Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-18T18:58:12.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The ‘good-enough’ music teacher

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2008

Keith Swanwick*
Affiliation:
keith.swanwick@btopenworld.com

Abstract

Teaching and learning are complex processes and evaluating the work of music teachers is neither obvious nor simple. The outcomes of educational transactions may not be completely or immediately apparent. Furthermore, the contexts in which musical skills and understanding are acquired are multiple, going well beyond the formal categories of ‘general’ class music teacher or the ‘private’ instrumental and vocal teacher. In many of these alternative settings, standardised student assessment or teacher evaluation processes may be inappropriate. In this paper, an approach to evaluating teaching and learning draws on Swanwick's three principles for music educators. To these three principles is added the need to understand the educational and social context in which a teacher works. These criteria help to identify the ‘good-enough’ teacher's contribution to students' musical development. The concept of the ‘good-enough’ teacher is exemplified, not in the context of conventional formal teaching settings but in a third, much less defined role, that of music leader. The extent to which music leaders contribute to their musical environment is evaluated in a study of their continuing professional development. This evaluation was initiated by Youth Music, a UK organisation working alongside the formal and community-based sectors to support music-making and training.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

COHEN, L. & MANION, L. (1980) Research Methods in Education. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
DAHL, R. (2005) Film, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. www.roalddahlfans.com/books/charsongs.php#AugustusGoogle Scholar
EISNER, E. W. (1985) The Art of Educational Evaluation. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
FINNEGAN, R. (1989) The Hidden Musicians: Music-Making In An English Town. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
FINNEY, J. (2006) ‘The possibility of richer learning, poetic thinking and musical understanding’, National Association of Music Educators Magazine, 18, 24.Google Scholar
GREEN, L. (2001) How Popular Musicians Learn: A Way Ahead for Music Education. London and New York: Ashgate Press.Google Scholar
KRESS, G. & VAN LEEUWEN, T. (1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
MURPHY, R. (2007) ‘Harmonizing assessment and music in the classroom’, in Bresler, L. (Ed) International Handbook of Research in Arts Education (pp. 361–79). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
POLANYI, M. (1967) The Tacit Dimension. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
POLANYI, M. & PROSCH, H. (1975) Meaning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
POPPER, K. (1972) Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
ROSS, M. (1978) The Creative Arts. London: Heinemann Educational.Google Scholar
SALAMAN, W. (1983) Living School Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
STENHOUSE, L. (1975) An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
SWANWICK, K. (1988) Music, Mind and Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
SWANWICK, K. (1999) Teaching Music Musically. London and New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SWANWICK, K. & LAWSON, D. (1997) An Evaluation of the South Bank Centre Music Education Project, 1994 to 1997. London: Institute of Education, University of London.Google Scholar
TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR SCHOOLS (2007) Professional Standards for Teachers. London: TDA.Google Scholar
VYGOTSKY, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
WINNICOTT, D. W. (1953) Transitional objects and transitional phenomena. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 34, 8997.Google ScholarPubMed
WINNICOTT, D. W. (1971) Playing and Reality. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar