By Emily-Jane Orford
Published in fermata (University of Victoria) 2001
… music in education, the competing agenda of cutbacks in provincial education … Vocal Music Textbooks authorized by the Ontario Ministry of Education 1846-1988 …
If in our rapidly advancing computer/gadget/automation age man is to retain – or rather reclaim – his humanity, he has to relearn to see, hear, smell, taste, touch and think. An educational system which neglects to cultivate these faculties, which has maneuvered arts to the back pages or totally out of its curriculae, is much to blame for the insensitivity and inhumanity of many a man and woman.[1]
Too often in the history of Canada’s public education system, the arts, particularly music, have been maneuvered, misplaced or totally ignored. Canadian educators have always been inconsistent in their views of music in education. For the most part, they fail to recognize the research which supports music as a necessary core subject. In so doing, education fails to address the broad concept of a culture which includes music – a culture which is supposed to be the core, the basis, of an all-encompassing education system. Although research supports the values of music in education, it alone will have little impact on Canadian education as long as music appears, as it does now, to be an expensive frill.
Research in music education has convincingly shown the importance of music in education and in the development of a young person’s mind and learning abilities. Japanese educators such as Shinichi Suzuki have based their philosophies of music education on the belief that music enhances a young person’s development and creates good citizens.[2] Even in the United States, music has, for the most part, been identified as a core subject in the education system.
Psychiatrists, psychologists, theorists, and music educators continue to study the value of music in education. Anthony Storr, a lecturer in psychiatry at Oxford University, strongly believes in music education for all children at an early age, because, as he explains, music “gives it [life] meaning. … It remains as a fixed point of reference in an unpredictable world.”[3] He suggests that “those who have been lucky enough to receive an adequate musical education in early life are better integrated in every way when they reach maturity…”[4]
Research in California[5] and Rhode Island[6] supports Storr’s claim. After studying students with music instruction as well as those without any music over an eight month period, the Center for Neurobiology of Learning and Memory at the University of California, Irvine, concluded that “music instruction can improve a child’s spatial reasoning,[7] which is essential to success in math, the sciences and engineering.”[8] The scientists suggest that the abstract thinking required for complex problem solving is often difficult to put into words. Skills learned in music, such as creative thought and spatial reasoning abilities, enhance an individual’s concept of abstract thought.
Education in itself is a cultural tool by which societies prosper and flourish. In this perspective, music plays a significant role. It is, after all, music that addresses one’s culture, one’s society, indeed one’s individuality. The music theorist, John Shepherd, stresses that music is very much tied to society and what a person experiences from that society. Music goes beyond the passive concept of being a language that communicates to one who can sit back and listen. It is an external element of one’s individuality which encompasses all that culture is. Music is an important developmental connection to one’s society and to one’s inner self which also connects and integrates all the other arts. Indeed, music is a means by which an individual can assimilate internally the many key concepts of one’s culture and express them personally.
Life is revealed in music. … [Music] is a starting point, a place of departure into an experience in examining society, specifically a culture that has grown up within society. … Music is a conglomerate; it possesses deep roots which give it a distinct shape and sound.[9]
If music is an inherent element and an internal influence in human life, than it should follow that music functions both globally and concretely, “shaping, forming, and, crucially, internalized within the body.”[10] In this sense, music must be recognized as both an external part of one’s culture and an internal, emotional and psychological response to all the elements that surround and influence the musical sound. The audio sound of music itself invades the space in which the individual exists. Therefore, music struggles between the margin (the peripheral boundaries of culture) and the centre, while humanity attempts to define its role and to place it consistently within the contexts of everyday life.
This interplay between personal absorption into music and the sense that there is, nevertheless something out there, something public, is what makes music so important in the cultural placing of the individual in the social.[11]
Culture, which includes music as well as all the other arts, is about life. It is this “life” that education should be addressing.
Educators must recognize that music has unique and powerful qualities of its own. Its sound is both “concrete and contextualized.”[12] While music is lived, silence (if there is such a thing) is unstable and constantly in flux. Music exists because it is there. As Shepherd writes,
Music is an inalienable presence within human societies. … It is central to those processes within any society whereby individuals are collectively moved to think and organize themselves.[13]
Music is both a conscious and a subconscious action/reaction to the influences which form the individual’s conscious/subconscious. Music is a product of the intellect; but it also exerts power over the intellect. Music, writes Shepherd, evokes directly the textures, processes, and structures of the social world as that world is manifest in the external, public realm of social interaction and the internal, private realm of individual subjectivity.[14]
In other words, music is not just about life, it is about living.
The human need for sound in the form of music has its cultural roots in both religious and secular music. A secular oral tradition may be traced in all societies, providing a basis for what twentieth century musicologists have defined as “folk music” and “ethno-music”. Song was carried by early European settlers who sang as they traveled to their new homes in the New World, toiled on the land and slaved over the daily chores. Song carried the voyageurs across the country during their long perilous canoe trips and portages. “To offset the tedium of paddle strokes – they [the voyageurs] sang.”[15] Folk songs were (and, in many cultures, still are) the history lessons of a child’s education. In this context, music is an essential tool of one’s heritage.
While educators across Canada continue to argue the merits of music in education, the competing agenda of cutbacks in provincial education budgets and parental demands for the return to the three R’s have contributed to the demise of music education. With the exception of the provinces of Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island, where music is a compulsory core subject for all public school students, music education has been marginalized and integrated into the overall category of “the Arts”, although as such it is supported as a core subject. Few school boards insist on music education in all the elementary grades from 1 to 6 and even fewer public schools teach music in these grades. In reality, music education exists only where there are teachers qualified to teach music or teachers who, although lacking in qualifications, are willing to attempt to teach it.
The root of the controversy over the place of music in the public education system stems from the more general lack of consensus as to what a young person needs in education. Philosophies on education continue to support the role of teaching the whole child. Generally speaking, these philosophies recognize children as the foundation and the cultural product of a society. As they grow, children become the manifestation of the many institutions which educate and influence them. Culture expresses all that a society and children, as they absorb this culture, will become. In the words of the religious fundamentalist educator, Friedrich Froebel: “Humanity as a whole is represented in each child but it is always revealed in unique ways.”[16]
Educational philosophies have been written, discussed, re-written and re-evaluated since the beginnings of inquiry on the need for education. As far back as Plato and Socrates, one finds the need for music in education. In the past two hundred years, education has developed a sophistication which finds itself continually under intense scrutiny. Contemporary educational thought emerges from theories propounded by Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel, Montessori, and Dewey who strongly supported the need for music in a well-rounded curriculum that educates the whole child. While contemporary educators support these basic philosophers, they fail to recognize the musical component. Canadian composer and music educator, R. Murray Schafer writes:
Many school administrators have no music in their bellies. It is not easy to show these people that great minds of the past have assigned to music an educational role of the highest signficance, unless they have read the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Montaigne, Locke, Leibnitz, Rousseau, Goethe, Shaw and others, which is by no means likely.[17]
The cultural institutions which educate tomorrow’s society support the general principle that each child needs certain basic abilities to survive as an adult. Ontario’s recent Royal Commission Report states quite clearly:
It is education, after all, that touches each of us at one time or another in our lives, and that, more than most things, can intimately and directly limit, or help create, our future.[18]
Accordingly, the public education system needs to focus its policies on the cultural development of children. As early as 1856, Canadian educators were speaking out for music in education, promoting the belief that “music is very properly considered one of the most refined means of elevating our minds.”[19] An educational system that promotes such a cultural development is thus compelled to develop a curriculum that really matters to the students.
It must touch the deepest parts of their lives, link them to a broad perspective on social action, and yet realistically prepare them for an economy and a society where detailed skill and knowledge are essential to survival.[20]
This curriculum must be concise and thorough in its demands for all the subjects which its philosophies promote, including music.
Philosophies on education have been in a state of flux since the beginnings of educational theories. Socrates (469-399 B.C.) believed that education was a search for the truth and a “knowledge that was eternal and universal.”[21]Plato (427-347 B.C.) based his views of education on Socrates’ theories. Regarding music, Plato summarized Socrates:
We attach supreme importance to a musical education, because rhythm and harmony sink most deeply into the recesses of the soul and take most powerful hold of it, bringing gracefulness [health and wellbeing] in their train… And also because he that has been duly nurtured therein will have the keenest eye for defects, whether in the failures of art, or the misgrowths of nature. …[22]
Plato further developed his theories on education by promoting the “principle of freedom” which became the catch-word “free play” in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. “Avoid compulsion,” Plato said, “and let your children’s lessons take the form of play. This will also help you to see what they are naturally fitted for.”[23] The theoretical summaries of Socrates and Plato find their corollaries in the contemporary research on music education. The idea of sharpening one’s senses through music education is a recurrent argument for the inclusion of music in today’s curriculum.
