Running Head: IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION?

Is Advocacy Helping or Hurting Music Education?

Allison Werner

Buffalo State University

IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 2

Introduction

“Advocacy is letting everyone know about the importance of what you do” (Hill, 2002, p.

5). Music educators currently struggle with finding the right ways to advocate for their program

without burning themselves out from all of the extra work of researching and implementing

new resources and methods into their teaching. Often, music educators do not know where to

begin or who to turn to for help. In many cases, “we find ourselves consistently arguing for the

importance and value of our discipline” (Collins, 2014, p. 9). The National Association for Music

Education (MENC) has been credited with paving the advocacy roadway for educators for

decades and continues to remain a leader and resource for teachers in the field of the arts.

Their efforts have always been painted in such a positive light for others, but a growing number

of teachers are starting to question the reliability of their research and whether or not the

direction the advocacy roadway is heading should be trusted.

There have been many recommendations made to music teachers on how they should

advocate, but hardly any research has been conducted on how effective those strategies are

(Abril and Bannerman, 2014). In their study, Abril and Bannerman found that, of 374 teachers

surveyed, almost half of the teachers held a belief national education policy held no effect on

music education. Their findings concluded that music teachers found local school

administration to be the most positive factor for maintaining or improving their programs.

(Abril and Bannerman, 2014). On the other hand, many educators blame the current lack of

support for music education on the No Child Left Behind Act, which has nothing to do with local

school districts and everything to do with the government (Major, 2013). Music has been

pushed on the backburner for other subjects in school because “these educational shifts
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 3

resulted in an increased amount of time spent on tested subjects” (Major, 2013, p. 6). If music

educators still cannot agree on how this status of reduction and irrelevance came to be in the

first place, how can agreeing on advocacy efforts that will work on a national level be expected?

Past advocacy efforts have been presented by music teachers with little success. In

many cases, advocacy leaders incorrectly use research in their fight and push for equality

among other subjects in a way that diminishes the true value of music. In searching for “music

advocacy” on Pinterest, an educator will more than likely be met with dozens of ideas that

involve music nurturing student growth in other subjects, increase of grade point averages, and

“connecting” music to the other subjects in school. The strongest argument for music in the

lives of students should start with music for the sake of music. “Music education speaks to

people with many voices. The most obvious voice is that of music itself” (Mark, 2005, p. 95).

In order for policy makers, parents, students, and administrators to make informed

decisions regarding music there must be a music teacher willing to educate others about the

importance of music in schools. Music teachers need an understanding that “Education

decision makers… must appreciate why music education is important to society so they can

make informed decisions about any number of issues that affect music in schools” (p. 95).

This literature review will look into advocacy methods that have been used in the past

and present to fight for music education as a core subject in schools. The two current schools

of thought on music advocacy (music makes you smarter vs. music for music’s sake) will be

compared and contrasted in their effectiveness at advocacy and reliability as a resource for

teachers.
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 4

What to Advocate

West and Clauhs define philosophy as “a set of beliefs that guide behavior, and … our

efforts to support music education should be driven by our beliefs about its value” (2015, p.

57). When starting the creation of an advocacy plan, a music teacher should always first reflect

on their own beliefs and philosophy of music education. If the words that are spoken are

considered to be of value but it do not align with a music educator’s beliefs and teaching

philosophy, then the advocacy arguments being made do not highlight a music educator’s true

beliefs (West and Clauhs, 2015, p. 57). In fact, it could be argued that instead of advocacy

dictating a philosophy of music education, advocacy plan should be the result of a teacher’s

philosophy.

Tutt and Townley believe that “effective advocacy is based on the principle of arguing

for a specific set of beliefs and needs, as opposed to simply engaging in advocacy activities that

are not tied to thorough research and documentation” (2011, p. 63). Essentially, to advocate

for a program a music educator must have an in-depth understanding about why music is

personally important. In following Tutt and Townley’s method, an effective advocate of music

will first develop their philosophy, use that philosophy to craft goals to work towards, and then

create and implement an advocacy plan (2011).

To truly discover a philosophy of music education, a music educator must take all other

factors (administration, parents, community) out of the equation and reflect on their own

personal beliefs of music. An educator that bases their advocacy around their beliefs will be a

successful advocate because of their personal connection to the plan.

IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 5

How Music Educators Advocate

Music education needs to become sticky. In other words, “it must become potent and

irresistible” (Kratus, 2007, p. 46). To know how to advocate for music in schools, music in the

community should first be taken into consideration. If out of school music is using technology

to connect musicians across the world, the in-school music curriculum should also mirror that

method. When out of school music is principally non-classical, should music educators teach

students using only classical music? Music advocacy is ever evolving, as is society, and must

adapt to the current social conditions and community needs.

In simple words, “music education advocacy is a constant” (Orzolek, 2004, p. 13).

Although data and polls have shown that today’s society deeply values music education, music

educators still find themselves fighting to keep music teachers in schools. A teacher cannot

expect that putting one flyer in a take-home folder will be the only move they make towards

advocating for their program each year. Teachers should view advocacy as “a representation of

what we hope music education can become” (Hedgecoth and Fischer, 2014, p. 57). The work of

an advocate is an endless cycle and should be viewed as a part of the job.

For some teachers, advocacy is as simple as using a concert program as a soapbox for

the music program. Block interviewed Rob Westerberg, a choral director in Maine, who claims

that “through the use of program notes, we can make it clear that we have an educational

agenda going on” (Block, 2008, 20). A concert program could be used for showcasing alumni

successes, advertising future concert dates, and could even include current research data on

music education. Many educators would believe that this type of advocacy method would

work best for their school, and in some cases this method could be successful. Regardless of
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 6

the advocacy method used, music as a school subject has suffered during this time when only

“what gets measured gets attention” (Shorner-Johnson, 2013, 54). The arts have been seen as

a superfluous subject and music educators across the country find themselves asking “how do

we justify the arts” when music is not tested? (55).

There are essentially two schools of thought in the music world regarding advocacy.

Music educators either advocate for their program through the approach of “music makes you

smarter” or “music for music’s sake” (Gee, 2002, p.7). Unfortunately for current educators,

neither of these approaches are successful at keeping music programs in every scenario. In

fact, using the “music makes you smarter” approach has started to raise an uproar in the music

education community at the validity of its nature. The second school of thought, “music for

music’s sake,” is a more reasonable approach from a philosophical standpoint, but most often

lacks a strong argument to validate music’s place in the school day.

Music Makes You Smarter!

Research has shown that there are positive relationships between prolonged musical

training (in some cases instrumental, others general classroom setting) and geometrical skills,

reading fluency, language acquisition, significant structural brain changes, and memory skills

(Cole, 2011). When research is published in a way that draws conclusions and results showing

positive relationships between music and academic success, the initial response is to use it as

an advantage! In many cases, music educators will take these research findings, incorporate

them into a visually pleasing poster, and post them all over the school for the entire district to

see. Instead of racing to use this information, educators should be carefully deciding if the

research is reliable and accurately conclusive.

IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 7

For instance, conclusions have been drawn that “positive changes in brain structure and

function have been observed in musicians who have learned a musical instrument in a weekly

one-to-one lesson for more than 2 years” (Collins, 2014, p. 8). There is a lot of information here

that an administrator or community member would look at and compare to their own program.

If a music educator used this information, it would only remain relevant to students who have

learned an instrument for more than 2 years and only in a situation where they have received

instruction in a weekly one on one lesson. The chances of 100% of students fitting into that

category are slim, and therefore the research not applicable.

Peterson studied 45 articles and after categorizing them found that the majority of the

articles used extrinsic benefits as the basis for their argument. Of the 45 articles published, 20

percent included statements for spiritual and moral development, 33 percent included

statements of brain and skill development and 20 percent included statements of mental and

physical well-being (Peterson, 2011). This information, while impressive, lacks the background

information of the age and social conditions of students, length of studies, or even what type of

music is being used. Although the articles were all published by sources that are reputable in

the music education world, the overall findings lack a substantial foundation for their use.

