Values,Agency,and Identity in a Music Teacher Education Program

Abstract

Many view music teacher education as a locus for socially just transformation of music education through the development of preservice teacher agency and identity development. However, few have directly examined values in music teacher preparation programs, and values are implicit in agency. The purpose of this exploratory, intrinsic case study was to investigate the visible values in music education courses at one institution to add a new dimension to research and practice. We collected data from four instructor and five undergraduate participants through observations, interviews, and syllabus review. Themes of critical thinking, agency, student centeredness, positive teacher-student relationships, and skills and knowledge for teaching emerged from the data. Findings indicate that values may be relative in practice despite shared language among preservice teachers and music teacher educators. We provide guiding questions for program review and future research through the lens of values.

Keywords

agency case method music education majors music teacher identity music teacher preparation preservice teachers values

Many scholars view music teacher education (MTE) as a locus for socially just transformation of music education in the United States (e.g., Barrett, 2015). For example, in the Oxford Handbook of Preservice MTE in the United States, Conway et al. (2019) encouraged music teacher educators to create atmospheres in which “future teachers are actively pushed to develop an agentic, forward-thinking teacher identity” (pp. 913–914). The authors urged music teacher educators to develop preservice music teachers’ agency so that they may push boundaries for greater inclusivity of underserved student populations through access, innovative forms of music education, and collaboration. Their call echoes other scholars’ visions of teacher agency as a potential means for progressive reform in music education (e.g., Allsup & Westerlund, 2012; Powell, 2019).

A focus on the adoption of an agentic music teacher identity for greater social justice in school music education requires the consideration of values because values are implicit in human agency. Agency involves making decisions and taking action. According to Harland and Pickering (2011),

Valuing is about choices. We evaluate as we make decisions about what we do and how we live, and under normal circumstances our thinking and actions express or reflect our values. In turn, our thinking creates the values of the world and . . . the values of teaching and higher education. (p. 9)

Thus, values are practical manifestations of deeply held ontologies and play a major role in individual agency. Few researchers have directly examined how values are made manifest within MTE programs.

Review of Literature

Leading philosophers have discussed values in their work on the purposes of music education (e.g., Elliott, 1993; Reimer, 1989; Woodford, 2005). Some have made direct, explicit connections to values in MTE (Allsup, 2003, 2015; Allsup & Westerlund, 2012; Barrett, 2015). These scholars have called for the inclusion of democratic values for social justice in MTE to expand the boundaries of school music to include open forms and global repertoire (Allsup, 2015; Barrett, 2015). Allsup (2003, 2015), Allsup and Westerlund (2012), and Barrett (2015) aligned on the importance of critical thinking and reflection, empathy, equity, cultural responsiveness, and diversity as guiding values in MTE. In addition, Allsup (2015) argued that a democratic MTE requires preservice teachers (PSTs) to become aware of structures, relationships, and agency. This awareness could empower future music teachers to resist the neoliberal business influences on education in the United States that have reduced effective teaching and learning to what is measurable and demonstrable. Similarly, Barrett (2015), Powell (2019), and Tucker (2020b) posited that the development of PST agency in MTE is crucial for positive change in the field through students’ future teaching practices.

Democratic values for social justice are implicit in Frederickson and Conway’s (2009) conception of music teacher preparation as education rather than training. The term training implies that students will acquire skills and knowledge for effective functioning within narrow roles such as band or orchestra directors. In contrast, education involves the holistic development of individuals to become music education professionals capable of considering and selecting the mix of curricular approaches most relevant to their teaching contexts. Barrett (2015) linked control, prediction, and regulation to music teacher preparation as training, and Allsup (2015) believed training provided an illusion of certain outcomes for preservice music teachers who desire practical coursework and vocational training. The notion of music teacher preparation as education is more comprehensive because it includes both skill acquisition and the development of PST agency. The emergence of PSTs’ agency inherently involves their values, because values are inseparable from identity and identity is agency in action (Tucker, 2020a).

Values have been integral to scholars’ calls for transformation through the expansion of PSTs’ imaginations for agentic action (Dobbs, 2014; Jorgensen, 2003; Powell, 2017). Teacher agency, which requires imagination, has emerged as a means of transformation of and/or navigation between music traditions and their corresponding values (see Allsup, 2016; Powell, 2019). Several authors have called on music teacher educators to inspire and facilitate agency, or conscious, intentional action, by providing opportunities for PSTs to imagine music futures beyond their personal experiences (Dobbs, 2014; Jorgensen, 2003; Powell, 2017; Tucker, 2020b). However, many researchers have found that PSTs are strongly influenced by their experiences in the Western classical traditions of bands, choirs, and orchestras and desire to reproduce their experiences for future students (Campbell, 1999; Dobbs, 2014; Dolloff, 1999; Powell & Parker, 2017; Schmidt, 1998). Thus, Dobbs (2014) called on music teacher educators to carefully honor PSTs’ experiences while challenging them to imagine and embrace a culturally relevant, equitable, diverse, polymusic education. Allsup (2012) and Powell (2019) responded to Dobbs’s charge by encouraging music teachers to prioritize student well-being above the preservation of structures and traditions. Therefore, democratic values and agency are inherent in appeals for the expansion of PSTs’ imaginations for social justice in school music education.

At the time of writing, we could locate one study in which researchers directly examined preservice music teachers’ values (Woody et al., 2018). Woody et al. found that as PSTs matured through their college careers, they exhibited a stronger music learning orientations and possessed/valued reflectivity and music comprehensiveness dispositions to a greater extent. However, Woody et al. examined a priori values. A qualitative, inductive exploration may yield different, naturalistic findings on undergraduate music education majors’ values. Furthermore, the robust and important bodies of research on self-efficacy, identity, and teacher concerns in MTE provide limited, speculative insight into music teacher agency and values, which indicates a need for direct inquiry (Rathgeber & Mantie, 2019). Additionally, scholars have recently found that preservice and novice music teacher identity and agency are inherently intertwined, which indicates that the phenomena may be best studied concurrently (Dabback, 2018; Draves, 2019; Powell, 2017).

The purpose of this exploratory intrinsic case study was to investigate the visible values in music education courses at one institution to add a new dimension to research and practice. We included both professors and undergraduates to investigate values-related processes such as communication and/or transfer that may occur in the social interactions between them. Therefore, the guiding research questions were as follows:

Research Question 1: What values and beliefs are shared and communicated by music education professors?

Research Question 2: What values and beliefs do PSTs hold?

Research Question 3: What values are transferred between professors and students in undergraduate music education courses?

Research Question 4: How are preservice music teachers’ agency and identities shaped (or not) by professors’ values?

Theoretical Frameworks

We used Harland and Pickering’s (2011) nondualistic view of values as one theoretical framework for this study. Harland and Pickering argued that values are neither completely foundational nor entirely relativistic. A foundational view emphasizes the sociality of shared values and the notion that some values are objectively and inherently better than others. A relativistic conception of values highlights the importance of context and the individual in the belief that all values are relative. Harland and Pickering rejected the dichotomy between foundationalism and relativism and accepted that neither philosophy fully illustrates the practice of values in the complexities of everyday life. Thus, we used both foundational and relative perspectives of values throughout the study, which was appropriate given the complexity of higher education and the pluralism of contemporary society. In addition, Harland and Pickering connected values to life experiences and actions, which informed our analysis of agency in the MTE program of study.

We also employed Biesta’s (2015) three domains of educational purpose as a theoretical lens (see Figure 1). Biesta theorized that there are three functions of education: qualification, socialization, and subjectification. Biesta conceives of qualification as the transmission and acquisition of knowledge, skills, and dispositions. He sees socialization as involving identity development and initiation into traditions and ways of being. Finally, he argues that subjectification represents the evolution of individuals from the objects of others’ actions into subjects with initiative, responsibility, autonomy, independence, criticality, and the capacity for judgment. This framework allows space for different conceptions of knowledge acquisition, identity development, and the meaning of human existence within each function. However, the three functions are inseparable and educators’ efforts to influence one function may affect students in the others. For example, any effort to help students acquire teaching skills will also inform their socialization to the teacher role, identity development, and agency.

Figure 1.

The three functions of education and the three domains of educational purpose (Biesta, 2015, p. 78).

Method

We conducted an intrinsic case study of an MTE program during the Spring 2019 semester. The case study was bound by the three required core courses for all undergraduate music education majors (irrespective of concentration area) at a large, public university in a Southwestern state. The courses were introduction to music education (two sections taught by different instructor participants), elementary general music methods (two sections taught by different instructor participants), and secondary general music methods (one section taught by an instructor participant). This MTE program represented an intrinsic case (Stake, 1995) because of its inherent interest—the instructors actively incorporated democratic values for social justice into the curriculum and are widely known for their research in different facets of social justice in music education. We investigated the MTE program as the case, or unit of analysis, rather than participants as individual cases, which aligned with our interest in the social interactions between participants (Stake, 1995).

At the time of data collection, Olivia was a doctoral student in music education and Sean was her advisor. We had varying degrees of experience as music teacher educators, and we were interested in the development of PST agency in MTE programs. The compelling, inextricable natures of agency, identity, and values helped us formulate research questions. We entered the research with a bias toward the benefits of MTE programs for future music educators, but we had few, if any, preconceived notions on potential answers to the research questions. This was an exploratory study, and we had few indications from prior literature concerning potential findings. We were direct observers at the time of data collection; neither of us taught any of the music education courses involved in the study.

Participants

Interview participants were four instructors (professors) and five PSTs in the program. We used convenience and criterion sampling to recruit volunteers through conversations, emails, and classroom announcements. To focus our inquiry on participants fully immersed in the MTE program, our central criterion for PST sampling was the completion of the final required core music education course offered at the university by May 2019. Of the over 20 undergraduates who volunteered to participate and met the criterion, we selected five individuals who reflected the diversity of the program. They identified as two male, three female, two white, two Latinx, and one East Asian American participant. Their pseudonyms were Desiree, Eric, Leslie, Matt, and Monica. Eric and Matt planned to teach band, Monica desired to direct choirs, Desiree hoped to become an orchestra teacher, and Leslie wanted to teach elementary general music after graduation. The instructors (Drs. A, P, Q, and R) were all tenure-track assistant or tenured associate professors. Due to their high profile within the field of music education, we do not provide their demographic descriptions to protect the confidentiality of their participation.

Data Collection and Analysis

Following case study methodology, we collected rich, descriptive field notes from direct observation, transcriptions of semistructured interviews, and document reviews of publicly available course syllabi (Stake, 1995). Because this study was exploratory, we limited data collection to two observations per course and one interview per participant to facilitate our focus on themes that emerged from the program as a whole rather than from individual courses or participants. Additionally, we used robust theoretical frameworks (Biesta, 2015; Harland & Pickering, 2011) to use “theory to think with . . . data [and] data to think with theory” (Jackson & Mazzei, 2012, p. vii). Given the lack of research on values in MTE, we believed we had enough data to provide a compelling exploratory analysis with the theoretical tools we selected. In our observations and field notes, we focused on the implicit and explicit communication and transfer of values through classroom activities and undergraduates’ interactions with professors (Harland & Pickering, 2011). Interviews were open-ended and designed to gain insight into participants’ values on music education (Merriam, 2009; see Online Supplemental Appendix A). We collected all the data except for our interview of Dr. Q in February, March, and April 2019. We selected this time frame in an effort to observe and discuss central course content with participants; we avoided observing introductory activities in January and final exams in May. We conducted one interview (with Dr. Q) in August 2019 due to unavoidable scheduling conflicts during the spring semester.

At the beginning of our analysis, we individually coded the first two sets of field notes and one interview transcript using open coding and values coding (Saldaña, 2016). We attempted to capture both emic and etic meanings as they appeared inductively in the data. Thus, both theoretical frameworks (Biesta, 2015; Harland & Pickering, 2011) informed our design and analysis. After coding our initial data independently, we compared and discussed our codes and their meanings and generated a codebook to separately analyze remaining data. We sought trustworthiness through reflexivity, triangulation, and documenting rich, descriptive field notes (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Tracy, 2010). We corroborated evidence across participants and between field notes, interviews, and syllabi (Stake, 1995). In an effort to contribute rigor (Tracy, 2010) to the study, we chose to emphasize theory in our analysis rather than utilizing member checks. Following Harland and Pickering (2011), we maintained that values may be unstable and change, often subconsciously. Personal experience, the social world, group membership, and social interactions mediate values. Because values are often subconscious and contested, we believed theoretical analysis would provide deeper interpretations and connections to literature than conscious member checks.

Findings

Theme 1: Critical Thinking

Throughout our data collection, Dr. A, Dr. P, and Dr. Q exhibited a consistent orientation toward social justice, and critical thinking was their central desired outcome of students’ coursework. They sometimes referred to critical thinking as independent thought, and they desired for students to think for themselves beyond recreating their own prior experiences and the status quo of standardized, performance-based curriculum. The instructors encouraged critical thinking through reflective writing, discussion, and open-ended projects. Dr. A and Dr. P used words such as challenge, push, and disrupt to describe their efforts. Dr. A and Dr. P also led students through critical listening exercises of Western, non-Western, and popular musics to encourage student reflection (see Online Supplemental Appendix B, for additional participant quotes.)

I see my role . . . as disrupting the cycle and getting students to think differently about what it means to be musical, a musician, and a teacher of musicians. What is legitimate music? Does that include pop music, world music, and jazz? (Dr. P interview, March 28)

Dr. Q used a less direct approach by first seeking to know PSTs and then encouraging them to consider others’ points of view.

I try not to push . . . because I know that we have students that come from different backgrounds . . . I try not to make assumptions about their knowledges that they bring into the classroom. I try to seek information about their own personal experiences and build from that so that we can be on some common ground. (Dr. Q interview, August 19)

Although they used different approaches, Dr. A, Dr. Q, and Dr. P valued critical thinking. They questioned students’ assumptions on what music is, what music teaching and learning are, and who decides what quality music and performance are. Thus, Dr. A’s, Dr. P’s, and Dr. Q’s conceptions of critical thinking were solidly situated in the subjectification domain of education.

Dr. R also valued critical thinking but put more emphasis on skills and knowledge acquisition (in the qualification domain) and PSTs’ socialization to the teacher role. For example, Dr. R desired for PSTs to think critically about what elementary students are capable of rather than the materials and nature of music and music education. Dr. R’s central goal for PSTs was for them to be ready to step into an elementary music teaching position with the skills and curriculum necessary to experience a degree of immediate success. This required predetermined conceptions of music education, which Dr. R drew from existing methods in elementary music classrooms such as Kodály and Orff.

I at least want to expose them to the most popular and current approaches to teaching elementary music. . . . I want to give them as many resources to find appropriate literature as possible. . . . So, I made a huge list of songs along with the accompanying [state-standardized] concepts that [they] could use. (Dr. R interview, April 2)

Students responded positively to all four instructors’ variations of critical thinking.

A lot of the time we are told what we should think. . . . We don’t think about why we do this. So, challenging common notions, even if they are good ideas, [helps us] understand why we believe them. . . . It’s been a common thing in all of my [music education] classes. (Matt Interview, April 2)

Theme 2: Agency

While all four professors valued critical thinking, it manifested differently in their instruction because they were emphasizing different domains of education (Biesta, 2015) and working toward different goals. Dr. R focused on PSTs’ qualification and socialization in Western traditions and current norms. In contrast, the other three instructors focused on the subjectification domain. Critical thinking was an end and an implicit means to their ultimate, although opaque, goal of MTE: teacher agency. Harland and Pickering (2011) connected values and agency by positing that “values guide our decisions and actions” (p. 14). Congruently, we define agency here, as Tucker (2020b) has in prior work, as “the decisions and actions music teachers make and take on behalf of their students, programs, and selves in practical areas of music teaching such as curriculum, instruction, repertoire selection, and performance” (p. 26). Thus, critical thinking involves internal examination, while agency is related to decisions and actions.

In this study, instructors alluded to agency in their language of intentionality and decision making. Agency was distinct from critical thinking in professor participants’ emphasis on action in relation to education, music education, and societal structures. They viewed critical thinking as an outcome of their instruction and a requisite component of the agency that PSTs could use to make contextualized decisions for students and see beyond normative stereotypes.

Research tells us unless you go out and make a conscious decision to teach like this, you will revert back to teaching how you were taught. Do you want to teach that way? Do you want to be different? (Dr. A field notes, February 18)

I know . . . [they’ll have] to work within a certain structure. But maybe . . . they can help instill some change. (Dr. Q interview, August 19)

Dr. A, Dr. P, and Dr. Q desired social justice in music education, particularly through cultural competence, culturally relevant pedagogy, and the reduction of inequitable competition. However, they did not expect to transmit these values to their undergraduate students. They expected their students to begin adopting some of the skills and knowledge necessary in teaching for social justice in music (e.g., critical thinking), but they respected students as independent subjects (as opposed to objects; see Biesta, 2015) by accepting differences in their developing beliefs and future decisions about what and how to teach. However, they hoped that PSTs would one day enact changes in the profession to combat injustice, specifically the inequities perpetrated by music contests.

I know most of you grew up [competing a lot] and maybe that works for you. That’s fine if you critically think about it and say, “Yeah, that works for me.” But what I’m asking you is to critically think about it. Whatever conclusion you come to, that’s your’s, but I want to challenge you on it. I’m going to push you and force you to think deeper. (Dr. P interview, March 28)

Unsurprisingly, some PSTs discussed using their agency to expand conceptions of music education, while others envisioned using agency within the current norms of school music.

I do his lesson plan differently now. I don’t use the standard piano book. I use actual real-world music and . . . he gets more engaged with it. (Desiree interview, March 26)

I want to be an assistant band director and teach the second or third band where I have access to private lessons. . . . Because we both know that we live in a capitalist hell-scape and we have to have money to be able to do some things. . . . We are going to go to [contest] and hopefully we will get [high ratings]. (Eric interview, April 19)

Theme 3: Student Centeredness

Student centeredness emerged as another value all four instructors desired to transmit to PSTs. Professors modeled student-centered instruction and explicitly taught PSTs the importance of focusing on students’ needs.

Dr. R: Who has juries coming up in a couple of weeks? (Many raise their hands.) How are you feeling about that? (Murmuring.) That’s why I front-load the readings at the beginning of the semester. . . . We will have a final, it will be online, so, you can go out of town. We’ll have a review day, it’s not a “gotcha” test. (Dr. R field notes, April 4)

You have to put self in students’ shoes and remember what it’s like to not know stuff. (Dr. Q field notes, February 25)

In addition, all of the PSTs we interviewed valued student centeredness.

I took the first class with Dr. A. . . . It was a great like introductory course and really opened up your mind. Dr. A super stressed that students are first. Like, you cater to the students, not the students cater to you, and that really spoke to me. (Leslie interview, March 22)

You may not always get to the objective at the end of the day. I mean that’s the goal but sometimes you have to [remember that] they are human, too, and they need you to be able to accommodate and be flexible. (Monica interview, April 12)

Participants held varying conceptions of what student centeredness meant, but their definitions organically converged around flexibility and responsiveness to students. Student centeredness was a socialized disposition that corresponded with adaptability in the qualification domain and treating students as people or subjects in the subjectification domain. Thus, student centeredness, outside of flexibility and responsiveness, was similar to critical thinking, in that it may have been a foundational (i.e., universal and unchanging) value in name only and a relative (i.e., changing depending on the context) value in meaning and practice (Harland & Pickering, 2011).

Theme 4: Teacher-Student Relationship

Like student centeredness, all participants valued positive teacher-student relationships. The two themes overlapped in the importance of flexibility, but participants’ conceptions of healthy teacher-student relationships were more robust and complex. The professors valued building meaningful relationships with PSTs for the relationships themselves, but instructors also viewed the relationships as necessary for PSTs to take on the teacher role. However, the professors diverged on their views of the role of comfort in the teacher-student relationship. Dr. A, Dr. Q, and Dr. P sought to establish relationships and environments of trust so that they could push or encourage students out of their comfort zones to think critically. They valued PSTs’ discomfort in terms of challenging music education norms.

I always feel that if they’re not at least a little uncomfortable I’m not doing my job. . . . The more I push them out of their comfort zone, the more they open up to . . . other perspectives. . . . At the same time, it’s important to build that space of trust. So that when you’re pushing them to be uncomfortable, it’s okay. . . . I’ll say the word “experiment” a kazillion times. We’re experimenting here, let’s try it. (Dr. A interview, February 18)

In contrast, Dr. R seemed to focus solely on building warm relationships with PSTs so that they would feel comfortable trying on the elementary music teacher role. Dr. R’s priority may have been necessary given the large number of PSTs planning to teach secondary music who were enrolled in Dr. R’s elementary methods class.

I want to set up a space that it is safe to make mistakes. As long as . . . you are putting forth a good effort, everything is great . . . I was shocked at how many people told me they were terrified of young children. (Dr. R interview, April 2)

Dr. R’s emphasis was on the socialization domain and the other three instructors focused on the subjectification domain. However, the qualification function of education was involved in both approaches because PSTs could not begin developing teacher identities or think as teacher-agents without exhibiting some degree of knowledge and skills for teaching.

Like their instructors, one of the PSTs’ most salient goals for themselves was to build meaningful relationships with their future students. They referred back to important relationships with their prior music teachers and emphasized the positive impact MTE professors had on them. Within the teacher-student relationship, they valued authenticity, availability, and vulnerability. However, unlike their professors, they did not deeply describe nor exhibit a clear educative purpose for the relationship. PSTs valued the teacher-student relationship in and of itself. The purpose of the relationship was open-ended beyond treating students well, and their envisioned domain of educational purpose for the relationship was unclear.

I want to be . . . someone who is compassionate. One of my goals is . . . to have an open-door policy for if students want to come in and talk about anything. If they want me to give advice, I will, if they want me to just sit and listen, I will. (Eric interview, April 19)

Theme 5: Teaching Skills and Knowledge

All four professors placed great emphasis on students’ acquisition of teaching skills and knowledge. The implicit assumption behind this emphasis was that music teaching is a skilled profession that one can learn through intentional practice and action. This belief and the corresponding value of competent teaching may have been the only truly foundational value in the program. In addition, the professors viewed some skills and knowledge as universals that may be applied to any type of musicking.

Students will also work to develop their musicianship skills in the context of their role as a future music educator. (Dr. A syllabus)

[The professors] definitely have high expectations just like for our musical ability. Like theory and aural skills, and being able to sight-read, notate music and rhythms, and just basic stuff like that. (Monica interview, April 12)

Dr. Q offered a potential explanation for the dissonance between professors’ desires to focus on the subjectification domain and their actual instructional practice, which emphasized the qualification and socialization domains.

I feel . . . like I’m being pulled in different spots. I need to be teaching them what they’re expected to know. If I don’t, they’re not going to get hired. . . . Like, are they able to speak the same language? Can they teach the same way? So it’s not like, “Oh, what are they learning over [there]? It’s just all of this ‘froo-froo’ stuff.” (Dr. Q interview, August 19)

Instructors may have emphasized PSTs’ acquisition of teaching skills and knowledge due to the pressures they perceived from inservice teachers and administrators for novice teachers to succeed in music teaching positions as they currently exist in the local, regional, and state context (i.e., elementary general music, band, choir, and orchestra). Additionally, all PST participants were required to audition on a band/orchestra instrument or classical voice for admission to the music education program, and thus they participated in those types of musicking prior to university. They were also required to take lessons and perform in ensembles in that mode, and field experiences and student teaching took place in these “traditional” paradigms. Thus, these “universal” teaching skills and knowledge were always implicitly (and often explicitly) linked to the status quo of music education in this context (i.e., band/choir/orchestra/elementary general music).

Discussion

The purpose of this exploratory intrinsic case study was to investigate the visible values in music education courses at one institution to add a new dimension to research and practice. We found that values that appear to be shared among music teacher educators may be foundational in name and relative in practice. Critical thinking, student centeredness in flexibility and responsiveness, and positive teacher-student relationships emerged as values that instructors communicated and PSTs held. On the surface, these values align with scholars’ visions of MTE programs guided by values of critical thinking and reflection, empathy, equity, cultural responsiveness, and diversity (Allsup, 2003, 2015; Allsup & Westerlund, 2012; Barrett, 2015). However, the lack of shared definitions of values in this study reveals that regardless of common language, values may be foundational only in name and relative in practice if meanings are not explicitly discussed and connected to social justice (Harland & Pickering, 2011). Music teacher educators may need to define the words they use when setting goals and determining the values of MTE programs. Biesta’s (2015) three domains of educational purpose may be helpful in these discussions. The framework contains space for differing values in instructors’ emphases on PSTs’ skills, knowledge, and dispositional development in the qualification, socialization, and subjectification domains. The communication of disagreements as varying emphases in domains may diffuse potential conflicts rooted in pluralistic values held by music teacher educators.

Instructors in this study also desired to transfer their value of agency to PSTs. Professors evoked agency in class discussions with PSTs about acting in future classrooms beyond personal experiences and dominant narratives. They valued both critical thinking and agency, but they viewed critical thinking as a requisite component and outcome of their courses. In contrast, professors seemed to hope to inspire PSTs’ future agency rather than treat PSTs’ adoption of positive perceptions of agency as tangible goals. PSTs adopted agentic orientations toward greater social justice in music education to differing degrees. The lack of consistent agentic identity (Conway et al., 2019) development across participants suggests that PSTs’ awareness of structures and agency may not be sufficient. Teacher resistance to limiting structures, through agency, is necessary for reform in music education (Allsup, 2015); however, resistance is a choice. Music teachers, embedded in localized levels of structural constraints, ultimately decide how much to resist or adhere to existing forms and structures of school music. Thus, further discussion among music teacher educators on the intersection of nurturing PSTs’ agency and PSTs’ freedom to exert agency toward their chosen outcomes is vital in the discourse around school music reform. Regardless, the choice to resist the status quo, whatever that may be in a given context, is not possible without agency, and the development of PST agency in MTE remains crucial for a socially just transformation of the field through music teacher action (Barrett, 2015; Powell, 2019; Tucker, 2020b).

Finally, we found that PSTs’ competency in the skills and knowledge for teaching music as it currently exists in schools to be one of the only foundational values in the MTE program of study. This finding indicates a need for music teacher educators to interrogate the values they share, because the value of skill competency may perpetuate the status quo in music education. Professors in this study appeared to view PSTs’ acquisition of teaching skills and knowledge, which explicitly connects to Biesta’s concept of qualification, as somewhat independent from PSTs’ socialization and subjectification. However, PSTs’ socialization is informed by instructors’ transmission of specific skills, and education in the qualification and socialization domains similarly informs PSTs’ growth in the subjectification domain. Thus, investigations into the influence of PSTs’ acquisition of content knowledge and skills (which is in the qualification domain) on the development of their agency (which is in the subjectification domain) may bear fruitful findings for MTE programs. In addition, growth in the depth and breadth of PSTs’ imaginations may be key in the development of their agency, and values may be a helpful lens for uncovering invisible limits on imaginations through unexamined practices and emphases in MTE programs (Dobbs, 2014; Jorgensen, 2003; Powell, 2017; Tucker, 2020b).

Our qualitative, exploratory approach to this study included limitations. Findings are not generalizable, although the themes may resonate to various degrees with music teacher educators in similar contexts. Participants were volunteers, which may indicate that they were exceptional rather than typical individuals. In addition, our theoretical frameworks, such as any tools, had limited use and may have facilitated findings that would have been different if we had used other lenses.

Conclusion

This was an exploratory study of values in an MTE program and further research is needed. In conclusion, we provide questions to guide our collective reflection and future research of values.

Do the values music teacher educators want to communicate align with what they are communicating to students in their programs? Answering this question may require an honest internal study of and reflection on courses, syllabi, and students’ perspectives.

Which values, relationships, identities, agentic orientations, skills, knowledge, and dispositions are foundational for music teaching? Although thinking through this question will be challenging and require debate, this line of thought may reveal program structures that encourage reproductive rather than transformative teacher agency.

If music teacher educators agree on which values are foundational, do they share the same definitions of those values? How do instructors’ foundational values manifest within the qualification, socialization, and subjectification functions of education? If MTEs do not agree on foundational values, by what process should they reconcile disparate views?

What are the different meanings music teacher educators, PSTs, and inservice teachers make around the value of student centeredness? What is student-centered music teaching in concrete practice?

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-jmt-10.1177_10570837211030520 – Supplemental material for Values, Agency, and Identity in a Music Teacher Education Program

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-jmt-10.1177_10570837211030520 for Values, Agency, and Identity in a Music Teacher Education Program by Olivia Gail Tucker and Sean Robert Powell in Journal of Music Teacher Education

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-2-jmt-10.1177_10570837211030520 – Supplemental material for Values, Agency, and Identity in a Music Teacher Education Program

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-2-jmt-10.1177_10570837211030520 for Values, Agency, and Identity in a Music Teacher Education Program by Olivia Gail Tucker and Sean Robert Powell in Journal of Music Teacher Education

Footnotes

Author Notes

The authors conducted this research while Olivia Tucker was enrolled in doctoral study at the University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, under the supervision of Dr. Sean Powell. The authors presented this study to the Society for Music Teacher Education at the 2019 Symposium on Music Teacher Education in Greensboro, North Carolina, on September 13, 2019.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Olivia Gail Tucker

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Allsup

R. E.

(2003). Mutual learning and democratic action in instrumental music education. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(1), 24–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345646

Allsup

R. E.

(2015). Music teacher quality and the problem of routine expertise. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 23(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.2979/philmusieducrevi.23.1.5

Allsup

R. E.

(2016). Remixing the classroom: Toward an open philosophy of music education. Indiana University Press.

Allsup

R. E.

Westerlund

(2012). Methods and situational ethics in music education. Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education, 11(1), 124–148. http://act.maydaygroup.org/

Barrett

J. R.

(2015). Striving for justice with determination and hope: An epilogue. In Benedict

Schmidt

Spruce

Woodford

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social justice in music education (pp. 658–668). Oxford University Press.

Biesta

G. J. J.

(2015). What is education for? On good education, teacher judgement, and educational professionalism. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12109

Campbell

M. R.

(1999). Learning to teach music: A collaborative ethnography. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 139, 12–36. www.jstor.org/stable/40318946

Conway

Pellegrino

Stanley

A. M.

West

(2019). Setting an agenda for music teacher education practice, research, and policy. In Conway

Pellegrino

Stanley

A. M.

West

(Eds.), Oxford handbook of preservice music teacher education in the United States (pp. 905–917). Oxford University Press.

Dabback

(2018). A longitudinal perspective of early career music teachers: Contexts, interactions, and possible selves. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 27(2), 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083717727268

10.

Dobbs

T. L.

(2014). “No actual teaching”: Expanding preservice music teachers’ imaginaries of teaching. In Barrett

J. R.

Webster

P. R.

(Eds.), The musical experience: Rethinking music teaching and learning (pp. 294–308). Oxford University Press.

11.

Dolloff

L. A.

(1999). Imagining ourselves as teachers: The development of teacher identity in music teacher education. Music Education Research, 1(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461380990010206

12.

Draves

T. J.

(2019). Teaching ambition realized: Paul’s beginning music teacher identity. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 29(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1057083719844211

13.

Elliott

D. J.

(1993). On the values of music and music education. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 1(2), 81–93. www.jstor.org/stable/40327057

14.

Frederickson

W. E.

Conway

C. M.

(2009). Conversations. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 19(1), 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083709345657

15.

Harland

Pickering

(2011). Values in higher education teaching. Routledge.

16.

Jackson

A. Y.

Mazzei

L. A.

(2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives. Routledge.

17.

Jorgensen

E. R.

(2003). Transforming music education. Indiana University Press.

18.

Lincoln

Guba

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

19.

Merriam

S. B.

(2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

20.

Powell

S. R.

(2017). The self-authoring of a music educator: A journey through figured worlds. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 210–211, 25–41. https://doi.org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.210-211.0025

21.

Powell

S. R.

(2019). Structure and agency in novice music teaching. Research Studies in Music Education, 41(2), 206–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X18794514

22.

Powell

S. R.

Parker

E. C.

(2017). Preservice music teachers’ descriptions of successful and unsuccessful teachers. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 26(3), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083716662689

23.

Rathgeber

Mantie

(2019). Markers of agency in preservice music teachers: A directed content analysis of written coursework. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 219, 27–46. https://doi.org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.219.0027

24.

Reimer

(1989). A philosophy of music education (Vol. 2). Prentice Hall.

25.

Saldaña

(2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.

26.

Schmidt

(1998). Defining “good” music teaching: Four student teachers’ beliefs and practices. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 138, 19–46. www.jstor.org/stable/40318937

27.

Stake

R. E.

(1995). The art of case study research. Sage.

28.

Tracy

S. J.

(2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121

29.

Tucker

O. G.

(2020a). “Everybody is good enough”: Band teacher agency in a highly competitive environment [Doctoral dissertation]. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1707234/

30.

Tucker

O. G.

(2020b). Supporting the development of novice music teacher agency. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 29(3), 24–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083719885868

31.

Woodford

P. G.

(2005). Democracy in music education. Indiana University Press.

32.

Woody

R. H.

Gilbert

Laird

L. A.

(2018). Music teacher dispositions: Self-appraisals and values of university music students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 66(1), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429418757220

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.11 MB

0.29 MB