The romantic era exhumed the ideal of freedom in education. Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) challenged what he saw as a corrupt society with paradoxes on the basic goodness of man who has been spoiled by society and is in need of a good education provided by that same society to become good again. He stressed a need for a natural education – one that eliminated external control and concentrated on the basic senses. His “education by nature”[24] imposed no artificial restrictions and relied on natural curiosity to direct the educational process. Rousseau’s ideals were both fanciful and, at times, contradictory. His treatise, Emile (published in 1762) had a profound impact on the educational theorists of the next two centuries.
One of Rousseau’s strongest advocates was Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827) who was influential at a time when the entire class system society was under siege. His philosophies focussed on an experiential type of learning – learning through the senses at stages natural to the child’s psychological maturity. These theories seemed to parallel Rousseau but in a more concise and less contradictory manner. Pestalozzi’s theories were class-less. He believed that every child had the right to an education and that the education of every child was the regeneration of a reformed society. This child-centred viewpoint has continued to contemporary times and is often the focus of recent educational curriculae.
Pestalozzian theories were supported and further developed by Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852), a former teacher at the Pestalozzi Institute in Frankfurt, who promoted free learning, and Maria Montessori (1870-1952) who developed her own theories of spontaneous auto-education. Montessori’s philisophy focussed on the belief that a child learns and masters certain basic techniques before progressing to another. She believed that education should parallel the biological and psychological development of each individual child through a series of what she called “sensitive periods.”[25]
Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel and Montessori developed their own unique curriculae. Subjects were not clearly identified individually since each subject could be integrated with another. None of these theorists presented definitive directives with regard to the subject of music. It existed as part of the experiential learning and not as a defined subject in itself. That clear distinction was left to theorists such as Joseph H. Naef who brought Pestalozzi’s ideas to North America in 1806 and applied them to music. Naef was a pioneer in Pestalozzian music theory; but it was William Channing Woodbridge, who, in 1830, presented to the American Institute of Instruction in Boston the Pestalozzian theories as they would become accepted and adapted to music education in the United States. In his lecture, Woodbridge presented seven principles of Pestalozzian music instruction:
(1) teach sounds before signs…; (2) lead him [the pupil] to observe by hearing and imitating sounds, their resemblances and differences…, [being] active instead of passive in learning; (3) teach but one thing at a time…; (4) [make] him practice each step of these divisions (rhythm, melody (pitch), and dynamics] … before passing to the next; (5) [give] the principle theory after practice and as an induction from it; (6) [analyze and practice] the elements of articulate sound…; and (7) [have] the names of the notes correspond to those used in instrumental music.[26]
In the 1830s, Lowell Mason used Woodbridge’s principles to further develop his Pestalozzian ideas in his bid to strongly promote music education in the United States. He incorporated Woodbridge’s principles of three departments of music instruction: rhythm, pitch and dynamics.[27] Thus it would appear to be the American education system that strongly advocated identifying music as a separate course of study. Indeed, it was the United States that first developed a strong music program in 1838 which included music in the curriculum as a unique subject on its own. American educators developed their theories based on Mason’s 1837 report which examined music by intellectual, moral and physical standards and insisted that music maintain “a natural place in every system of instruction which aspires, as should every system, to develop man’s whole nature.”[28]
John Dewey (1859-1952) is a key figure in American educational thought. Born in Vermont, he developed his ideals and theories while teaching in American schools. Dewey believed that the purpose of education was “to train children in co-operative and mutually helpful living … [through the] … instinctive, impulsive attitudes and activities of the child.”[29] Based on new ideas being studied in psychology and philosophy, Dewey promoted the ideal that: “Education is not separate from life; it is not even preparation for life: it is life.”[30] On these grounds, he established a broad concept of curriculum, maintaining that:
if education is the means by which society perpetuates itself, then the content of education should include all aspects of society: information, skills, ideas from business, industry, agriculture, the liberal arts, natural and social sciences, practical and fine arts.[31]
Music (as well as the other arts) were considered by Dewey to be a part of one’s culture. As such, it must exist in the educational system of that culture. Between Naef, Mason and Dewey, music had become a core subject in the American education system.
It is generally accepted that Canadian educational theorists were strongly influenced by the Americans, specifically in the area of music education.[32] Naef and Mason’s adopted Pestalozzian theories were transferred to music education. These theories infiltrated various parts of Canada, primarily the Maritimes, Ontario and Manitoba. When Egerton Ryerson, as chief superintendent of education for Upper Canada, listed music as a subject for study in 1846, his plan was to have all the regular classroom teachers teach music as they would any of the other core subjects. With so few of the teachers having any knowledge of or training in the rudiments of music, this plan met with either opposition or was totally ignored. The difficulty in this intent is described in an 1856 report published in the Canadian Music
Review :
We have had some little experience in Musical Education at Schools. Need we wonder at the present state of the Art in this country when we see, day after day, not only the abuse it is subjected to, but the carelessness and indifference displayed in imparting necessary instruction. Few of the uninitiated would be prepared to credit the absolute ignorance which exists among pupils in many of what are otherwise considered excellent institutions for teaching “the young idea”.[33]
Ryerson was faced with a monumental task. Unfortunately his plan to bring music education to all the classrooms of Ontario did not work and by the time Alexander T. Cringan began to influence Ontario’s music education in the 1880s, music was being taught primarily in the larger communities only where music specialists were available to come into the classroom. In identifying music as a separate subject, school boards were pressured to provide qualified music specialists to teach music even at the elementary grades. Music became an expensive course to offer and therefore attracted the label of “frill”. In this context, music became an on-again/off-again fad depending on the political and financial climate of the times and location.
Educational policies regarding music have typically fluctuated with the ups and downs of the public school system. Although public schools had been established and firmly accepted in the political climate of Europe before the beginning of the nineteenth century, it was not until 1816 that Upper Canada enacted legislation regarding education. The Common School Act of 1816 promoted the policy to aid popular education and it provided money for teachers’ salaries in public schools. However, it was not until 1823, that legislation was modified to create a Central Board of Education with the powers to prescribe courses of study and texts in both common and grammar schools and to have the power to establish teachers’ qualifications. While the educational policies and legislation developed, curriculae varied from region to region as much in Upper Canada as anywhere else in the country. Some educators, like the Rev. John Strachan who founded the Cornwall Grammar School in 1804, allowed for a modest amount of the “arts” in the curriculum, but music, as with all the arts, was left primarily to the priorities of each individual teacher. Even after Ryerson and Cringan developed their treatises on music in education, many schools in rural and small communities went without music instruction of any kind due to lack of funds, lack of qualified music teachers or teachers willing to teach music, or lack of concern for the need to teach music.
One notices a somewhat different perspective in the development of the Quebec public education system. Education in Quebec was the domain of the Roman Catholic church until well into the twentieth century. History records the presence of music in education as early as 1626 when the Jesuits arrived and used Gregorian chants to teach the First Nations’ children. Music was used by the religious orders for educational purposes thus making music an important part of the church-run educational system. Secular music of any description did not enter the realm of music education in the schools. It was not until the 1930s that music education was monitored to any degree with the curriculum work in solfege developed by Claude Champagne.[34] As education underwent a transition from church control to provincial control, music suffered and was left to the forces outside the realm of public education, which in most cases was the church. Although educational policy in Quebec has developed considerably since the 1960s, music does not maintain a dominant role. It would seem that the three R’s of Quebec education continue to be “la religion, le francais et l’arithmetique.”[35] This being the case, it is not surprising that many of Quebec’s musicians and composers today recall very little (if any) music being taught in their early years at school.[36]
Music in Canada’s public schools remains today much the same as it has been throughout its brief history. For the most part, music is recognized as an individual subject; but its reception (and indeed its presence in the classroom) is inconsistent across the country. While music educators continue to develop sophisticated curriculae, the implementation of music in the classroom is left to the often uninformed policy makers of the individual schools. Physical education still ranks higher in importance than does music and, ironically, in many cases, costs more in equipment.
Fortunately, various contemporary curriculae have evolved out of the concept that one’s individual culture includes all of the integrated arts. The different First Nations, Dene Kede and Inuit groups have, for instance, initiated and produced programs based on their culture, treating music as a fundamental part of their respective cultures. These programs are designed for all cultural groups to provide all children with an historic background of the cultures of these first peoples. In Inuuqatigiit, an Inuit curriculum, the physical activity of chanting and drumming utilizes a number of integrated concepts which go beyond the isolated subject of music, or the isolated subject of dance, or, indeed, the isolated subject of theatre arts.
Luke Arna’naaq writes: “In my childhood the practice of traditional drum dancing was important for many reasons.”[37] As part of his culture, the musical act of drumming was secondary to the general purpose of the exercise.
