The Lighthouse Framework: Proposing a Movement-Based Constructivist Framework for Early Childhood Music Education and Pre-Service Education Programs

Abstract

This article aims to provide practical strategies and examples for pre-service early education programs and early education teachers to develop music- and movement-based curricula for teacher preparation programs and early childhood music classrooms. To address the inconsistencies in early childhood music programs, the authors developed the Lighthouse Framework, which utilizes constructivist ideology to help students learn through and adapt the teaching model while simultaneously learning music- and movement-based content. Through this proposed framework, pre-service teachers can gain authentic teaching experience, real-time feedback, and an adaptable framework for their future curriculum planning.

Keywords

constructivism early childhood music music and movement teacher education

The Importance of Music and Movement

Young children naturally connect with music through body movement. Research has shown that infants are born with a predisposition to physically respond to music and rhythm (Trehub, 2001; Trainor, 2010). Studies have also found similar patterns of brain activity for both music and movement (Trimble & Hesdorffer, 2017). Music and movement have been found to enhance children’s learning, including language development (Gordon et al., 2011; Yoo & Bidelman, 2019), social-emotional skills (Gurgen, 2016; Schäfer et al., 2013), and spatial awareness (Forgeard et al., 2008; Hetland, 2000). Additionally, moving along with music allows children to refine and develop their gross motor skills, body coordination, and self-regulation (Robinson et al., 2016). Incorporating music and movement into children’s learning is helpful for their overall development.

This connection between music and movement in childhood has been well-documented for over 100 years. Some of the earliest music and movement pedagogical ideas are still used in music classrooms today and are continuously being built upon. In 1886, Emile Jaques-Dalcroze introduced a pioneering method called Eurhythmics (Dalcroze, 1921), which emphasized the use of movement in music education to encourage students to engage with music holistically. This method aims to develop rhythmic accuracy, coordination, and musical expressiveness through movement. In the 1920s, Carl Orff developed Orff Schulwerk (Orff & Keetman, 1950), a pedagogical method which emphasizes the use of movement, speech, and percussion instruments for young children. In the early 20th century, Hungarian composer Zoltán Kodály developed the Kodály Method (Choksy, 1999), which focuses on developing the inner ear and rhythmic training by utilizing music and movement to teach. American music educator Edwin Gordon (2012) developed a theory that suggests that children can learn aural skills through music and movement with proper exposure and imitation. These music education leaders, including Dalcroze, Orff, Kodály, and Gordon, each stress the importance of movement in early musical development.

In the late 20th century, von Laban and Ullmann (1971) developed Laban Movement Analysis (LMA), as a way to analyze movement based on space, time, weight, and flow. This system is centered on the idea that movement is a universal language which provides insights into a person’s psychology, personality, and emotions. With the main components of space, weight, speed, and flow, LMA emphasizes the physical aspects of movement, the quality of movement, the form of movement, and the relationship between movement and the environment. This system has been adopted in education to enhance students’ expressiveness, creativity, and communication of movement. Nash (1974) and Gordon (2012) highlighted the importance of integrating musical movement activities within Laban’s framework to promote the comprehension of rhythm and to stimulate the development of expressive musical performance.

Papazachariou-Christoforou (2022) highlighted the importance of active bodily engagement in enhancing musical comprehension (p. 13). Nijs and Bremmer (2019) further emphasized that music educators can leverage the connections between physical experiences and musical comprehension to develop music activities centered around movement that encourage children to engage with and understand music. Furmanek (2014) discussed how teachers can utilize movement activities throughout the school day to tap into children’s innate flow and improve their learning experience. McLennan and Bombardier (2015) suggested that children construct their own learning and interpretations through music and movement. This authentic experience is children’s innate language, manifesting the joy of learning.

The Need for a Framework

Despite the recognition that music and movement are crucial for children’s development among educators, there remains a significant lack of emphasis on music education in undergraduate early childhood education programs. According to the “Unifying Framework for the Early Childhood Education Profession” developed by Power to the Profession (Ponder, 2020), the current state of early childhood education is described as “an incoherent and inconsistent system that fails to recognize differences in preparation, skills, and experience” (Ponder, 2020, p. 7). In particular, the requirements for individuals working in early childhood education are highly variable. Although some states have made improvements to their professional preparation programs, most of these programs are not standardized, creating disparate levels of teacher preparedness within and across states (Ponder, 2020). These programs exhibit inconsistency in their requirements for music education training, which indicates a need for greater focus and attention on incorporating music into the preparation of future educators.

Research has revealed that early childhood educators felt unprepared to teach music due to a lack of training (Kim & Kemple, 2011; Rajan, 2017b). Many education programs exhibit incoherence in terms of early childhood music courses for both music teacher preparation programs and for future general education teachers who will include music in their classrooms. While some general education programs require students to take music education courses, many do not offer them as either optional or required. Furthermore, options for courses that combine music and movement in education preparation courses are even more rare. As a result, many candidates pursuing degrees in Early Childhood Education and General Education with subject foci other than music often feel unprepared to develop or implement meaningful, student-centered music curricula for their future students (Bautista et al., 2022).

Traditional teacher education programs often focus solely on K-12 teacher training, neglecting the field experience required for pre-kindergarten teachers (Legette, 2018). Bautista et al. (2022) stressed the need to better prepare early childhood pre-service teachers in music education. After speaking with teachers across the globe, they argued that early childhood education teachers were ill-prepared to teach music. The authors pointed out four main issues: (1) a weak foundation in general music prior to teacher preparation programs, (2) a limited provision of music education courses within the teacher preparation programs, (3) low quality and limited applicability of certain pre-service music courses, and (4) limited professional development for in-service early childhood education teachers.

Research has suggested that in preschool settings, singing songs is a common activity used by educators not necessarily for musical purposes, but rather as a tool to teach children about other subject areas or to introduce new vocabulary (Garvis, 2012; Liao & Campbell, 2016; Young, 2007). In addition, the prevalent pedagogical approach to music in early childhood education settings, both in Western and Eastern countries, has been described as teacher-centered and reproductive, which does not promote children’s self-expression and creativity (Campbell & Scott-Kassner, 2014). Opportunities for children to engage in instrumental music activities or projects involving sound exploration, improvisation, or creation are seldom offered.

With the goal of providing more support for early childhood music and movement programs, we propose the use of the Lighthouse Framework. This constructivist, movement-based framework equips teacher education programs and pre-service teachers with a helpful tool and the necessary skill sets to develop curricula for their future classrooms. This framework nurtures critical thinking, creativity, and builds confidence regardless of learners’ musical background. This paper explores the necessity of a consistent and constructivist movement-based framework for early childhood education, specifically focusing on music and non-music pre-service teachers, as well as course professors and instructors. Additionally, we emphasize the significance of combining music and movement, providing examples and practical applications for the framework.

The Constructivist Lighthouse Framework

As this review of literature demonstrates, music and movement pedagogy involve more than merely singing, dancing, and clapping. Valerio and Freeman (2009) indicated that pre-service early childhood education teachers become more confident by taking risks themselves. Thorn and Brasche (2020) found that training in music instills confidence in early childhood educators and enhances students’ development. Mueller (2003) emphasized the importance of active participation in child development, highlighting that young children learn by doing. The Lighthouse Framework for music and movement requires active participation and risk-taking, addressing the field experience gap in early childhood educators (Legette, 2018). As a result, we propose using this framework to teach music and movement curricula in both teacher education and for early childhood classrooms. The Lighthouse Framework is an expansion of the instructional scaffolding (Wood et al., 1976) and the Spiral Curriculum developed by Jerome Bruner (1960) and could be expanded upon using the principles from that model.

Development of the Framework

This framework was developed with the intent of offering pre-service teachers and teacher training programs a comprehensive tool for developing curricula that incorporates music and movement. Its original inception was in our grade school music classrooms as a method of scaffolding learning material. Due to the success of this strategy, it was more formally developed into the Lighthouse Framework and reconceptualized for use in university teacher education programs as both a tool for learning and for developing curricula in pre-service teachers’ future classrooms. The framework has undergone extensive testing by the two authors in various courses at a university across multiple semesters. Research has been conducted to validate its effectiveness, and the results are currently awaiting publication.

The Lighthouse Framework was conceived as an extension of the basic curricular technique of scaffolding (Wood et al., 1976) and of the Spiral Curriculum (Bruner, 1960). In Wood et al.’s original proposition of scaffolding, students learn under their teachers’ tutelage until what they have learned becomes a tool with which they can utilize to learn new, more complicated material. The Lighthouse Framework expands upon this strategy by offering a method for scaffolding both lessons within units and units themselves. It also offers specific steps for scaffolding lessons within a unit with a special emphasis on reflection.

When utilized in teacher education, the Lighthouse Framework can be thought of as an expansion of or parallel to Bruner’s Spiral Curriculum (1960). Under the framework, pre-service teachers will move through the prescribed, scaffolded steps with increasing complexity and depth, just as they would with a Spiral Curriculum. The difference is that rather than revisiting the same topics throughout a course, students utilize the same steps to investigate new topics or units that build upon each other. In this way, the Lighthouse Framework offers methods to scaffold both lessons and units in a way that reinforces both the curricular material and the learning process.

Constructivism at the Core

This framework illustrates steps taken to bring learners from the “known,” which is the knowledge students come to our classes with or have learned in our previous lessons, to the “unknown,” which is new curricular material. The steps taken utilize constructivist and student-centered pedagogy to connect learners’ previous experiences, both academic and not, to introduce new knowledge. Constructivism emphasizes student-centered learning, where learners construct their own understanding of music by integrating new information with their existing knowledge and experiences (Mascolo & Fischer, 2004). Students take an active role in their learning, constructing their own meaning and incorporating what they learn into the reality and relevancy of their lived experiences (Dewey, 1938).

Constructivist ideology is central to the Lighthouse Framework because students build upon what they know, have learned, and have experienced to make meaning of their education. In grade school classrooms, students learn through a strictly prescribed and collaborative scaffold that utilizes what they know to introduce new topics and units of study. In teacher education classrooms, pre-service teachers not only engage in the learning process but also acquire the ability to adapt and apply it effectively in their future classrooms. They assimilate the knowledge gained during the course, along with the principles of the Framework, and skillfully tailor them to suit their upcoming careers as educators.

In music education, this involves exploring and experimenting with music, creating original compositions, and reflecting critically on their learning. Collaborative activities, critical thinking, and problem-solving are encouraged, and connections are made between different aspects of music and the learners’ personal experiences. The ultimate aim of constructivism in music education is to foster the development of learners’ musical skills, knowledge, and understanding through an active, experiential, and collaborative learning process.

The Lighthouse Framework

The Lighthouse Framework uses the form and internal staircase of a lighthouse as the basis of the metaphor. The stairs within represent the steps taken to get from the known to the unknown/the prior knowledge to introduction of new materials. As learners “climb” these steps, they are immersed in new, unknown knowledge until they reach the next landing within the lighthouse. These landings represent the precipice between the known and the unknown and afford the learner a moment of respite and reflection. At each landing, there is a window through which they can reflect on the new knowledge’s application to their personal academic goals. Without the complete set of knowledge, the curriculum offers, the window at each landing only provides a single lens with which to view one’s context. As learners continue up the lighthouse, they see that new, more complex knowledge is scaffolded upon what they have already learned. It is not until they reach the top of the lighthouse that they gain a full, 360° view with which to reflect on how what they have learned can be applied to their lives and/or careers. The steps included in this model are specific, but should be adapted for use in different contexts (Figure 1, Table 1).

Figure 1.

Lighthouse Framework graphic.

Table 1.

The Steps of the Lighthouse Framework.

Step #	Step	Explanation
1	Reflection	Learners reflect on what they already know about the new subject material so that their prior knowledge, gained both inside and outside of classes, can be leveraged to create student-centered learning experiences.
2	Introduction of new knowledge	The instructor will act as the facilitator to introduce new knowledge.
3	Exploration	Learners are immersed in collaborative activities and formative assessments to become familiar with new knowledge. Learners discuss and design ways in which to they will demonstrate their understanding of the new knowledge.
4	Demonstration	Learners demonstrate their understanding of the new knowledge by engaging in collaboratively designed tasks. This can act as a summative assessment of learners’ understanding of the current learning target.
5	Feedback	Learners receive feedback from both their instructor and their peers on their demonstrations to address any gaps in knowledge revealed during the demonstration.
6 or 1*	Reflection*	Learners reflect on the knowledge they have acquired and how it fits into their existing understanding. They also consider how this newfound knowledge can be utilized in their future classrooms.

Note the “reflection” step acts as the last but also the first step of the framework.

As shown above, the Lighthouse Framework provides opportunity for formative and summative assessment. During “Exploration” learners can be given opportunities to show their learning through observation, discussions, or other formative assessment methods. At the end of a “unit” or current topic of study, instructors can administer summative assessments during the “Demonstration” or “Feedback” steps to fully assess learners’ understanding of the topic.

The lessons, topics, or units that make up a curriculum form the structure of the tower and build upon one another, all while remaining integral to the structure of the curriculum. These scaffolded units can be represented by the stripes on a lighthouse; they are painted on for the sake of being easier to see, but are truly inseparable, each contributing to the overall development of understanding. Thus, the “content” on the lighthouse (topics of study) are arranged into the following scaffolded order:

(a) Singing with hand signs

(b) Warm-up movement

(d) Rhythmic and body percussion

(e) Tempo and movement

(f) Dynamics and movement

(g) Improvisation

(h) Music and choreography

(i) Tableau

The nine suggested topics in this curriculum focus explicitly on different types of musical movement, highlighting the importance of movement compared to many traditional music curricula. For example, singing is taught in conjunction with body movements as it involves the use of the diaphragm, vocal cords, and breathing postures. Kodály hand signs are used not only as a visual representation of solfège but also as a way to promote kinesthetic learning. Similarly, rhythmic learning is closely associated with body movements, and learners internalize rhythm through tapping, clapping, or dancing, developing a more intuitive sense of rhythm. Rather than learning by rote, learners collaboratively build on class materials and structures to form their own meaning that can be applied to their future classrooms. This approach is engaging and empowering for pre-service teachers, helping them not only build a base of pedagogical knowledge but also the skills and understanding to develop their own materials.

The Lighthouse Framework can be used both in pre-service education classrooms and in the pre-service teachers’ classrooms. The curricular material presented in this Framework was designed first for use in early childhood classrooms, but the Framework can be utilized just as well with pre-service teachers. By shifting the focus of the Framework from simply delivering music and movement lessons to students, to instructing education students on how to teach music and movement lessons, education students can engage in a more authentic learning experience (Abril, 2011). The Framework is written in such a way that pre-service teachers can adapt it and their individual program’s curriculum to their future classrooms. By doing so, pre-service teachers simultaneously gain curricula planning knowledge and experience using the materials. The versatility of this framework extends its utility to music education teachers, who can utilize it as a valuable curriculum planning tool. While they might already be well-versed in the content, they can greatly benefit from the framework’s effective constructivist strategies.

Using the Lighthouse Framework, the pre-service teachers are assigned each topic as a “task.” This involves reflecting on their prior knowledge, problem-solving, demonstrating, and finally, engaging in another round of reflection. It is also important to note that the nine focus topics are scaffolded. They are structured in ways that help pre-service teachers start with activities that involve smaller scales of movement and more straightforward problem-solving activities, leading to larger scales of movement and more freedom to create.

The Lighthouse Framework is particularly useful for teacher education, especially when pre-service instructors must learn about a content area that they are not familiar with. Pre-service instructors can learn about the content area and principles of pedagogy simultaneously, learning both what and how to teach. They learn through the same five steps that their future learners would so that they can experience the learning experiences themselves and also gain a standard framework through which to conduct their future curricula. For music and movement, a subject which many pre-service instructors are unfamiliar with, teacher education becomes a kind of dual curriculum. Pre-service instructors must learn both the content area and how to teach it. By unifying the framework in which the content is taught and the instructional model the course instructor wishes to instill in their pre-service instructors, learners experience the instructional model in real-time (Table 2).

Table 2.

Examples of Practical Applications.

	Step 1	Step 2	Step 3	Step 4	Step 5	Step 1
(a) Singing with hand signs	Reflection	Introduction of new knowledge	Exploration	Demonstration	Feedback	Reflection
(a) Singing with hand signs	Learners are familiar with the concept of “Do, Re, Mi,” but may require pedagogical guidance on how to effectively teach them.	Hand signs help embody Solfeggio and can be used for conducting.	Learners learn melodies from songs they know using Hand Signs.	Learners teach the melodies they transcribed to the rest of the class.	Learners discuss the success of their demo lessons from the perspectives of both early-childhood learners and teachers as well as the strengths and limitations of hand signs in general.	Learners reflect on how their understanding has developed and how hand signs can be used in their future classrooms.
(b) Warm-up movement	Exercising without stretching and warming up can lead to poor performance and injury.	Warming up your voice and body lead to optimal performance.	Learners discuss different exercises that they have done both related and unrelated to music and how they could be beneficial for music and movement.	Learners program a warm-up routine for their classes.	After performing a brief vocal exercise, learners discuss the warm-up routine and discuss how the routine affects their performance.	Learners reflect on how warming up before making music and moving can affect performance and how warming up can be used in their future classrooms.
(c) Emotion and body-mind movement	Music and movement can communicate emotion.	Music can be used to regulate learners’ emotions and promote overall wellness, ex.	Learners explore different activities that allow learners to express their emotions through movement as well as songs that help learners to calm down and regulate their breathing.	Learners program activities that help students regulate emotions through movement, singing, and breathing.	Learners engage in discussions regarding their experiences and any improvements in their mind-body emotions that may have resulted from the demo lessons.	Learners reflect on the many ways in which music and movement can communicate emotion and how these connections can be made in their future classrooms.
(d) Rhythmic and body percussion	Rhythm involves the movement of sound.	Reading, composing, and teaching rhythms in creative ways.	Learners explore and catalog different sounds they can make using their bodies and found objects.	Using their bodies and found objects, student leaders collaboratively arrange a percussion cover of a song with the rest of the class.	Learners discuss how body movement enhances their rhythmic learning.	Learners reflect on how their understanding of rhythm has developed and how they can utilize movement to enhance their future learners’ rhythmic learning.
(e) Tempo and movement	Tempo is the speed at which music is performed (Kennedy et al., 2012).	Different Italian terms that represent music and how tempo can be used to engage learners and teach them how to regulate their movement that promote spatial awareness and motor development.	Learners perceive variations of different tempos through body movement.	Using the representation of interactive games and animals, learners present activities to teach and internalize the concept of tempo.	Learners engage in discussions regarding the benefits and challenges of designs aimed at enhancing their internalization of tempo, and how this can improve their learning outcomes.	Learners reflect on the tempo of music, especially in relation to movement, can affect emotion and how this can be used in their future classrooms.
(f) Dynamics and movement	Dynamics are gradations in the volume of music (Kennedy et al., 2012).	Similar to tempo, dynamic can be used to engage learners and teach them how to regulate their movement that promote spatial awareness and motor development.	Learners explore different sounds they have heard (animals, vehicles, instruments, etc.) and categorize them into dynamic categories.	Learners utilize interactive games, body movement, and daily/animal representations as teaching tools to help internalize the concept of dynamics, presenting various activities that engage them in the learning process.	Learners engage in discussions to discover how dynamics further enhance one’s musical experience.	Learners reflect on how movement can embody changes in dynamics and how their future learners might incorporate dynamics into their creative work.
(g) Improvisation	Improvisation playing without a written score (Kennedy et al., 2012).	Improvisation requires specific understandings and experimentation with previously gained knowledge.	With guidance, learners experience improvisation through body percussion, singing, and instrumental playing.	Using their previous knowledge attained in this course, learners create activities for beginners to improvise and make music together.	Learners reflect on their improvisation experience both as learners and instructors.	Learners reflect on how their understanding has developed and how Hand Signs can be used in their future classrooms.
(h) Music and choreography	Choreography is a system of describing and designing dances (Kennedy et al., 2012).	Ways and techniques of implementing choreography in music class.	Using choreography skills, learners explore ways to use choreography to express emotions, promote creativity, and develop rhythmic skills.	Learners collaboratively create choreography using age-appropriate movements that convey the meaning of the music.	Learners provide feedback on how the choreography was created and rationales behind the product.	Learners reflect on how choreography can be used in their future classrooms to enhance learning in music and other subjects.
(i) Tableau	Tableau involves participants using their bodies to create static images that represent a particular scene (Farmer, 2014).	Using tableau to illustrate a deeper concept and as a way for learners to reflect on their learning.	Learners utilize tableau to represent and internalize musical concepts, theories, or stories.	Learners create lesson plans to illustrate how tableau can encourage collaboration and critical thinking as a tool in the classroom.	Learners provide feedback for each other on how they internalize concepts through the lessons as well as analyzing the effectiveness of this tool in the music classroom.	Learners reflect on how they might use tableaus in their future classrooms.

Examples of Practical Applications

Internalization, Adaption, and Recommendations

It is imperative to note that the best way to implement this framework is through internalization and adaptation rather than imitation. Pre-service early education students can learn through the framework so that they can adapt it to their future curricula. They may utilize the framework in their classwork but are also encouraged to build off of it to achieve curricular goals and to develop their pedagogy. It is necessary for learners to be able to adapt the framework and manipulate curricular materials to fit the needs of their future classrooms.

To fit the needs of more traditional assessment systems, opportunities for formative and summative assessment have been incorporated into the framework. A natural place for summative assessment would be the demonstration and/or feedback steps as learners would be demonstrating their understanding of the topic at the end of the unit. Formative assessment can naturally fit throughout the framework, but the most logical place would be during the exploration step, where learners can receive immediate feedback and are preparing for their demonstrations.

Shively (2015) asserted that constructivism in music education should not be considered as a strict methodology, but instead as a framework for analyzing one’s own classroom practices. The author emphasized the importance of maintaining a flexible understanding of constructivism (p. 129). Early childhood directors, teachers, and college professors can benefit from adapting and implementing this framework with flexibility, guided by the constructivist lens. It is crucial to maintain an open-minded attitude to enable learners to become student-centered teachers in the future.

To effectively equip pre-service teachers for their future classrooms, it is essential to provide them with authentic, student-centered learning experiences. These experiences allow them to experiment, explore, and demonstrate their own perspectives. Our aim is for the Lighthouse Framework to serve as a valuable and student-centered training experience for early childhood education, filling existing gaps for pre-service teachers. Additionally, we envision it as a practical tool for college instructors and professors to utilize in preparing their future teachers for the classroom.

Footnotes

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

Katy Ieong Cheng Ho Weatherly

Author Biographies

Dr. Katy Ieong Cheng Ho Weatherly currently serves as an Assistant Professor of Music and Music Education at the University of Macau. She holds degrees from Columbia University’s Teachers College and The Juilliard School. Dr. Weatherly has demonstrated her dedication to education and research through various roles, including serving as a district music and performing arts manager in Washington D.C. for four years. Prior to this, she worked as an education director for the International Chamber Orchestra Young Artists Program, a strings faculty member at Teachers College, and an orchestra director at P.S. M517 in Harlem, New York. In recognition of her contributions, she was honored as a Washington Performing Arts Education Honoree in 2022. Dr. Weatherly’s research interests include creative music pedagogy, informal music learning, collaborative learning, and contemporary music education.

Christopher Alan Weatherly is a Doctoral Student in Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Virginia. He currently serves as an instructor in music at the University of Macau and a curriculum team member at the School of the Nations, an international PK-12 school in Macau. With over a decade of experience in teaching music, Christopher has taught students from pre-kindergarten to 12th grade in New York and Washington D.C. He is a graduate of both Columbia University’s Teachers College and the College of St. Rose.

References

Abril

C. R.

(2011). Music, movement, and learning. In Colwell

Webster

(Eds.), MENC handbook of research on music learning (pp. 92–129). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199754397.003.0003

Bautista

Yeung

Mclaren

M. L.

Ilari

(2022). Music in early childhood teacher education: Raising awareness of a worrisome reality and proposing strategies to move forward. Arts Education Policy Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2022.2043969

Bruner

J. S.

(1960). The process of education (pp. xvi, 97). Harvard University Press.

Campbell

P. S.

Scott-Kassner

(2014). Music in childhood: From preschool through the elementary grades (4th ed.). Schirmer Cengage Learning.

Choksy

(1999). The Kodály method I: comprehensive music education (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.

Dalcroze

J. E.

(1921). Rhythm, music and education ( Rubenstein

H. F.

, Trans.). The Riverside Press.

Dewey

(1938). Experience and education (First free press edition 2015). Free Press.

Farmer

(2014, December 29). Tableaux. Drama Resource. https://dramaresource.com/tableaux/

Forgeard

Winner

Norton

Schlaug

(2008). Practicing a musical instrument in childhood is associated with enhanced verbal ability and nonverbal reasoning. PLoS ONE, 3(10), e3566. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003566

10.

Furmanek

(2014). Classroom choreography: Enhancing learning through movement. YC Young Children, 69(4), 80–85.

11.

Garvis

(2012). “You are my sunshine my only sunshine”: Current music activities in kindergarten classrooms in Queensland, Australia. Australian Journal of Music Education, 1, 14–21.

12.

Gordon

E. E.

(2012). Learning sequences in music: A contemporary music learning theory. GIA Publ.

13.

Gordon

R. L.

Magne

C. L.

Large

E. W.

(2011). EEG correlates of song prosody: A new look at the relationship between linguistic and musical rhythm. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 352. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00352

14.

Gurgen

T. E.

(2016). Social and emotional function of musical listening: Reasons for listening to music. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 16(66), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.66.13

15.

Hetland

(2000). Learning to make music enhances spatial reasoning. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3/4), 179. https://doi.org/10.2307/3333643

16.

Kennedy

Rutherford-Johnson

Kennedy

J. B.

(2012). The Oxford dictionary of music (6th ed). Oxford University Press.

17.

Kim

H. K.

Kemple

K. M.

(2011). Is music an active developmental tool or simply a supplement? Early childhood preservice teachers’ beliefs about music. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 32(2), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/10901027.2011.572228

18.

Legette

R. M.

(2018). Preparing preservice music teachers to teach in prek settings through the use of service learning. Music Educators Journal, 105(1), 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0027432118784364

19.

Liao

M. -Y.

Campbell

P. S.

(2016). Teaching children’s songs: A Taiwan–US comparison of approaches by kindergarten teachers. Music Education Research, 18(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/14613808.2015.1049256

20.

Mascolo

M. F.

Fischer

K. W.

(2004). Constructivist theories. In Hopkins

Barre

R. G.

Michel

G. F.

Rochat

(Eds.), Cambridge encyclopedia of child development. Cambridge University Press.

21.

McLennan

D. P.

Bombardier

(2015). Kindergarten: “Paper shoes aren’t for dancing!” YC Young Children, 70(3), 70–75.

22.

Mueller

A. K.

(2003). Making connections between movement and music for young children. General Music Today, 16(3), 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/10483713030160030104

23.

Nash

G. C.

(1974). Creative approaches to child development with music, language, and movement. Alfred Publishing Co., Inc.

24.

Nijs

Bremmer

(2019). Embodiment in early childhood music education. In Young

Ilari

(Eds.), Music in early childhood: Multi-disciplinary perspectives and inter-disciplinary exchanges (Vol. 27, pp. 87–102). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17791-1_6

25.

Orff

Keetman

(1950). Musik für Kinder: Reime und spiellieder. Schott.

26.

Papazachariou-Christoforou

(2022). Movement experiences in preschool music classes. Journal of General Music Education, 36(1), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/27527646221110863

27.

Ponder

(2020, March). Unifying Framework for the Early Childhood Education Profession [Slideshow]. https://powertotheprofession.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Power-to-Profession-Framework-03312020-web.pdf

28.

Rajan

R. S.

(2017). Preschool teachers’ use of music in the classroom: A survey of park district preschool programs. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 27(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083717716687

29.

Robinson

L. E.

Palmer

K. K.

Bub

K. L.

(2016). Effect of the children’s health activity motor program on motor skills and self-regulation in head start preschoolers: An efficacy trial. Frontiers in Public Health, 4, 173. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00173

30.

Schäfer

Sedlmeier

Städtler

Huron

(2013). The psychological functions of music listening. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 511. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00511

31.

Shively

(2015). Constructivism in music education. Arts Education Policy Review, 116(3), 128–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2015.1011815

32.

Thorn

Brasche

(2020). Improving teacher confidence—Evaluation of a pilot music professional development program for primary teachers. Australian Journal of Music Education, 53, 41–47.

33.

Trainor

L. J.

Corrigall

K. A.

(2010). Music acquisition and effects of musical experience. In Riess Jones

Fay

R. R.

Popper

A. N.

(Eds.), Music perception (Vol. 36, pp. 89–127). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6114-3_4

34.

Trehub

S. E.

(2001). Musical predispositions in infancy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 930(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2001.tb05721.x

35.

Trimble

Hesdorffer

(2017). Music and the brain: The neuroscience of music and musical appreciation. BJPsych International, 14(2), 28–31. https://doi.org/10.1192/S2056474000001720

36.

Valerio

W. H.

Freeman

N. K.

(2009). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of early childhood music teaching experiences. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 181, 51–69.

37.

von Laban

Ullmann

(1971). Rudolf Laban speaks about movement and dance: Lectures and articles. Laban Art of Movement Centre. https://books.google.com/books?id=bcXQtgAACAAJ

38.

Wood

Bruner

J. S.

Ross

(1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

39.

Yoo

Bidelman

G. M.

(2019). Linguistic, perceptual, and cognitive factors underlying musicians’ benefits in noise-degraded speech perception. Hearing Research, 377, 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2019.03.021

40.

Young

(2007). Early childhood music education in England: Changes, choices, and challenges. Arts Education Policy Review, 109(2), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.3200/AEPR.109.2.19-26