Mentoring in music education programs is such a ubiquitous part of the process; it is sometimes o... more Mentoring in music education programs is such a ubiquitous part of the process; it is sometimes overlooked or subsumed under other categories. The purpose of this article is to highlight mentoring relationships within an undergraduate music teacher education program. Formal, informal, vertical, and horizontal mentoring are examined from the perspectives of undergraduate preservice music teachers working in a community-university partnership. The data are culled from a 14 month, intrinsic case study of the University of South Carolina String Project, designed to examine the participant experience for all member groups within the string project— the undergraduate preservice teachers, the community students, and the faculty. Mentoring relationships are explored as a critical component of experience for the preservice teachers. Their voices are presented here to illustrate the value they placed on mentoring, as well as the challenges that emerged in construction of a mentoring mosaic as part of their preservice teaching experience. Mentoring relationships are the cornerstone of teacher education programs (Campbell & Brummett, 2007; Schmidt, 2010). Often, relationships are assigned, as when a supervising professor guides a preservice teacher through the student teaching
International Journal of Music Education, Jun 18, 2013
Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s p... more Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s praxial philosophy of music education, as explained in Music Matters: A New Philosophy of Music Education. This literature includes a range of commentaries in journals, books, edited books, and dissertations. Although Elliott has replied to some positive and negative commentaries since 1995, he has not addressed several adverse discussions by leading music education philosophers. Accordingly, we posit that there is an important gap in music education’s philosophical discourse that may cause some music education students and researchers to accept or reject important criticisms of Elliott’s praxialism without sufficient information or reflection.
In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.
Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s p... more Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s praxial philosophy of music education, as explained in Music Matters: A New Philosophy of Music Education. This literature includes a range of commentaries in journals, books, edited books, and dissertations. Although Elliott has replied to some positive and negative commentaries since 1995, he has not addressed several adverse discussions by leading music education philosophers. Accordingly, we posit that there is an important gap in music education’s philosophical discourse that may cause some music education students and researchers to accept or reject important criticisms of Elliott’s praxialism without sufficient information or reflection. In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.
Mentoring in music education programs is such a ubiquitous part of the process; it is sometimes o... more Mentoring in music education programs is such a ubiquitous part of the process; it is sometimes overlooked or subsumed under other categories. The purpose of this article is to highlight mentoring relationships within an undergraduate music teacher education program. Formal, informal, vertical, and horizontal mentoring are examined from the perspectives of undergraduate preservice music teachers working in a community-university partnership. The data are culled from a 14 month, intrinsic case study of the University of South Carolina String Project, designed to examine the participant experience for all member groups within the string project— the undergraduate preservice teachers, the community students, and the faculty. Mentoring relationships are explored as a critical component of experience for the preservice teachers. Their voices are presented here to illustrate the value they placed on mentoring, as well as the challenges that emerged in construction of a mentoring mosaic as part of their preservice teaching experience. Mentoring relationships are the cornerstone of teacher education programs (Campbell & Brummett, 2007; Schmidt, 2010). Often, relationships are assigned, as when a supervising professor guides a preservice teacher through the student teaching
International Journal of Music Education, Jun 18, 2013
Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s p... more Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s praxial philosophy of music education, as explained in Music Matters: A New Philosophy of Music Education. This literature includes a range of commentaries in journals, books, edited books, and dissertations. Although Elliott has replied to some positive and negative commentaries since 1995, he has not addressed several adverse discussions by leading music education philosophers. Accordingly, we posit that there is an important gap in music education’s philosophical discourse that may cause some music education students and researchers to accept or reject important criticisms of Elliott’s praxialism without sufficient information or reflection.
In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.
Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s p... more Since its publication in 1995, a significant literature has developed around David J. Elliott’s praxial philosophy of music education, as explained in Music Matters: A New Philosophy of Music Education. This literature includes a range of commentaries in journals, books, edited books, and dissertations. Although Elliott has replied to some positive and negative commentaries since 1995, he has not addressed several adverse discussions by leading music education philosophers. Accordingly, we posit that there is an important gap in music education’s philosophical discourse that may cause some music education students and researchers to accept or reject important criticisms of Elliott’s praxialism without sufficient information or reflection. In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.
Uploads
Papers by Susan Davis
In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.
In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.
In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.
In this article we analyze several critiques of Elliott’s praxialism. Our discussion divides into three sections related to major topics presented in the praxial philosophy particularly and music education generally: music making, music listening and musical works, and musical values. Each section presents (a) critics’ evaluations of Elliott’s position on a given topic, and (b) Elliott’s stated position on that topic, as explained in Music Matters. Where pertinent, we consult the views of other scholars on specific topics. We end each section with brief reflections on critics’ claims, reserving our final evaluations for the concluding section.