the selected categories with the | j covariate factors indicated the following; j | 1. Authors writing articles of greater length tended to use terms found in all categories with greater frequency than authors writing articles of lesser length. 2. Authors writing repetitively in the journal I ' tended to use terms found in all categories, with the s | exception of Category IV (Musicality), with greater frequency than authors writing just one article for the journal during the period under examination. Multiple partial correlation. The findings for the multiple partial correlation of the selected cate gories with their designated primary factors (social, economic, cultural, and professional influences) and the common ancillary factors (professional affiliation, responsibility of the authors in the Music Educators 157 ! 1 National Conference, and the source of the article), while the covariate predictors (length of article and repetitive writing by one author) were held constant, revealed the following: In reference to all categories except Category III (Aesthetic), the identified Influences when taken in combination, while controlling for undesirable factors, were significant predictors of the selected topics. Conclusions The findings of the study permit these tentative generalizations: 1. The Music Educators Journal is an important vehicle for the communication of the theoretical consid erations of the profession. 2. The discussions of theoretical topics in the Music Educators Journal are not random; they represent thej presentation and development of identifiable topics. 3. While social, economic, cultural, and profes sional factors are reflected in the discussion of the Music Educators Journal, the ability to identify the degree of their influence is extremely limited. 158 4. Authors coming from outside music education play an important role in the communication of the concerns of society as they relate to the music program. 5. Officials of the Music Educators National Conference carry the major responsibility for the formula tion and communication of the organized theoretical foundations for music education. 6. Classroom teachers do not contribute signifi cantly to the theoretical discussions in the Music Educators Journal. 7. Professors in music education write in the Music Educators Journal with a high degree of independence and diversity. Implications Specific Implications Four major questions were asked by this study. It is the purpose of this section of the chapter to discuss the implications of the findings for music education in reference to these questions. Question one. What topics were frequently discussed in the selected professional literature during I the period defined by the study? While in no way attempting to identify all of the j topics under discussion by music education during the | decade, the study did affirm the interest of the profes- | sion in the cognitive, affective, psychomotor, and social j ] aspects of the music program. The findings of the study | I suggest the importance of the journal as a major source of i ; communication within the profession and as a vehicle for evaluation and change in music education. Question two. What was the nature of the discus- | i sion of these defined topics? Two ideas became apparent from the study of the j ! selected topics: (1) there was a degree of commonality i I among the identified topics, and (2) the degree of differ- j ence in the identified topics was produced by a change in i focus rather than a change in theory. The examination of the nature of the selected topics revealed that the discussions were expositions of one basic theory of music education, i.e., the education j of the individual in music must be based on the intrinsic | i qualities of music and the importance of these qualities in the life of man. What was identified in the study as j 160 j separate topics was, in essence, a series of changing foci I created by the various segments of the profession engaged i | in a search for a greater understanding of the nature and purpose of its program in relation to this theory of music j education. When, in the first years of the decade, the i I 1 American public demanded a more challenging instructional i program, music education responded by focusing its atten tion on the academic phase of the music program. It was i apparent that the profession, in an effort to maintain its place in the curriculum, sought a new kind of respecta- j bility within American education. This emphasis on the i academic aspect of the music curriculum, in turn, i \ initiated a renewed interest in the aesthetic goals of i I i i music education. Authors, fearing that music education i I was losing sight of its primary purpose in the schools, i ' moved to return the music program to its aesthetic realm. j | Subsequently, the appearance of a new definition of music i competence in the latter part of the decade seemed to be the attempt of some leaders to reconcile the idea of music | as a discipline with music as a fine art. The final ! interest of music education in the responsibility of music ! ! in the society seemed to bring a balance to the music ' program that viewed the student as a social, intellectual, | and emotional being. Question three. What social, economic, cultural, i | i and professional factors appeared to influence the discus** ; sion of these defined topics? ! j This study demonstrated the difficulty present in | ] any attempt to identify the varying factors in their multiplicity of interactions as they influence the growth and development of professional considerations. It became apparent from this investigation that much which had appeared to influence the writings of the profession proved statistically to have been fleeting and momentary in importance. It is equally possible to conjecture that events of some importance to the discus sion may not have been identified due to the subtlety of their communication. As a result of this study, however, an idea seems to suggest itself; the idea that one central factor may have influenced the whole decade of thought. While the study seemed to lack the ability to identify with any degree of exactness the events that were of influence to the discussions, it did point to one factor that each event held in common. These events and publications were the result of some kind of governmental or private support and economic aid. Thus, it is suggested that the growing socio-economic concern for the arts that appeared during the decade may have been the single most influential factor in the development of new definitions for music education. Question four. What segments of the music educa tion profession or agencies outside the music education profession participated in the discussion of the defined topics? The study identified the professor of music educa tion on the college or university level, who was a part of the general membership of the Music Educators National Conference, as the most typical author of the decade. Music professors from both the official and unofficial segments of the conference contributed just over half of all articles selected for the study. It is obvious from these findings that this group did exert a considerable influence over the thinking of the profession through its writings in the journal. 163 The study also showed that as a group this segment of the profession did not influence any one phase of the discussion. This would seem to suggest that the impact of higher education upon the discussions was to some extent random in nature, reflecting the individual interests or ideas of the writers. The implications of these findings for music education are: (1) the degree of individuality in the writing of the college and university professor may have served as an important protection against the stagna tion of ideas or the repetition of established theory; and (2) the degree to which the writing of these acknowledged authorities in the field failed to agree with the topics identified as concerns of the official# of the conference may have protected the profession from the single- mindedness that is often the result of too much organized communication. The discovery of the important role played by writers in higher education should have special meaning to this segment of the profession. It would seem important that these authors take cognizance of the responsibility of the music education professor to the profession; a responsibility for the communication of ideas that reflect 164 | a high degree of Integrity and a depth of consideration. | The investigation indicated that authors from out- i | side music education were important in the communication ; of ideas to the profession. The realization that these j authors wrote with a frequency equal to the officials of i j the conference has important implications for music educa tion. These authors most assuredly helped to shape the ideas of the profession and to bring balance to its com munication. They may have protected the profession from an imbreeding of ideas and an isolation of thought during j | these years. i j ' When the authors from music education were taken i 1 | as a segment, as compared to those authors from outside the profession, it became apparent that the profession was primarily interested in the process of making music. Of j special importance to the profession was the indication | that the elected and appointed officials of the conference appear to carry the major responsibility for the establish ment of the broad theoretical base for the music program. This should suggest to the music educator the importance i of the officials of the conference in the formulation and development of the music program as well as the ! administration of the organization. Finally, the findings for the general membership, : | : particularly the classroom teacher, suggest that what they j ' | i did not write was of more interest than what they did | j t i i write. With the possible exception of musicality, the ! j i topics selected for this study were not the concerns of j | the general membership of the conference. This finding, i while not too surprising when one considers a segment of J ! i the profession engaged daily with the practicality of the i ! music classroom, does emphasize the ever-present problem j of involving the practitioner in the theoretical considers- j ; tions of his profession. For, as it is well known, only I through this involvement can real change take place on the i I most important level of the program, the classroom. General Implications Certain general implications were drawn from the i {findings of the study. They are given in this section of |the chapter. Implications for the future use of the research design. The design selected for this study proved adequate to the task defined by its problem. The subjective 166 i analysis of the material was particularly important. It I ! permitted a degree of depth in the examination of the i material that would have been impossible in a completely ! | objective study. It should be emphasized, however, that i the results of this study also evidenced the importance of ! the objective testing of the subjective analysis. It was possible through this final step of the study to see j relationships not readily observable in the subjective study and to control undesirable factors that tended to j distort the original findings. j | Implications for music education. The findings of i I the study imply a continual maturing of the profession | throughout the decade. By the end of the period under ! i discussion the journal evidenced considerable growth in its scholarly presentations and its definitive discussions. The analysis of the journal writing also suggests that music education was a dynamic profession during these years. Music education was in a continual state of evaluation and examination throughout the deeade under discussion. The writing of the profession documented the excellence of its leadership. A nucleus of authors, ....... 