The Role and Influence of Performance in School Music Programs: A Grounded Theory

Abstract

The purpose of this grounded theory research was to investigate music teachers’ perceptions of the role and influence of performances in K–12 music programs and the processes by which these performances impact music teaching and learning. Three specific research questions informed this study: (1) What role do performances play in school music programs? (2) How are music teachers’ pedagogical decisions informed or influenced by their efforts to mount performances? and (3) What other aspects of the music teaching-learning process are influenced by efforts to mount performances, and what form does this influence take? Five themes emerged to describe the ways in which efforts to prepare and mount performances interact with the music teaching and learning process: community expectations, student motivation, time management, teaching strategies, and teacher views of performance. These themes were used to generate an emergent theory including two interlocking process cycles that illustrate the ways in which performances are situated within school music programs. Implications for the field of music education and for future research are discussed.

Keywords

performance pedagogy grounded theory curriculum music education

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abril

C. R.

Gault

B. M.

(2008). The state of music in secondary schools: The principal’s perspective. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(1), 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429408317516

Alsobrook

J. A.

(2013). Music education in America: A content analysis and national perspective of standards-based outcomes for K-8 general music (Publication No. 3587684) [Doctoral dissertation, Lindenwood University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Barbour

R. S.

(2014). Analysing focus groups. In Flick

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 313–326). SAGE.

Berg

B. L.

(1998). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Byo

S. J.

(1999). Classroom teachers’ and music specialists’ perceived ability to implement the national standards for music education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(2), 111–123. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345717

Charmaz

(2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. SAGE.

Corbin

J. M.

Strauss

A. L.

(2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). SAGE.

Creswell

J. W.

Poth

C. N.

(2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.

Draisey-Collishaw

(2007). The limits of doing: A critical assessment of performance-based music education. Canadian Music Educator, 48(4), 31–36.

10.

Emerson

R. M.

Fretz

R. I.

Shaw

L. L.

(2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.

11.

Eyerly

(2007). Redefining performance in choral music education, part II. Choral Journal, 47(11), 49–51.

12.

Freer

P. K.

(2011). The performance-pedagogy paradox in choral music teaching. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 19(2), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.2979/philmusieducrevi.19.2.164

13.

Gall

M. D.

Gall

J. P.

Borg

W. R.

(2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Pearson.

14.

Garrett

M. L.

(2009). An examination of high school chorus directors’ attitudes toward non-traditional music classes. Research Perspectives in Music Education, 13(1), 15–21.

15.

Glaser

B. G.

Strauss

A. L.

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Publishing Co.

16.

Haning

(2018). Achievement or attitude: Performance assessment practices of secondary music teachers. In Brophy

T. S.

Faultley

(Eds.), Context matters: Selected papers from the 6th international symposium on assessment in music education. GIA.

17.

Jellison

J. A.

(2004). It’s about time: Senior researcher acceptance address. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52(3), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345854

18.

Juchniewicz

(2007). Band directors’ preferences and attitudes on the implementation of non-traditional music classes. Research Perspectives in Music Education, 11(1), 6–11.

19.

Kotora

E. J.

Jr. (2001). Assessment practices in the choral music classroom: A survey of Ohio high school choral music teachers and college choral methods teachers (Publication No. 3036343) [Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

20.

Mark

M. L.

Gary

C. L.

(2007). A history of American music education (3rd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.

21.

Matthews

W. K.

Koner

(2017). A survey of elementary and secondary music educators’ professional background, teaching responsibilities and job satisfaction in the united states. Research and Issues in Music Education, 13(1), Article 2. https://ir.stthomas.edu/rime/vol13/iss1/2

22.

Miksza

(2013). The future of music education: Continuing the dialogue about curricular reform. Music Educators Journal, 99(4), 45–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0027432113476305

23.

Mitchell

(2010). The impact of evaluative performances on the what and who of music education. Canadian Music Educator, 51(4), 41–42.

24.

Morrison

C. D.

(2009). Music listening as music making. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 43(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1353/jae.0.0030

25.

Nielsen

L. D.

(2013). Developing musical creativity: Student and teacher perceptions of a high school music technology curriculum. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 31(2), 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123312473610

26.

Orman

E. K.

(2002). Comparison of the national standards for music education and elementary music specialists’ use of class time. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50(2), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345819

27.

Patton

M. Q.

(2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE.

28.

Regelski

T. A.

(2007). Amateuring in music and its rivals. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 6(3), 22–50. http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/Regelski6_3.pdf

29.

Regelski

T. A.

(2014). Resisting elephants lurking in the music education classroom. Music Educators Journal, 100(4), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0027432114531798

30.

Reimer

(2003). A philosophy of music education: Advancing the vision (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.

31.

Reimer

(2004). Reconceiving the standards and the school music program. Music Educators Journal, 91(1), 33–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/3400103

32.

Roberts

B. A.

(2007). Making music, making selves, making it right: A counterpoint to Rhoda Bernard. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 6(2). http://act.maydaygroup.org/articles/Roberts6_2.pdf

33.

Strauss

A. L.

(1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press.

34.

Swanwick

(1999). Music education: Closed or open? Journal of Aesthetic Education, 33(4), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.2307/3333725

35.

Tobias

E. S.

(2012). Hybrid spaces and hyphenated musicians: Secondary students’ musical engagement in a songwriting and technology course. Music Education Research, 14(3), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2012.685459

36.

Trollinger

V. L.

(2006). A reconception of performance study in music education philosophy. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 14(2), 193–208.

37.

Turino

(2008). Music as social life: The politics of participation. University of Chicago Press.

38.

Walker

(2005). A worthy function for music in education. International Journal of Music Education, 23(2), 135–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761405052408

39.

Williams

D. A.

(2007). What are music educators doing and how well are we doing it? Music Educators Journal, 94(1), 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/002743210709400105

40.

Woodford

P. G.

(2002). The social construction of music teacher identity in undergraduate music education majors. In Colwell

Richardson

(Eds.), The new handbook of research on music teaching and learning (pp. 675–694). Oxford University Press.

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.

0.00 MB

0.13 MB