Integrating popular music into urban schools: Assessing the effectiveness of a comprehensive music teacher development program

Abstract

As popular music education programs become more common, it is essential to determine what kinds of professional development experiences that are designed to help teachers include popular music into their music education classrooms are effective—keeping in mind that the inclusion of popular music in K–12 classrooms requires a change not only in instrumentation and repertoire but also pedagogical approaches. This study examined the effects of a popular music professional development initiative on more than 600 New York City urban music teachers’ musicianship, their pedagogy, and their leadership skills throughout one school year. Results revealed increases in all three areas, most notably in teachers’ musicianship. The study also showed an increase in teachers’ positive perceptions about their music programs, specifically, their level of excitement about the state of their music program and that their music program was more effective at meeting their students’ needs than it had been previously.

Keywords

Music educators musical skill development nontraditional ensembles popular music professional development urban music teaching

Professional development is viewed as a mechanism for building the capacity of teachers and as a means to leverage change (Guskey, 2002). Helping teachers develop new skills and integrate new content into the curriculum is a critical factor in the continued success of school music programs. However, not all professional development approaches are equally effective in helping teachers improve their skills (McLaughlin & Talbert, 2001). The availability of multiple resources, continuous supports extended over more prolonged periods, and collective participation often characterize higher-quality professional development (Desimone, 2011; Desimone et al., 2003). Martin-Kniep (2008) advocated that teachers become most likely to realize their professional development experiences into their K–12 classrooms through membership in a community of practice,

. . . teachers can help students learn best when they have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to make that happen; when they see themselves as learners; when they are supported by structures that value their learning as well as student learning; and when they can work in forums in which students and others can inform their decision making and other practices. (p. 3)

Within the field of popular music education, Hewitt (2018) found that meaningful and impactful professional development was “(a) chosen by the teacher, (b) occurs over a sustained period of time, and (c) requires reflection by the teacher regarding their curricular beliefs and practices” (p. 176). Music education researchers have noted effective elements of professional development in popular music for in-service teachers. These themes included the importance of professional development communities (Kastner, 2014) focusing on new pedagogies that are student-centered (Hallam et al., 2011), and emphasize active learning and collaboration (Dorfman, 2020).

Popular music education pedagogies require specific skill sets that empower teachers and students to “take risks, learn alongside one another, and address 21st-century knowledge and skills through engaging with the music that students choose and create” (Vasil et al., 2019, p. 85). Green (2006) argued that the inclusion of popular music in K–12 classrooms requires a change not only in instrumentation and repertoire but also pedagogical approaches and described popular music pedagogical approaches as ones that include ongoing communication and mentorship, trial and error, and innovative approaches. These approaches allow students to “determine their own targets and learn through self-directed activities starting with familiar music, moving on to other genres and ultimately composition. When this approach is adopted the role of the teacher is to model, support, advise and guide” (Hallam et al., 2017a, p. 132).

Internationally, popular music education professional development opportunities for in-service teachers thrive and exist through organizations such as Musical Futures and Musical Futures International, which provide training and resources for classroom and instrumental teachers. The inclusion of popular music pedagogies in public school music education classrooms has become increasingly common in the 21st century (Lebler & Weston, 2015; Powell & Burstein, 2017). Despite the growing number of opportunities for pre-service music educators to learn about popular music pedagogies in colleges and universities, a sample of 160 music teachers in the United States showed that 90.0% of the participants had “zero courses devoted to popular music pedagogy in their undergraduate curriculum” (Springer, 2016, p. 409). As a result of this lack of preparation in popular music pedagogies, many music teachers report feeling unprepared to teach popular music (Springer, 2016), with some music teachers citing a lack of skills of popular music instruments to be an issue (Hallam et al., 2017b). Even when college and university students participate in music courses focused on popular music pedagogies, they can remain “uncomfortable with the idea of placing students in similar settings” (Isbell, 2016, p. 27). Therefore, it is essential to determine what kinds of professional development experiences effectively empower novice through veteran in-service music teachers to include popular music in their music education classrooms. In this article, we report on a professional development program, Amp Up New York City (Amp Up NYC), that aimed to empower novice through veteran in-service music teachers to include popular music pedagogies in their music classrooms.

The Amp Up NYC professional development initiative

Amp Up NYC was a comprehensive, ongoing music teacher development program that included membership in a professional learning community (PLC). At the time of the study, the PLC interacted daily through social media and monthly in teacher-led jam sessions and teacher-led professional development workshops. Amp Up NYC was initiated through a collaboration between Little Kids Rock (LKR), Berklee College of Music, and Berklee City Music Network^® and was developed to support the New York City Department of Education’s efforts to expand and advance modern band music programming for students in the New York City Public Schools through offering an ongoing professional development initiative. For the purposes of this study, modern band is defined as an instrumental and vocal music program that focuses on teaching kids to perform, improvise, and compose the popular musical genres of the past 60 years on instruments, including guitar, bass, keyboard, drums, vocals, ukulele, and technology. At the time of this study, Amp Up NYC represented “the largest private investment in a public school district’s music education program in the United States” (Tempera, 2014). All music teachers who participated in the program were provided with a classroom set of popular music instruments (i.e., electric and acoustic guitars, electric basses, drum sets, ukuleles, and technology such as amps and microphones). The participating music teachers also had access to digital resources from the LKR website and Berklee College of Music. Between 2013 and 2016, this program offered 53 professional development workshops, donated over 7,000 popular music instruments, and provided digital resources to 641 New York City public school music teachers and 79,000 New York City public school students in Kindergarten through 12th grade.

Participation in Amp Up NYC kicked off with a 1-day interactive workshop for each of the 641 participating music teachers. Each music teacher who attended the workshop received a classroom set of popular music instruments and curricular resources. The content of the workshops focused on developing the skills participating music teachers would need to facilitate a modern band program in their classrooms. Seventy-eight percent of the participating teachers reported having little or no experience in facilitating popular music ensembles prior to attending the workshop. The primary purpose of the introductory workshop was for music teachers to experience playing, improvising, composing, modeling, and performing on modern band instruments, including the guitar, electric bass, drums, and keyboard. In addition to the skill-building activities, the workshop also focused on approaches to teaching through popular music pedagogies. The workshop also provided the teachers with the opportunity to reflect on their current music programs and school cultures as they planned how they would shape their modern band programs to best fit the needs, readiness levels, and interests of their students.

LKR provided continuous support to the Amp Up teachers throughout the school year. Monthly professional development sessions were offered over the course of the 3-year initiative. Amp Up NYC teacher attendance ranged between 20 and 45¹ at each of these monthly sessions. Each monthly session lasted 3 hr and was designed to enhance and support the continuous learning and implementation of a modern band program after the initial 1-day workshop. Topics covered during these monthly sessions included (a) beginning guitar techniques, (b) classroom management, (c) including students who have special needs, (d) technology in the modern band classroom, (e) electric bass techniques, and (f) drum set assembly, repair, and maintenance.

The use of social media and virtual communication supported ongoing communication and professional learning among the participating music teachers. Digital resources such as lesson plans, arrangements of popular music, and play along tracks were made available through cloud-based sharing on the Berklee PULSE Music Method website and the LKR Jam Zone website. In addition, staff members from LKR emailed and posted video tutorials and resources to the teachers weekly. All participating teachers were invited to join a private Facebook Group Page, where modern band teachers across the country share lesson plans, practice, performance videos, and discuss best practices daily.

Weiss et al. (2017) studied the impact of participation in Amp Up NYC on students’ musical, social and emotional, and college and career readiness skills. The purpose of this evaluation was to examine the effects on music teachers’ musicianship, pedagogy, and school-wide leadership after participating in the Amp Up NYC professional development initiative. The Center for Arts Education Research (CAER) at Teachers College, Columbia University, conducted this study in the modern band classrooms of New York City Public Schools during the 2015–2016 school year.

Methodology

We employed a sequential exploratory mixed-methods research design (Creswell, 2014) to collect and analyze qualitative and quantitative data from multiple sources during the 2015–2016 school year. As a result of this design, we conducted three stages of analysis: (a) after the primary qualitative phase; (b) after the secondary quantitative phase; and (c) at the integration phase that connects the two strands of data and extends the initial qualitative exploratory findings. The three phases of data collection allowed for the research team to conduct member checks prior to each stage of analysis. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and jottings taken during observations were written into field notes immediately following each observation (Bernard, 2011). The research team employed thematic coding (Charmaz, 2006) to organize the qualitative data. This article reports on the final integration phase of the research.

Qualitative data sources included (a) participant and non-participant observations of monthly Amp Up NYC professional development workshops; (b) non-participant observations of modern band classes, rehearsals, and performances in five case study schools; (c) in-depth, structured interviews at the five case study schools with the Amp Up NYC music teachers, their principals, and their non-music colleagues; (d) resource and document analysis of Amp Up NYC music teachers’ lesson plans and Amp Up NYC resources; and (e) open-ended questions on an end of the year, online survey. The five case study teachers were recruited purposefully based on the individual teachers’ levels of experience facilitating modern band programs in their classrooms. Quantitative data were collected from an end of the year online survey that was distributed to each of the 641 participating Amp Up NYC music teachers.

The data collected sought to answer the following question: “How did participation in Amp Up NYC affect NYC public school music teachers’ musicianship, pedagogical approaches, and leadership within their school communities?” The next sections describe the development of the tools we used to collect the quantitative and qualitative data during the 2015–2016 school year.

Development of the end of the year survey

Based on the results of a pilot study in 2014–2015, we decided to use the Retrospective Pretest Method (RPM) when designing the survey (Lam & Bengo, 2003). We chose the RPM because it allowed teachers to reflect on their musical, social/emotional, and academic growth during the school year. Lam and Bengo (2003) reported that RPM is also an effective strategy to avoid response-shift bias with self-report measures. As per the RPM, we employed a 5-point Likert-type scale where teachers rated levels of their musicianship or pedagogical skill at the end of the year and the beginning of the year (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Sample RPM item from the online teacher survey.

We collected additional quantitative data in the form of hours spent participating in various musical activities outside of school and percentages recorded to reflect teachers’ perceptions of how well their school’s music programs were fitting their students’ needs and levels of student engagement during music classes.

To increase the validity and reliability of the online survey, we validated the tool through Cognitive Interview Methodology (CIM) (Biemer et al., 2011). We conducted CIM interviews with each of the five case study school teachers. The CIM interviews indicated that the survey items were clear, relevant to their music teaching, and measured their musical and nonmusical outcomes from participation in Amp Up NYC well. Feedback from a few of the case study teachers allowed us to improve the clarity of some of the items that measured percentages and hours. The final, revised version of the survey was emailed via Qualtrics, a cloud-based online survey platform, through a secure web link to all 641 of the participating Amp Up NYC teachers in May 2016.

Case studies: Amp Up NYC music teachers

We selected five school music programs as case studies. To study a diverse sample, the five schools were selected based on characteristics of the school’s music teacher such as (a) the longevity of their teaching career, (b) level of experience teaching modern band, and (c) their individual schools’ cultures. Each of the five case study teachers participated in the day-long workshop and reported active participation in the Amp Up NYC PLC’s daily communication and monthly meetings. This section introduces each of the five case study Amp Up NYC music teachers.

Teddy, a first-year Amp Up NYC teacher at Little Town Academy of Technology, was selected because he represents the majority of the Amp Up NYC teachers. Teddy had never taught with modern band music instruments before but was a mid-career music teacher and a professional jazz musician. A novice at playing modern band instruments he unpacked the delivery boxes of guitars and amps and began learning how to play them alongside his middle school students. Tony is an elementary music teacher at John Dewey Elementary School, who was eager to expand his incorporation of modern band in his elementary general music classes. He created his curriculum based on the available resources and often presented his strategies to his colleagues during the monthly Amp Up NYC sessions. Similar to Teddy, Mike was a first-year Amp Up NYC teacher, mid-career music teacher, and a professional jazz musician. At the time of this study, Mike had built a highly successful Latin and Jazz band program and had been teaching for 5 years. He employed the Berklee PULSE Music Method and several of the Amp Up NYC improvisation strategies into his Latin and Jazz band program at Northbound Middle School. Miranda is a unique case in the program because she entered with prior experience incorporating popular music education into her high school music curriculum at Rutherford B. Hayes Secondary School. In fact, modern band music ensembles are the only ensembles offered at Miranda’s school. Lauren is a second-year Amp Up teacher and experienced modern band teacher, who teaches instrumental music at Lyndon B. Johnson High School (LBJHS). LBJHS has a marching band, concert band, and modern band. In addition, Lauren incorporates the Amp Up NYC music initiative into her non-performance guitar classes.

Effects of Amp Up NYC on participating music teachers

At the end of the 2015–2016 school year, 140 Amp Up NYC teachers (22%) completed the online survey. Half of the teachers who responded were first-year Amp Up NYC teachers and beginning modern band teachers with no experience teaching popular music pedagogies, like Teddy. We categorized the remaining respondents as second-year modern band teachers (27%) and those who had used the modern band approach before 2014 (23%). Mike, Tony, Miranda, and Lauren represent the novice, intermediate, and expert modern band music teachers, who participated in the Amp Up NYC program.

Changes in musicianship

With a survey response rate of 22%, we were cautious in our analysis of the results. Hence, we used confidence intervals (CIs) to make summary statements about the data. Using the 95% confidence level, we considered results that fell outside of the CI to be more important than differences where the CIs of means overlapped. Several authors (Cumming et al., 2004; Cumming & Finch, 2005) argue that CIs are more reliable indicators of the likelihood of replicating the results than are p values.

Questions on the online survey examined how the respondents perceived their skill development on several typical modern band instruments. Teachers were asked to rate their skills on a 5-point scale ranging from none (1), beginner (2), intermediate (3), advanced (4), and expert (5). The results appear in Table 1.

Table 1.

Teachers’ perceived musical skill levels (CI = .95).

Instrument or musical area	Means before participation	Means after participation
Guitar	2.59 [2.41, 2.77]	3.00 [2.79, 3.21]^a
Bass	2.18 [2.03, 2.33]	2.66 [2.47, 2.85]^a
Drums	2.17 [2.02, 2.32]	2.68 [2.49, 2.87]^a
Vocals	3.36 [3.12, 3.60]	3.49 [3.25, 3.73]
Keyboard	3.15 [2.93, 3.37]	3.29 [3.06, 3.52]
Music technology	2.86 [2.66, 3.06]	3.16 [2.94, 3.38]

CI: confidence interval.

Indicates means where CI (95%) does not overlap.

Our analysis using CI = 95% revealed that teachers perceived they improved on the Drums, Bass, and Guitar. The improvement they perceived in the areas of Vocal, Keyboard, and Music Technology were not large enough to generalize to all Amp Up teachers. It is useful to note that the Bass and Drums were the areas where teachers perceived having the least amount of skill before participating in Amp Up NYC whereas Vocals and Keyboards were the areas that the teachers perceived as having the highest level of skills prior to their Amp Up NYC experiences.

One goal of Amp Up NYC was to help music teachers develop their musicianship in improvisation and composition assuming that teachers must first acquire new skills before they can be expected to teach these skills in their classrooms. Using 5-point rating scale ranging from none (1), beginner (2), intermediate (3), advanced (4), and expert (5), the online survey asked teachers questions about their comfort and skill in the areas of improvisation and composition. The results, which appear in Table 2, reveal that the teachers perceived their comfort and skill improved in each of the areas, although not beyond the 95% CIs.

Table 2.

Teachers’ perceived comfort and skill in composing and improvising.

Area	Means before participation	Means after participation
Comfort in improvising	3.09 [2.84, 3.34]	3.41 [3.19, 3.63]
Comfort in composing	3.22 [2.98, 3.46]	3.49 [3.28, 3.70]
Skill in improvising	3.07 [2.84, 3.30]	3.29 [3.08, 3.50]
Skill in composing	3.16 [2.94, 3.38]	3.34 [3.15, 3.53]

The Amp Up NYC Teachers at the case study schools had a lot to say in regard to the impact that participation in the program had on their musicianship. One common theme that is present in each of these teacher’s experiences is that they all accepted the challenge of learning a new instrument or style of music so that they could share these instruments and styles with their students. A few examples of this theme appear in Table 3.

Table 3.

Amp Up NYC’s impact on case study music teachers’ musicianship.

Amp Up NYC school music teacher	Interview quotes
Tony	“I’m learning a lot more instruments. I started playing the ukulele because I was teaching kindergarten only and I knew that there was no way my kids were going to play guitar . . . and now I’m teaching myself trombone, and I’ve been practicing my guitar and bass skills” and “I’m learning a lot more songs. I’m trained as jazz musician so for years I bought into the Kool-Aid of like, oh yeah, pop music sucks and blah blah blah, and now I’m finally seeing the beauty in pop harmony and chord changes. I’m starting to open up my mind.” (February 2016)
Lauren	“I used to be so scared because I’m not really a guitarist at all . . . So as soon as you hold the guitar, the kids are like, ‘Oh play something, play something!’ I’ve come to terms with that I am not a guitarist- but I mean I can accompany kids and I’ll tell them I know how to read music, and I know basics, but I’m not really a guitarist. I’m a singer, that’s what I was classically trained to do. But I’ll do it, and I’ll show them how to do it and once they see that I can do chords and stuff like that then I still have their respect. But I’ll play with them, and I’ll show them, and I’ll help them and teach them the difficult chords too. You know if a part is missing and there’s no bass guitarist I’ll be like yeah—if I can figure out a bass line that I can play then I can put it on a kid and be like ok if I can do it then you can totally do it too. It’s these three notes and go for it. And then the kids feel like they can play another instrument as well.” (February 2016)
Teddy	“I learned a little more about guitar and keyboard, and I learned how to play drums because I never really knew how to play drums and I never really played a bass until 20 minutes before we started and we got the basses, and I pulled them out of the box. And then when I was playing bass in the room when they came, it helped me understand how steady the time has to be, which I’m very aware of in the jazz setting. So, I was really trying to focus in on the timing of playing the bass- even just playing quarter notes on one note. Just to lock it in. And also, just the energy. It’s really hard!” (January 2016)

Participating in a professional development program like Amp Up NYC may change teachers’ personal music-making behaviors (Sanderson, 2014). We examined whether there were differences from before participating and after participating in Amp Up NYC in teachers’ active music-making activities and passive musical activities such as listening to music and attending concerts. Specifically, we looked at the number of hours per week the participating teachers spent on activities like singing or playing in a band, practicing their instrument, listening to music, and attending live performances. Our analysis (Table 4) indicated that after participating in the program, music teachers increased the amount of time spent participating in all of these musical activities, although only in the area of “Practicing an instrument” did the mean differences exceed the 95% CI. The most frequently mentioned “other” outside of school music activities that teachers mentioned was “songwriting.”

Table 4.

Number of hours spent on outside of school musical activities per week.

Activity	Means before participation	Means after participation
Play/Sing in a band	5.82 [4.60, 7.04]	6.68 [5.37, 7.99]
Sing in a choir	2.24 [1.52, 2.96]	2.76 [1.92, 3.60]
Practice an instrument	8.40 [7.26, 9.54]	10.98 [9.74, 12.22]^a
Use music technology	6.06 [4.88, 7.24]	8.39 [7.08, 9.70]
Listen to music	14.16 [12.87, 15.45]	15.74 [14.46, 17.02]
Attend live concerts	4.61 [3.66, 5.56]	5.68 [4.61, 6.75]
Other	3.10 [1.82, 4.80]	5.12 [3.24, 7.00]

CI: confidence interval.

Indicates mean where CI (95%) does not overlap.

Changes in pedagogy and philosophy

There was a change in the teaching approaches used by the teachers before and after participation in Amp Up NYC. We asked teachers which pedagogical/philosophical approaches (Orff, Kodály, Suzuki, and Music as a Second Language [MSL]²) they used both before and after they participated in Amp Up NYC. The teachers were asked to select each of the music teaching approaches that they use regularly; so most of the responding music teachers selected more than one approach. The results showed little changes in the teachers’ use of the Orff (–4%), Kodály (–4%), and Suzuki (+2%) methods. However, a substantial increase was reported from before participation to after participation in the use of the MSL approach (+37%).

We observed another notable change in pedagogical approaches in the number of compositions that Amp Up NYC students created. The survey revealed that there was an important increase in the number of compositions students created in their music classes after participating in the program. At the beginning of the school year, teachers reported that their students composed an average of 1.90 (95% CI [1.59, 2.17]) original pieces each year. After participating in the program, the same teachers reported that their students composed an average of 2.93 (95% CI [2.46, 3.34]) compositions each year. In addition, the number of teachers who reported their students created no compositions in their music classes decreased from 18% to 6%.

Efficacy of philosophical and pedagogical approaches

There are some general outcomes of professional development experiences that may be more important than developing specific skills and understandings. We examined teachers’ attitudes toward their music program and its place in their school. Based on LKR’s desired outcomes for modern band participation, we believe that if teachers do not have a positive perspective on the impact of a program, then they may be less likely to implement it. Specifically, the questions we asked were “What percentage of your students’ musical needs are met by your modern band music classes?” and “On average, what percentage of your students are fully engaged in your music classes?” Teachers rated their students’ levels of engagement and their school music program’s fulfillment of their needs on a scale from 0% to 100%. Our analysis revealed that teachers perceived that their music program meets more of their students’ need after (79%; 95% CI [76.12%, 82.04%]) implementing Amp Up than before (50%; 95% CI [45.24%, 55.04%]). We asked a similar question about the teachers’ perception of the percentage of students that were “fully engaged.” Once again teachers perceived that their students were more engaged after implementing Amp Up (before: 66%; 95% CI [62.32%, 70.28%], after: 85%; 95% CI [82.91%, 87.37%]).

On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being not at all and 5 being completely agree), we asked Amp Up NYC teachers how much they agreed with the statement, “I am excited about the current state of my music program.” Our analysis revealed that teachers were more excited about their programs after (M = 4.39; 95% CI [4.27, 4.51]) participating in Amp Up NYC than before (M = 3.63; 95% CI [3.43, 3.77]).

Amp Up NYC teachers who responded to the online survey shared anecdotes about how participation in the program affected their philosophy and pedagogy. In addition to changes in their beliefs and practice, these teachers shared how participation in this program helped them to become more effective and successful music teachers. Many of the music teachers commented on the need for additional professional development, “Really would love a 2nd workshop for additional info, now that I’ve gotten my feet wet I would like to be able to sit down and further explore from an intermediate point of view.” Another Amp Up NYC teacher shared their success using guitar riffs, “I found it hard to teach easy chords to my elementary/fourth and fifth grade beginning guitar students. This year I switched to teaching guitar riffs first and started having more success with that.”

Our research team observed examples of the pedagogical and philosophical change that the Amp Up NYC teachers reported during daily music classes and performances. During the end of the year performance at Little Town Academy of Technology, Teddy stood in the back of the room and watched his students announce, count off, and lead their modern band performance. The lead singer introduced each of the pieces, and the drummer told a few jokes in between songs. The students had named their band “The Show Offs” and performed three tunes: “Eleanor Rigby,” “The Lion Sleeps Tonight,” and “The Best Day of My Life.” After the band played “Eleanor Rigby,” Teddy loudly called out from the back of the multipurpose room, “Hey Amelia! Introduce the band!” Amelia looked to the audience, which was made up of about 70 of her peers and a handful of teachers and parents, and then looked to the members in the band and loudly whispered, “Do you guys want to just introduce yourselves?” The students nodded yes and took turns holding the microphone close to their faces and introduced themselves quickly and abruptly. One of the students almost dropped the microphone as he handed it back to Amelia before he had finished saying his name. Teddy smiled proudly and adoringly as his students finished passing the microphone around the semicircle before continuing on with the rest of their set. At the end of the performance, Teddy joyously disclosed,

Yeah that is nothing like what I have to do in 20 minutes for my 6th grade chorus concert! It’s not every day that the teacher gets to stand in the back of the room while the kids do the whole performance! (June 2016)

Changes in school leadership, culture, and climate

There were three items on the teacher survey which provide some insight into the role of the Amp Up NYC teachers in the school and community: (a) Music Program influences school’s culture—before (M = 3.77; 95% CI [3.17, 4.37]), after (M = 4.32; 95% CI [4.19, 4.45]); (b) Average number of in-school concerts—before (M = 2.35; 95% CI [2.02, 2.68]), after (M = 3.24; 95% CI [2.79, 3.69]); and (c) Average number of community concerts—before (M = 1.05; 95% CI [0.87, 1.23]), after (M = 1.45; 95% CI [1.20, 1.70]). All three areas show an increased presence of the music program in the school and community. However, while the average number of school concerts show non-overlapping CIs (95%), the 95% CI for music program influences school’s culture and the number of community concerts overlapped.

During the third and final interview, we asked each of the teachers about their role in their school’s community. To compare the perceptions of the case study teachers, we interviewed their principals (n = 2) or assistant principals (n = 3) and non-music teachers (n = 7). Our analysis suggests that all five of the case study school teachers are leaders in their schools and communities. The most notable and recurring attributes of these leaders include dedication, innovation, initiation, reliability, and organization. Table 5 highlights examples of the attributes that each of the five case study teachers demonstrated.

Table 5.

Commonalities of leadership qualities among the five case study school music teachers.