167 articulate in word and creative in thought, advanced the ; basic ideas of the decade; ideas that were subsequently developed and recapitulated by other authors in the field. William C. Hartshorn, Bennett Reimer, Oleta A. Benn, Charles Leonhard, Robert Choate, and Max Kaplan must be particularly noted for the clarity and inspiration of their writings. To attempt to forecast the future of music educa tion as a result of this study is, of course, an impos sible task. However, if the direction taken by the profession as it wrote in the journal during this last decade is to give any clue to the future, it would seem to suggest the continuing commitment of music education to the individuality of the educative process and to a music curriculum centered upon and guided by the inherent qualities of music. Recommendations Recommendations for Further Research The following recommendations for possible research studies are an outgrowth of this investigation: 1. The research design used by this study should be examined, developed, and expanded in an effort to ] provide the means whereby Information of a more sophisti- | cated nature than was possible In this first exploratory I study could be made available to music education, | 2. The replication of this study should be i carried out in order to confirm or disprove the findings ! i j of the study. i 3. A number of studies should be initiated based i j i on new categories, changed criteria for the selection of the content material, other professional literature, or ' different periods in the history of music education as a means of gaining increased understanding of the dynamics i ' of the profession. 4. Further applications of the findings in this study might be found in the formulation of survey instru- i | ments that would permit an examination of the degree to which the journal succeeded in the communication of ideas. Recommendations for Music Education It seems appropriate, as a result of this investi gation, to make the following recommendations: 1. The profession, in view of the Important role played by the Masic Educators Journal in the communication 169 i , of the theoretical considerations of music education, should make every effort to maintain the quality of the publication through the careful selection of editorial leadership and policy. 2. In an effort to ensure a balance of ideas and an awareness of the social concerns as they relate to the music curriculum, music education should continue to seek commentary on the current problems in the field from authorities outside the profession. 3. In view of the important role played by the elected and appointed officials of the Music Educators National Conference in the communication of the broad theoretical foundations of the music program, music educa tion should select its officials with a great deal of discernment. 4. To permit a better balance in the thinking of the profession, music education should make a greater effort to involve classroom teachers in the theoretical considerations and to provide for the communication of these ideas in the journal. 5. In order to encourage the creative and independent thinking that is requisite to a dynamic and maturing profession, music education should continue to make the Music Educators Journal to some degree an open forum. 6. Music education should continue to evaluate the nature of its discussions in an effort to assure the validity of changing ideas and to give direction to the decisions yet to be made. r _. i i i i ! 1 B I B L I O G R A P H Y I I BIBLIOGRAPHY A, Chronological Listing of Articles Selected for the Study Hanson, Howard. "The Arts in an Age of Science," Music Educators Journal. XLIV (September- October, 1957), 23-26. Abel, David W. "Adolescence and Adolescent Behavior, Aspects Related to Music." Music Educators Journal, XLIV (September-October, 1957), 74-77. Broudy, Harry S. "Does Music Bducation Need a Philosophy?" Music Educators Journal. XLIV (November-December, 1957), 28-30. Lawler, Vannett. "Preparing for the Years Ahead, Part I," Music Educators Journal. XLIV (January, 1958), 20-23. Travelstead, Chester C. "Basic Objectives of taisic Education at the Secondary Level," Music Educators Journal. XLIV (January, 1958), 24-26. McBride, William B. "Our Maturing Profession," Music Educators Journal. XLIV (February-March, 1958), 35-37. Lawler, Vanett. "Preparing for the Years Ahead, Part II," Music Educators Journal. XLIV (February- March, 1958), 48-56. 173 3. Fitts, Lilia Belle, "Purposes and Goals of Music Education in 1958," Music Educators Journal, XLIV (April-May, 1958), 19-21. 9. Fawcett, Novice G. "An Educator Looks at Music and j the Arts in a Day of Science," Music Educators I Journal. XLIV (April-May, 1958), 22-26. j 10. Earhart, Will. "What is Music For?" Music Educators j Journal. XLIV (June-July, 1958), 23-26. 11. Chappie, Stanley. "The Art of Teaching," Music Educators Journal. XLV (September-October, 1958), 23-26. I I 12. Mones, Leon. "Music and Education in Our American Democracy," Music Educators Journal. XLV (September-October, 1958), 27-30. 13. Laniers, William M. "Music and the Humanities," Music Educators Journal. XLV (November-December, 1958), 21-24. 14. Nye, Robert. "Some Thoughts and Theories About Secondary School Music," Music Educators Journal, i XLV (November-December, 1958), 26-30. 15. Klausmeier, Herbert J. "The Nfeed to Develop Expres sive Abilities of Gifted Children," Music Educators Journal. XLV (November-December, 1958), 46-50. 16. Kent, Richard. "Popular Music," Music Educators Journal. XLV (November-December, 1953), 52-54. i 17. Jarvis, Ellis A. "The Fine Arts in the Age of J Automation," Music Educators Journal. XLV (January, 1959), 19-21. 18. Whitner, Mary Elizabeth. 'Vhy Music is Indispensa ble," Music Educators Journal. XLV (January, 1959), 24-28. 174 19. Lawson, Warner. "Some Comments by a Choral I Conductor," Music Educators Journal. XLV (January, 1959), 50-54. | ; 20. Benn, Oleta A. "The Place of Music in a Technologi cal World," Music Educators Journal. XLV ! (February-March, 1959), 29-33. i i 21. Kleetnan, Frances Alice. "Musicology for the Theory i Teacher," Music Educators Journal. XLV (February- j March, 1959), 50-77. I | 22. Ernst, Karl D. "Quality Teaching is Our Answer," Music Educators Journal. XLV (April-May, 1959), 27-29. j 23. Conner, Forrest E. "Music in the General Curricu- i lum," Music Educators Journal. XLV (April-May, | 1959), 34-39. i | 24. Pitts, Lilia Belle. "The Classroom Teachers i Speak." Music Educators Journal. XLV (April-May, ; 1959), 42-44. 25. Krone, Max T. "Jazz and the General Music Class," Music Educators Journal. XLV (June-July, 1959), 23-24. | 26. Hanson, Howard. "Music Education Faces the | Scientific Age," Music Educators Journal. XLV June-July, 1959), 17-19. i 27. Hartshorn, William C. "Integrity in Music Educa tion," Music Educators Journal. XLV I (Septeraber- October, 1959), 29-32. 28. Reimer, Bennett. "What Music Can Not Do," Music Educators Journal. XLVX (September-October, 1959), 40-45. 29. Trillingham, C. C. "Creative Arts in American Education," Music Educators Journal, XLV1 (November-December, 1959), 19-21. 30. i i 31. i | 32. i ] i 33. 34. 35. I 36. i I | 37. 38. 39. 40. ...... ’ 175 1 1 j Aftreth, Orville B. "The Principal^ Role in the Music Program," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (January, 1960) Laniers, William M. "The Two Kinds of *fcisic," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (February-March, 1960). 36-82. i Pace, Robert. "Keyboard Experience in the Class room," Music Educators Journal, XLVI (February- March, 1960), 44-45. Lundin, Robert W. "Musical Learning and Reinforce ment Theory," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (February-March, 1960), 46-49. Swanson, Frederick J. "When Voices Change," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (February-March, I960), 50-56. Gray, Justin. "Music Education and Creativity," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (February-March, 1960), 58-62. Carey, Margaretta. "Music for the Educable Mentally Retarded," Music Educators Journal, XLVI (February-March, 1960), 72-74. Kerman, Joseph. "The Place of Music in Basic Educa tion," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (April-May, 1960), 43-46. Ling, Stuart J. "Toward Real Musical Literacy," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (April-May, 1960), 52-54. Merrick, Joseph. "Why Bands?" Music Educators j Journal. XLVI (April-May, 1960), 66-68. Ernst, Karl D. "The Report on General Music," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (June-July, 1960), 21-23. 176 41. Mathews, Paul W. "We Need Superior Music Teachers," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (June-July, 1960), 31-32. 42. Phelps, Roger P. "Research in Music and Music Educa tion," Music Educators Journal. XLVI (June-July, 1960), 51-53. 43. Hartshorn, William C. "Music for the Academically Talented," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (September-October, 1960), 33-56. 44. Breinholt, Verna and Schoepfle, Irene. "Music Experiences for the Child with Speech Limita tions," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (September- October, 1960), 45-52. 45. Chenette, Louis, '*0068 1 x 4 « 4?" Music Educators Journal. XLVII (September-October, 1960), 45-52. 46. Filas, Thomas. "Something for Class C Band, Please," MUsic Educators Journal. XLVII (September- October, 1960), 85-86. 47. McCutcheon, Marjorie F. "Why So General About Music?" Music Educators Journal. XLVII (Septem ber-October, 1960), 87-88. 48. Marple, Hugo D. "The Challenge of the Conant Report to Music Education," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (November-December, 1960), 35-96. 49. House, Robert W. "The Role of the Fine Arts in the Preparation of Teachers," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (November-December, 1960), 39-43. 50. Tallmadge, William H. "Teaching Improvisation," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (November- December, 1960), 58-60. 51. Miller, Kurt. "The Three-Way Team for an Effective Music Program," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (January, 1961), 37-38. 177 52. Kennedy, James Paul. "Are Contests Musical Experi ences?" Music Educators Journal. XLVII (January, 1961), 60-67. 53. Largman, Rosalynd. "Is Music Teaching Up to Date?" Music Educators Journal. XLVII (January, 1961), 88-89. 54. Engleman, Finis E. ''Music and Public Education," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (February-March, 1961), 35-39. 55. Moses, Harry E. "General Music in General Educa tion," Muaic Educators Journal. XLVII (February- March, 1961), 51-54. 56. John, Robert W. "The General Music Program," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (February-March, 1961), 55-60. 57. Obert, Roland. "Wire Me the Answers," Music Educa tors Journal. XLVII (February-March, 1961), 64-66, 58. Hall, M. E. "New Challenges in Music Education," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (February-March, 1961), 69-73. 59. D'Andrea, Frank. "Music and the Adolescent," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (February-March, 1961), 75-77. 60. Hummel, J. George. "Class Piano and Population Explosion," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (February-March, 1961), 78-80. 61. Schmidt, Lloyd. "The Role of the Band in Music Education." Music Educators Journal. XLVII (February-March, 1961), 81-83. 62. Choate, Robert A. "The Shaping Forces of Music in the Changing Curriculum," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (April-May, 1961), 29-32. 178 63. Hartshorn, William C., et al. "The Music Curriculum Present and Future," Music Educators Journal, XLVII (April-May, 1961), 42-46. 64. Neilson, James. "The Emergence of the Concert Band," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (April-May, 1961), 49-50. 65. Moore, Earl V. "Music in Higher Education," Music Educators Journal, XLVII (April-May, 1961), 54-60. 66. Flora, Frank E. "Successful Administrative Relation ships Make Successful Music Programs," Music Educators Journal, XLVII (April-May, 1961), 66-67. 67. Britton, Allen P. "Music in the Nineteen Sixties," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (June-July, 1961), 23-26, 68. Jarrett, James L. "Music as a Fine Art," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (June-July, 1961), 27-28. 69. Zimmerman, George H. "Listen!" Music Educators Journal. XLVII (June-July, 1961), 29-31. 70. Tipton, Gladys. "Music Education in the Changing World," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (June- July, 1961), 32-35. 71. "The General Music Program, the Viewpoint of Some Students," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (June- July, 1961), 43-46. 72. Green, Elizabeth A. H. "On the Teaching of Conduct ing," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (June-July, 1961), 50-56. 73. Gerow, Maurice. "Criteria for Choral Program Build ing," Music Educators Journal. XLVII (June-July, 1961), 69-73, 179 74. Hoffer, Charles R., and English, Catherine A. "The Music Specialist and the Classroom Teacher." Music Educators Journal. XLV III (September-October, 1961), 45-48. 75. Reed, Alfred. "The Composer and the College Band," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (September- October, 1961), 51-53. 76. Keables, Harold, et al. "The Mechanics Necessary to Preserve the Music Program in Education," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (September-October, 1961), 66-74. 77. Ross, William E. "The Importance of Good Technique in Singing," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (September-October, 1961), 91-95. 78. Patrick, Nelson G. "The Music Teacher and Vocational Counselling.1 1 Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (September-October, 1961), 97-99. 79. Van Ess, Donald Harrison. "The Pursuit of Excellence in Music Education," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November-December, 1961), 37-40. 80. Burnsworth, Charles C* "Self-Contained Classroom Reconsidered," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November-December, 1961), 41-42. 81. Canfield, Susan T. "Creativity in Music Education," .Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November- December, 1961), 51-56. 82. "What Are Music Educators Thinking and Saying?" Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November- December, 1961), 58-61. 83. Swanson, Frederick. "The Proper Care and Feeding of Changing Voices," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November-December, 1961), 63-66. 180 84. Walton., Charles W. "Three Trends In the Teaching of Theory,” Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November-December, 1961), 73-76. 85. Van Camp, Leonard. "Public Relations and the Secondary School Music Education," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November-December, 1961), 81-89. 86. Helbig, Otto H. "Improving Instrumental Rehearsal Effectiveness," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November-December, 1961), 96-97. 87. Ernst, Karl D. "Music in the Schools," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (January, 1962), 46-50. 88. Martin, Francis F. "Toward a Psychoacoustic Approach to Music Appreciation," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (January, 1962), 61-64. 89. Hesch, Clarence J. "Above and Beyond a Knowledge of Music," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (January, 1962), 67-70. 90. Hood, Marguerite. "Our Changing School Music Program," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February-March, 1962), 49-78. 91. John, Robert W. "The General Music Dilemma," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February-March, 1962), 64-68. 92. Chappie, Stanley, "Some Fundamental Values in Music," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February- March, 1962), 71-78. 93. Westcott, Wendell. "Handbells in Music Education," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February-March, 1962), 109-115. 94. Harrison, Russell M. "Human Relations in Teaching," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February-March, 1962), 122-126. j 181 ! 95. Forcucci, Samuel L. •'Music and the Self-Contained Classroom, This Is the Question.” Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February-March, 1962), 132-138. ! 96. Dello Joio, Norman. "The Quality of Music," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (April-May, 1962) 33-35. ; 97. Van Bodegraven, Paul. "Soft Spots in the Teacher Training Program," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (April-May, 1962), 47-49. | j 98. Hoffinan, Mary. "Are We Short-Changing our Elementary I Teachers?" Music Educators Journal. XLVIII ! (April-May, 1962), 73-74. | 99. Ling, Stuart J. "Is There a Music Gap?" Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (April-May, 1962), 79-80. |l00. Giaudrone, Angelo. "A Problem in Counterpoint," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (June-July, 1962), j 41-44. 101. Hunt, C. B. "Improving Teacher Training," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (June-July, 1962), | 45-48. | {102, O'Toole, Catherine M. "Music for the Handicapped Child," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (June- July, 1962), 73-76. 103. Howerton, George. "Music As One of the Humanities," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (September-October, 1962), 28-30. 104. Smith, Carleton Sprague. "The Study of Music As an Academic Subject," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (September-October, 1962), 31-34. 105. Andrews, Frances M. "Issues and Problems in Music Education." Music Educators Journal, XLIX (September-October, 1962), 39-112. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 182 Youngberg, Harold C. "Contemporary Music In the High School," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (September-October, 1962), 51-54. Reed, Al£red. "The Instrumentation of the Band," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (September-October, 1962), 56-61. Weidensee, Victor. "Some Thoughts on Improving Secondary School Music," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (September-October, 1962), 70. Benn, Oleta A„ "Excellence in Elementary Music Programs," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (November-December, 1962), 34-59. Chappie, Stanley. "The Study of MUsic Through Performance," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (November-December, 1962), 43-44. de la Vega, Aurello. "The Training of a Composer Today," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (November- December, 1962), 45-48. Harris, Wesley M. "Music In the Space Age," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (November-December, 1962), 79-81. Bloch, Richard L. "Performance: Our Steppings tone to Musical Understanding," MUsic Educators Journal. XLIX (November-December, 1962), 90-93. Lewis, Phillip. "Teaching Machines Have the Beat," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (November-December, 1962), 94-98. La Rosa, Joseph D. "Preparing the Conductor," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (November-December, 1962), 107. Hartshorn, William C. "The Study of Music as an Academic Discipline," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (January, 1963), 25-28. 183 117. Rossi, Nick. "Music Listening in the General Music Class," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (January, 1963), 32-34, 118. Klien, Lothar. "Choral Publications," Music Educators Journal, XLIX (January, 1963), 34-36. 119. Holloway, Birdie H. "A Music Telecourse for Class room Teachers," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (January, 1963), 61-64. 120. D'Andrea, Frank. "A New Basis for Music in the Secondary Schools," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (February-March, 1963), 33-36. 121. Colwell, Richard. "Evaluation: Its Use and Significance," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (February-March, 1963), 45-49, 122. Schoenbach, Sol. "Chamber Music in Secondary Schools," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (February-March, 1963), 73-74. 123. Whybrew, William E. "Art and Technique in Music Education," Music Educators Journal, XLIX (February-March, 1963), 77-83. 124. Troth, Eugene W. "Sing Your Way to Musical Learn ing," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (February- March, 1963), 93-94. 125. Trudgen, Earle, et al. "The Pursuit of Excellence in Music Education Through Effective Supervision," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (February-March, 1963), 130-136. 126. Zeiger, Albert L. "A Case for Jazz in the Class room," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (February- March, 1963), 137-139. 127. Kaplan, Max. "Music Education and National Goals," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (April-May, 1963), 33-36. 184 128. Glenn, Neal E. "Current Issues in Graduate Music Education Programs," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (April-May, 1963), 37-52. 129. Wilson, Keith. "More Than Conducting," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (April-May, 1963), 47-48. 130. Landis, Beth. "A Look at Textbooks for Education in Music," Music Educators Journal, XLIX (April-May, 1963), 83-84. 131. Phillips, Norman, and Scott, John. "Organizing a Junior High School Elective Chorus," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (April-May, 1963), 109- 111. 132. Gaston, E. Thayer. "Aesthetic Experiences in Music," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (June-July, 1963), 25-64. 133. Richards, Mary Helen. "The Legacy from Kodaly," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (June-July, 1963), 27-30. 134. Pflederer, Marilyn. "The Nature of Musicality," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (June-July, 1963), 49-52. 135. Rice, William C. "Young Singers: Handle with Care," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (June-July, 1963), 75-76. 136. Arberg, Harold W. "Music and the Humanities," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (June-July, 1963), 79-80. 137. Sand, Ole. "Current Trends in Curriculum Planning," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 42-92. 138. Stevens, Halsey. "Youth and New Music," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 49-51. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 185 Law, Glen C. "Music Administration During Transi tional Turmoil," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 52-55. Stem, Milton. ''Keyboard Instruction in the College Curriculum," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 56-58. Youngert, Eugene. "Music: Necessity, Not Frill," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 81-82. Hansen, Helge E. "A Guide to High Fidelity in the Music Department," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 111-112. Rounds, L. E. "A Song in Their Hearts," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 114-116. Krongard, Hyman I. "Why Music in the Public Schools?" Music Educators Journal. L (September- October, 1963), 123-128. Jackson, Sadie I. "Ear and Rhythmic Training," Music Educators Journal. L (September-October, 1963), 133-135. Cady, Henry L. "The Sociology of Music: A Perspec tive," Music Educators Journal. L (November- December, 1963), 25-58. Hartshorn, William C. "The Teaching of Music," Music Educators Journal. L (November-December, 1963), 28-60. Buechner, Alan C. "Team Teaching in Elementary Music Education," Music Educators Journal. L (November-December, 1963), 31-35. Penna, Joseph. "Tradition Versus the New in Music Education," Music Educators Journal. L (November- December, 1963), 39-48. I 186 4 150. Surplus, Robert W. "Keyboard Experience in Elementary Music," Music Educators Journal* L | (November-December, 1963), 83-87. | 151. Oakland, Lloyd. "Our Curious Blessings," Music \ Educators Journal. L (November-December, 1963), ! 90-91. | ; 152. Weaver, James D. "The Schools1 Role in the Cultural Renaissance," Music Educators Journal. L (November-December, 1963), 99-103. | | 153. Gremelspacher, Joseph A. "Music Education Stands ! Tall," Ffrisic Educators Journal. L (November- | December, 1963), 104-106. i 154. Zimmerman, Alex H. "The Meaning of Our Profession," Music Educators Journal. L (January, 1964), 29-33. 