The chanting and drumming served a purpose for Inuit. The chants told hunting stories, relieved tension between rivals, talked about hardship, sad and happy events, spirituality, and were a form of sharing emotions with others. When different family groups got together, there was much joy and the drum dances became part of the festivities. Singing and dancing are enjoyed by all cultures. It is a form of sharing enjoyment with others.[38]
Similar material has been published featuring other important cultures within Canada. These materials are available and applicable to all Canadian classrooms for the benefit of a multicultural education to a multicultural society. Sandra Davies has published curriculum material focusing on the culture of the Japanese and Chinese populations of British Columbia. This material presents the arts (not just music) of these two cultures as they exist in their integrated form as part of the lives of the Japanese and Chinese Canadians.
There is certainly no lack of Canadian material to assist any teacher (music specialist or not) in music education. The Canada is…Music series (1980) and Musicanada series (1983) present Canadian child-centred methods incorporating contemporary and First Nations’ concepts of teaching music as both sound and symbol and an integrated subject. The basic premise of these texts is that:
…music is a basic means of expression and communication embraced throughout history by virtually all cultures. In terms of the individual, recent studies have proven the value of music in developing the whole child, emotionally, physically and intellectually.[39]
These texts not only support the concept of music in Canadian education, they support the teacher’s ability to teach music integratively with the whole curriculum.
In spite of the availability of such sophisticated ideas, texts and curriculae, music continues to have a tenuous influence on the minds of the education policy makers of this country. While Prince Edward Island, with its Kodaly approach to music education, and Saskatchewan, which utilizes many of R. Murray Schafer’s ideas, strongly promote, and indeed guarantee that music continues in every school, the remaining provinces and territories continue to produce material to support music in the public schools, but fail to enforce a universal policy on music instruction. Crippled by the American ideal of an isolated subject, music suffers from continued demands for a justification based on its expense. By rights and history, music education needs to develop beyond modernist objectification to the post-modern concept of all the arts belonging together. Music needs to return to its place in Canadian culture – a place which recognizes the concept of community – and a concept which addresses the education of the whole child.
It [community] means the importance of grounding the music curriculum in a particular place and moving to an ever-broadening view, ensuring that all learners come to understand their place within a growing community, value differences as well as similarities, feel connected to others, accept and love their own musical traditions, and are empowered to change those things that should be changed and embrace new perspectives.[40]
As we have seen, Plato, Socrates, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel, and Montessori have heavily influenced the way education is today. For the most part, however, Canadian educators refuse to recognize the position of music in the theories of these key educational philosophers, and they continue to ignore what the First Nations are proving most effectively – that music is an integral part of one’s culture. Education needs to address culture. As the Dene Kede community states:
Culture is more than land skills. Culture is the Dene community. Culture is the spiritual world of the Dene. And culture is the way of perceiving oneself.[41]
This statement could be easily altered to include any and all cultures.
In educating the whole child – Canada’s citizen of tomorrow – educational policies must cease to isolate subjects such as music from their overall cultural perspective. Since the very survival of music in education hinges on cost-effective curriculae, music must be developed as part of the overall educational perspective. Education must position itself to prepare the community – indeed the culture – of tomorrow’s society. In so doing, education must embrace what Kasemets contends are the basics: “seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking.”[42] This is where music fits in.
[1] Udo Casements, “Eight Edicts on Education with Eighteen Elaborations,” Source, 2:2 (July 1968) 41.
[2] Shinichi Suzuki, Nurtured by Love. The Classic Approach to Talent Education, 2nd edition (Athens: Senzay Publications, 1983) 105.
[3] Anthony Storr, Music and the Mind (New York: Macmillan, 1992) 188.
[4] Ibid 124.
[5] Kenneth Whyte, “Why Johnny Can’t Sing”, Saturday Night (June 1996) 14.
[6] Maggie Fox, “Music makes your kids smarter, study finds” Email (May 22, 1996) 1.
[7] The term “spatial reasoning” applies to the abstract qualities of mathematics which, like music, is a complex language of patterns and relationships that is pre-dominantly non-verbal. Qualitative spatial reasoning in mathematics uses descriptors like (-, 0, +) instead of real numbers to do its work. The ability of the human mind to understand these abstract spatial concepts is the key to designing interfaces, to implementing sophisticated computer technology and even geographic mapping. Spatial reasoning, then, is the human attempt to make structured sense out of an abstract chaos. Storr writes: “Mathematics and music both exemplify the fact that making coherent patterns out of abstract ideas is a deeply significant human achievement which enthrals and satisfies those who are able to understand such patterns whether or not they are directly related to life as it is ordinarily lived.” Storr, Op.Cit. 182.
[8] Whyte, Op.Cit. 14.
[9] Norman B. Bassey, Canadian Studies in Canadian Schools: A report for the Curriculum Committee of the Council of Ministers of Education on the study of Canada, Canadians and life in Canada (Toronto: Council of Ministers of Education, 1971) 16.
[10] John Shepherd, “Music and the Last Intellectuals,” Journal of Aesthetic Education (25:3, Fall 1991) 106.
[11] Simon Frith, “Towards an aesthetic of popular music,” Music and Society: the politics of composition, performance and reception eds. Richard Leppart and Susan McClary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) 139.
[12] Shepherd, Op.Cit. 113.
[13] Ibid 113.
[14] Ibid 103.
[15] Peter C. Newman, Caesars of the Wilderness: Company of Adventurers Vol. II (Markham: Penguin, 1987) 38.
[16] Margaret Gillett, A History of education thought and practice (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1966) 222.
[17] R. Murray Schafer, Creative Music Education. A Handbook for the Modern Music Teacher (New York: Schirmer, 1976) 235.
[18] Ontario Ministry of Education, For the Love of Learning: Report of the Royal Commission on Learning I-IV and Summary (Toronto: Queen’s Printer, 1994) 1.
[19] Canadian Music Review, “Musical Education at Schools” (Copied from Canadian Music Review), Dwight’s Journal of Music (10:3, Oct. 18, 1856) 2.
[20] Our Schools/Our Selves Education Foundation, Our Schools/Our Selves Education Foundation Brochure (Toronto: Our Schools/Our Selves Education Foundation, 1994) 2.
[21] Gillett, Op.Cit. 31.
[22] Bernard Rainbow, Music in Educational Thought and Practice: A Survey from 800 BC (Aberystwyth: Boethius Press, 1988) 3. [23] Herbert Read, Education through Art (London: Faber and Faber, 1970) 6.
[24] Gillett, Op.Cit. 147.
[25] Ibid 253.
[26] Phil D. Perrin, “Pedagogical Philosophy, Methods and Materials of Tune Book Introductions: 1801-1860,” Journal of Research in Music Education (XVIII:1, Spring 1970a) 66.
[27] Ibid 67.
[28] Charles R. Hoffer, Introduction to Music Education Second Edition (Belmont: Wadsworth, 1993) 81.
[29] Gillett, Op.Cit. 248.
[30] Ibid 249.
[31] Ibid 251.
[32] J. Paul Green and Nancy F. Vogan, Music Education in Canada: A Historical Account (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1991) 50. Eleanor Marjorie Newman, An Analysis of Canadian Content in Vocal Music Textbooks authorized by the Ontario Ministry of Education 1846-1988 unpublished MA thesis (Ottawa: Carleton University, 1988).
[33] Canadian Music Review, Op.Cit. 2.
[34] Helmut Kallmann, Gilles Potvin and Kenneth Winters (eds.), Encyclopedia of Music in Canada Second Edition (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992) 244.
[35] Reginald Gregoire, L’Evolution des politiques relatives aux programmes d’etudes du primaire et du secondaire public du secteur catholique francophone du Quebec (Sainte-Foy: Ecole nationale d’administration publique, 1986) 52.
[36] Marie-Therese Lefebre, La Creation Musicale des Femmes aux Quebec (Montreal: Les editions du remue-menage, 1991) 16.
[37] Inuit Subject Advisory Committee, Inuuqatigiit. The Curriculum from the Inuit Perspective. Curriculum Document Kindergarten – 12 Draft (Northwest Territories: Department of Education, Culture and Employment, 1995-6) 88.
[38] Ibid 89.
[39] Penny Louise Brooks, Betty Anne Kovacs and Mary Martin Trotter, Musicanada 4. Teacher’s Guide (Toronto: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1983) 1.
[40] Estelle R. Jorgensen, “Music Education as Community”, Journal of Aesthetic Education (29:3, Fall 1995) 77.
[41] George Blondin, Mary Firth, Judith Drybone Catholic, Joe Boucher, Bella Drymeat Ross, Elizabeth Chocolate MacKenzie, Joseph Jerome Bonnetronge, Marie Cadieux, Adele Hardisty, and Alphonse Eronchi, Dene Kede Curriculum document: Grades K-6 (Yellowknife: Northwest Territories Education Development Branch, 1993) xiv.
[42] Kasemets, Op.Cit. 41.
