The Professional Development of Music Educators inMassachusetts Public Schools

By Andrew T. Garcia

At the Massachusetts Music Educator’s 2003 All-State Conference, Dr. Richard Colwell,arguably the most distinguished music education scholar of our time and editor of bothHandbooks on Research on Music Teaching and Learning (1992, 2000) spoke about theperceived problem of professional development in music education. His claims are thatprofessional development “as it is defined by the Massachusetts Department of Education doesnot 1-recognize the complexity of [

professional development

]; 2-it does not recognize theimportant issues facing teachers in all disciplines and 3-it does not specify minimum experiencesthat lead toward professional improvement….” In defining the problem he made three points:

The first is that the definition of professional development is too broad

(Renji, 1996a, 1996b; Sparks, 1994)

giving it responsibility for too many critical issues. My second point is that subject matter competence must be a primary consideration, and the third point is that a different administrative structure is needed to monitor and approve all professional development.

He concluded his remarks by suggesting solutions to the second and third problem:

“I’m arguing that mandatory professional development in one’s subject matter, like secondary band, be approved by an organization of subject matter specialists in the field like MICCA or a group in this audience….School districts are very different throughout the state. The performance standards appropriate for each should be established by MICCA {or other Music Agency} and local school personnel in conjunction with and outside music consultant.”.

(Colwell, 2003)

As a member of the audience who heard Dr. Colwell’s remarks, I wondered what theconsensus among those that were gathered was. Were they in agreement? Are there glaringproblems with regard to music education professional development throughout the state? Asmusic supervisor of my school district, I recognized some of these problems-especially theproblem of over-generalizing professional development for ALL teachers and the subjectivenature of administrative decisions that are made with regard to professional development. I knewthat I had to seek meaningful professional development opportunities outside of my district andthat I often incurred the expense of these. My attendance at the conference was an example. Topursue these questions and to get a better understanding of the nature of professionaldevelopment of Music Teachers in Massachusetts public schools, I developed a survey.

SURVEY PROCEDURE

A survey was developed to acquire a specific understanding of professional developmentissues facing Massachusetts music teachers. Both broad and specific questions were asked.The survey was sent to 30 Music Teachers and was voluntary. It was conducted entirely via e-mail. E-mail was chosen because of its ease of delivery and response. Survey participants wereasked to simply supply their answers and e-mail the survey back. 14 complete responses werereceived in time to submit this study for publication. Once the surveys were received, responseswere placed in tables by survey question so they could be displayed and analyzed. The surveyquestions are listed below. As this is study is ongoing, any MMEA member who would like tocomplete the survey is more than welcome to do so. Please mail completed surveys to: PDSurvey, 969 Main St., Dalton, MA, 01226.

PARTICIPANT SNAPSHOT

The participants were self-selected and represent a small percentage of all music educatorsin the state. While some responses are indicated in percentages it is important to point out that10% represents one person only. 5 males and 6 females took part in the survey. 4 teach at theelementary level, 5 teach at the middle school level and 4 teach at the high school level (some

teachers teach at multiple levels). 5 teach general music, 5 teach instrumental music, 4 teachchoral music, 2 teach music theory and history and 1 teaches music technology. The ages ofteachers responding ranged from 25-56 and the years of teaching experience ranged from 1-30+years. 2 teachers teach in urban school districts, 5 teach in suburban districts and 3 teach inrural districts. Overall, a wide variety was represented by survey respondents even if the numberof respondents was low.

THE SURVEY QUESTIONS1- Does your District support professional development related to your teachingassignment/subject area and your professional development needs?

6 of the participants indicated “yes” and 4 participants indicated, “No”. Not anoverwhelmingly positive response! No additional information was provided to indicate the reasonsfor either response, however, the following questions are more specific.

2- What topics do you feel are important in terms of your professional

development?

Responses were:

•

Standards-Based Curriculum

•

Implementation of curriculum and standards

•

Improving teaching and musicianship skills

•

Music Computer Applications, Technology

•

Recording

•

Music Advocacy

•

Classroom management,

•

Curriculum development k-12

•

Conducting/ rehearsal techniques

•

Arranging

•

Current vocal methods and scientific research pertaining to vocal development.

These responses echo common themes in professional journals such as Music Educator’sJournal, The Journal for Research in Music Education, and the Journal or Music TeacherEducation and the two Handbooks on Music Teaching and Learning.

3- Please rate to what degree your District supports professional development in the followingareas:

•

Elementary General Music Methods

•

Middle School General Music

•

Instrumental Music Methods

•

Instrumental Music Repair

•

Instrumental Music Other (specify)

•

Music Technology

•

Choral Music (all levels)

•

World/Multicultural Music

•

Music History

•

Music Theory

•

Assessment (Music)

•

Differentiated Learning and Classroom Management techniques

•

Curriculum Mapping

•

Integrating Music with other subjects

•

Word Processing skills

•

Internet uses in Music Learning

•

Web Design for Music Educators

The majority of responses for

Elementary General Methods Courses

Middle School General Music, Instrumental Music Methods and Instrumental Music Repair

was “rarely” or“never”. These responses indicate that there is a shortage of specific, context-specificprofessional development happening in schools. Instrument repair was the least offered topiceven though it is known to be a real need of band directors, in particular, new teachers (Conway,2002). At least half of the respondents indicated that differentiated learning and internet-basedprofessional development takes place regularly. Responses appear to indicate that broad-basedprofessional development educational receive more support than subject-specific topics (Hussey,Estrada, Decker & Crawford, 1999; Newman, 1998; Olebe, 1999).

4- Does your School District support self-directed professional development

relatedto your teaching assignment/subject area?

Responses to this question underscored the findings from question 3. Only 2 teachersindicate that the district “always” supported development in the specific teaching assignment. 4indicated, “sometimes” and 4 indicated “rarely” or “never”.

5- Does your school or district provide professional development

opportunities specific to MUSIC teaching and learning?

80% responded, “yes” and 20% responded, “no.” One participant wrote the following:

“Yes, only if you consider that these occur through my DEPARTMENT not trough general sessions sponsored by the school system. The system allows this to happen by providing dedicated K-12 Performing Arts meeting time throughout the year in which my whole department meets to learn or work on curriculum together.”

This statement suggests that specific professional development in music is best createdand implemented by music departments themselves. I wondered how many other districts arefree to do this.

6- Please indicate what types of professional development

opportunities your schooldistrict supports/offers.

The responses were as follows:

•

Sponsors or sends us to classes---50%

•

Sponsors or sends us to workshops---70%

•

Sponsors or sends us to conferences---70%

•

Provides mentors: matches with experienced music teacher in district---50%

•