155. Petzold, Robert G. "Directions for Research in ; Music Education," Music Educators Journal. L ! (January, 1964) , 39-42. j 156. Johnson, M. 0. "Listening with the High School Band," Music Educators Journal, L (January, 1964), 83-84. i | 157. Duerksen, George L. "On Teaching Aesthetic Sensi- I tivity," Music Educators Journal. L (January, ; 1964), 85-86. 158. Cooper, Irvin. "Realizing General Music Outcomes Through Singing," Music Educators Journal. L (January, 1964), 87-91. 159. Heller, Dorothy M. 'The Psychology of Preadoles cence in Teacher-Pupil Planning," Music Educators Journal. L (January, 1964), 92-96. 160. Sherbum, Merrell L. "Music in the Language Laboratory," Music Educators Journal. L (January, 1964), 109-110. 187 161. Engelman, Finis E. "The Arts and American Educa tion," Music Educators Journal. L (February- March, 1964), 30-101. 162. Britton, Allen P. "The Development of Courses, Resources, and Activities for Performing Students," Music Educators Journal. L (February-March, 1964), 42-44. 163. Leonhard, Charles. "The Place of Music in Our Elementary and Secondary Schools," Music Educators Journal. L (February-March, 1964), 53-57. 164. Fowler, Charles B. "Music: A Sound Approach to Living," Music Educators Journal. L (February- March, 1964), 51-52. 165. Landeck, Beatrice. "Basic Ideas in Elementary Music," Music Educators Journal. L (February- March, 1964), 67-70. 166. Shephard, John W. "Who Will Teach Strings?" Music Educators Journal. L (February-March, 1964), 85- 88. 167. John, Robert W. "I Would Like to See . . . ," Music Educators Journal. L (February-March, 1964), 91- 92. 168. Mack, Gerald R. "Vocal Training in the High School," Music Educators Journal. L (February-March, 1964), 95-96. 169. Carlsen, James. "Toward Academic Excellence in Music," Music Educators Journal. L (February- March, 1964), 117-122. 170. Lang, William C. "An Expanding Role for Music in a Science Centered Age," Music Educators Journal. L (February-March, 1964), 123-126. ( — 188 171. Monsour, Sally. "Developing Musical Under standing ," Music Educators Journal. L (April-May, 1964), 28-30. 172. Peterson, Georgians, and Borstad, Rodney. "Integra tion of the Arts in the Curriculum," Music Educators Journal. L (April-May, 1964), 37-39. 173. Britton, Allen P. "The General Theoretical Founda tions of Music Education," Music Educators Journal. L (April-May, 1964), 44-45. 174. Simpson, Ray H, "Music Instructors * Use of Self- Evaluation Tools," Music Educators Journal. L (April-May, 1964), 82-88. 175. Hamm, Ruth Pollock. "Orff Defended," Music Educators Journal. L (April-May, 1964), 90-92. 176. Nash, Grace C. "Orff Schulwerk in the Classroom," Music Educators Journal. L (April-May, 1964), 92-93. j 177. English, Mary E., et al. "Preparation for Music ! Instruction," Music Educators Journal. L (April- j May, 1964), 104-109. | 178. Lemer, Max. "New Dimensions," Music Educators Journal. L (June-July, 1964), 29-33. 179. Henderson, Robert. "On the Musicianship of Conduc tors," ltosic_Educators_Journal, L (June-July, 1964), 57-59. 180. Feldman, Harry Allen. "Jazz: A Place in Music Education?" Music Educators Journal. L (June- July, 1964), 60-64. 181. Taylor, Harold, "Jftisic as a Source of Knowledge," Music Educators Journal. LI (September-October, 1964), 35-38. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. 192. ...... 189 Ivey, Donald. "Can We Afford to Deceive Our selves?" Music Educators Journal. LI (September- October, 1964), 43-45. Doran, Joseph L* "Modem Music and the Music Educator," Music Educators Journal. LI (September- October, 1964), 46-48. Kruth, Edwin C. "Musical Performance: Standards and Quality," Music Educators Journal. LI (September-October, 1964), 49-51. Jacobson, George H. "Music Teacher Education and the Liberal Arts College," Music Educators Journal. LI (September-October, 1964), 61-62. Bay, Adela. "A New Approach to an Old Problem," Music Educators Journal. LI (September-October, 1964), 64-71. Stehn, John A. "On the Training of School Band Directors," Music Educators Journal, LI (September-October, 1964), 77-81. Konowitz, Bert. "In Answer to 'Jazz: A Place in Music Education?*” Music Educators Journal. LI (September-October, 1964), 87-149. Mayer, Fred C. "The Relationship of Blend and Intonation in the Choral Art," MUsic Educators Journal. LI (September-October, 1964), 109-110. Broudy, Harry S. "Educational Theory and the Music Curriculum," Music Educators Journal. LI (November-December, 1964), 32-144. Dietz, Robert J. "Criticisms and Recommendations," Music Educators Journal, LI (November-December, 1964), 45-135. Delhi, Ned C. "Developing Musical Concepts Through Performance," Music Educators Journal. LI (November-December, 1964), 61-62. 193. i j i 194. I j 195. l 196. 197. i i i I i j 198. i i i j 199. j I 200. ! 201. 202. 203. 190 Hansen, Curtis. "Tuning the Choir," Music Educators Journal, LI (November-December, 1964), 85-89. Schupp, Robert C. "Selecting Music for Junior High School Orchestra," Music Educators Journal, LI (November-December, 1964), 97-99. Mitchell, Lloyd C. "The Preparation for Teachers of Related Arts Courses," Music Educators Journal, LI (November-December, 1964), 115-117. Lehman, Paul R. "The Stage Band: A Critical Evaluation," Music Educators Journal, LI (November-December, 1964), 55-129. Reimer, Bennett. "The Development of Aesthetic Sensitivity," Music Educators Journal. LI (January, 1965), 33-36. Duckworth, Guy. "Piano Education," Music Educators Journal. LI (January, 1965), 40-44. Fitch, John R. "Must Folk Music Dominate Elementary School Singing?" Music Educators Journal. LI (January, 1965), 70-71. Humphries, Arthur F. "The Music Educator: A Part of the Answer or a Part of the Problem?" Music Educators Journal. LI (January, 1965), 72-73. Fletcher, Paul F. "A Jazz Unit in Writing," Music Educators Journal. LI (January, 1965), 82-83. Goldiamond, Israel, and Pliskoff, Stanley. "Music Education and the Rationale Underlying Programmed Instruction," Music Educators Journal. LI (February-March, 1965), 43-195. Woodworth, G. Wallace, "The Place of Music in the Curriculum," Music Educators Journal. LI (February-March, 1965), 48-50. 191 204. Wilson, Harry R. "Music Education; Quo Vadis?" Music Educators Journal. LI (February-March, 1965), 57-189. ] 205. Richards, Mary Helen. "Hand Singing— A Part of 'The j New Music,1" Music Educators Journal. LI (February-March, 1965), 86-87. I 206. Bisdorf, Don L. "The Small-College Music Depart- i ment," Music Educators Journal. LI (February- March, 1965), 107-110. | | 207. Isch, Anthony. "The Benefits of the Marching Band," Music Educators Journal. LI (February-March, 1965), 97-100. 208. Cordovana, Michael. "The Rewards of Teaching Music," Music Educators Journal. LI (February- March, 1965), 111-112. i 209. Kemer, Estelle. "The Value of Postponing Notation in Teaching String Instruments," Music Educators j Journal. LI (February-March, 1965), 115-119. ' 210. Hartman, Bill. "Bodily Movement: A Choral Aid," | Music Educators Journal. LI (February-March, | 1965), 123-126. I 211. Picemo, Vincent. "Music Education Through the j Classroom Teacher," Music Educators Journal. LI (February-March, 1965), 129-130. 212. Diercks, Louis H. "The Detection,Care and Preserva tion of the Young Tenor," Music Educators Journal, LI (February-March, 1965), 135-138. 213. Keller, Charles R. "The Educational Revolution and Music," Music Educators Journal. LI (April-May, 1965), 35-148. 214. Fowler, Charles B. "The Misrepresentation of Music: View of Elementary and Junior High School Music Materials." Music Educators Journal, LI (April- May, 1965), 38-42. . ....-...... - . 192 215* Bencriscutto, Frank. "The Precarious Position of Music," Music Educators Journal, LI (April-May, 1965), 58-62. 216. Warren, Joseph. "Music Reading: When and How," Music Educators Journal, LI (April-May, 1965), 66-68. 217. Tanner, Paul 0. W. "The Musical Values of the Stage Band," Music Educators Journal. LI (April-May, 1965), 83-84. 218. Anslinger, Walter L. ’The Stage Band: A Defense and an Answer," Music Educators Journal, LI (April-May, 1965), 84-86. 219. Chidester, Lawrence W. "Contemporary Music and the Music Educator," Music Educators Journal, LI (April-May, 1965), 117-119. 220. Van Bodegraven, Paul. "Music Education in Transi tion," Music Educators Journal. LI (June-July, 1965), 26-106. 221. Ivey, Donald. "An Eclectic Concept of Music Humanities," Music Educators Journal. LI (June- July, 1965), 34-38. 222. Heisinger, Brent. "American Society and Music Education." Music Educators Journal, LI (June- July, 1965), 39-40. 223. Priesing, Dorothy. f I Musicianly Performance at the Piano: A Thought-Process," Music Educators Journal. LI (June-July, 1965), 42-43. 224. Sizer, Theodore R. "Art and Music in the Curricu lum," Music Educators Journal, LI (June-July, 1965), 44-46. 225. Bradley, Jane Wickson. "Eighth Grade Singing: Is It Fun?" MuBic Educators Journal. LI (June-July, 1965), 49-52. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 233. 234. 235. 236. 193 Madsen, Clifford K. "Experimental Research in Applied Music," Music Educators Journal. LI (June- July, 1965), 63-64. Beer, Alice S. "What's New?" Music Educators j Journal. LI (June-July, 1965), 67-68. ! Eifert, Donald. "The Music Educator and Guidance," Music Educators Journal. LI (June-July, 1965), 83-84. Mueller, John. '"Hie Arts and the Individual," Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 48-177. Leonhard, Charles. "Philosophy of Music Education," Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 58-177. Schwadron, Abraham A. "In Defense of the Special Music Teacher." Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 62-64. Landon, Joseph W. "The Arts Deserve Quality Leader ship," Music Educators Journal. LII (September- October, 1965), 73-75. Morgan, Hazel B. "First Steps in Research for Graduate Students: A Challenge to Music Scholars," Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 76-82. Serposs, Emile H. "The Rockerfeller Report--Its Implications for Music Educators," Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 93-94. Prince, Donald M., and Chance, Vemer M. "Another Look at the School Music Program," Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 96-101* Wehner, Walter L. "Woodwind Teaching Suggestions," Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 114-118. 194 237. "Music in the School Curriculum," Music Educators Journal. LII (November-December, 1965), 37-39. 238. Benn, Oleta A. "For Contact with the Significant," Music Educators Journal. LII (November-December, 1965), 40-42. 239. Madison, Thurber H. "The Relevance of Inter disciplinary Dialogue for the Philosophy of Music Education," Music Educators Journal. LII (November-December, 1965), 61-126. 240. Clifford, Timothy F. "Skew That Curve?" Music Educators Journal. LII (November-December, 1965), 87-90. 241. Hewitt, James. "Helping Stage Band Members Learn to Improvise," Music Educators Journal. LII (November-December, 1965), 101-106. 242. Reimer, Bennett. "The Curriculum Reform Explosion and the Problem of Secondary General Music," Music Educators Journal. LII (January, 1966), 38-121, 243. Colwell, Richard. "Music: Both a Performing and a Listening Art," Music Educators Journal. LII (January, 1966), 45-50. 244. Carpenter, C. R. "Potential Uses of Television and Films in Music Education," Music Educators Journal. LII (January, 1966), 52-56. 245. Musser, Willard. "The Director and the Wind Ensemble," Music Educators Journal, LII (January, 1966), 59-61. 246. Baker, William, "After All, How Many of Them Continue with Music?" Music Educators Journal. LII (January, 1966), 71-74. 195 247. Hughes, William 0. "Planning Educative Experiences in Junior High School General Music," Music Educators Journal. LII (January, 1966), 76-78. 248. Perkins, James A. "The University and the Arts," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 49-213. 249. Miller, Thomas W. "Alienation and Exclusion in High School Ifasic," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 57-60. 250. Otto, Richard A. "Some Considerations for Music Curriculum Development," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 61-62. 251. Coakley, Marjorie Malone. "Music Curriculum Guides: Their Development and Use," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 63-171. 252. Anderson, Maynard C. "On Teaching Musical Style," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 87-93. 253. Scholl, Sharon. "Music for Dancers," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 99-100. 254. Wyman, Raymond. "Audio Media in Music Education," I Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 105-108. 255. Slaughter, C. H. "Those Dissonant Boys," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 110-112. 256. Kondorossy, Elizabeth J. "Let Their Music Speak for the Handicapped," Music Educators Journal. LII (February-March, 1966), 115-119. 257. Shewan, Robert. "Music Selection for High School Choirs," Music Educators Journal. LII (February- March, 1966), 129-132. 258. 259. 260. 261. 262. 263. 264. 265. 266. 267. 268. 196 Pace, Ruth. "Applied Music and the High School Teacher," Music Educators Journal. LII (February- March, 1966), 135-137. Vander Werf, Lester S. "The Arts— The Forgotten Segment of American Education," Music Educators Journal, LII (February-March, 1966), 138-143. Skaggs, Hazel 6. "Broadway Musicals in Schools Today," Music Educators Journal. LII (February- March, 1966), 148-149. Dallin, Leon. "A Survey of Programed Music Teach ing Material," Music Educators Journal, LII (February-March, 1966), 198-200. Hoffer, Charles R. "Teaching Useful Knowledge in the Rehearsal," Music Educators Journal. LII (April-May, 1966), 49-94. Kaplan, Max. "Tanglewood Seminar: Music in American Life," Music Educators Journal. LII (April-May, 1966), 59-61. Delhi, Ned C. 'Research: Confined to Ivory Towers?" Sftisic Educators Journal. LII (April-May, 1966), 70-73. Burakoff, Gerald. '*The Recorder in Our Schools," Music Educators Journal. LII (April-May, 1966), 110-112. Sand, Ole. "Schools for the Seventies," Music Educators Journal. LII (June-July, 1966), 40-128. Perris, Arnold. "Are We Out of Date?" Music Educators Journal. LII (June-July, 1966), 46-48. Taylor, Harold. "The Spirit of Humanism," Music Educators Journal, LIn(September, 1966), 51-53. I . 269. i j 270. i I ] ! 271. ! ] 272. 1 ! 273. j 274. i i I I 275. 1 I 276. 277. 278. 279. 197 House, Robert W. "Developing an Educative Setting for Performing Groups," Music Educators Journal. LIII (September, 1966), 54-149. Wersen, Louis G. "The Grand Plan," Music Educators Journal. LIII (October, 1966), 34-121. Karel, Leon C. "Teacher Education in the Related Arts," Music Educators Journal. LIII (October, 1966), 38-41. Reimer, Bennett. "Curriculum Reform and the Junior High General Music Class," Music Educators Journal. LIII (October, 1966), 42-127. Sigel, Allen R. "The Search for Expressiveness in Instrumental Performance," Music Educators Journal. LIII (October, 1966), 65-68. Stanton, Royal. "A Look at the Forrest," Music Educators Journal. LIII (November, 1966), 37-115. Marburger, Carl L. "New Dimensions of Educational Programs for Disadvantaged Youth," Music Educa tors Journal. LIII (November, 1966), 40-106. Eisman, Lawrence, '^Teaching the Difficult General Music Class," Music Educators Journal. LIII (November, 1966), 51-53, Fisher, Charles M. "The Place of Religious Music in the School Curriculum," Music Educators Journal. LIII (November, 1966), 66-67. Klein, Lothar. "Reflections on Music and the Liberal Arts," Music Educators Journal. LIII (December, 1966), 22-81. Wilhelms, Fred T. "The Humanities Almost at the Crossroads," Music Educators Journal. LIII (December, 1966), 27-29. 198 280. Rankin, Stuart. "Forging a Junior High General Music Program," Music Educators Journal. LIII (December, 1966), 31-32. 281. Ross, Jerrold. "Music Education 1966 and Forward," Music Educators Journal. LIII (January, 1967), 36-38. 282. Boney, Joan. "The Role of the College String Class in the Development of the School Orchestra Director," Music Educators Journal. LIII (January, 1967), 73-74. 283. Tirro, Frank P. "The Commitment to Music," Music Educators Journal. LIII (January, 1967), 113-117. 284. Nelson, Boris. E. "The Commonwealth of the Arts," Music Educators Journal. LIII (February, 1967), 36-106. 285. Andrews, Frances. "The Preparation of Music Educa tors for the Culturally Disadvantaged," Music Educators Journal. LIII (February, 1967), 42-44. 286. Gilmore, Lee. "The Arts in the College Program in General Education: An Issue," Music Educators Journal. LIII (February, 1967), 119-124. 287. Thomson, William. "New Math, New Science, New Music," Music Educators Journal. LIII (March, 1967), 30-83. 288. Wendrich, Kenneth A. "Music Literature in High School: The Yale Curriculum Development Project," Music Educators Journal. LIII (March, 1967), 35-132. 289. Franklin, A. David. "Ends and Means in Music Educa tion," Music Educators Journal. LIII (March, 1967), 103-106. 199 290. Choate, Robert A., and Kaplan, Max. "Music in American Society--Introduction to Issues," Music Educators Journal. LIII (April, 1967), 45-51. 291. Vernazza, Marcella. "What Are We Doing About Music in Special Education?" Music Educators Journal. LIII (April, 1967), 55-58. 292. Watson, Jack. "Television in Music Education," Music Educators Journal. LIII (April, 1967), 64- 65. 293. Campbell, D. N. "Education for the Aesthetic Experience," Music Educators Journal. LIII (April, 1967), 77-83. 294. Christian, Floyd T. "Let's Take a Look at School Music," Music Educators Journal. LIII (April, 1967), 99-100. 295. Furrington, Bruce R. "Team Teaching in the Musical Arts," Music Educators Journal. LIII (April, 1967), 135-137. 296. Wersen, Louis G. "The Challenge of Change," Music Educators Journal. LIII (May, 1967), 38-41. 297. Benn. Oleta A. "Objectives and Responsibilities in Teacher Education," Music Educators Journal. LIII (May, 1967), 42-45. 298. Giaudrone, Angelo. "Road Map to the Future," Music Educators Journal. LIII (May, 1967), 57-121. 299. Rothrock, Carson. "Scheduling Lessons in Ensembles," Music Educators Journal. LIII (May, 1967), 60-61. 300. Hood, Marguerite V. "Non-Performance Music Classes in Secondary Schools," Music Educators Journal. LIII (May, 1967), 75-79. 200 301. 302. 303. 304. 305. 306. 307. 308. 309. 310. 311. B. Books Barzun, Jacques. Music in American Life. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1956. Berelson, Bernard. Content Analysis in Communica- tion Research. Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1952. Birge, Edward Bailey. History of Public School Music in the United States. Philadelphia: Oliver Dltson Company, 1927. Borg, Walter R. Educational Research: An Introduc tion. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1963. Broudy, Harry S. Building a Philosophy of Educa tion. 2d ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1961. Bruner, Jerome S. On Knowing: Essays for the Left Hand. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1963. ________ . The Process of Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1960. ________ . Toward a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 1966. Butts, R. Freeman, and Cremin, Lawrence A. A History of Education in American Culture. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1953. Cassirer, Ernst. An Essay on Man. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944. Cheyette, Irving, and Cheyette, Herbert. Teaching Music Creatively in the Elementary School. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1969. " 201! 312. Conant, James B. The American High School Today. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1963. 313. . The Education of American Teachers. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1963. 314. Dewey, John. Art as Experience. New York: G. P. Putnam*s Sons, 1959. 315. Dudley, Louise, and Faircy, Austin. The Humanities. McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1951. 316. Farnsworth, Paul R. The Social Psychology of Music. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1958. 317. Ferguson, George A. Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1959. 318. Finkelstein, Sydney. Art and Society. New York: International Publishers Company, Inc., 1957. 319. Flavell, John H. The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget. The University Series in Psychology. Edited by David C. McClelland. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1963. 320. Gage, N. L. (ed.). Handbook of Research in Teach ing. New York: Rand McNally and Company, 1963. 321. Gardner, John W. Excellence. New York: Harper and Row,Publishers, 1961. 322. Glenn, Neal E., and Turrentine, Edgar M. Introduc tion to Advanced Study in Music Education. Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown Company, Publishers, 1968. 323. Gottschalk, D. W. Art and the Social Order. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1947. 202 324. 325. 326. 327. 328. 329. 330. 331. 332. 333. 334. 335. 336. Gross, Ronald (ed.). The Teacher and the Taught. New York; Dell Publishing Company, Inc., 1963. Jacobs, Norman. Culture for the Millions. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1964. Jones, Archie N. (ed.). Music Education in Action. Dubuque, Iowa; William C. Brown Company, Publishers, 1960. Kaplan, Max. Foundations and Frontiers of Music Education. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1963. ________ . Leisure in America: A Social Inquiry. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1960. Kwalwasser, Jacob. Exploring the Musical Mind. New York: Coleman Publishing Company, 1961. Lang, Paul Henry (ed.). One Hundred Years of Music in America. G. Schirmer, Inc., 1961, Langer, Susanne K. Feeling and Form: A Theory of Art. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1953. ________ . Philosophy in a New Key. New York: New American Library, 1948. ________ . Problems of Art. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1957. Lehman, Paul R. Tests and Measurements in Music. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968. Leonhard, Charles, and House, Robert W. Foundations and Principles of Music Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1961. Lemer, Max. America as a Civilization. 2 vols. New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1961. 203 i 337. Lins, Joseph L., and Rees, Robert A. Scholar's Guide to Journals of Education and Educational Psychology. Madison: Dembar Educational Research Services, Inc., 1965. 338. Lundin, Robert W. An Objective Psychology of Music. 2d ed. New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1967. 339. Martin, Gary M. Basic Concepts in Music. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1966. 340. Meyer, Leonard B. Emotion and Meaning in Music. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. 341. Morgan, Hazel B., and Burmeister, Clifton A. Music Research Handbook. Evanston, 111.: The Instrumentalist, 1962. 342. Murphy, Gardner, Freeing Intelligence Through Teaching. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1961. 343. Mursell, James L. Education for Musical Growth. Boston: Ginn and Company, 1948. 344. ' Human Values in Music Education. Park Ridge, 111.: Silver Burdett Company, 1934. 345. ________ . Music Education: Principles and Programs. Park Ridge, 111.: Silver Burdett Company, 1956. 346. Palisca, Claude V. Music in Our Schools: A Search for Improvement. Report of the Yale Seminar on Jfasic Education. Washington, D.C.: Office of Education, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1964. 347. Pratt, Carroll C. Music As the Language of Emotion Louis Charles Elson Memorial Fund. Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1950. 348. 349. 350. 351. 352. 353. 354. 355. 356. 357. 358. 204 Pullias, Earl V. A Search for Understanding. Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown Company, Publishers, 1964. Rader, Melvin (ed.). A Modem Book of Aesthetics. 3d ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1960. Rapaport, David. Emotion and Memory. Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Company, 1942. Read, Herbert, and Munro, Thomas. The Creative Arts in American Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1960. Seashore, Carl. The Psychology of Music. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1938. ________ . In Search of Beauty in Music. New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1947. Sessions, Roger. The Musical Experience of Composer, Performer, and Listener. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950. Taylor, Harold. On Education and Freedom. New York: Abelard-Schuman, Ltd., 1954. Tead, Ordway. The Climate of Learning. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1950. Whitehead, Alfred North. The Aims of Education. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1929. Whybrew, William. Measurement and Evaluation in Music. Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown Company, Publishers, 1962. 205 C. Articles and Periodicals j 359. Barth, George W. "Music Education," Review of Educational Research. XXXIV (April, 1964), 222- ! 235. I i | 360. Boyle, Imogene. '"The Responsibility of School Music to Music," Music Educators Journal. XX.III (April- May, 1957), 46-50. i ! 361. Braderaas, John. "Government, the Arts, and Public } Happiness," Music Educators Journal. LII (April- ! May, 1966), 41-45. 362. Britton, Allen P. "The 1962 MENC Program," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February-March, 1962), 45-92. | 363. . "Thank You, Mr. President," Music | Educators Journal. XLVIII (November-December, I 1961), 33-36. 1 i j 364. Child, Irvin, and Schwartz, Rosaline S. "Exploring the Teaching of Art Values," The Journal of Aesthetic Education. I (Autumn, 1966), 41-54. 365. Clarke, Henry Leland. "The Basis of Musical Com munication,” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. X (1952), 242-246. 366. Council for Research in Music Education. Bulletins Nos. 1-10. Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois, 1963-1967. 367. Cowell, Richard. "The Theory of Expectation Applied to Music Listening," Council for Research in Music Education. Bulletin No. 5 (Spring, 1965), 17-23. 368. | j 369. i t I 370. I i | 371. 372. 373. ! 374. I i I 375. 376. 377. 378. 206 Dejager, H. "Musical Socialization and the Schools," Music Educators Journal. LIII (February, 1967), 39-111. Dissertation Abstracts. Vols. XII-XXVIII. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Uhiversity Microfilms, 1952-1967. Education Index. Vols. VII-XVII. New York: H. W. "" Wilson Company, 1947-1967. Farnsworth, Paul R. "Has the Status of Music Changed in Thirty Years?" Journal of Psychology. LVI (October, 1963), 269-272. "Ford Foundation Composers Project in Music Educa tion," Music Educators Journal. XLV (February- March, 1959), 39. Fowler, Charles B. !, The Discovery Method," Journal of Research in Music Education. XIV (Summer, 1966), 126-134. Goldberg, Arthur J. "The State of the Performing Arts," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (February- March, 1962), 51-54. Gordon, Roderick D. "Doctoral Dissertations In Music and Music Education," Journal of Research in Music Education. XIII (Spring, 1965), 45-55. Hartshorn, William C. "Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965," Music Educators Journal. LII (September-October, 1965), 65-67. Hevner, Kate. "A Study of Tests for Appreciation of tftisic." Journal of Applied Psychology. XV (December, 1931), 575-583. Hornyak, Robert R. "An Analysis of Student Attitudes Toward Contemporary American Music," Council for Research in Music Education. Bulletin No. 8 (Fall, 1966), 1-14. 207 379. Housewright, Wiley L. "The Music Educators Journal," Music Educators Journal. L (April-May, 1964), 40-43. 380. "An Interview with the White House Cultural Coordinator,” Music Educators Journal. XLIV (June-July, 1962), 77. 381. John, Robert W. "Music Education in This Age," Music Educators Journal. XLIII (January, 1957), 11-12. 382. Johnson, H. Earle. "The Need for Research in the History of American Music," Journal of Research in Music Education. VI (Spring, 1958), 43-61. 383. Journal of Research in Music Education. Vols. I-XV. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1953-1967. 384. Kaplan, Max. "Music, Community, and Social Change," Music Educators Journal. XLIII (November- December, 1956), 47-49. 385. Keston, Murton J., and Pinto, Isabelle M. "Possible Factors Influencing Musical Preference," Journal of Genetic Psychology. LXXXVI (March, 1955), 101- 113. 386. Kyme, George. "Masic Education," Review of Educa tional Research. XXXI (April, 1961), 208-216. 387. LaBach, Parker. "Why We Are Criticized: A Music Educator's Analysis," Music Educators Journal. XLIII (November-December, 1956), 18-19. 388. Lawler, Vanett. "Fifty Years: A Look to the Future," Music Educators Journal, XLIII (April- May, 1957), 33-38. 389. "Legislation and the Arts," Music Educators Journal. LI (June-July, 1965), 41. 390. 391. 392. 393. 394. 395. 396. 397. 398. 399. 400. 208 Leonhard, Charles. "Music Education: Aesthetic Education." Education. LXXIV (Spring, 1953), 23-26. ________ . "Research: Philosophy and Aesthetics," Journal of Research in Music Education. Ill (Spring, 1955), 23-26. "MENC Tanglewood Symposium Project," Music Educators Journal. LIII (January, 1967), 3. Meyer, Leonard B. "Meaning in Music and the Information Theory," Journal of Aesthetics and Art ; Criticism. XV (1957), 412-424. ________ . "Some Remarks on Value and Greatness in Music," Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. XVII (1959), 486-500. Meyers, Charles S. "Individual Differences in Listening to Music," British Journal of Psychology. XIII (July, 1922), 52-71. Mosier, G. I. "A Critical Examination of the Concepts of Face Validity," Educational and Psychological Measurement, VII (Summer, 1947), 191-206. Mueller, Khte Hevner. "Studies In Music Apprecia tion, " Journal^_of_Research^in_JftJsic_JEducation, IV (Spring, 1956), 3-25. The Music Index. Vols. I-XIX. Detroit: Informa tion Service, Inc., 1949-1967. Mustard, Edwin C. "An Administrator Looks at Music in the Junior High School," Music Educators Journal. XLIII (September-October, 1956), 40-41. "The National Cultural Center," Music Educators Journal. XLIX (November-December, 1962), 55. 209 401. Normann, Theodore F. "The Responsibility of Music to Education," Music Educators Journal. XLIII (September-October, 1956), 20-22. 402. Fetzold, Robert G. "Directions for Research in Music Education," Council for Research in Music Education. Bulletin No. 1 (Spring, 1963), 18-23. 403. Pratt, Carroll C. "Structural Versus Expressive Form in Music," Journal of Psychology. V (January, 1938), 149-155. 404. Psychologies1 Abstracts. Vols. I-XLI. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1927- 1967. 405. Reimer, Bennett. "Effects of Music Education," Journal of Research in Music Education. XIII (Fall, 1965), 147-158. 406. ________ . "Teaching Aesthetic Perception," The Educational Forum. XXX (March, 1966), 349-356. 407. Schoen, Miax. "Psychological Problems in Musical Art," Journal of Research in Music Education. Ill (Spring, 1955), 27-39. 408. Schuraan, William. "The Responsibility of Music Education to Music," Music Educators Journal. XLII (June-July, 1956), 17-19. 409. Smith, Ralph A. "Patterns of Meaning in Aesthetic Education," Council for Research in Music Educa tion. Bulletin No. 5 (Spring, 1965), 1-12. 410. Snapp, Kenneth 0. "Musicianship Training for the Band Director,V Music Educators Journal. XLIII (September-October, 1956), 69-73. 411. Sparling, Edward J. "Music for the Masses," Music Educators Journal. XLIII (November-December, 1956), 28-30. 412. 413. 414. 415. 416. 417. 418. 419. 420. 210' Taylor, Irving A., and Paperte, Frances. "Current Theory and Research in the Effects of Music on Human Behavior," Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. XVII (1958), 251-258. Weld, H. "Experimental Studies," American Journal of Psychology. XXIII (April, 1912), 245-309. Zimmerman, Alex H. "Ford Foundation Grant to MENC for Project on Contemporary Music in the Schools," Music Educators Journal. XLVIII (November- December, 1961) D. Publications from Learned Societies Buttelman, Clifford V. (ed.). A Steadfast Philosophy. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1962. Collins, Thomas C. (ed.). Music Education Materials: A Selected Bibliography. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference* 1963. Comprehensive Musicianship: The Foundation for College Education in Music. A Report of the Seminar Sponsored by the Contemporary Music Project. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1965. Doll, Richard C. (ed.). Individualizing Instruc tion. Washington, D.C.: Association for Supervi sion and Curriculum Development, 1964. Dressel, Paul L., and Mayhew, L. B. General Educa tion! Explorations in Evaluation. Washington, D.C*: American Council on Education, 1954. Education and the Creative Arts. A Report of the 1959 Annual Meeting of the American Association of School Administrators. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1959. 421. 422. 423. 424. 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 211 Ernst, Karl D., and Gary, Charles L. (eds.). Music in General Education. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1968. Gary, Charles L. (ed.). The Study of Music in the Elementary School: A Conceptual Approach. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1968. ________ . Vignettes in Music Education History. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1964. Hartshorn, William C. Music for the Academically Talented Student in the Secondary School. National Education Association Project on the Academically Talented Student. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1960. The Identification and Education of the Academically Talented Student in the American Secondary School. National Project on the Academically Talented Student. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1958. Kaplan, Max. Music Education in a Changing World. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1958. Madison, Thurber (ed.). Source Book III: Perspec tives in Music Education. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1966. Murphy, Judith, and Sullivan, George. Music in American Society. An Interpretive Report of the Tanglewood Symposium. Washington, D.C*: Music Educators National Conference, 1968. Nelson, Henry B. (ed.). Basic Concepts in Music Education. Fifty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I. Chicago; University of Chicago Press, 1958. 212 430. 431. 432. 433. 434. 435. 436. 437. Pool, Ithiel De Sola (ed.). Trends In Content Analysis. Papers of the Work Conference on Content Analysis of the Committee on Linguistics and Psychology, Social Science Research Council. Urbana, 111.: University of Illinois Press, 1959. Prescott, Daniel Alfred. Emotion and the Educative Process. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1938. Schwadron, Abraham A, Esthetics: Dimensions for Music Education. Washington, D.C.: Music Educators National Conference, 1967. E. Public Documents United States Congress. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Public Law 10, 89th Congress, 1965. ________ . The National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act. Public Law 209, 89th Congress, 1965. F. Unpublished Material Colwell, Ruth Ann. "The Development of a Theoreti cal Base for a Course in Music Appreciation at the College Level." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1961. Houlihan, James E., Jr. "The Music Educators National Conference in American Education." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Boston university Graduate School, 1961. Reimer, Bennett. "The Common Dimensions of Aesthetic and Religious Experience." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1963. 213 Rogge, Genevieve 0. "Music as Communication with Special Reference to Its Role as Content." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, 1952. Schneider, Erwin H., and Cady, Henry L. "Evaluation and Synthesis of Research Studies Related to Music Education." Unpublished Cooperative Research project. Washington, D.C.: Cooperative Research Program of the Office of Education, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1965. APPENDICES i APPENDIX A ADDITIONAL FORMS AND CHARTS RATER'S INSTRUCTIONS i Purpose of the Study j Through the Investigation of selected literature, i I this study will identify the topics of concern to music j education during a defined period. r i I ! Research Design j The research method being used by this study is called content analysis. This consists of a statistical analysis of predetermined words found in the selected i content material. I i ) j The Rater's Responsibility It is the responsibility of the rater to analyze the selected content material in reference to the pre determined words in order to tabulate the frequency with which these words are used. i Procedure 1. Read the instructions carefully, j 2. Study the words found on the Information Sheet until they are familiar. 216 217 3. When ready, begin the analysis of the sample ! article and fill in the Information Sheet. Compare the i ! results with the model tabulation of the article. ■ 4. Begin the analysis of the selected articles: j a. Fill in the information at the top of the Information Sheet using information about the author and j the article found at the beginning or end of the article. ! b. Begin to read the article. Keep the Information Sheet ready for reference and recording. c. When a predetermined word is found in the ! text, refer to the Information Sheet and locate the i i ! category in which it is listed. Note that the words are I considered acceptable for use in the study if: (1) they appear as they are found on the Information Sheet, e.g., I 1 | appraise; (2) they appear with the addition or change of the prefix or suffix of the word, e.g., reappraise or appraisal. Also note that words marked with an asterisk (*) may be used in that form only and words marked with a cross (+) may be found in more than one category. d. When the word is located in the category or categories, then the subcategory should be consulted. The subcategory determines the context in which the word j 2X8 i ! must be used, e.g., appraise must be used in reference to i ! the music or arts curricula. Check the sentence in which I I the word appears for evidence of the context, e.g., It is time for music education to appraise its existing program. ! If this does not give conclusive evidence, then refer to ' the paragraph in which the word appears, e.g., It is often I j said that growth will only come with constant appraisal. ! Therefore, music education must begin its task immedi- i j ately, if the music program is to survive in the schools. | Do not go beyond the paragraph in which the word | is found in order to determine the context in which the ! word is used. i ! e. Tally the presence of the word under the i | appropriate category on the Information Sheet or reject t | it as failing to meet the prescribed meaning. f. Continue this procedure for the entire article. g. On completion of the article, total the tallies made for each category and place the final scores in the space provided on the Information Sheet. h. Proceed to the next article. 219 INFORMATION SHEET TITLE __________________________ AUTHOR ______________ VOLUME ____ DATE PAGES REPEAT NO. AFFILIATION: Music Education____ Outside Profession MENC: Elected or Appointed ___ General Membership _ POSITION: Professor Supervisor Teacher___ _____ ARTICLE: Speech Original____ Length ___________ I. SCIENCE Non-mu/Arts R. World Events C. Mu/Arts Curriculum Academic* Cold war Assess Knowledge* Crisis Appraise Mathematics Missile Critical Science Orbit Evaluate Subject* Russia Examine Technique Satellite Fail Technology Soviet Justify Space Role Threat Place Total 220 II. ACADEMIC Mu/Arte as Body of Knowledge Content Course History Humanities* Knowledge* Related Arts Study Subject* Total ____ III. AESTHETIC A. Mu/Arts/Mu Ed Aesthetic Communicate Emotion Express Feel Import Meaning Perceive Perceptive Receive Receptive Respond Response Spirit Sense A. Mu/Arts/Mu Ed B. Academic* Discipline Intellect Intelligent IQ Gifted (academic) Outstanding (academic) Talent (academic) Total IV. MUSICALITY A. Teacher/Student in Mu B. Teaching/Learning in Mm Achieve Aptitude Competent Excellent Musicianship Musicality Talent (music)+ Comprehend Compose Concept Dance Discriminate Listen Evaluate+ Play Interpret Sing Relate Write Skill Understand i Total _____ V. SOCIETY' A. American Mu/Arts/Mu Ed Audience* City* Composer* Citizen(s)* Culture* Democracy* Federal* Ghetto* Inner-city* Man* Nation* Performer* Public* Slum* Society* State* Sub-culture* B. American Society Affluence Change Disadvantage Free Grant Legislature Leisure Peace Poor Poverty Revolution Riot Unrest War Total APPENDIX B WORD FREQUENCY CHART WORD FREQUENCY CHART I Article _____________________Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 1. 30 1 12 0 5 2. 2 1 7 3 0 3. 11 0 9 4 0 4. 8 0 5 10 3 5. 6 0 4 16 0 6. 13 5 1 2 2 7. 11 3 8 12 9 8. 6 0 11 9 3 9. 52 2 5 0 9 10. 10 0 17 1 2 11. 4 6 3 3 0 12. 13 6 16 4 17 13. 1 1 5 2 0 14. 4 23 3 22 0 15. 26 27 19 15 2 16. 1 0 3 0 2 ^Consult corresponding article numbers in the Bib liography for titles and authors of articles listed here. 223 224 WORD FREQUENCY CHART— Continued Article____________________Categories N6 .a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 17. 2 1 5 8 5 • 00 15 8 11 13 6 19. 0 5 1 23 1 to o • 52 3 3 2 3 2 1. 0 1 0 6 0 2 2. 8 5 7 7 4 23. 4 2 1 12 3 24. 0 0 3 4 0 25. 1 0 4 3 0 CM 28 3 5 6 5 27. 3 1 23 28 0 » 00 CM 13 0 13 1 0 29. 46 1 0 0 8 30. 8 0 7 13 1 31. 0 0 16 13 0 32. 0 0 0 15 0 33. 0 0 0 13 0 34. 1 5 1 28 0 WORD FREQUENCY CHART— Continued 225 Article No.a Categories Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 35. 1 1 5 1 . 0 36. 0 0 2 12 0 37. 12 3 14 17 2 38. 4 6 0 4 0 39. 1 0 2 7 0 40. 5 18 0 15 0 41. i 4 0 4 3 0 42. 6 0 0 1 i 0 43. 32 82 42 30 2 ! 44. | 0 2 16 51 0 45. 5 2 0 5 0 | 46. 0 0 0 9 0 47. 0 0 0 8 0 48. I 10 20 0 0 2 49. 13 8 3 22 0 50. 0 1 0 17 0 51. 3 0 12 18 1 52. 3 0 2 7 0 53. 9 3 4 10 0 WORD FREQUENCY CHART--Continued 226 Article Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 54. 34 12 5 6 17 55. 7 11 1 13 0 56. 10 3 0 31 2 57. 1 1 1 17 0 58. 1 0 2 3 1 59. 2 7 14 2 0 60. 5 2 0 2 0 61. 6 2 0 10 0 62. 28 11 3 3 14 63. 3 8 4 5 4 64. 0 0 0 0 2 65. 3 9 1 6 3 66. 11 0 0 0 1 67. 17 3 5 4 8 . CO to 4 0 6 3 4 69. 1 4 4 28 0 70. 12 1 13 18 9 71. 2 4 1 10 0 72. 0 0 0 2 0 227 WORD FREQUENCY CHART--Continued Article Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 73. 0 0 8 3 0 74. 2 0 1 5 0 75. 0 0 0 3 0 76. 0 1 8 12 1 77. 0 1 0 13 0 78. 3 1 0 10 1 79. 8 13 6 11 0 80. C 0 0 0 1 00 * - * • 8 1 6 1 0 82. 10. 14 1 4 3 • 00 0 0 0 8 0 . 00 8 9 3 16 0 85. 2 0 0 1 0 • \D oo 0 0 0 0 0 87. 14 19 12 21 4 » 00 00 0 6 30 14 0 00 • 0 0 0 3 0 90. 6 33 0 17 3 91. 3 0 0 3 1 92. 4 8 14 16 0 228 WORD FREQUENCY CHART--Continued Article No.a Categories Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 93. 0 1 4 7 0 94. 0 0 0 0 0 95. 2 1 2 4 0 96. 2 0 8 1 2 97. 6 0 7 17 0 98. 0 0 0 0 0 99. 3 0 2 5 7 100. 45 18 2 9 0 101. 8 4 5 7 0 102. 0 0 2 16 0 103. 9 7 12 12 5 104. 7 20 4 6 2 105. 14 25 0 15 9 106. 0 0 1 0 7 107. 0 0 0 1 0 108. 4 21 0 2 1 109. 5 29 27 32 0 no. 0 5 4 11 0 111. 2 5 5 4 1 229 WORD FREQUENCY CHART--Continued Article Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 112. 36 1 0 0 4 113. 8 0 5 12 3 114. 2 0 0 1 0 115. 0 0 3 3 0 116. 12 57 36 30 0 117. 0 5 23 25 0 i 118. 0 0 1 0 0 119. 2 0 0 4 0 | 120. 14 40 63 8 0 121. 8 6 5 52 0 ! 122. j 0 1 0 2 1 ! 123. 0 0 8 28 0 124. 0 2 2 46 0 125. 10 5 9 33 0 | 126. 1 2 5 3 1 127. 14 0 6 4 13 128. 21 4 0 7 4 129. 0 0 0 5 0 130, 6 8 2 9 0 230 WORD FREQUENCY CHART"Continued Article Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 131. 0 0 0 8 1 132. 13 3 20 7 1 133. 0 1 3 15 4 134. 0 5 75 32 0 135. 0 0 0 12 0 136. 4 3 2 1 3 137. 60 3 0 2 12 138. 0 1 0 1 0 139. 20 4 14 4 15 140. 0 0 0 8 0 141. 7 0 0 0 0 142. 0 0 0 0 0 143. 8 1 10 1 2 144. 15 7 10 4 2 145. 0 1 13 5 Q 146. 23 5 3 0 13 147. 1 29 27 43 0 148. 14 1 0 8 1 149. 8 1 12 4 3 231 WORD FREQUENCY CHART— Continued Article No.a Categories Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 150. 0 1 7 27 0 151. 1 1 0 1 4 152. 9 3 3 4 18 153. 13 15 0 9 0 154. 17 27 9 18 4 155. 1 0 3 18 0 156. 0 7 0 43 0 157. 2 5 73 1 1 158. 0 3 0 37 1 159. 0 0 0 1 0 160. 3 3 0 8 1 161. 28 15 10 9 16 162. 8 9 0 2 15 163. 8 17 19 43 0 164. 2 1 22 9 2 165. 9 10 18 49 1 166. 0 2 3 12 8 167. 3 4 0 4 1 168. 0 0 7 11 0 232 WORD FREQUENCY CHART— Continued Article No.8 Categories Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 169. 36 15 0 14 0 170. 9 12 9 10 9 171. 4 3 22 21 0 172. 11 8 8 7 2 173. 2 0 7 9 0 174. 0 0 0 V 0 175. 2 0 2 4 0 176. 0 0 0 22 0 177. 1 0 1 17 0 178. 31 0 4 0 17 179. 1 1 2 13 0 180. 5 8 1 0 0 181. 51 3 15 7 7 182. 3 0 1 7 1 183. 0 2 0 7 2 184. 7 12 2 10 2 185. 5 10 0 0 0 186. 4 0 2 31 1 187. 0 7 2 12 0 ~... 233 WORD FREQUENCY CHART— Continued Article Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 188. 1 2 5 3 5 189. 1 0 0 26 0 190. 10 34 24 32 8 191. 26 11 6 4 3 192. 6 3 1 35 0 193. 0 0 0 14 0 194. 0 0 0 5 1 195. 0 47 6 20 3 196. 11 11 25 5 1 197. 2 14 121 5 0 198. 4 2 5 60 1 199. 0 0 3 8 0 200. 1 1 0 2 0 201. 0 0 0 1 0 202. 8 0 1 1 0 203. 8 19 10 25 1 204. 26 10 25 33 5 205. 0 2 1 18 0 206. 0 5 0 2 0 207. 9 0 0 4 1 234 WORD FREQUENCY CHART— Continued Article ____________________Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 208. 0 0 1 3 1 209. 0 0 4 17 0 2 1 0. 0 0 8 14 0 211. 2 6 1 2 1 212. 0 0 0 0 0 213. 19 37 5 7 19 214. 1 1 8 16 13 215. 6 5 16 2 12 216. 0 0 1 28 0 217. 0 0 0 1 1 218. 0 3 2 6 0 219. 2 0 0 2 2 220. 6 9 4 42 11 221. 3 24 8 15 9 222. 9 7 12 8 25 223. 0 2 6 18 0 224. 8 2 28 3 0 225. 0 2 0 12 0 226. 2 0 5 2 1 227. 1 3 0 9 1 WORD FREQUENCY CHART— Continued Article Categories No.a Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 228. 2 0 0 1 0 229. 0 0 8 0 45 230. 12 6 22 10 2 231. 1 6 20 25 9 232. 13 10 15 3 2 233. 6 3 0 0 1 234. 1 1 1 4 8 235. 2 0 2 4 5 236. 0 2 0 11 0 237. 7 14 5 21 6 238. 6 2 7 4 3 239. 2 2 10 0 0 240. 0 0 6 2 3 241. 0 2 3 9 0 242. 10 35 29 7 2 243. 2 8 7 53 1 244. 3 3 1 11 5 245. 0 0 3 3 0 246. 19 9 3 2 2 247. 1 3 7 39 0 WORD FREQUENCY CHART--Continued 236 Article No.a Categories Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 248. 9 12 4 3 7 249. 13 5 21 2 24 250. 10 1 1 10 4 251. 0 19 1 12 0 252. 0 13 12 7 0 253. 0 0 7 8 0 254. 7 0 0 0 2 255. 1 3 1 8 3 256. 4 0 4 27 1 257. 0 2 12 4 0 258. 2 2 7 3 0 259. 8 13 21 24 2 260. 2 5 0 4 2 261. 0 0 0 0 0 262. 0 22 2 32 0 263. 6 2 1 1 34 264. 2 0 0 0 1 265. 0 1 1 21 0 266. 21 1 1 1 7 237 WORD FREQUENCY CHART--Continued Article ____________________Categories No. Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 267. 3 13 1 1 2 268. 26 35 15 6 13 269. 2 5 4 58 3 270. 4 2 3 6 0 271. 13 27 5 11 0 272. 18 0 35 14 4 273. 1 2 40 5 0 274. 20 2 10 10 18 275. 1 0 0 5 34 276. 0 1 3 15 0 277. 3 3 5 1 1 278. 7 13 14 2 1 279. 3 21 5 0 6 280. 14 12 0 13 1 281. 11 9 10 7 18 282. 0 0 0 4 0 283. 13 6 6 5 5 284. 8 8 21 5 10 285. 0 1 1 2 25 WORD FREQUENCY CHART--Continued Article No.a Categories Science Academic Aesthetic Musicality Society 286. 10 3 13 1 1 287. 20 28 10 76 4 288. 1 7 1 33 8 289. 1 19 23 19 0 290. 23 10 11 3 57 291. 0 0 4 26 0 292. 0 0 2 15 1 293. 6 7 124 1 0 294. 4 2 6 0 5 295. 0 1 0 33 0 296. 12 0 1 0 37 297. 13 5 3 6 4 298. 25 23 22 1 15 299. 0 0 0 1 0 300. ns EBa aas 0 44 10 15 0 APPENDIX C MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES Categories Time Period I Science II Academic III Aesthetic IV V Musicality Society 1957 X 14.3 .6 9.3 2.3 1.6 s 14.29 .58 2.52 2.08 2.89 1958 X 11.9 5.6 7.7 7.4 3.7 to 1959 a 13.73 8.94 6.06 7.16 5.0 1959 X 13.2 2.3 5.8 8.7 2.7 to 1960 s 17.83 2.43 6.52 8.46 2.75 1960 X 4.9 7.0 5.3 13.6 .3 to 1961 s 7.71 18.10 9.96 11.94 .73 1961 X 6.1 3.4 3.1 8.5 2.0 to 1962 s 7.49 4.46 3.90 8.82 3.96 1962 X 6.2 7.1 5.1 8.3 1.7 to 1963 s 10.38 10.14 7.58 7.84 2.55 x a* mean: s <® standard deviation i * 2 4 0 J 241 MEAN FREQUENCY SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SELECTED CATEGORIES--ContinuM Categories Time Period I Science II Academic III Aesthetic IV V Musicality Society 1963 X 7.5 5.7 9.5 11.9 2.6 to 1964 s 11.18 11.66 16.59 14.23 4.81 1964 X 7.2 6.8 7.2 14.0 2.6 to 1965 s 11.18 9.74 12.69 12.94 4.42 1965 X 3.8 4.5 8.3 10.3 14.2 to 1966 s 5.48 7.30 18.59 12.37 8.27 1966 X 6.1 7.6 7.4 11.1 4.6 to 1967 s 7.05 9.57 9.77 13.90 8.57 1967 X 7.4 8.7 13.4 12.7 9.5 s 8.25 11.55 27.08 18.37 14.93 Grand Mean 6.70 5.85 6.50 10.79 3.2 7 x « mean; s « standard deviation

