Continuing Professional Musical Development for Non-Specialists

and training by devising ready-made musical programmes with multi-media resources to support their delivery, or by providing in-school musical training for non-specialists as separate services or as an integral part of musical provision. For example, by encouraging educators to overcome their musical fears by learning an instrument alongside their pupils, as exemplified by the Wider Opportunities scheme, but which has met with varying degrees of success (Lamont, Leighton, Underhill & Hale, 2009; Ofsted, 2012a; Ofsted, 2012b). The Sing Up27 _{programme supports enthusiastic}

members of staff, who may not be music specialists, identified as “Singing Champions” who encourage the development of singing in their classroom practice and throughout school life. However, whilst the idea has had much success in increasing singing in schools and cascading musical training and skills in order to widen the pool of musical expertise in schools (CUREE, 2011), the model still relies on the passion and

commitment of one or two individuals endeavouring to challenge attitudes and practice in schools where colleagues may or may not be so predisposed towards music.

5.3.2.1 The Music Specialist as a Musical Trainer

The previous chapter showed how the music specialist could be a valuable resource for educators in support of their use of music within the curriculum and in collaborative work tailored to the needs of children with SEND. Music specialists were keen to share their skills and knowledge with their colleagues, with one participant (A003) actively engaged in the training of colleagues in developing singing generally and its use in relation to children in the attached specialist unit. Certainly, the music specialist can act as an important role model, mentor and resource (Holden & Button, 2006). The bespoke singing project showed how this might be achieved and sustained in practice through an experiential and team-teaching approach to the use of music in this context. Holden & Button’s research (2006) identified that class teachers who reported the highest level of musical independence in their sample, had received advice and

assistance from a music specialist, yet only 9% of their sample had had the opportunity to experience this form of support. Moreover, the majority of class teachers in Holden & Button’s study relied on published musical schemes of work, which they appeared to follow religiously. They found only a third of teachers were prepared to use their own musical ideas and knowledge in their teaching which corresponded to the group with the highest musical confidence levels. This is important in this research context as it helps to explain calls by survey respondents for ready-made interventions and programmes, a need, which the CD resource, referred to in Chapter Four, aimed to address. However, these findings also give credence to the approaches adopted by the bespoke projects where the music specialist worked alongside school staff not just in delivering music as an intervention but also in providing training that help to change attitudes and embed new practice. This is a view supported by Hennessy’s findings discussed above, in relation to the support music specialists can give trainee teachers and exemplified in the deputy head’s use of the music specialist in her development of a creative curriculum that was also supported by her prior work with music and creative specialists as part of her school’s involvement with the Creative Partnerships programme.

Nevertheless, it was notable how many of the examples of practice in the previous chapter were delivered, planned, or designed by music specialists, which whilst well intentioned might actually result in sustaining the status quo between music specialist and non-specialist and lead to the further “deskilling” of class teachers. The dominance and expertise of the music specialist in delivering music for the whole school was a particular theme to emerge from the analysis. Despite the positive benefits identified

above, the music specialist role in some cases had adverse effects. The presence of a music specialist was seen to limit opportunities for classroom-based music training, reinforcing existing musical identities, feelings of inadequacy and notions about the purpose and ways in which music should be delivered in school as the deputy head (A002) explains:

A002: p. 13. […] I was very lucky in that there was a […] music teacher and took all the music lessons, put on the music performances and taught an awful lot of the music, taught a lot of instrument sessions as well. She was very talented and she is the AST [Advanced Skills Teacher] for music in [city name] as well. […] So I have been quite a bit spoilt for the last few years because it was quite amazing to watch her work because obviously to have somebody who was a music primary specialist. You know she had that understanding, that really deep sense of understanding about the age range of the children and how primary children learn. […] And she had the musical skills to actually be able to plan really exciting, really progressive schemes of work so in terms of the progression you saw within children. […] She used to do performances at the end of the year. She did the Wizard of Oz with dual cast so there was a Year 5 cast and a Year 6 cast. We had the orchestra playing all the songs. You know it’s that kind of stuff that as a non-music specialist you look at that and just think ‘I’ve no idea!’[…] And I think that’s a fairly big issue.

The large scale performance-based nature of this music specialist’s practice became the benchmark against which the deputy head measured her own ability to teach music and shaped her ideas about how music should be delivered. Such views are in contrast with the tailored use of music as an intervention or resource, described in Chapter Four. The class teacher/ peripatetic teacher (A004) and others challenged the deputy head’s view about the need to be an accomplished performer; a distinction that was not always clear to non-specialists:

A004: pp. 19-20. The skills are different. As a practical musician I am

reasonably fairly competent but I am a better teacher than I am a practitioner, performer. You think that is the same in most- because I think if you can sense that you are not brilliant yourself then that can make you a better teacher because you are conscious of what it is you are trying to aim for, if that makes sense?

These comments once again highlight Burland’s distinctions about the musical identity of the performer and non-performer, referred to earlier that might be extended here to fit an educational context.

The deputy head’s aspirations to teach music were curtailed by her awe of the music specialist’s skills, but also by her more basic need to pass her NQT year; reflecting Maslow’s theory that basic needs of job security are more pressing than higher level needs:

A002: p. 28. And there is only so much, when you’re an NQT again that you’re going to push to do- “Oh let me do music lessons with the kids”, instead of, “You do them! […] You’re really much better at this than me”. You’re not necessarily going to do that so, so that’s what I mean about, it’s brilliant having a music specialist but then you are probably quite deskilled- […] And you can go to another school and you are expected to teach your music. That’s quite a big thing I think for some people.

Hennessy (2000) notes how the dominance of the music specialist can limit

opportunities for trainees to develop their music practice, however, not because of the music specialist’s personal attitude towards supporting trainee teachers but because of the way in which schools allocated school music teaching to music specialists. In her study, some schools had bought music specialists in on a freelance or peripatetic basis specifically to provide music education and were thus unwilling to divert the music specialist to teacher training. This is important as Hennessy found that the most confident students had received the support of a music specialist during their training. She noted the frustration of one trainee teacher, keen to teach music but who had only had a few opportunities to use music. He, like the deputy head in this study, felt powerless to change the system. This highlights how a desire to use music can be supported or thwarted by the musical culture of the school and individual and

institutional attitudes towards music in school practice and training, with a consequent effect on individual practice in the short and long term. These findings highlight the overlap between individual and environmental factors, which are discussed in the next chapter.

Collectively, this evidence indicates how the apparent lack of opportunities for musical training during initial teacher training can reinforce childhood musical experiences, attitudes of individual musical ability and notions of musical learning, such that the stage is set early on for educators to become dependent on the music specialist, leading to the potential deskilling of educators. This has a bearing on the use of music as a resource in the classroom or learning support setting where music was delivered by non-specialists. Nevertheless, as the inclusion manager’s (A017) practice

demonstrates, the use of music technology or simple instruments such as the hand bell can be highly effective in this context. The inclusion manager did not report any advanced musical background but felt that music was one of the easiest things to be included in, and adopted a functional approach to ensuring children had access to musical learning. Thus, she had different non-musical motivations and the

independence of her role meant she was not subject to the same pressures and concerns surrounding the teaching of music as experienced by classroom colleagues.