Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:59:01.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tradition and Transformation: Addressing the gap between electroacoustic music and the middle and secondary school curriculum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2013

Jeffrey Martin
Jeffrey Martin*
Affiliation:
Mount Allison University, Department of Music, 134 Main Street, Sackville NB, E4L 1A6, CANADA
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Given the growing acceptance of information and communication technology (ICT) as integral to today's middle and secondary school classrooms, electroacoustic music would seem on the surface to be a central feature of the music curriculum. However, models that approximate actual practices of electroacoustic music in the classroom are rare, with many schools focusing squarely on ICT, either as tools to facilitate traditional musical contexts or to explore innovative uses of that technology. Also, with the exception of some notable recent developments, there are few initiatives to bring middle and secondary students, or their teachers, into contact with the practices of electroacoustic music communities. The purpose of this article is to explore this problematic gap between the education and electroacoustic music communities in an attempt to identify some of the issues that lie at the foundation of an effective curriculum. The position taken is that these foundational matters need to be addressed prior to any discussion of ‘best practices’ for middle and secondary electroacoustic music education.

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 18 , Special Issue 2: Best Practices in the Pedagogy of Electroacoustic Music and its Technology , August 2013 , pp. 101 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alperson, P. 1991. What Should One Expect from a Philosophy of Music Education? Journal of Aesthetic Education 25(3): 215–242.Google Scholar
Beckstead, D. 2001. Will Technology Transform Music Education? Music Educators Journal 87(6): 44–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J.S., Collins, A., Duguid, P. 1989. Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher 18(1): 32–42.Google Scholar
Cain, T. 2004. Theory, Technology and the Music Curriculum. British Journal of Music Education 21: 215–221.Google Scholar
Caskey, M.M., Anfara, V.A., Jr. 2007. Research Summary: Young Adolescents’ Developmental Characteristics. http://www.nmsa.org/Research/ResearchSummaries/DevelopmentalCharacteristics/tabid/1414/Default.aspx Google Scholar
Elliott, D. 1995. Music Matters: A New Philosophy of Music Education. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Field, A. 2007. New Forms of Composition and how to Enable Them. In: J. Finney and P. Burnard (eds.) Music Education with Digital Technology. New York: Oxford, pp. 156–168.Google Scholar
Finney, J., Burnard, P. 2007. Music Education with Digital Technology. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Goehr, L. 1992. The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the Philosophy of Music. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Harter, S. 1990. Causes, Correlates and the Functional Role of Global Self-Worth: A Life-Span Perspective. In J. Kolligian and R. Sternberg (eds.) Perceptions of Competence and Incompetence across the Life-Span. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp. 67–98.Google Scholar
Hickey, M. 2003. Creative Thinking in the Context of Music Education. In M. Hickey (ed.) Why and How to Teach Music Composition. Reston, VA: MENC, pp. 31–53.Google Scholar
Higgins, A.M. 2004. The Music of Sound: A Constructivist Approach to the Comprehension of Electroacoustic Music, through the Composition of Musique Concrète, at Post-Primary School Level. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Landy, L. 2007. Understanding the Art of Sound Organization. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Landy, L. 2009. Increasing Access to Sound-Based Music. Proceedings of the 6th EMS Conference. June 22–25, 2009. Buenos Aires, Argentina. http://www.ems-network.org/ems09/papers/landy.pdf Google Scholar
Landy, L. 2012. Making Music with Sounds. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leppert, R., McClary, S. 1987. Music and Society: The Politics of Composition, Performance and Reception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lounsbury, J.H. 2000. Understanding and Appreciating the Wonder Years. National Middle School Association. http://www.nmsa.org/moya/PlanYourCelebration/PRResources/WonderYears/tabid/1198/Default.aspx Google Scholar
Manning, M.L. 1993. Developmentally Appropriate Middle Level Schools. Wheaton, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.Google Scholar
Martin, J. 2012. Toward Authentic Electronic Music in the Curriculum: Connecting Teaching to Current Compositional Practices. International Journal of Music Education 30(2): 120–132.Google Scholar
Regelski, T. 2004. Teaching Music in Grades 4–8: A Musicianship Approach. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Regelski, T. 2005. Implications of Aesthetic Versus Praxial Philosophies. In D. Elliott (ed.) Praxial Music Education: Reflections and Dialogues. New York: Oxford, pp. 219–248.Google Scholar
Savage, J. 2005. Working Towards a Theory for Music Technologies in the Classroom: How Pupils Engage With and Organise Sounds With New Technologies. British Journal of Music Education 22(2): 167–180.Google Scholar
Savage, J. 2007a. Pedagogical Strategies for Change. In J. Finney and P. Burnard (eds.), Music Education with Digital Technology. New York: Oxford, pp. 142–155.Google Scholar
Savage, J. 2007b. Reconstructing Music Education Through ICT. Research in Education 78(1): 65–77.Google Scholar
Savage, J., Challis, M. 2001. Dunwich Revisited: Collaborative Composition and Performance with New Technologies. British Journal of Music Education 8(2): 139–149.Google Scholar
Savage, J., Challis, M. 2002. Electroacoustic Composition: Practical Models of Composition with New Technologies. Sonic Arts Network Journal of Electroacoustic Music 14: 8–13.Google Scholar
Scruton, R. 1997. The Aesthetics of Music. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Spruce, G. 2002. Ways of Thinking About Music: Political Dimensions and Educational Consequences. In G. Spruce (ed.) Teaching Music in Secondary Schools: A Reader. London: RoutledgeFalmer/Open University Press, pp. 3–24.Google Scholar
Watson, S. 2011. Using Technology to Unlock Musical Creativity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watts, C. 2004. Mixing Things Up: Collaboration, Converging Disciplines, and the Music Curriculum. Organised Sound 9(3): 295–299.Google Scholar
Wolff, J. 1987. The Ideology of Autonomous Art. In R. Leppert and S. McClary (eds.) Music and Society: The Politics of Composition, Performance and Reception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar