Intersections between music education and the sociology of childhood in Brazil: Searching for children’s agency and musical protagonism

Abstract

This article discusses the concept of children’s agency in early childhood music education, integrating perspectives from the sociology of childhood and analysing music teaching and learning contexts in Brazil. Although children are increasingly recognised as catalysts for change in education and policy, there is still a persistent gap between theoretical discussions about agency and the practical opportunities available for children to actively engage in musical learning. Children’s agency as their ability to make decisions, express preferences and influence their environment. However, in early childhood music education, the traditional understanding of agency is usually limited to the transmission of content dictated by educators, promoting a vertical and teacher-centred dynamic. To address this concern, we propose that significant, meaningful and creative musical experiences depend on acknowledging children’s role as protagonists of their musical experiences. Recognising them as social agents shifts the focus from passive learning to active participation in shaping their experiences, and by discussing the concept of musical protagonism, we seek to emphasise the inherent value of children’s musical expressions. This study presents a nuanced analysis of children’s agency and protagonism through an interdisciplinary lens, leading to a conceptual framework to better understand children’s musical practices.

Introduction

The concept of childhood is historically constructed and socially situated, varying according to cultural and political contexts (Corsaro, 2011; James et al., 1998; Wheeler, 2023). Among the various factors that have impacted childhood and education throughout history, we highlight the changes brought about by industrialisation, urbanisation, and the social transformations between the 19th and 20th centuries (Fonterrada, 2008), as these changes redefined the educational structure of the time, driven by the need to qualify the labour force (Ariès, 1981), and they influenced how society perceived and integrated children. Although these transformations originated in the Western context, their effects spread to the Global South in different domains, such as education.

The late abolition of slavery, the transition to an oligarchic republic, and uneven industrialisation had a significant impact on children’s socialisation in Brazil (Cunha, 1975). Selective urbanisation, migration, and the maintenance of colonial structures shaped conceptions of childhood and influenced the organisation of the education system. From that perspective, we assume that the understanding of childhood in Brazil requires an approach that considers the impacts of these transformations on children’s ability to construct their social and cultural worlds. The New Sociology of Childhood offers a significant theoretical framework for analysing how these changes influence children and their role as agents in re-signifying cultural and educational practices (Prout, 2011; Sarmento, 2004, 2005). In Brazil, where structural inequalities have a considerable impact on limiting equitable access to music education, fostering musical agency becomes a pedagogical challenge and a strategy for social transformation. Recognising children as agents in their learning processes brings attention to the importance of inclusive and culturally situated musical practices (de Carvalho et al., 2022; de Oliveira and Cunha, 2021).

This research investigates the intersection between music education and the sociology of childhood in Brazil, emphasising the concept of musical protagonism. This definition refers to the active participation of children in musical practices as creators, interpreters, and decision-makers, breaking with views that position them as mere passive recipients of musical knowledge. Based on theories that highlight children’s agency (Dyson, 2020; Gallagher, 2019; Oswell, 2021; Sutterlüty and Tisdall, 2019), the proposed concept of musical protagonism dialogues with approaches that overcome adult-centred perspectives and value children as active social agents capable of producing culture and knowledge (Madalozzo et al., 2024).

The article is structured around four sections. We begin by presenting Brazilian perspectives that articulate the sociology of childhood and early childhood music education. Next, we explore the intersections between these fields and further discuss the concept of musical agency, proposing the definition of musical protagonism. In the third section, we explore these concepts in children’s music education. Finally, we reflect on how the principle of musical protagonism can impact future research.

Perspectives from Brazil: From historical challenges to a new understanding by the sociology of childhood

Historically, childhood conceptions have varied across cultures. In the Middle Ages, children were seen as miniature adults, dressed and tasked like them (Ariès, 1981), while by the Romantic period childhood was redefined as a time of innocence and fragility, shaping educational and social policies, particularly in Western Europe and North America (Garlen, 2018). These policies are often based on the assumption that children should be protected from ‘adult’ knowledge and experiences, thereby reinforcing the binary distinction between adulthood and childhood and sustaining the notion of childhood as a separate and inherently innocent phase of life. According to Garlen (2018), ‘The protective practices of adults on behalf of children, from parental monitoring of entertainment to governmental policies that seek to restrict the access of children to certain kinds of information, take for granted the naturalness of childhood innocence’. In Brazil, these conceptions were shaped by the dynamics of slavery, colonisation, and deep social inequalities. During the colonial and imperial periods, childhood was experienced in different ways depending on the social class and ethnicity of the children. White elite children received a formal education inspired by European moulds, while indigenous and black children, many of them enslaved, were often subjected to forced labour (Veiga, 2008). The idea of children as innocent beings and the need for their protection applied only to certain social groups, while most children were seen as available labour to contribute to the home economy or to the society (De Castro and Kosminsky, 2010).

Even with the abolition of slavery in 1888 and with the advent of the Republic in 1889, the Brazilian state was slow to consolidate universal public policies for children, maintaining a structure in which many children remained marginalised and unprotected across the 20th century. In the 1970s, ‘educational policies aimed at the education of children aged 0–6 defended compensatory education to remedy the cultural deficiencies, linguistic deficiencies, and affective gaps of children from the lower classes’ (Kramer, 2006: 799). As a result, instead of fostering inclusive and equitable educational approaches, these policies often sought to ‘correct’ children’s supposed deficiencies, perpetuating social hierarchies and limiting their opportunities for meaningful participation in society.

Despite the advances brought by the Statute of the Child and Adolescent (ECA) in 1990, historical conceptions of childhood continue to persist in Brazilian society continue to persist in Brazilian society, reinforcing inequalities and limiting the full implementation of children’s rights (Ilari, 2007; Kramer, 2006). Additionally, the idea of childhood as a preparatory stage for adulthood continues to prevail, reducing children’s chances of being recognised as living entities in their own right, distinctive voices, and needs. Moreover, the inequalities inherited from Brazil’s colonial past persist, with marginalised children – particularly those of black, indigenous and poor backgrounds – often denied equal protection and opportunities. Within some communities in Brazil with household economic necessities or due to lower parental education, for example, child labour is regarded as a necessary component of life, overshadowing children’s right to education and play (Emerson and Souza, 2003). The Statute emphasises children’s rights; however, it was conceived by adults who determined children’s needs without direct child-led advocacy, and the institutional and societal responses frequently remain paternalistic (Veloso, 2008), prioritising protection through charity or punishment rather than empowering children and recognising their agency.

The contrast between the idealised conception of childhood promoted by policy – characterised by innocence, protection, and passive reception of care and education – and the lived realities of marginalised Brazilian children, shaped by poverty, work, and social exclusion, exposes deep social, economic, and cultural fractures (Veloso, 2008). Rather than existing in a universally safeguarded phase of dependency, many children actively navigate and challenge their exclusion, demonstrating agency in ways that contradict the privileged ideal of childhood as a time of innocence and protection. For these children, the experience of childhood is frequently characterised by adversity, including poverty, violence and the struggle for fundamental rights such as education and healthcare (Emerson and Souza, 2003). The pervasiveness of violence, both physical and structural, engenders an environment where children are exposed to a multitude of risks, including exploitation through child labour and involvement in criminal activities. These children often inhabit conditions that starkly contrast with the idealised notion of childhood promoted by societal norms (Emerson and Souza, 2003).

The intersectionality of factors such as race, class (Ribeiro, 2011), and geography (Agasisti et al, 2022) have a significant impact on the lived experiences of these children. Black and indigenous children (Veloso, 2008), as well as those from rural or impoverished urban areas (Ribeiro, 2011), are disproportionately affected by these inequalities, facing systemic barriers that prevent them from benefiting from the full rights and opportunities that should be guaranteed by law. This disparity ultimately indicates a societal failure to address the structural causes of inequality, despite the existence of legal frameworks such as the ECA. While some children have access to a structured and protected education, others face child labour, exploitation, and precarious access to education and health (Kramer, 2006). These entrenched historical conceptions underscore the challenges Brazil faces in fully implementing the ECA and acknowledging children as equal participants in shaping their own futures (Kramer, 2006).

On a theoretical view, the work of James et al. (1998) has been fundamental in the domain of the sociology of childhood, challenging traditional views of childhood, and can contribute to a deep analysis of the country’s context. They argue that children are active social agents who shape their own experiences within historical, cultural, and socio-economic contexts. This perspective emphasises that childhood is not a fixed or universal concept but rather a social construction influenced by various agents such as parents, teachers, peers, and society at large (James et al., 1998). This definition is particularly fitting in the Brazilian context presented. Understanding childhood as a socially constructed experience in Brazil requires examining how both formal and informal agents shape the opportunities and challenges children face, from family dynamics to societal structures and government policies.

Florestan Fernandes’ ethnographic study, As Trocinhas ¹ do Bom Retiro (1947), which focused on a working-class neighbourhood in São Paulo, was a pioneering work in portraying children as dynamic agents in their social environments, actively shaping their development through interactions with family, peers and the community (Ianni, 2011). His early sociological research – especially the one that focused on children’s folklore and peer dynamics – addressed themes that would later become central to the New Sociology of Childhood, such as the importance of peer cultures, the production of meanings by children and the valorisation of their everyday practices. Although Fernandes did not explicitly formulate a theoretical framework that understood children as social agents with self-governing dynamics, his methodological stance, expressed in the search to understand the child’s own point of view, anticipates constructionist approaches to childhood. As Ianni (2011) notes, Fernandes’ studies showed how popular practices, including those of children, reflected and contributed to wider social transformations. His attention to the self-organised structures of the Trocinhas, with their languages, initiation rituals, norms of coexistence and forms of exclusion, reveals how children construct and negotiate their social worlds, establishing internal rules and forms of belonging. Thus, although its theoretical and temporal focus precedes the formulation of the New Sociology of Childhood, Fernandes’ work makes fundamental contributions by recognising childhood as a situated social category and laying the foundations for future sociological research that understands children as active participants in their cultures and contexts.

Fernandes’ work preceded the contributions of James et al. (1998) in the sociology of childhood, thereby establishing an early foundation for the understanding of childhood as a socially constructed and active process – which included the concept of ‘children’s culture’ (Fernandes, [1944] 2016: 245). His research laid the foundation for subsequent scholars who built upon these concepts, emphasising children’s agency within societal structures. Fernandes showed that children often create distinct childhood cultures outside formal educational environments, developing informal networks, engaging in play and work, and raising social ties that shape their identities and roles within the community.

However, it was not until the mid-2000s, with the work of Sirota (2001) and Montandon (2001), that the sociology of childhood was introduced academically in Brazil, sparking discussions about childhood as a social construct shaped by various cultural contexts. The authors emphasised that childhood is not a universal phase, but rather a social construction shaped by historical, cultural and institutional factors. Their perspectives highlight the influence of family and school interactions (Montandon, 2001) as well as inequalities of class, race, gender and region on children’s experiences (Sirota, 2001). Cunha et al. (2022) consider these publications important milestones in Brazilian history, as they offer perspectives from French and British sociologists. As Nascimento (2011) states, ‘Quinteiro (2003) presented a text on “The emergence of the sociology of childhood in Brazil” at the 26th Annual Meeting of National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in Education (ANPEd)’ (p. 3), which fuelled the proliferation of publications translated into Portuguese based on the concept of childhood proposed by the sociology of childhood.

Despite the advances in the understanding of childhood, it is crucial to recognise that childhood is a multifaceted phenomenon that cannot be comprehensively understood through the lens of a single discipline (Sarmento, 2013); therefore, the research incorporating these contributions remains limited, particularly in the domain of music education in Brazil (Cunha et al., 2022). Although studies on childhood have advanced by integrating perspectives from sociology, psychology, anthropology and education, there are still challenges in the practical application of this knowledge in public policies and pedagogical practices. School curricula, for instance, are still largely based on traditional conceptions of children as ‘in developing’ beings, reinforcing adult-centred approaches and limiting the recognition of children’s agency. This perspective often positions children as passive recipients of knowledge and emphasises structured progression and predefined learning outcomes rather than their active participation in shaping their own learning experiences. An example is the Brazilian National Common Curricular Base (BNCC) – a set of guidelines that establishes the essential knowledge and skills to be developed by students at various stages of education – which, while recognising children’s rights and participation, still organises learning through adult-imposed objectives and competency frameworks.

In the context of Music Education, the BNCC defines the following areas of knowledge: context and practices, elements of language, materialities, musical notation and recording, and creation processes. These areas are further broken down into specific skills, which outline the music education objectives within the BNCC (Brasil, 2017). According to Del-Ben and Pereira (2019), these skills have a ‘more curricular than basic character, defining content and methodologies, thereby limiting teachers’ autonomy in the development of their educational-musical practices in schools’ (p. 202). This is consistent with a developmentalist view in which children are seen as ‘becoming’ rather than ‘being’ (e.g. James et al., 1998; Qvortrup, 1994), and their learning is assessed based on their ability to meet adult-defined expectations rather than their ability to express agency in the learning process (Uprichard, 2008). Though we acknowledge many theoretical advances, there is still a long way to go before the interdisciplinary understanding of childhood translates into concrete transformations that respect and value children’s active participation in different spheres of society (Coutinho and Moro, 2017).

Intersections between the sociology of childhood and early childhood music education

The sociology of childhood and music education share several key areas of focus, including an emphasis on children’s agency, interest in child development, and the construction of childhoods. Both fields recognise children as active participants in shaping their own experiences, moving beyond traditional views that see them as passive recipients. However, their theoretical and methodological approaches often diverge, reflecting the unique perspectives and goals of each discipline. While the new sociology of childhood focuses on the social and cultural contexts that shape childhood, music education incorporates these influences into the development of musical skills, creativity, and expression. Despite these differences, both fields encourage participatory and collaborative practices, valuing children’s involvement in their learning and growth. Although children’s agency has recently received increasing attention, for example in the field of education (James and Prout, 2005; Qvortrup, 2011; Sorbring and Kuczynski, 2018), little is discussed about children’s agencies in music education contexts and children’s lived experiences in collaborative musical activities (Stolp et al., 2023).

Music education has evolved significantly, particularly in the 20th century, considered the ‘century of the great methods’ (Gainza, 2003). Many methodologies across the century have focused on elementary musical instruction, incorporating broader influences from fields like technology, psychology, and multiculturalism. The field has seen a progression through initial periods emphasizing precursory ideas, active learning incorporating body movement, instrumental training, creative exploration where students become producers, and finally, a phase of integration and the emergence of new paradigms or methodologies that are more flexible and collectively produced than traditional methods (Gainza, 2003).

Recent studies carried out in the country have critically examined traditional models of music education, often described as a ‘conservatory model’ (Vieira, 2000), ‘conservatory form’ (Jardim, 2008) or ‘conservatory habitus’ (Pereira, 2014). The ‘conservatory model’ refers to a highly structured system that emphasises technical proficiency in Western classical music, limiting students’ engagement with other musical genres and cultural expressions. The ‘conservatory form’ focuses on the formal, individualistic nature of music education in these institutions, where students are isolated in their learning and the teacher holds the primary authority, leaving little room for creativity or collaboration. The ‘conservatory habitus’ refers to the ingrained cultural values and dispositions that favour elitist musical practices, often marginalizing popular and folk music and reinforcing social stratifications. These models, rooted in a hierarchical and formal approach to music education, have been criticised for excluding diverse musical traditions and reinforcing cultural elitism. The challenge, therefore, is to move beyond these frameworks and adopt a more inclusive, flexible, and contextually relevant approach to music education that embraces the cultural diversity and creative potential of Brazilian students (de Carvalho et al., 2022; Madalozzo et al., 2022).

The interactions between music education and the sociology of childhood in Brazil began to stand out in the mid-2000s, with the work of Lino (2008), who emphasised the importance of investigating children from their own perspectives (p. 42), and the understanding of music as a fundamental dimension of childhood present even before formal schooling (Cunha et al., 2022: 2). Stemming from this initial research, several studies have begun to explore the dialogue between the areas, valuing children’s perspectives and recognising them as subjects with rights, capable of expressing opinions, expressing interests, and actively participating in musical practices that take their specificities into account (Bulaty et al., 2022; de Carvalho et al., 2022; Henriques, 2024; Madalozzo et al., 2022; Madalozzo et al., 2024; Maziero, 2024). These contributions from the sociology of childhood have collaborated in discussing music education in a more inclusive and sensitive approach to children’s experiences and voices (Cunha et al., 2022: 16) – emphasising the importance of an inclusive and participatory music education that values children’s agency (de Carvalho et al., 2022).

However, there remains a disconnect between theories and practice, especially evident when pedagogical strategies are unable to adapt to the diverse cultural contexts and needs of students, often due to a lack of resources, training, or institutional support (de Carvalho et al., 2022). As Tardif (2002) observes, while educational theory advocates for the empowerment of students as active participants, the real-world conditions – such as overcrowded classrooms and rigid curricula – often affect the implementation of these ideas. Overcrowded classrooms and rigid curricula are significant barriers to effective education, particularly in the context of Brazilian public schools. Overcrowding limits individualised attention, strains resources, and makes it difficult for teachers to implement effective strategies or create an optimal learning environment. This issue is compounded in under-resourced urban and rural areas, where students are most affected. Rigid curricula, on the other hand, prioritise content delivery over deeper engagement and critical thinking, often clashing with students’ diverse learning styles and cultural contexts (Crabtree and Sapp, 2004). In addition, most schools in Brazil do not have specialist music teachers; these teachers are typically found in music schools, conservatories, and a few expensive private schools (Ilari, 2007).

Children’s participation in music education should extend beyond the passive reception of knowledge; instead, it should prioritise active engagement, wherein children are recognised as creators, interpreters, and critical thinkers within their musical experiences (Madalozzo, 2019). Prioritizing active engagement in music education fosters creativity, critical thinking, agency, social skills, emotional development, and deeper learning, empowering children as creators, interpreters, and critical thinkers in their musical experiences (Ilari et al, 2020). This means not only recognising children’s cultural contexts, understanding and valuing the diverse cultural backgrounds, traditions, and experiences that shape their lives and learning but also providing opportunities for them to contribute with their own musical expressions. In practice, this re-evaluation requires a more inclusive approach that considers diverse musical traditions and does not limit children’s active participation in the construction of musical knowledge, or restricts their creativity and expression (Penna, 2012).

The Brazilian disparity in access to resources including race, gender, socioeconomic status, and geographic location (World Bank, 2024) raises critical questions about how it affects the adoption of musical practices that promote active participation among children. On the one hand, a lack of musical instruments, suitable materials, and appropriate school facilities can limit opportunities for hands-on involvement (Oliveira, 2000), making it more difficult for children to explore and create music meaningfully. Teachers in these contexts may find it challenging to implement participatory methodologies due to logistical constraints. On the other hand, an abundance of equipment and structured learning environments does not necessarily guarantee greater student participation; it can inadvertently discourage spontaneity, improvisation, and creative agency, essential components of participatory musical practices – which we will now discuss.

Children’s agency and musical protagonism

This section analyses two key concepts guiding the discussion about children’s role in music education: children’s agency and musical protagonism. Across the 20th century, music education saw a significant shift from traditional music teaching toward active, student-centred approaches, with agency becoming a central concept, meaning the students’ active participation in their own learning and creative processes. For instance, the Kodály Method, developed in the 1920s, focuses on learning through singing and hands-on activities such as solfege and rhythm exercises, allowing students to engage actively by vocalizing, moving, and interpreting music (Silva, 2011). Another example is the Orff Method, developed in the 1930s, which empowers students to create music using accessible instruments like xylophones, drums, and body percussion. In this method, students actively collaborate, improvising, composing, and performing music (Bona, 2011). Dalcroze Eurhythmics, developed in the early 20th century, encourages students to embody music through movement, helping them internalise concepts like rhythm, tempo, and dynamics by physically connecting their bodies to the music (Mariani, 2011).

In all these examples, the main concern is fostering students’ independence, creativity, and agency by encouraging them to make decisions, collaborate, and actively engage with music. Gainza (2003) describes the 20th century as the ‘century of children’, underlining the need to prioritise students’ needs over pedagogical content. Although Gainza does not explicitly use the term ‘agency’, the approach values students’ well-being, individuality, and personal needs rather than focusing solely on transmitting content. Despite these theoretical and methodological recognition of children’s agency, there is often a mismatch between recognizing and acknowledging their ability to act and fostering the real opportunities for their development. This gap is also observed in early childhood music education, as traditional pedagogical practices can limit children’s active participation by emphasising educators’ vertical transmission of knowledge (Karlsen, 2011, 2019).

The concept of agency entails a shift towards a more horizontal and collaborative model in which children are not just recipients of knowledge but co-creators of their musical education (St. John, 2006). The emphasis here is on the importance of empowering children to play an active role in their learning, recognising their voices, choices, and creativity as essential elements of the educational process. Musical agency, therefore, refers to children’s ability to make decisions, express preferences, and actively shape their musical environments. The concept challenges teacher-centred models of education (Vygotsky, 1978), which portray children as passive recipients of knowledge rather than active participants in creating their own learning experiences, such as the traditional ‘banking model’ described by Freire (1970), position children as passive recipients of knowledge, with teachers as the sole authorities who deposit information into students’ minds. This approach, rooted in rigid and systematic instruction, contrasts with progressive educational theories that highlight children’s active participation in their learning. Dewey (1938) suggests that meaningful education should be experiential and interactive, fostering critical thinking and agency. Similarly, Vygotsky (1978) emphasises the social and collaborative nature of learning, demonstrating how children construct knowledge through guided participation rather than passive absorption. These perspectives challenge traditional models and support approaches that recognise children as active agents in their own educational journeys.

Children’s agency in music is also defined by the spontaneous exploration of the recorder before formal instruction and their collaborative creation of a final piece further exemplifies their musical agency. These actions highlight children’s ability to shape, reinterpret, and personalise music through active involvement. Furthermore, as Young and Ilari (2019) note, children use songs to assert their identities and build relationships with others. Karlsen (2011) suggests that musical agency is directly related to self-regulation, identity construction and the development of musical competencies, with children seeing themselves as active participants in music. Group music practice can also be seen as a space for social transformation, where musical interactions promote changes in people (DeNora, 2003). In order to promote children’s musical agency, music education must be renewed in its organisational aspects and specific pedagogical practices, ensuring that it is an effective tool for social change and human development (Gainza, 2003). Therefore, how can the concept of musical protagonism highlight a different and deeper dimension in this discussion?

For the sociology of childhood, the concept of protagonism has a broader and more challenging meaning. Liebel (2013) argues that although the term is often confused with ‘agency’. According to Liebel (2000), child protagonism rejects the idea of a submissive and excluded childhood, proposing a vision of children as active social agents capable of transforming their environment. The word protagonist, often defined as a ‘leading actor’, originates from the Greek word protos, meaning ‘first’, and agonistes, meaning ‘fighter’ or ‘competitor’. Protagonism refers to a position of prominence or leadership in a specific situation or context (Gebert, 2019; Giddens, 2000; Liebel, 2000, 2013). A protagonist is at the centre of actions, choices, or events, and usually holds a visible and influential role.

In music education, we interpret protagonism as the participation of the students both as leaders and in ‘supporting roles’, in a balanced view of music where leadership and support have artistic and pedagogical value. In this sense, musical protagonism emphasises the active and creative role of children in leading, creating, and ultimately co-constructing musical experiences in collaborative and inclusive environments. Therefore, the concept of musical protagonism refers to the way in which children become leaders in their own musical experiences, developing a sense of belonging and autonomy.

While agency is linked to the process of action (what children do/are allowed to do) – that is, the way someone influences, interacts with and even alters the environment around them, making decisions and shaping it – , musical protagonism is related to the position children actually occupies (i.e. what they are). For example, students can choose the instruments they want to play during a music lesson, or can choose to explore freely musical instruments, and this behaviour can be understood as agency. On the other hand, musical protagonism defines children’s actions when they ‘discuss’ their musical practices in a multimodal way, as non-verbal children can plainly be protagonists of their musical experiences. To be a musical protagonist, the child must have a space provided (or not) by the adults and other companions around them. Thus, promoting musical agency is fostering opportunities for children to get involved in improvisation or musical composition. However, when children act as protagonists of their musical practices, they determine the course of the lesson, as their collaborations and suggestions are heard, acted upon and experienced.

Although related, the two concepts – agency and protagonism – are complementary, and propose different intensities of participation, of children’s ownership of the musical process. While agency describes how that individual acts and interacts in the immediate context, musical protagonism puts the individual at the centre of the educational process. In early childhood music education, we propose that musical protagonism should not be limited to allowing children to choose their repertoire (thus, exercising agency), but also to move on to more complex activities, such as improvisation and composition, exploring their musical preferences and creative potential, in a more horizontal social action, that encourages mutual respect, dialogue, and inclusive participation, enabling children to explore their creative potential in a safe and collaborative space.

Musical protagonism emphasises children’s active role in shaping their musical experiences. While existing discussions on musical agency highlight participation and autonomy, musical protagonism extends this by considering how children not only engage but also take initiative, make decisions, and influence the musical environment around them. By coining the concept of protagonism from the perspective of the sociology of childhood and music education, we seek to offer a new conceptual tool that defends a broader protagonism, which is not limited to an individual expression, but also reflects the social and cultural interactions in which children are inserted.

Contrary to the approach of Carneiro and Parizzi (2025), who define child protagonism as a collective action shaped by life experiences, implying that children interpret and deal with reality in their own way, our proposal recognises that musical protagonism must be understood within a broader context, which involves the structural, cultural and social conditions that influence or limit children’s practice. These conditions, which are often externalised and not integrated into the children’s experience, play a central role in the way protagonism manifests itself, making it a fundamental aspect to be considered in pedagogical practice.

Agency and protagonism in children’s music education

Young and Ilari (2019) emphasise that social, cultural, and family contexts play a fundamental role in developing children’s musical independence and freedom of expression. Their musical experiences occur in different spaces, such as at home, at school, in their communities, and broader cultural contexts. Cultural traditions and family interactions shape musical learning opportunities in these environments, influencing how children perceive and engage with music. Environments that encourage creativity through free and active participation tend to promote the development of musical protagonism, while more conservative contexts that impose rigid musical experiences can limit musical independence.

A central aspect of agency in early childhood music education is related to the pedagogical approaches and curricula adopted by music educators, which play a central role in promoting or limiting children’s agency. Traditional approaches, often based on vertical teaching models, tend to prioritise the transmission of knowledge in a hierarchical way, limiting students’ autonomy and active participation (Karlsen, 2011; Young, 2006; Young and Wu, 2019). However, the tension between rigid curricula – often strongly linked to standards – and the need to promote students’ creativity and autonomy (Green, 2008) is complex and demands a change in teacher training, too. Predetermined and strict curricula can constrain children’s actions, limiting their opportunities to explore, experiment and make decisions. When music education is predominantly centred on meeting fixed standards, such as preparing for exams or performances, children’s creativity and active participation take a back seat. In these contexts, children are often expected to follow predefined paths rather than engage in music-making as a dynamic and participatory process – in other words, to follow rules instead of being protagonists.

This vertical approach does not recognise children as protagonists in their learning. To effectively apply the concept of protagonism in music education, it is essential to rethink the pedagogical methodologies used. Traditional approaches often overlook the active participation of children, focusing instead on passive learning. For protagonism to truly be integrated, music education needs to be restructured to value children as active participants in their own learning processes. This requires adopting pedagogical practices that encourage exploration, creativity, and decision-making, rather than simply transmitting knowledge. By doing so, music education can better support the development of children’s agency, enabling them to take ownership of their learning and engage with music in meaningful ways.

An approach that promotes experimentation through an open curriculum demands greater autonomy from students and teachers. More contemporary, dialogic pedagogies, also known as creative methodologies (Gainza, 2003; see also Karlsen, 2011 and Burnard, 2012), emphasise a horizontal, collaborative approach that recognises the value of children’s ideas and allows for a more flexible learning environment where musical agency can develop. In this context, teachers act as facilitators who support children’s exploration and decision-making. This approach allows children to engage in creative and exploratory musical activities, where they can make choices, experiment with sounds and collaborate with their peers, thus exercising their musical protagonism.

As Kramer (2006) points out, theoretical knowledge about childhood is not always translated into effective educational reforms, resulting in a fragmented view of children’s roles. Sirota (2001) points out that to transform views of childhood from passive to dynamic, different areas of knowledge need to engage in a dialogue, rethinking methodologies so that they recognise children as active agents. Therefore, an important discussion on this matter is the music teacher training. Considering that training courses can be rigid and inflexible, skipping deep talks about curricular autonomy, this lack of discussion can leave future teachers unprepared. Recognising that teachers’ prejudices, assumptions and cultural beliefs about children’s actions can influence their pedagogical practices is important. Teachers can perpetuate power dynamics that limit children’s actions by viewing them as passive recipients of knowledge or by failing to recognise each child’s potential to shape their learning experiences. Cultural assumptions about which children are ‘capable’ or ‘deserving’ of musical protagonism, for example, can lead to differential treatment, restricting the opportunities of some pupils and placing too much importance on controlling others. Teachers must examine their assumptions and prejudices with critical scrutiny to ensure they facilitate a space where all children can take on active and co-creative roles in their musical education. The teacher’s role as an adjunct is more than just support. It means actively removing barriers to agency and creating an inclusive, empowering educational environment.

However, it is also true that the working conditions of many teachers, including overcrowded classrooms, lack of resources, mountainous bureaucracy, depersonalisation, and burnout (Schaack et al., 2020), inhibit critical evaluation of curricula (Swanwick, 2008). These factors limit the time and energy available to teachers for planning and executing artistic and experiential activities, which may result in their adoption of a more traditional and safer curricular and/or pedagogical approach (Elliott and Silverman, 2015) because, as Freire (1970: 44) stated: ‘if education is not liberating, the dream of the oppressed is to become the oppressor’.

Pedagogical approaches and music education curricula for the early years of schooling can offer children opportunities to be active in their learning, allowing them to express who they are (Campbell, 2010). For this to happen, a certain degree of openness is required on the part of music teachers, who must be willing to move away from the centre of the teaching process, accepting error as part of learning, acting as mediators or facilitators rather than controllers of knowledge, finally recognising their children’s musical protagonism.

As mentioned earlier, the social and cultural contexts of musical learning are essential in understanding the opportunities and obstacles children may experience in exercising agency (Arroyo, 2002). Current musical practices and the contexts that enable them are complex and diverse (Martínez-Cantero, 2017). The way children participate and understand the educational process is affected by social inequalities, the availability of resources (e.g. qualified teachers and musical instruments), and cultural beliefs about childhood and music (James, 2009). In addition, society’s attitudes towards childhood and music are directly linked to varying cultural values about how children should be viewed and supported in their education. Therefore, music learning must consider these sociocultural issues and offer inclusive and culturally fair approaches that value children’s agency, as well as allowing them to be musical protagonists, offering adequate resources to help them grow (James, 2009; Martínez-Cantero, 2017).

Concluding remarks

When structured based on traditional models, music education in early childhood often reflects adult-centred values, limiting children’s active participation and restricting their possibilities for musical agency. By prioritising top-down teaching approaches, in which the teacher holds authority and content is transmitted in a standardised way, there is a risk of silencing children’s expressions and reducing their role to mere recipients of knowledge. As discussed throughout this article, overcoming this vision requires a profound restructuring of pedagogical practices, anchored in the sociology of childhood, to recognise children as social agents capable of giving new meaning to their musical and educational experiences.

However, implementing child-centred approaches faces significant challenges. Many educators have been trained within traditional performance-oriented paradigms and may feel unprepared to adopt more flexible and participatory models. In addition, institutional structures, often guided by quantitative assessment metrics and rigid curricula, make it challenging to incorporate methodologies prioritising creativity and exploration. Added to this is the scarcity of resources, such as diverse musical instruments and culturally relevant materials, which could broaden children’s musical experiences and enable teaching more in line with their realities and interests.

Transforming this scenario requires systemic changes beyond the pedagogical field and reaching public policies that value music in early childhood education. This means rethinking teacher training to include approaches that respect children’s agency and offering continuous professional development so that educators feel prepared to implement more inclusive practices. In addition, making curricula more flexible and providing adequate funding for music programmes are essential steps towards creating more equitable and enriching learning environments.

Denying children the potential for action in music education means restricting their creative development and reinforcing hierarchical structures that impact their participation in other aspects of social life. Music education, when done in a participatory way, can be a space for expression. It helps strengthen identity and build citizenship. In this way, recognising and promoting children’s musical protagonism should be a pedagogical choice and a social commitment.

Recognising children as protagonists of their musical practices in diverse teaching and learning settings, and truly opening space for them to exercise their musical agency, can collaborate to widen and to amplify children’s participation in significant, meaningful and creative musical practices. We understand that the definition of musical protagonism can foster a new perspective on how children engage with music, and magnify teachers’ view (and hearing) of their expressions.

This transformation requires collective action involving educators, policymakers, families, and communities in building a music education that genuinely values children as active learning subjects. Only by reformulating practices and structures, respecting children’s cultures, and expanding their expressive possibilities will it be possible to guarantee a more democratic, accessible, and meaningful music education for all children. We understand that the definition of musical protagonism can contribute to this change in research, training, and practice.