Another study, conducted by Michele Henry, specifically looked at Texas All-State

musicians and their musical experiences and motivating factors. She used a survey of 21

questions to seek the overall demographics, musical experiences, and future plans of the

individuals selected for All-State that year (2015). Of the 1,205 students who completed the

study sixty five percent anticipate majoring in a field of music and only 18 percent specified

music education. If the ultimate goal of educating students is to support a lifelong journey of
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 8

music, current music educators are doing a great job according to the results of their study.

The validity of a statement like that is lacking, though, when the study only used All-State

musicians as the sample and the results did not show college graduation statistics to back up

the data found for amount of students with the intended major of music.

Music educators need to be aware that “advocacy is letting everyone you know about

the importance of what you do” (Burton, 2004, p. 17). Instead of using research to prove that

music benefits other subjects, teachers should be arguing for why music should be learned

because of the importance of music itself. Although eye-catching and eye-opening, brain based

research studies should not be the only advocacy plan that the music education profession uses

to justify music in a student’s life.

Music for Music’s Sake

Some music educators have found that the most effective advocacy method for their

situation is to argue for music for the sake of music. In many cases, a “lack of a solid

philosophical basis for music education advocacy” has led to “questionable advocacy materials

and the lack of lobbying at the federal and state levels” (Elpus, 2007, p. 13). This would refer to

the opposing idea that “music makes you smarter.” The most concerning factor is that the

organization with the most impact and influence over this profession is using said materials and

research for the foundation of current advocacy materials.

It has come to attention that “we are selling out our professional dignity and relying on

questionable research or questionable interpretations of valid research” (Elpus, 2007, p. 15).

When parents, the community, and administrators are promised that students exposed to

music in schools will have higher test scores, better literacy skills and higher graduation rates,
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 9

music educators are setting themselves up for scrutiny and blame. In fact, when looking closer

at the conclusions of research findings, Kenneth Elpus claims that “the conclusions… the data

are often appropriated and mischaracterized for use in advocacy” (2007, p. 15). How can the

entire framework for current advocacy be built over research if that research is not valid? False

assumption of concluding materials from research have become highly-used “facts” in the

profession for the support of music in schools.

When educators switch from the “music makes you smarter” mindset to a “music for

music’s sake” mindset, they need to begin with a philosophy. Tutt and Townley suggests that

teachers reflect on the reasons they believe music education has a purpose in public schools.

(2011). In the end, the strongest advocate for a music program is the teacher from that

program. Each educator must full-heartedly believe in the philosophy that is designed.

Educators who do not have a personal connection and belief in the philosophy will be less

convincing to an audience. A teacher’s personal music education philosophy can then be

turned into goals for their program, and then developed into an advocacy plan (2011).

Although this method does not usually result in immediate results, it would best be compared

to the tortoise and the hare fable. Those who are quick to advocate, taking no time to think

through a plan, may appear to win the race at first. The teachers who take time in creating

advocacy plans that can be backed up completely will win the advocacy battle for their

students.

Music makes a person human. Although there are academic benefits to music, the

more impressive benefits are those that carry outside of school. When advocating for music for

music’s sake music educators can “shift public policy from increasing math scores toward
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 10

increasing happiness; from creating global competitors towards developing local contributors;

from regurgitating fact toward heightening understanding” (West and Whalen, 2015, p. 61).

The most important factor in advocating for students, is continuous persistence. A

music educator’s job does not end when the bell rings, or when school ends for the summer. In

the same fashion, all advocacy methods should not end even if they are successful the first time

around. When arguing for “music for music’s sake” teachers should view the advocacy plan as

a continuous part of the job. After looking into music programs that are successful in their

advocacy methods Luehrsen found that “this is what it takes: concerned, active, persistent

people working for music education access in their own communities” (2005, p. 82).

Conclusions

Current music education advocacy methods are far from perfect and need a serious

overhaul. Elpus believes that current advocacy arguments lack a “strong, defensible,

philosophical basis for music education” and contribute to practices that are “controversial and

divisive within the profession” (Elpus, 2007, p. 14). The current advocacy leaders have

encouraged music educators to use their advocacy products in all school situations and boast

of the success music educators have had with their documents. To use these resources without

fully researching them is equivalent to eating a granola bar without reading the nutrition label.

A new road for the future needs to be paved where “music advocates are equipped with

training, better materials, clear goals, and national leadership from MENC” (Elpus, 2007, p. 17).

Music educators need to realize that “advocacy does not drive the profession; rather, it

reflects music educators’ beliefs, purposes, and accomplishments” (Mark, 2002, p. 48). Current

advocacy methods, whether they are “music makes you smarter” or “music for music’s sake,”
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 11

need to reflect both personal belief and philosophy as musicians and music educators.

There is a reason that music has remained a part of student’s lives for so long, and there

are also reasons why music advocates still need to fight for this to continue in the future.

Without educators who are confident in their own philosophical beliefs, this profession is

slowly becoming data-driven-robots that spit out facts to prove that music makes brains

smarter and bigger while ensuring graduation drop-out rates shrink. In the end “the rush of

competitive economic words such as productivity and efficiency, that which separates humans

from machines becomes all the more important” (Shorner-Johnson, 2013, 55). Music is a part

of culture and an essential part of being human, it should continue to always be an art form

that is fought for both in school and outside of school.

IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 12

References

Abril, C. R., & Bannerman, J. K. (2015). Perceived Factors Impacting School Music Programs: The

Teacher’s Perspective. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(4), 344–361.

Block, D. G. (2008). Advocacy: Concert programs can double as advocacy tools. Teaching Music,

16(2), 20.

Cole, K. (2011). Professional notes: Brain-based-research music advocacy: Brain-based-research

music advocacy. Music Educators Journal, 98(1), 26-30.

Collins, A. (2014). Music Education and the Brain: What Does It Take to Make a Change?

Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 32(2), 4–10.

Elpus, K. (2007). Improving Music Education Advocacy. Arts Education Policy Review, 108(3),

13-18.

Gee, C. B. (2002). The “Use and Abuse” of Arts Advocacy and Consequences for Music

Education. Arts Education Policy Review, 103(4), 3.

Hedgecoth, D. M., & Fischer, S. H. (2014). What History Is Teaching Us: 100 Years of Advocacy in

Music Educators Journal. Music Educators Journal, 100(4), 54–58.

Henry, M. L. (2015). The Musical Experiences, Career Aspirations, and Attitudes Toward the

Music Education Profession of All-State Musicians. Journal of Music Teacher Education,

24(2), 40–53.

Hill, W. L., Jr. (2002). Advocacy in music education. (Connections). Teaching Music, 10(2), 5-6.

Kratus, J. (2007). Music Education at the Tipping Point. Music Educators Journal, 94(2), 42–48.

Luehrsen, M. (2005). Music Education Advocacy Starts at Home. American Music Teacher,

54(5), 82.
IS ADVOCACY HELPING OR HURTING MUSIC EDUCATION? 13

Major, M. L. (2013). How They Decide: A Case Study Examining the Decision-Making Process for

Keeping or Cutting Music in a K–12 Public School District. Journal of Research in Music

Education, 61(1), 5–25.

Mark, M. L. (2002). A History of Music Education Advocacy. Music Educators Journal, 89(1), 44–

48.

Mark, M. L. (2005). WHY MUSIC? essays on the importance of music education and advocacy:

Why does our profession need advocacy? International Journal of Music Education,

23(2), 94-98.

Orzolek, D. C. (2004). Electing Music Advocates. Music Educators Journal, 91(2), 13–17.

Peterson, A. (2011). The Impact of Neuroscience on Music Education Advocacy and Philosophy.

Arts Education Policy Review, 112(4), 206–213.

Shorner-Johnson, K. (2013). Building Evidence for Music Education Advocacy. Music Educators

Journal, 99(4), 51–55.

Tutt, K., & Townley, M. (2011). Philosophy + Advocacy = Success. Music Educators Journal,

97(4), 60–63.

West, C., & Clauhs, M. (2015). Strengthening Music Programs While Avoiding Advocacy Pitfalls.

Arts Education Policy Review, 116(2), 57–62.