A Praxial Approach to Musicology in the Secondary School Curriculum
10.6092/issn.2039-9715/10180
Poiché l’estetica, che ha dominato a lungo l’educazione musicale, privilegia un’idea di musica come oggetto estetico, gli aspetti della musicologia relativi alla musica come pratica culturale si sono spesso ridotti al minimo e hanno fornito una visione limitata della musica stessa. Ciò ha anche minimizzato il ruolo della musicologia nel curriculo musicale della scuola. Nel mio articolo, in primo luogo, sostengo che la prassi musicologica è congruente con le filosofie praxialsite dell’educazione musicale e che risulta appropriata per l’inclusione nel curriculo musicale secondario. In secondo luogo, offro una serie di criteri e raccomandazioni per applicare questa filosofia e integrare la prassi musicologica in quel curriculo. Infine, a titolo esemplificativo, cito due brevi esempi, confidando che questo contributo possa delineare almeno un possibile percorso che renda la musicologia parte integrante del curriculo scolastico e offra indicazioni per un quadro filosofico pienamente applicabile.
application/pdf
2039-9715
10180
en
James Vincent Maiello
Musica Docta
Scuola secondaria
A Praxial Approach to Musicology in the Secondary School Curriculum
Text.Serial.Journal
https://musicadocta.unibo.it/
9
Articoli
2019-12-20
2019-12-16
2019-12-20
2020-02-19
57-65
MD
James Vincent Maiello
2019/12/20
10.6092/issn.2039-9715/10180
57
Winnipeg, Manitoba
2039-9715
Scuola secondaria
en
65
A Praxial Approach to Musicology in the Secondary School Curriculum
https://musicadocta.unibo.it/article/download/10180/10023
9
         Musica Docta. Rivista digitale di Pedagogia e Didattica della musica, pp. 57-65




                              JAMES VINCENT MAIELLO
                                  Winnipeg, Manitoba

            A PRAXIAL APPROACH TO MUSICOLOGY
          IN THE SECONDARY SCHOOL CURRICULUM

                                                                          For Dave Pratt

     School music teachers and musicologists alike will almost certainly
acknowledge that musicology is in some way valuable for music students at all
levels, but it is unclear what exactly that means and exactly how musicology may
be integrated effectively into the school music classroom. As James Davis and I
have both noted, the ‘liberal arts component’ of musicology has continued to
lose ground in curriculum and instruction, with school music programs focusing
most heavily on performance.1 The traditional ‘music appreciation’ course of the
secondary school curriculum has become what American music education calls
‘general music’, and even that has minimized the content and skills with which
musicology as a discipline is occupied. This is due in part to the fact that music
education relies on an antiquated notion of the nature, methodologies, and prac-
tices of musicology and related disciplines, but that is beyond the scope of the
present essay. The National Association for Music Education (NAfMe) revised
the former Music Educators National Conference (MENC) National Standards
for Music Education in 2014 to make them even more focused on performance,
recognizing “performing, creating, and responding” as broad domains and rein-
forcing the dominance of an aesthetics-based philosophy of both music and mu-
sic education.2
     Praxial theories of music education may offer some redress. Since their
emergence almost thirty years ago, these philosophies have gained acceptance
with scholars and become popular with music teachers at all levels. From my
perspective as a teacher of music history and musicology, the approaches I will
outline presently offer exciting and potentially transformative opportunities for
pedagogy in the university, a case I have argued at length elsewhere.3 In this

     1  See J. V. MAIELLO, “Toward an Extension of Regelski’s Praxial Philosophy of
Music Education into Music History Pedagogy”, Journal of Music History Pedagogy, IV, n.
1, 2013, pp. 71-108, http://ams-net.org/ojs/index.php/jmhp/article/view/85 (last accessed,
19.09.2019); J. A. DAVIS, “Music History Pedagogy on the Ground Floor”, this journal,
VI, 2016, pp. 19-26: 21, https://musicadocta.unibo.it/article/view/6562 (last accessed,
19.09.2019).
      2 See the National Association for Music Education’s website, in particular

https://nafme.org/my-classroom/standards/ (last accessed, 19.09.2019).
      3 See MAIELLO, “Toward an Extension of Regelski’s Praxial Philosophy of Music