Attribute	Interview quotes and excerpts from field notes
Dedication and Reliability	“Mike’s consistent and unwavering leadership can be characterized by his nickname, which is ‘the machine’, which is the name that his principal used to refer to him several times during the interview to convey how consistently reliable and organized he is. The principal at Northbound believes that Mike’s ability to play this role in the school community is largely due to his dedication to the students and the school.” (Excerpt from Researcher’s Field Notes, Northbound Middle School, June 2016)
Innovation	“Tony is an innovative teacher, who is eager to share his ideas with his colleagues within the Amp Up community and his school community. He posts a public blog that shares his ideas about music instruction, philosophy, as well as open the space for dialogue with other visitors to his webpage.” (Excerpt from Researcher’s Field Notes, John Dewey Elementary School, March 2016)
Organization and Innovation	“My school’s music program facilitated by Miranda has impacted my student to a great degree. Miranda allows the students to research music genres from various decades and they choose a decade and songs they want to perform. They invite students to be featured vocally on these songs as well as the teachers. Students playing while their teachers perform has helped to foster positive student/teacher relationship which transfers into the classroom. This music program is an integral part of my students’ academic and social development.” (Non-Music Teacher, Rutherford B. Hayes Secondary School, June 2016)
Initiation	“Although Tony is fairly new to the school community, his presence has made a very positive impact on our students and staff. He jumped right into projects already in progress and became a key player in their success. He has taken initiative in activities for both students and staff and is always working on creating positive activities. Tony is working right now on a final presentation where both students and staff will present John Lennon’s ‘Imagine’ to the school community and all students and staff will be a part!” (Principal, John Dewey Elementary School, June 2016)

Discussion

The purpose of this research was to investigate the impact of a comprehensive professional development program on participating teachers’ musicianship, pedagogy, and leadership. After participating in the yearlong program, Amp Up NYC teachers reported positive changes in all three domains as evidenced through the data collected from the online survey and observed in the five case study school music teachers’ classes and student performances.

Changes in teachers’ musicianship

The survey data showed increases in the Amp Up NYC music teachers’ musical skills in the areas of playing modern band instruments, and increases in composing, improvising, teaching composition, and teaching improvisation although these increases were not large enough to be generalized confidently. A goal of the Amp Up NYC program was to help music teachers develop their musicianship in improvisation and composition due to previous research findings that reported composition and improvisation are the areas where music teachers report the highest levels of anxiety and avoidance (Randles & Smith, 2012). Based on this work, we anticipated a positive correlation between the teachers’ levels of comfort and skill composing and the number of compositions that their students created would exist. The data revealed that when teachers acquired new skills playing and performing on modern band instruments, they appeared to be more comfortable and empowered to teach modern band programs in their schools. The survey data indicated that there were small increases in the number of hours Amp Up NYC teachers spent engaging in music-making activities outside of school (i.e., singing or playing in a band, practicing their instrument, listening to music, and attending live performances). These new skills may lead teachers to become more engaged in musical activities outside of school for their leisure and enjoyment.

Changes in teachers’ pedagogy and philosophy

The findings of this study add to the existing body of literature that advocates for music teachers to align their multiple teaching methods and approaches with their school’s cultures and environments to increase the likelihood that their music classes will meet their students’ needs (Benedict, 2010; Regelski, 2002). The fact that the Amp Up NYC teachers reported an increase from implementing the MSL Approach from 23% of their instructional time to 60% of their instructional time (+37%) is an essential detail of this study because it reveals the efficacy of the ongoing professional development model in making changes and expanding music teachers’ pedagogies and philosophies. The increase in teachers’ reported usage of the MSL Approach is not a surprising finding for several reasons. First, the Amp Up NYC instructional materials and resources were created based on the MSL approach. Therefore, when teachers incorporated the Amp Up NYC strategies and resources into their teaching, they were implementing the MSL approach. Second, the MSL approach is the pedagogical and philosophical foundation of Amp Up NYC. Third, the participating teachers were eager to try something new in their classrooms. As we observed in the case study schools, the music teachers in Amp Up NYC were not novice teachers and were eager to implement new strategies to complement their established knowledge and skills using Kodály, Dalcroze, Orff, Suzuki, and other approaches in their music classrooms.

In addition to ongoing professional development and learning, scholars report that effective approaches to professional development have several common features. These features include (a) work to link improved instructional practice and student learning, (b) address the needs of student and adult learners, (c) are collaborative and ongoing experiences, (d) create a culture of excellence, and (e) allocate time for reflective practice that nurtures learning and application (Blankstein et al., 2007). Two unique aspects of Amp Up NYC were the monthly meetings and the online community of practice hosted on the private Facebook group page. The focus of the monthly meetings and discussions that occurred on the Facebook group were designed to be directly related to the needs of Amp Up NYC teachers as they implemented modern band music programs into their classrooms. These ongoing aspects of the program correspond with the recommendations to create and maintain a community of practice (Wenger, 2006) through informal professional development. Killion (2000) defined informal professional development as, “teacher planning, grade-level or department meetings, conversations about students, reflection on students’ or teachers’ work, problem-solving, assisting each other, classroom-based action, research, coaching and supporting instructional resources” (p. 3). Killion advocated that creating these types of learning opportunities emphasizes, ignites, and sustains teachers’ excitement for learning, growing, and altering their instructional practices (as cited in Drago-Severson, 2009, p. 21).

The data collected in this study suggest that Amp Up NYC music teachers felt that participation in the yearlong program enabled them to teach music programs that were more effective at “meeting their students’ needs” and that more of their students were “fully engaged” in the music program than they had been previously. The research team also examined the outcomes from Amp Up NYC through music students’ responses to an RPM online survey (n = 940) and observations/interviews of students at the same five case study schools (Weiss et al., 2017). In our study of student outcomes, some results seem to support the views expressed by their teachers regarding their new approaches to pedagogy. For example, at the end of the school year, after their music teacher had participated in Amp Up NYC, 63% of the responding students agreed or strongly agreed that they had a voice in the selection of songs that their modern band played, and an even larger percentage (72%) agreed (or strongly agreed) that they are able to work well with other students, which we assume may be a result of more collaborative pedagogy. Finally, 82% of the students agreed or strongly agreed that their music teacher respects them as a musician, another response which we view as an outcome of a more collaborative pedagogical approach to instruction.

Changes in leadership

We observed the least amount of change in the third domain, leadership. We suspect that the lack of change is because often, music teachers are already established leaders within their school communities, and Amp Up NYC did not majorly influence their role in their school’s community. The majority of Amp Up NYC teachers were novice modern band music teachers but veteran music teachers with an average of 5 years of teaching experience.

Connections to previous perceptions of popular music pedagogies

Previous examinations into music teacher professional development within popular music practices have largely focused on the Musical Futures Initiative in the United Kingdom (Hallam et al., 2011, 2017a, 2017b). Hallam et al.’s (2011) initial report focused on seven Musical Futures Champion Schools.³ While far fewer teachers were involved with their study than this present study of the Amp Up NYC professional development initiative, several of the outcomes are similar. Hallam et al. (2011) reported that teachers who participated in the Musical Futures Professional Development workshop and implemented the Musical Futures programs in their schools reported that they were able to better engage their students, felt more excited about the state of their music program, and improved their own instrumental playing abilities: findings that were echoed in this study of Amp Up NYC teachers.

The experiences of the Amp Up NYC teachers also connect to previous conceptions of popular music pedagogies as outlined by Green (2006, 2008). In this study, Lauren’s experiences of learning to play the guitar with her students is echoed in the concept of “teacher as learner” as described by Green (2008) who wrote of teachers sitting alongside students as co-learners through informal learning practices. Similarly, Green’s (2006) description of the changing role of the teacher in popular music pedagogies is reflected in Teddy’s description of his role with his modern band as compared to his role as a chorus teacher.

The similarities between the findings of this study and previous research on popular music professional development suggest that the outcomes of the Amp Up NYC initiative are not solely unique to those teachers who participated in the Amp Up NYC professional development initiative. While the monthly in-person professional development opportunities and the scale of the online support community separate Amp Up NYC from other popular music professional development opportunities, more research is necessary to determine how beneficial these aspects of the initiative were in the overall benefits described by the participants.

Conclusion

Amp Up NYC had many of the characteristics of effective professional development programs (Desimone, 2011; Desimone et al., 2003; Martin-Kniep, 2008). In addition to the introductory workshop, the program included online resources, monthly opportunities to communicate in person with other Amp Up NYC teachers, a variety of support materials, and musical instruments needed to facilitate a modern band program. The data show that there are more popular music and modern band programs throughout the New York City public schools today than there were before the Amp Up NYC initiative began. At the beginning of the 2019–2020 school year, LKR reported 445 active modern band teachers in NYC, serving over 71,000 students. Of those 445 teachers, 391 (88%) participated in the Amp Up NYC professional development initiative between the years 2014 and 2017.

As stated previously, Hewitt (2018) suggested three elements that led to meaningful and impactful professional development. These elements included optional participation by the teacher, occurring over a sustained period of time, and requiring reflection about curricular beliefs and practices. Using these criteria, the data suggest that a comprehensive, ongoing professional development approach like Amp Up NYC may be effective in empowering novice and veteran in-service music teachers to include popular music pedagogies in their music classrooms.

There are several limitations associated with this study and results should be viewed with caution. While important differences were found in the survey data, only 22% of the modern band teachers responded to our online survey and the evaluation design did not compare data from music teachers who did not participate in Amp Up NYC. We attempted to address the weaknesses in the survey response rate by using a conservative approach to our analysis of the survey results. Another limitation for replicating this study is that the participating music teachers received resources, instruments, and ongoing professional development opportunities at no-cost to them or their schools. Additional studies on the Amp Up NYC music program are warranted to further determine what components of professional development experiences like the Amp Up NYC professional development initiative are critical to its success.

Footnotes

Correction (July 2023):

This article’s Funding and Declaration of Conflicting Interests statements have been updated since its original publication.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Prior to this paper’s study, Dr Bryan Powell served as Interim Director, and then during data collection as Director of Amp Up, a subsidiary of Little Kids Rock (now known as Music Will). During writing of our paper, Dr Bryan Powell was a faculty member of Cali School of Music, Montclair State University, USA, and worked as a part-time employee at Little Kids Rock/Music Will.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This article is based on a program assessment funded by Amp Up NYC. The third author, Dr. Bryan Powell, was Director of Amp Up NYC, a subsidiary of Little Kids Rock (now Music Will) during data collection for this study. In this role, he served on the team that recommended the hiring of authors 1 and 2 to perform the program assessment reported in this article. Dr. Powell collaborated with authors 1 and 2 on data collection, such as recommending sites to observe, providing lists of participants, and assisting in arranging interviews, and participated in writing the original draft manuscript, as well as revisions and final edits to the published manuscript.

ORCID iD

Hal Abeles

Notes

References

Benedict

(2010). Methods and approaches. In Abeles

Custodero

(Eds.), Critical issues in music education: Contemporary theory and practice (pp. 194–214). Oxford University Press.

Bernard

H. R.

(2011). Research methods in anthropology: Quantitative and qualitative approaches (5th ed.). AltaMira Press.

Biemer

P. P.

Groves

R. M.

Lyberg

L. E.

Mathiowetz

N. A.

Sudman

, (Eds.). (2011). Measurement errors in surveys. John Wiley & Sons.

Blankstein

A. M.

Houston

P. D.

Cole

R. W.

(2007). Sustaining professional learning communities. Corwin.

Charmaz

(2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. SAGE.

Creswell

J. W.

(2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE.

Cumming

Finch

(2005). Inference by eye: Confidence intervals, and how to read pictures of data. American Psychologist, 60(2), 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.170

Cumming

Williams

Fidler

(2004). Replication, and researchers’ understanding of confidence intervals and standard error bars. Understanding Statistics, 3, 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328031us0304_5

Desimone

L. M.

(2011). A primer on effective professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 68–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200616

10.

Desimone

L. M.

Birman

Porter

Garet

Yoon

K. S.

(2003). Improving teachers’ in-service professional development in mathematics and science: The role of postsecondary institutions. Educational Policy, 17(5), 613–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904803256791

11.

Dorfman

(2020). Examining effectiveness of modern band professional development for practising teachers. Journal of Popular Music Education, 4(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1386/jpme_00011_1

12.

Drago-Severson

(2009). Leading adult learning: Supporting adult development in our schools. Corwin.

13.

Green

(2006). Popular music education in and for itself, and for “other” music: Current research in the classroom. International Journal of Music Education, 24(2), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761406065471

14.

Green

(2008). Music, informal learning and the school: A new classroom pedagogy. Ashgate.

15.

Guskey

(2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512

16.

Hallam

Creech

McQueen

(2011). Musical futures: A case study investigation [Final report from Institute of Education University of London for the Paul Hamlyn Foundation]. https://www.musicalfutures.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/musicalfutureslongitudinalstudy.pdf

17.

Hallam

Creech

McQueen

(2017a). Can the adoption of informal approaches to learning music in school music lessons promote musical progression? British Journal of Music Education, 34(2), 127–151. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051716000486

18.

Hallam

Creech

McQueen

(2017b). What impact does teaching music informally in the classroom have on teachers, and their pedagogy? Music Education Research, 19(1), 42–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2015.1122749

19.

Hewitt

(2018). The impact of a professional development program in popular music on a music teacher’s beliefs and practices [Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

20.

Isbell

D. S.

(2016). Apprehensive and excited: Music education students’ experience vernacular musicianship. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 25(3), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083714568020

21.

Kastner

J. D.

(2014). Exploring informal music learning in a professional development community of music teachers. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 202, 71–89. https://doi.org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.202.0071

22.

Killion

(2000, December/January). Exemplary schools model quality staff development. Results, p. 3.

23.

Lam

T. C.

Bengo

(2003). A comparison of three retrospective self-reporting methods of measuring change in instructional practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400302400106

24.

Lebler

Weston

(2015). Staying in sync: Keeping popular music pedagogy relevant to an evolving music industry. IASPM@ Journal, 5(1), 124–138.

25.

Martin-Kniep

(2008). Communities that learn, lead, and last: Building and sustaining educational expertise. Jossey-Bass.

26.

McLaughlin

M. W.

Talbert

J. E.

(2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. University of Chicago Press.

27.

Powell

Burstein

(2017). Popular music and modern band principles. In Smith

G. D.

Moir

Brennan

Rambarran

Kirkman

(Eds.), The Routledge research companion to popular music education (pp. 203–216). Routledge.

28.

Randles

Smith

G. D.

(2012). A first comparison of pre-service music teachers’ identities as creative musicians in the United States and England. Research Studies in Music Education, 34(2), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X12464836

29.

Regelski

(2002). On “methodolatry” and music teaching as critical and reflective praxis. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 10(2), 102–123.

30.

Sanderson

D. N.

(2014). Music class offerings beyond bands, choirs, and orchestras in Nebraska high schools [Master’s thesis]. University of Nebraska–Lincoln. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1079&context=musicstudent

31.

Springer

D. G.

(2016). Teaching popular music: Investigating music educators’ perceptions and preparation. International Journal of Music Education, 34(4), 403–415. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761415619068

32.

Tempera

(2014, March 20). Berklee to help expand music programs for NYC students. Boston Globe. https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/03/19/berklee-college-help-expand-music-programs-for-new-york-city-schoolchildren/zIa4xxm5WiTjDKK9XNXeeM/story.html

33.

Vasil

Weiss

Powell

(2019). Popular music pedagogies: An approach to teaching 21st-century skills. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 28(3), 85–95.

34.

Weiss

Abeles

H. F.

Powell

(2017). Integrating popular music into urban schools: Examining students’ outcomes of participation in the Amp Up New York City music initiative. Journal of Popular Music Education, 1(3), 331–356. https://doi.org/10.1386/jpme.1.3.331_1

35.

Wenger

(2006). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/11736