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An Analysis Of The Music Curricula Of Selected Church-Related Colleges Incalifornia

PDF

Art Education Programs Of The California State Colleges For Elementary Teachers

PDF

The Relationship Of Size To Current Expense Of Education In California Single-College Public Junior College Districts

PDF

Community Service Programs Of California Community Colleges: An Analysis Of Recent Developments

PDF

An Analysis Of The Role Of The Church Related College In California

PDF

An Analysis Of Critical Issues In Higher Education In Denmark

PDF

Factors influencing tenured senior high school instrumental music teachers to transfer or leave the profession

PDF

The Organization And Administration Of Special Counseling Programs For Adult Women In Colleges And Universities

PDF

Non-Intellective Factors Which May Be Related To Voluntary Withdrawal Of College Freshmen

PDF

The Relationship Of Teacher Preparation And Experience To The Appraisal Of Classroom Effectiveness By The Principal

PDF

A Suggested Journalism Curriculum For California Junior Colleges

PDF

Conflicts In Role Expectations For Academic Deans In Church-Related Colleges

PDF

A Historical Analysis Of Vocational Education: Land-Grant Colleges To California Junior Colleges, 1862-1940

PDF

The Identification Of Accident-Proneness In Junior College Vocational Students And Industrial Employees

PDF

The Image Of Higher Education In American Novels, 1920-1966

PDF

The Preparation Of Teachers Of French And Spanish In Southern California Secondary Schools

PDF

The Remedial Mathematics Curriculum In Selected California Community Colleges

PDF

A Latitudinal Study Of Attitudes Comparing Certain Student Groups On Issues Related To University Life

PDF

A Study Of Undergraduate Education In Selected Seventh-Day Adventist Colleges

PDF

Selective Variables In The Achievement Or Nonachievement Of Junior College Students From Different Socioeconomic Backgrounds

Asset Metadata

Creator Hooper, Maureen Dorothea (author)

Core Title Major Concerns Of Music Education: Content Analysis Of The Music Educators Journal, 1957-1967

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag music,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Pullias, Earl Vivon (committee chair), Glass, Phyllis W. (committee member), Wilbur, Leslie (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-383129

Unique identifier UC11360944

Identifier 7005213.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-383129 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7005213.pdf

Dmrecord 383129

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Hooper, Maureen Dorothea

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA