moving forward with music.

Blog post “abstract”:
(Is such a thing possible for a blog post?)
This post discusses the role that MENC played in the development of music education programming in the 1930s and 1940s and compares it to how the organization is handling programs like Glee and The Sing-Off today. History suggests that the early leaders of MENC would be jumping to be involved with network programming and music teachers should be disappointed in how our largest and loudest instrument for music education appears to be missing some very significant opportunities. I encourage a dialog in the comments and ask that you direct anybody with any interest in MENC or music education to this post. If you’re interested in sources for this research, see my note at the bottom of this post.

Many thanks to Justine Dolorfino and Prof. Matthew Thibeault for reading drafts of this post and giving comments. Justine has previously written about Glee and its role in music education. I strongly encourage you to check out her posts here and here! Prof. Thibeault has no blog or anything fun to link to (his academic papers would be unavailable to many), so I’ll link to this image of a smurf on a sled cat with a melon on its head.

(2/4/11 Update: MENC has responded with a study of the “Glee Effect”, an online survey of music teachers. To read their press release, go here. Please go to the comments of this article for a response from an official at MENC concerning their efforts to get MENC in more homes.)

Dearest Teaching Music Magazine visitors,

If you get a chance, check out the rest of my blog! There’s all kinds of fun stuff. If you’re not sure where to start, go to my Lessons page.

Want updates from me? (Of course you do!)

• Follow me on Facebook.
• Follow me on Twitter.
• Click HERE for my RSS feed. 

————-

I’m encouraged that the Interwebs seem to be speaking positively about NBC’s a cappella competition show, The Sing-Off. Primarily because I’m lazy, I’ll use the description from the NBC website to help explain the show:

The show will feature the country’s top ten a cappella groups performing popular songs like you’ve never heard them before. There’s no lip-synching, backup bands, or safety net. They’ll be singing for America’s vote, with the winner walking away with the ultimate prize – a Sony Music recording contract and $100,000.

If you’re a music teacher, you need to watch at least one episode (try Hulu). What is refreshing about The Sing-Off, in comparison to a show like American Idol, is that it doesn’t traffic in the humiliation and exploitation that we have come to expect from talent-based competition programs. While it should be remembered that any television program is simply designed as a way to sell ads, the content of The Sing-Off is explicitly and unashamedly about the joy of sharing music with others. As someone who has decided to spend their life trying to share my love of music, I must say that I often find myself emotional while watching the show - overwhelmed by both the power of the performances and the power of the vehicle for those performances: a nationally televised network program. This is not the first time there has been music education programming (and I know some will criticize the classification of The Sing-Off as music education), however, the absence of MENC, and other pro-music interests, is both curious and counterproductive.

For the first time in over half a century music programs, with a focus on critical listening and amateur participation, are a commodity for the networks. There is a market for our wares and I get the sense that we’re simply along for the ride, not actually in the driver’s seat.

Yes, there was a time when music education found its way on commercial broadcasting.
Unknown to many music educators, there was a period of time when music education was receiving similar attention to what we see with shows like Glee and The Sing-Off. Unfortunately, it was over 60 years ago. Back at the dawn of commercial radio, the newly created national networks invested serious money into music education programming. In 1929 alone, NBC invested $500,000 into the famous Music Appreciation Hour. In 2010 dollars, that is a staggering $6.3 million! If you factor in that commercial radio was still a developing medium, the investment from NBC seems even more significant.

(Click “Read More” for a look at MENC’s active involvement with the radio networks and a look at how the organization is handling shows like Glee today.)

Since 1948, when CBS canceled their educational response to the Music Appreciation Hour, The CBS American School of the Air, music education has struggled to find its groove in popular media. Yes, there were Leonard Bernstein’s popular Young People’s Concerts (1958 - 1972), but the series only produced around four episodes a year. Sadly, even with that minimal output, the concerts serve as an outlier - the exception that proves the rule. Why is it that there was space for such an investment in music education broadcasting? Well…

Music education as a commodity: An oversimplified explanation of the battle for the airwaves
In the late 1920s and 1930s, the commercial broadcasters were in an active battle with educators over the fate of educational broadcasting. Many educators believed that there should be a separate system of educational stations, distinct from the commercial stations, funded by the government. The networks wanted to maximize their influence over the radio airwaves and fought hard to keep as much of the spectrum open as possible, in order to maximize potential profits.

Early on in the discussion over radio licenses, the idea that a radio station must provide something to the public besides the potential to make money became an important concept. Both the Music Appreciation Hour and the School of the Air were designed to be used by teachers during the school day and the networks pointed to these programs as evidence of the ability of the networks to provide quality educational programming, for free, to the general public. As one can expect, the whole process was stacked against the educators and, in the end, once the commercial stations got their radio licenses and had squelched any idea of serious competition from educational radio, they dropped their own educational programming. In retrospect, it seems obvious that the networks would do that, but everything was new back then and any our radio system (followed by television) could have taken any shape* (see bottom of post).

Why did the networks choose music education?
In my opinion, there were three factors that encouraged the creation of music education programming:

1. As discussed already, the stations wanted to prove to the government that they were worthy of the free licenses they had received. And since they needed SOME sort of educational offerings, they settled on music because…
2. In 1925, music accounted for 71.5% of all content on the radio - most of it live. In fact, large stations were prohibited from playing records over the radio. This reliance on music has as much to do with the desire for people to hear music as it does with a new medium that was still grappling to understand what shape it would take. Music as an aural art form seemed perfectly suited for the radio.
3. In 1924, the first radio program to be sponsored by a business was a show that presented classical performance: Carbon Company’s Eveready Hour. Classical music was seen as a respectable art form and business became interested in reaching its listeners. Music education programming (which was exclusively Classical music on NBC) was seen as both distinguished and important - a great combination for potential advertisers.

It’s the 1920s and MENC is in the middle of it
By “it”, I mean, the planning of educational programming. As early as 1928, MENC had a committee that was devoted to music education over the radio. By the late 1930s, MENC was instrumental in the preparation of the musical programs being broadcast on the School of the Air. For those familiar with music education history in America, many of the names that were directly attached to these programs are impressive: Peter Dykema, Joseph Maddy, Edgar Gordon, Louis Woodson Curtis. That list includes four past MENC presidents. Additionally, starting in 1942, the current MENC president included a statement in the Teacher’s Manuals for the School of the Air. Lilla Belle Pitts wrote the following about the impact of radio on music education:

Believing that no product of modern science has greater educational potentialities than the radio, a committee representing the Music Educators National Conference has been working for several months in close cooperation with the Education Department of the Columbia Broadcasting System.

The quality and breadth of these programs is incredible. They included the participation of Aaron Copland, who hosted a few episodes on American music, and Alan Lomax, who was actually in charge of the programs for two years, often playing and singing the guitar himself for school children all across America.

It’s 2010. Where is MENC?
Why is it that when I watch The Sing-Off, Glee or even, American Idol, I don’t see music education advocates everywhere, both in advertisements and on the show themselves?

As I said before, I understand that some will dispute my claim that these shows serve as useful vehicles for music education. And while it’s true that these shows don’t parade under the banner of music education, it is clear that viewers do get a fantastic example of the value that music can play in society and culture. On The Sing-Off, we get to watch as a cappella ensembles from all walks of life each bring their unique sound to music that most of the viewing audience would be familiar with.

There’s even a group called Groove for Thought (see clip above) that is comprised of a number of music teachers. The judges constantly bring it up. As an example, during his comments on Groove for Thought’s performance, Ben Folds said on the 12/8 episode (see clip above. Also, ignore Nicole Scherzinger’s comments – someone else has already written that blog post.):

“You set us all up with all that ‘teacher stuff”’ and we were all ready to go “you know, your big brain got in the way [of being cool].” But, really, there is nothing cooler than teaching, personally.”

The line was met with sincere applause.

That, my friends, is on national television.

Some are going to say that Ben Folds was just providing lip service towards education. Personally, I don’t see that. But even if it was insincere, who cares? It’s the kind of message we need on national television. Much better than listening to your typical MENC PSA.

A new episode of Glee can be counted on to land in the top five rated shows of the week. I don’t know if enough people have really stopped to think about that. I have no real evidence on hand to support the idea that vocal music has become more popular in schools, however, anecdotal evidence suggests that its true and I doubt many would disagree with the assertion.

Yes, I know that some episodes of Glee can be problematic. Situations can be unrealistic – like when Mr. Schuester’s wife pretended to be pregnant and then attempted to play off Quinn’s baby as her own. I often find myself annoyed that we don’t see the students rehearse more. I have to remember that every television show requires the suspension of disbelief and that very few people would be interested in watching the glee club rehearse for weeks on end. Sometimes the show is DOA, a mish-mash of popular songs and silly situations. Other times, the show is incredibly moving as it deals with real life situations that today’s youth confront (bullying, relationships with friends and family, racism), using music both old and new - “Singin’ in the Rain” to “Baby, One More Time”.

The power of the show comes from watching the members of New Directions attempt to define their identity through their involvement with the group. We get the opportunity to watch as the personal lives of these students intersect with the music that they perform.

Throughout the series, we watch as Mr. Schuester works to bring out the best in his students. While he doesn’t always succeed, it is clear to anybody who watches the show that he has their best interests at heart. His role on the show, even his “outsider” status as a Spanish teacher, is a positive one for our profession –you don’t have to be a professional musician to have a real passion for music, after all. When I was teaching high school, a number of students in my extracurricular wind ensemble told me that I reminded them of Mr. Schuester, and despite some of the character’s obvious personal problems, at no point did I consider that anything less than a heartfelt compliment from them.

Having said all of this, why don’t we see MENC involved in programs such as this? Why hasn’t the organization found a way to finagle some PSA’s with members of the Glee cast that could air during the show (or any time, for that matter)? Why do I have to read about Mrs. Pacific Northwest America giving MENC face tattoos to school children? It should be clear to anybody why The National Anthem Project is one of our most visible programs (read: politics), but is this really the best way to reach Americans about the value of music in their lives? There are countless ways for MENC to be pushing music education publicly, not just in magazines to its own members. Why then, when millions are being entertained through watching people learn and perform music, is MENC not front and center? I have a feeling that Dykema, Gordon, and Maddy would have a similar question.

Shows like The Sing-Off and Glee are making the case for music education that our own professional organization consistently fails to make:
It’s not about math or science. Music is an important way for us to both express our feelings and communicate with others. And that, in and of itself, is more than enough for us to encourage participation in music.
______

Please remember to share your thoughts in the comments and to share this post with anybody who might find it useful (particularly if they’re active in MENC).

Sources:

I have included no citations, but everything in here has been thoroughly researched over the past few months. If you’re interested in any of the sources used for this, please reference my paper titled “Learning through the static: A look at the forces behind music education over the radio”. I will probably submit a revised version of this paper for publication, so if you have comments or suggestions, please let me know!

*If you’re looking for one individual to blame for commercial media, then perhaps Herbert Hoover might be a good one to point your finger towards. He was Secretary of Commerce before being the President and called numerous conferences on radio. Very early on in the process Hoover declared that the government had no place in radio, opening up the entire spectrum for commercial stations.