The purpose of this mixed methods study was to learn about the ways that instrumental music teachers in Chicago navigated the urban landscape. The design of the study most closely resembles Creswell and Plano Clark’s (2007) two-part Triangulation Convergence Mixed Methods Design, with the addition of an initial exploratory focus group component. Research questions focused on the contextual knowledge that the teachers held regarding their students and communities, the specialized skills they relied upon to be successful, the attitudes and beliefs they held toward teaching instrumental music in an urban school, and the challenges and rewards that they perceived from teaching in this context. The results suggest that the instrumental music teachers utilized their knowledge of the urban context to modify their general pedagogical approach, that they believed a specialized set of skills was required for success in the urban context, that they had relatively positive levels of job satisfaction and believed strongly in the development of their students’ potential, and that they faced serious challenges to the success of their programs but also perceived great reward from the personal and musical improvement of their students.
AdderleyC.KennedyM.BerzW. (2003). “A home away from home”: The world of the high school music classroom. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51, 190–205. doi: 10.2307/3345373
2.
AlbertD. (2006). Strategies for the recruitment and retention of band students in low socioeconomic school districts. Contributions to Music Education, 33(2), 53–72.
3.
AllsupR. (1997). From Herscher to Harlem: A subjective account. Music Educators Journal, 83(5), 33–36. doi: 10.2307/3399006
4.
AusmannS. W. (1991). Characteristics of inservice urban music teachers and preservice music teachers in Ohio and their attitudes toward teaching music in urban schools (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
5.
BarnettJ.HodsonD. (2001). Pedagogical context knowledge: Toward a fuller understanding of what good science teachers know. Science Teacher Education, 85, 426–453. doi: 10.1002/sce.1017
6.
BernardR. (2010). The rewards of teaching music in urban settings. Music Educators Journal, 96(3), 53–57. doi: 10.1177/0027432109356268
7.
BloorM.FranklansJ.ThomasM.RobsonK. (2001). Focus groups in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
BrandstromS.WiklundC. (1996). The social use of music and music education. Canadian Music Educator, 37(3), 33–36.
9.
BruengerS. D. (2009). Why select new music teachers chose to, or chose not to, apply to teach in an urban school district. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 19, 25–40.
10.
CallowayJ. (2009). In search of music equity in an urban middle school (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
11.
CarlosK. (2005). “We need a bigger harvest”: The case for culturally relevant pedagogy in general music education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, Champaign, IL.
12.
CarlowR. (2006). Building confianza: Using dialogue journals with English-language learners in urban schools. In Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.), Teaching music in the urban classroom (Vol. 1, pp. 25–34). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
13.
ChipmanS. (2004). A survey of perceptions of at-risk students by Florida secondary school band directors (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
14.
ConwayC. M.HibbardS.AlbertD.HouriganR. (2005). Voices of music teachers regarding professional development. Arts Education Policy Review, 107(1), 11–14.
15.
CorenblumB.MarshallE. (1998). The band played on: Predicting students’ intentions to continue studying music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46, 128–140. doi: 10.2307/3345765
16.
Costa-GiomiE. (2007). Music education programs in Texas. Southwestern Musician, 75(10), 54–57.
17.
Costa-GiomiE. (2008). Characteristics of elementary music programs in urban schools: What money can buy. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 177, 19–28.
18.
Costa-GiomiE.ChappellE. (2007). Characteristics of band programs in a large urban school district: Diversity or inequality?Journal of Band Research, 42(2), 1–18.
19.
CreswellJ. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
CreswellJ. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Department of Education. (2002). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools: 1999–2000. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
23.
Department of Education. (2004). Report of the National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
24.
EmmanuelD. (2005). The effects of a music education immersion internship in a culturally diverse setting on the beliefs and attitudes of pre-service music teachers. International Journal of Music Education, 23, 49–62. doi: 10.1177/0255761405050930
25.
EnsignJ. (2003). Including culturally relevant math in an urban school. Educational Studies, 34, 414–423.
26.
ErosJ. (2009). A case study of three urban music teachers in the second stage of their teaching career (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
27.
FieseR. K.DeCarboN. J. (1995). Urban music education: The teachers’ perspective. Music Educators Journal, 82(1), 32–35. doi: 10.2307/3398779
FitzpatrickK. (2008). A mixed methods portrait of urban instrumental music teaching (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
30.
FlowersT. (2003). Why do public school teachers leave their profession? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis, MN.
31.
FriedrichsC. (2001). The effect of professional growth opportunities as determined by California public high school instrumental music teachers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of San Diego, San Diego, CA.
32.
Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.). (2006a). Teaching music in the urban classroom, Volume 1: A guide to survival, success, and reform. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
33.
Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.). (2006b). Teaching music in the urban classroom, Volume 2: A guide to leadership, teacher education, and reform. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
34.
GardnerR. (2006). The development of a theoretical model to predict retention, turnover, and attrition of K-12 music teachers in the United States: An analysis of the Schools and Staffing Survey and Teacher Followup Survey (1999–2001) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Eastman School of Music, Rochester, NY.
35.
GayG. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 106–116. doi: 10.1177/0022487102053002003
36.
GlesneC. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (3rd ed.). Boston, MA : Pearson.
GrossmanP. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
39.
HazeletteE. (2006). Surviving the first year of teaching music in an urban school district: The music administrator’s perspective. In Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.), Teaching music in the urban classroom (Vol. 2, pp. 13–22). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
40.
HinckleyJ. (1995). Urban music education: Providing for students. Music Educators Journal, 82(1), 32. doi: 10.2307/3398883
41.
HuntC. (2009). Perspectives on rural and urban music teaching: Developing contextual awareness in music education. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 18, 34–47. doi: 10.1177/1057083708327613
42.
IkenK. (2006). The small, big city in music education: The impact of instrumental music education for urban students. In Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.), Teaching music in the urban classroom (Vol. 1, pp. 139–152). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
43.
Isaac-JohnsonD. (2007). Creating culturally relevant technological operas in an urban school (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri–Columbia, Columbia, MO.
44.
Kindall-SmithM. (2004). Teachers teaching teachers: Revitalization in an urban setting. Music Educators Journal, 91(2), 41–46. doi: 10.2307/3400048
45.
KinneyD. (2010). Selected nonmusic predictors of urban students’ decisions to enroll and persist in middle school band programs. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57, 334–350. doi: 10.1177/0022429409350086
46.
KlinedinstR. E. (1991). Predicting performance achievement and retention of fifth-grade instrumental students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 39, 225–238. doi: 10.2307/3344722
47.
KozolJ. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.
48.
Ladson-BillingsG. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
49.
LehmbergL. (2008). Perceptions of effective teaching and pre-service preparation for urban elementary general music classrooms: A study of teachers of different cultural backgrounds in various cultural settings (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.
50.
LincolnY. SGubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
51.
LindleyR. K. (2003). Effective secondary choral teacher behaviors: A survey of Oklahoma secondary choral directors (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK.
52.
MarshallH. (2006). Restructuring and partnering in urban schools: Change, cooperation, and courage. In Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.), Teaching music in the urban classroom (Vol. 2, pp. 161–178). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
53.
McCarthyJ. (1980). Individualized instruction, student achievement, and dropout in an urban elementary instrumental music program. Journal of Research in Music Education, 28, 59–69. doi: 10.2307/3345053
54.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55.
MixonK. (2005). Building your instrumental music program in an urban school. Music Educators Journal, 91(3), 15–23. doi: 10.2307/3400071
56.
MixonK. (2006). Building an instrumental music program in an urban school. In Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.), Teaching music in the urban classroom (Vol. 1, pp. 117–124). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
57.
MorrellE.Duncan-AndradeJ. (2002). Promoting academic literacy with urban youth through engaging hip-hop culture. English Journal, 91(6), 88–92. doi: 10.2307/821822
58.
NardiP. M. (2003). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
59.
NietoS. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
60.
PodrovskyR. (1978). A history of music education in the Chicago Public Schools (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
61.
Porcino DolamoreJ. (2006). The string chorale concept. In Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.), Teaching music in the urban classroom (Vol. 1, pp. 125–138). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
RobinsonM. (1999). A theory of collaborative music education between higher education and urban public schools (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Rochester, Eastman School of Music, New York, NY.
64.
RobinsonN. (2004). Who is “at-risk” in the music classroom?Music Educators Journal, 90(4), 38–43. doi: 10.2307/3399997
SchmidtP. (2007). Discourse and enactment in teacher preparation: Music teaching, ideology and urban education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
67.
ShieldsC. (2001). Music education and mentoring as intervention for at-risk urban adolescents: Their self-perceptions, opinions, and attitudes. Journal of Research in Music Education, 49, 273–286. doi: 10.2307/3345712
68.
ShulmanL. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.
69.
SmithC. (1997). Access to string instruction in American public schools. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 650–662. doi: 10.2307/3345429
70.
SmithJ. (2006). The challenges of urban teaching: Young urban music educators at work. In Frierson-CampbellC. (Ed.), Teaching music in the urban classroom (Vol. 1, pp. 57–74). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
71.
StewartD. W.ShamdasaniP. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
72.
Talbert-JohnsonC. (2004). Structural inequalities and the achievement gap in urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 37, 22–36. doi: 10.1177/0013124504268454
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
75.
TaylorJ. A.BarryN. H.WallsK. C. (1997). Music and students at risk: Creative solutions for a national dilemma. Reston, VA: Music Educators National Conference.
76.
VoltzD. L. (1998). Challenges and choices in urban education: The perceptions of teachers and principals. The Urban Review, 30(3), 211–228. doi: 10.1023/A:1023256901974
77.
WhitenerS. D.GruberK. J.LynchH.TingosK.PeronaM.FondelierS. (1997). Characteristics of stayers, movers, and leavers: Results from the Teacher Followup Survey: 1994–95. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
78.
YeeS. (1988). Careers in the classroom: Teachers who want to teach and schools that let them (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.
79.
ZhouM. (2003). Urban education: Challenges in educating culturally diverse children. Teachers College Record, 105, 208–225. doi: 10.1111/1467-9620.00236
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
