Music education--should it be required?

[secondwind]

I would like to get GMGers opinions about whether music education in some form--piano or another instrument, vocal, or even just music history and appreciation--should be considered a required or mandatory part of the education of young people. 

Should everyone learn to read and write music and to play or sing music, just as they learn to read and write their own language to express themselves?  Should they be given as little choice about this as about learning to add, subtract, multiply and divide?  Or should music education only be provided to those who really want it and show some special aptitude or gift?  And what about those who start off enthusiastically and then at some point enter the "I hate music" phase where practice becomes a dreaded chore?  Should they be allowed to stop?  Or should they be told that practicing is like brushing your teeth, not especially fun or exciting but worthwhile in the long run?  Should all children be exposed to classical music throughout their education as part of their curriculum, and learn about types of compositions, periods and styles of music, individual composers, etc., or should they only be exposed to the music that is popular in their families or communities?

If you have considered questions like these as a music student, a would-be music student, a parent, a grandparent, a teacher, a school administrator, or in any other capacity, I'd be interested to know your thoughts.  I don't have a particular ax to grind here, so I won't be criticizing anyone's opinions--I'm just curious.

[Bulldog]

I would like to get GMGers opinions about whether music education in some form--piano or another instrument, vocal, or even just music history and appreciation--should be considered a required or mandatory part of the education of young people. 

Should everyone learn to read and write music and to play or sing music, just as they learn to read and write their own language to express themselves?  Should they be given as little choice about this as about learning to add, subtract, multiply and divide?  Or should music education only be provided to those who really want it and show some special aptitude or gift?  And what about those who start off enthusiastically and then at some point enter the "I hate music" phase where practice becomes a dreaded chore?  Should they be allowed to stop?  Or should they be told that practicing is like brushing your teeth, not especially fun or exciting but worthwhile in the long run?  Should all children be exposed to classical music throughout their education as part of their curriculum, and learn about types of compositions, periods and styles of music, individual composers, etc., or should they only be exposed to the music that is popular in their families or communities?

If you have considered questions like these as a music student, a would-be music student, a parent, a grandparent, a teacher, a school administrator, or in any other capacity, I'd be interested to know your thoughts.  I don't have a particular ax to grind here, so I won't be criticizing anyone's opinions--I'm just curious.

There are many "shoulds" in your posting - just saying.  If you're talking about public schools, I doubt there's available monies to provide any significant musical education.

[secondwind]

There are many "shoulds" in your posting - just saying.  If you're talking about public schools, I doubt there's available monies to provide any significant musical education.

I'm talking about that hypothetical ideal world we wish we had--what would we do about music education in that world?

[karlhenning]

As I am a composer, my answer is probably obvious. I believe an arts component should be mandatory in secondary education, and music should be one piece of that.  Classical music.  You don't need to teach The Beatles in school: they'll hear it in the pizzerias, drive-in banks and shopping malls of this great land  

There are many "shoulds" in your posting - just saying.  If you're talking about public schools, I doubt there's available monies to provide any significant musical education.

All my music education before the age of 20 was in or through the public schools.  I leave it to others to judge whether that was significant  

[Bulldog]

I'm talking about that hypothetical ideal world we wish we had--what would we do about music education in that world?

Hell, if we're going to be assuming an ideal world, let's add surgical training to the list.

[Brian]

All my music education before the age of 20 was in or through the public schools.  I leave it to others to judge whether that was significant  

It explains why you believe in "Mozart".  

[DavidW]

The music programs in school don't require as much practice as private lessons do.  When I took music it wasn't a chore.  One year we played recorders with no outside practice and it was fun.  The year after it was violins, I can't recall if we had to practice or not but I loved it.  Year after we had to choose between band, strings or chorus.  I chose (incorrectly! I should have chosen strings) band and ended up playing the flute.  The thing is that there was only an hour of practice each night, and I didn't mind that just hated the fact that my asthma made it painful to do.  On the other hand, my sister took piano lessons outside of school, and she had to practice two hours a day.  I would certainly not want to do that!

And before all that we had a music class where we would learn to sing and dance (not that I can do either! lol) once or twice a week and it was alot of fun.  The point being that music can be taught to kids without making it a serious chore.

[karlhenning]

It explains why you believe in "Mozart". 

Man, I wish I still had the Firesign Theatre's Everything You Know Is Wrong on vinyl!

[DavidW]

I want to add that we also attended classical concerts and ballets every few months for field trips and that was also really neat.

[Bulldog]

All my music education before the age of 20 was in or through the public schools.  I leave it to others to judge whether that was significant  

Sure it was significant.  However, school monies are getting tighter and school systems have decided to shut down their musical training.  Given how poorly students do with the basic courses, I can't see music going anywhere in the public schools.

[karlhenning]

Sure it was significant.  However, school monies are getting tighter and school systems have decided to shut down their musical training.  Given how poorly students do with the basic courses, I can't see music going anywhere in the public schools.

Well, it has been the case at least since I was in 4th grade, that when local school boards feel any budgetary pinch, the first suggestion is to trim music as somehow "unnecessary."

Nobody thinks of trimming the football team.  I'm still making music, and making it better than I ever have.  My classmates who played football in high school, aren't playing football any more.

[DavidW]

Could be worse Karl, my elementary school didn't teach social science because our books were decades out of date!

[karlhenning]

They could have just called it History, Davey 

[secondwind]

Hell, if we're going to be assuming an ideal world, let's add surgical training to the list.

Hi Bulldog,

In my ideal world, we won't need surgeons--no cancer, no appendicitis, and everyone will be born beautiful and won't age, so we won't even need cosmetic surgeons! 0:)  And since we won't be paying such high prices for health care, there should be plenty of money for whatever level and type of music education we think is appropriate.

[DavidW]

They could have just called it History, Davey 

Nah it wasn't taught either.  I didn't learn anything until Jr. High, and that was state history only, so I really didn't learn anything until high school.

[matti]

No, not required even in an ideal world, but offered for all of those who are interested.

[karlhenning]

No, not required even in an ideal world, but offered for all of those who are interested.

Well, I think that learning applied music (i.e., taking lessons on an instrument, singing in choir) should be a matter of on offer.  A broad (and low-pain-threshold) survey of music history, though, would be highly advisable.  Not saying it has to be part of the student's curriculum every year through middle school or high school;  but perhaps one quarter of the freshman year.

[matti]

Well, I think that learning applied music (i.e., taking lessons on an instrument, singing in choir) should be a matter of on offer.  A broad (and low-pain-threshold) survey of music history, though, would be highly advisable.  Not saying it has to be part of the student's curriculum every year through middle school or high school;  but perhaps one quarter of the freshman year.

That is all fair enough, but as you well know, giving an offer should happen much earlier to make a professional career in classical music possible, at least as far as instrumentalists are concerned. In the good old Soviet Union they used to radar every age group in search of exceptional talents, and that may be happening in China now, and not only in music. In Western countries we are far less efficient in that respect - and I'm not saying we should be. However, with the economics of today, the near future in teaching any arts at school looks pretty gloomy. Music education won't disappear, but it will diminish.

[owlice]

I think arts education should be mandatory.

Now we can argue over what should be considered "arts education."

I grew up thinking that every kid in my school could read music -- I just assumed they could. We all took music in school, and many of the kids took private lessons, too. And sing? Well, of course; my 4th grade class sang at our teacher's wedding. This was a private school, however. When I got into public school, I assumed all my friends could read music, because .... most of them could. Sometimes, we'd sit around someone's house after school sightsinging (or trying to) madrigals.

My son's public school education required one quarter of general music education. Not a lot, alas. (He has also take two semesters of guitar in high school, one of which shows up on his transcript as "Basic Piano." Go figure!)

[jochanaan]

There are two elements here: exposure to good music, and musical performance.  Both should be taught, ideal world or not.

There have already been good arguments in favor of music-appreciation instruction, but I will add that music history and art history are intertwined with world history and thus good teaching must include them.

Yet few have considered the potential benefits of musical performance.  First, it encourages discipline; second, it's a great socializer; third, it broadens the mind by introducing concepts in a more powerful and convincing way than mere lectures ever could; and finally, success in music gives real self-confidence like few other things.  I speak mostly from my own experience, but any number of musicians, amateur and professional, would say the same if you asked them.

That's why we should teach music in the public schools.  Even at the athletic programs' expense.