Education into Music History Pedagogy” cit.




https://musicadocta.unibo.it
ISSN 2039-9715
© 2019 James Vincent Maiello – Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0
58                                  James Vincent Maiello




paper, however, I will suggest that a praxial philosophy provides a compelling
rationale for incorporating musicology into the secondary school curriculum and
that it offers a road map for designing effective instructional experiences focused
on musicological praxis. First, I will argue briefly that musicological praxis is
congruent with praxial philosophies of music education and that it is appropriate
and beneficial for inclusion in the secondary music curriculum. Second, I will
offer a set of criteria and recommendations for applying this philosophy and
integrating musicological praxis into that curriculum. Finally, I will use two brief
examples by way of illustration. I hope that this paper will outline at least one
path for making musicology a more integral part of curriculum and instruction
and that it will provide a broadly applicable philosophical framework.

A Brief Overview of Praxial Theories of Music Education
      Praxial theory represented the first serious alternative to “Music Education
as Aesthetic Education” (MEAE), an approach rooted in Kantian aesthetics and
aesthetic formalism, of which the most prominent proponent was Bennett
Reimer. MEAE was essentially an education in feeling and connoisseurship, re-
lying on the same premises that drove the traditional college music appreciation
course, among them the idea that one had to be knowledgeable and literate about
music and its intrinsic qualities to “appreciate” it and that students had to be
taught what constituted “good” music. Moreover, despite acknowledging the
existence and efficacy of extra-musical referents, he argued nonetheless that “the
artistic meaning and value is always and essentially above and beyond whatever
referents happen to exist in a work...”4 In short, Reimer put music as an aesthetic
object at the top of a hierarchy of ideas, which has driven the nature of music
education for decades.5
      Praxialism, on the other hand, privileges a hierarchy of practice. Philip
Alperson first challenged the aesthetic approach in 1990, arguing instead for a
“contextual, but not relativistic” philosophy that privileged not music as an aes-
thetic object, but rather “just what music has meant to people”.6 David Elliot
followed, criticizing Reimer’s narrow definition of art as “fine art” and propos-
ing a broader, more inclusive view of music”.7 Drawing in part on the concept
of “musicking” originated by David Walhout and popularized by Christopher
Small, Elliott defined music as a fundamentally human endeavor, not an

     4 B. REIMER, A Philosophy of Music Education, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall,
1989, p. 27.
     5 Ivi, p. 133.
     6 PH. ALPERSON, “What Should One Expect from a Philosophy of Music Educa-

tion?”, The Journal of Aesthetic Education, XXV, n. 3, 1991 (Special Issue: Philosophy of Music
and Music Education), pp. 215-224: 227.
     7 D. J. ELLIOTT, “Music Education as Aesthetic Education: A Critical Inquiry”,

The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning, II, 1991, pp. 48-66: 49.




Musica Docta, IX, 2019
ISSN 2039-9715
            A Praxial Approach to Musicology in the Secondary School Curriculum       59




aesthetic object.8 He also tied the value of music to human consciousness and
self-growth, invoking psychologist Mihalyi Czikszentmihalyi’s concepts of
‘flow’” and ‘optimal experiences’ to characterize the practice of making music.9
Thomas Regelski offered his own praxial philosophy, which advocated an ex-
ceptionally broad definition of musical praxis.10 Regelski built on the Aristotelian
concept of praxis, using Ellen Dissanayake’s writings on art to address the in-
trinsic value of music in enhancing the lives of students.11 He emphasized the
role of music in action and on musical praxis as part of a life well lived. 12 Regelski
also encouraged instructors to design “reasonably realistic real life experiences”
that students can replicate outside the classroom.13 Praxial approaches represent
not only rigorous alternatives to MEAE, but also a way to mitigate some of the
philosophical weaknesses that scholars like Elliott, Regelski, and Wayne Bow-
man have identified in the aesthetic education model.14 Although Music Matters
does not address musicological praxis explicitly as such, it does provide a foun-
dation for its inclusion; Regelski’s work on “music appreciation as praxis” is an
ideal useful point of departure from which to advocate for musicology in the
secondary school curriculum.15

Musicology as Musical Praxis
     Even a cursory examination suggests that musicological praxis aligns with
the central principles of praxial music education. First, musicological praxes are
as legitimate musical experiences as performance, composition, and the other
broad definitions of ‘music’ accepted by praxialists. This extends to what

     8 See D. J. ELLIOTT, Music Matters: A Philosophy of Music Education, New York, Ox-
ford University Press, 1995, p. 49. See also D. WALHOUT, “The Nature and Function
of Art”, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, XXVI, n. 1, 1986, pp. 8-20; CH. SMALL,
Musicking: The Meanings of Performing and Listening, Hanover, NH, University of New Eng-
land Press, 1988.
     9 ELLIOTT, Music Matters cit., p. 114.
     10 See TH. A. REGELSKI, “Music Appreciation as Praxis”, Music Education Research,

VIII, 2006, pp. 281-310; ID., “The Aristotelian Bases of Praxis for Music and Music
Education”, Philosophy of Music Education Review, VI, n. 1, 1998, pp. 22-59.
     11 See TH. A. REGELSKI, “Prolegomenon to a Praxial Philosophy of Music and

Music Education”, Canadian Music Educator, XXXVIII, 1997, pp. 43-51; See also E. DIS-
SANAYAKE, What is Art For?, Seattle, University of Washington Press, 1988; EAD., Homo
Aestheticus: Where Art Comes From and Why, New York, Free Press, 1992.
     12 REGELSKI, “Prolegomenon to a Praxial Philosophy of Music and Music Educa-

tion” cit., p. 44.
     13 TH. A. REGELSKI, Teaching General Music: Action Learning for Middle and Secondary

Schools, New York, Schirmer Books, 1981, p. 18.
     14 See, for example, W. D. BOWMAN, “An Essay Review of Bennett Reimer’s ‘A

Philosophy of Music Education’”, The Quarterly, II, n. 3, 1991, pp. 76-87.
     15 See REGELSKI, “Music Appreciation as Praxis” cit., passim.




                                                                   Musica Docta, IX, 2019
                                                                         ISSN 2039-9715
60                                James Vincent Maiello




Lawrence Levine called “highbrow” and “lowbrow,” including art and vernacu-
lar musics, as well as Western and non-Western musics;16 it applies also to mu-
sicological endeavors that address these musics, such as ethnomusicological
praxis. Second, musicological praxis serves one of the core purposes for making
music (and by extension music education) that Elliott articulated, namely that it
is a fundamentally autotelic action for self-actualization. In Csikszentmihalyi’s
terms, musicological praxis functions as a means for individuals to engage in
“optimal experiences” to effect “flow” and “self-growth”.17 As the core of a
praxial music curriculum, Elliott prescribes “genuine musical challenges” and
charges the instructor with developing in students “the musicianship to meet
these challenges through competent, proficient, and artistic music making”.18
Although legitimate on its own as an “optimal experience”, one of the benefits
of “doing” musicology is that is allows for more informed, robust, and indeed,
more phronetic decision-making, a concept central to the Aristotelian foundations
of praxial theory itself.19 Moreover, the knowledge and skills developed through
musicological praxis are essential for the type of music making Elliott advocates.
Turning finally to Regelski’s focus on music as part of a life well-lived, the value
of musicology in the secondary curriculum rests ultimately with the individual
student. Regelski’s approach depends on pragmatic and existential understand-
ings of metaphysics and epistemology in which an individual constructs
knowledge and meaning and in which an individual determines value. Thus, mu-
sicological praxis is inherently valuable to any student who considers it valuable,
something neither teachers nor students can know a priori. Rather than creating
an axiological free-for-all in which everything has value, I contend here that this
premise reveals the duty of praxial educators to provide as broad a range of
musical experiences as possible, of which musicology is a key component. The
greater the variety of musical experiences offered to students, the more they can
find music of value in their own lives. Moreover, self-actualization is an integral
part of a life well lived and the pinnacle of Maslow’s venerable hierarchy of
needs.20 Thus, musicological praxis also reflects Regelski’s fundamental criteria
for the intrinsic value of music and music education. I am confident that even
this brief consideration demonstrates that musicological praxis correlates with


     16 See L. LEVINE, Highbrow/Lowbrow: The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in America,
Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1990, passim.
     17 ELLIOTT, Music Matters cit., p. 34. See also M. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, Flow: The

Psychology of Optimal Experience, New York, Harper Collins, 1990 passim.
     18 ELLIOTT, Music Matters cit., p. 260.
     19 For a clear examination of the relationship between Aristotle’s ideas and praxial

philosophy and the concept of phronesis, see REGELSKI, “The Aristotelian Bases of
Praxis for Music and Music Education” cit.
     20 See A. MASLOW, “A Theory of Human Motivation”, Psychological Review, L, n. 4,

1943, pp. 370-396.




Musica Docta, IX, 2019
ISSN 2039-9715
            A Praxial Approach to Musicology in the Secondary School Curriculum       61




the core principles of praxial music education and that as such, it appropriate
and beneficial to include musicological praxis in the secondary music curriculum.

Adapting Musicological Praxis for the Secondary Music Classroom
      In adapting musicological praxis for secondary music students, it is critical
to acknowledge that musicology is already alive and well in classrooms all over
the western world in a panoply of manifestations. To dismiss this is ignorant and
would be a profound insult to practicing music educators. Moreover, such an
attitude smacks of disciplinary colonialism. My first recommendation, then, is a
general principle: Musicologists must be assistive to school music teachers, not
prescriptive. We must develop genuine, collegial relationships with music edu-
cators and we must understand our role as a resource. Musicologists might, for
example, facilitate the development of “more optimal experiences”. We can
work with in-service music teachers to ensure access to the latest research and
methodological approaches in the content area. We can collaborate to design
curriculum and instructional strategies that get students “doing” musicology in
the classroom. We can create and facilitate valuable professional development
opportunities. Conversely, music educators are exceptional resources for im-
proving pedagogy at the post-secondary level. My second general recommenda-
tion is that musicological praxis be aligned, insofar as possible, with existing
models of curriculum and instruction, at least in the initial stages of integration.
This will make it easier to integrate musicology into curriculum, facilitate the
legitimation of musicology in the classroom, and make advocacy easier and more
effective. Although these curricula often focus on MEAE, which undervalues
musicological praxis in its core philosophy, I still believe that it is better to work
from within rather than try and disrupt entrenched beliefs entirely.
      Turning to criteria for musicological praxis in the secondary classroom I
will echo similar recommendations I have made elsewhere for praxialism in the
post-secondary music history curriculum:21
1)   Curriculum and instruction should strive to be as student-centered as pos-
     sible. Students should have input and choice in curriculum and instruction,
     to be sure, but “student-centered” is not merely about choice. Rather, in-
     structors must consider carefully and systematically how curriculum and in-
     struction connect and intersect with the lives of students and benefit those
     lives;
2)   Musicological experiences must be “genuine” musical and intellectual chal-
     lenges in order to effect flow and self-growth. This is to say that, insofar as
     possible, classroom activities should be drawn from authentic musicological
     practices and not contrived solely as didactic exercises. Instructors should

     21 See MAIELLO, “Toward an Extension of Regelski’s Praxial Philosophy of Mu-

sic Education into Music History Pedagogy” cit..




                                                                   Musica Docta, IX, 2019
                                                                         ISSN 2039-9715
62                                    James Vincent Maiello




     scaffold instructional units and design optimal experiences that simultane-
     ously allow students to experience true success and to experience challenges
     at increasing levels of difficulty and sophistication;
3)   Classroom experiences should, as much as is practically possible, reflect au-
     thentic musicological praxis, though they may be adapted for content, grade
     level, and so on. As a corollary to this, Regelskian praxialism emphasizes
     that one of most important aims of teaching music in primary and second-
     ary schools is “to facilitate ongoing amateur praxis”, which in turn requires
     instructors to focus on functional, “independent musicianship”.22 In this case, I
     have given musicology the same status that is accorded amateur perfor-
     mance, that one may choose to engage in doing musicological activities not
     as a professional but as an interested amateur, for enjoyment and self-
     growth. This challenges the primacy of performance as the “most legiti-
     mate” musical practice favored by MEAE, and I suggest that listening and
     criticism, notation, and other musicological practices are just as valid for
     amateur practice as any other musical practice;
4)   Thus, classroom experiences should also be replicable outside the class-
     room so the student can continue to practice the activity as an amateur;
5)   Finally, instructors must engage regularly in critical reflection about curric-
     ulum, instruction, and assessment, and they must adapt accordingly. This
     last criterion is central to Regelski’s praxialism, which is heavily indebted to
     Frankfurt School critical theory, especially the work of Jürgen Habermas.
      These criteria and recommendations are not exhaustive guide, but rather an
initial, basic framework of principles and a starting point for praxial musicology
in the classroom.

Musicology in the Secondary Classroom: Sample Applications
     One of the most traditional and important of all musicological tasks has
long been the transcription and editing of music. For example, I have found
transcribing plainchant notation and secular monophony to be a straightforward
and highly successful musicological activity for secondary level music students.
Such an activity puts a premium on “doing” and it is best approached as guided
discovery, making it a good fit for praxial instruction. It is inherently student
centered and can be treated as a solitary activity, collaborative work, or both.
Transcription is also an authentic musicological task that can be adapted to a
variety of settings, skill levels, and age groups. For example, Cesarino Ruini has
offered a plan for how and why to introduce beginning university students to




     22   REGELSKI, Music Appreciation as Praxis cit., pp. 295 and 286 (italics in the original).




Musica Docta, IX, 2019
ISSN 2039-9715
            A Praxial Approach to Musicology in the Secondary School Curriculum       63




the joys of transcription, paleography, and editing.23 I have developed and im-
plemented instructional plans for musical transcription from medieval manu-
scripts for high school students and university undergraduates with positive re-
sults. Instructors may increase difficulty and complexity, providing consistently
optimal activities for effecting flow. The task also lends itself well to differenti-
ated instruction, making it effective even when students in a single class repre-
sent a wide range of skill levels. One might begin with Solesmes-style notation
and move on to manuscript square notation as the student develops knowledge
and skills. Diastematic and adiastematic notation provide additional challenges,
as do comparative editions, etc. Advanced students can move on to forms of
mensural notation, from which the options are virtually unlimited. Moreover,
the music itself becomes a point of entry to explore other musicological issues
like socio-historical context and use, issues of performance practice, more inter-
pretive issues like politics and gender, and other topics that reflect the current
state of musicology and related disciplines.
      Returning to Regelski, what is all this “good for,” how does it enrich a stu-
dent’s musical life? First, there is the practical benefit of being able to create
one’s own performing editions from original notation. Additionally, is impera-
tive to eradicate the notion that secondary students simply will not find this kind
of work interesting or fulfilling. The popularity of Sudoku and other puzzle
games, brain teasers, and so on suggests that treating intellectual activities like
transcription and editing as autotelic, optimal experiences will resonate with stu-
dents on their own merits. I have also witnessed the excitement of students of
all ages at seeing facsimiles of early music manuscripts in physical and digital
media. Transcription as a collaborative undertaking also creates a sense of com-
munity, underscoring the praxial view of music as a social endeavor. Indeed, one
of the most rewarding experiences of my master’s work was a collaborative edi-
tion, done in a notation course, of the Missa Verbum incarnatum of Arnold de
Lantins. During the course, the class developed a shared sense of purpose and
accomplishment. At the end of the project, we printed and bound our edition
and sang through it together with great pride. Again, it is only our preconcep-
tions of what students will and will not find rewarding (note that I did not say
“fun”) that limit the options.
      Two of ethnomusicology’s classic tasks, ethnography and oral history, pro-
vide other ways to integrate authentic musicological praxis into the secondary
music classroom. High school students, for example, might construct an eth-
nography of their own musical lives or of a variety of musical settings from con-
certs of western art music to music at religious services and more informal social
situations. Preparatory exercises might include writing “thin” and “thick”

      23 C. RUINI, “Teaching Medieval Music Today: New Approaches to Paleography

and Music History”, this journal, VI, 2016, pp. 69-76, https://musicadocta.unibo.it/arti-
cle/view/6569 (last accessed, 19.09.2019).




                                                                   Musica Docta, IX, 2019
                                                                         ISSN 2039-9715
64                              James Vincent Maiello




descriptions of their own school day, and so on. A more involved project would
be an investigation of the musical lives of their grandparents through a combi-
nation of library research, observation, and interviews in the same way ethno-
musicologists examine music in specific populations or communities. Such a
project should begin with an overview of research methods and the ethical con-
siderations of working with human research subjects, with preparatory exercises
like comparing overt/covert and active/passive observer roles and collecting
brief oral histories. After this, students identify major trends in popular and art
music culture during a specific period of their grandparents’ lives using standard
research methods and resources and work collaboratively to develop general in-
terview questions. These might include prompts to invite respondents to share
oral histories, discuss their impressions of the role music occupied in their daily
lives, and so on. Students would also develop follow up questions specific to
their individual case. After the fieldwork, students would then assess the data
gathered and complete written accounts of their observations, assessments, and
interpretations. The capstone of the instructional unit should mirror what eth-
nomusicologists in practice do and include one or more of the following: written
ethnographies, poster sessions, and the comparison of all data to map common
trends and outliers. Again, subsequent projects might vary in topic and increase
in complexity.
      As with the transcription project, these experiences align well with the core
principles of praxial philosophy. They are student-centered and focused on ac-
tion, and the emphasis of ethnography and oral history on the socio-cultural
context of music correlates perfectly with praxialism’s treatment of music as a
social endeavor rather than simply an aesthetic one. Designing ethnographic
projects around students’ interests and lives, as in the examples I have just out-
lined, keeps the activity student centered, and it is replicable outside the class-
room. In examining the role of music in someone else’s life, students are
equipped with the tools to examine and assess their own and musical experiences
critically and those of other cultures and time periods, even if they are unlikely
to engage in systematic ethnomusicological research as an amateur pursuit. We
should not, however, discount the intrinsic rewards of intellectual and academic
work. Such research is intrinsically valuable as an autotelic experience for self-
actualization. The intellectual challenges presented by “doing” ethnography
range from the very basic (e.g. observation and description) to the very complex
(e.g. interpretation and analysis); they can be adjusted for students at all levels.
In this way, it is possible to provide genuine challenges throughout the curricu-
lum as students develop more advanced skills and knowledge, constantly effect-
ing flow and self-growth.




Musica Docta, IX, 2019
ISSN 2039-9715
              A Praxial Approach to Musicology in the Secondary School Curriculum        65




Conclusions
      I have tried make the case in this essay for musicology as praxis and for the
inclusion of that praxis into the secondary school music curriculum. Musicolog-
ical praxis aligns well with praxial music education. Because aesthetic philoso-
phies privilege music as an aesthetic object, they minimize the aspects of musi-
cology that are concerned with music as a cultural practice and provide an un-
necessarily narrow view of musical praxis itself, aspect that have become central
to the modern discipline itself. Indeed, some of the most important musicolog-
ical discoveries and ideas – the connection of L’homme armé masses with the Or-
der of the Golden Fleece, colonial implications of musical exoticism in Verdi’s
Aida, and issues of gender and “madness” in Donizetti’s Lucia di Lammermoor to
name just a few – would find themselves cast aside if a rigorously aesthetic ap-
proach were applied.24 In closing, I cannot overstate the importance of recog-
nizing the work that music teachers are already doing in bringing musicology
into their classrooms. By being assistive and supportive, musicologists can con-
tribute significantly to the quality and quantity of these musicological experi-
ences in the secondary music curriculum. In doing so, we also have the oppor-
tunity to benefit society in all the same ways that music education has advocated
for its own legitimacy. This is an exciting prospect, and I hope this paper has
shown that a praxial approach is an effective, if not the optimal, way forward in
integrating musicology into the school music curriculum.
                                                                  James.Maiello@umanitoba.ca




     24See W. F. PRIZER, “Music and Ceremonial in the Low Countries: Philip the Fair
and the Order of the Golden Fleece”, Early Music History, V, 1985, pp. 113-153;
R. P. LOCKE, “How ‘Eastern’ is “Aida”?”, Cambridge Opera Journal, XVII, n. 2, 2005,
pp. 105-139; S. MCCLARY, Feminine Endings: Music, Gender, and Sexuality, Minneapolis,
MN, University of Minnesota Press, 1991.




                                                                     Musica Docta, IX, 2019
                                                                           ISSN 2039-9715
