IJCM 11 (3) pp.

353–362 Intellect Limited 2018

International Journal of Community Music

Volume 11 Number 3
© 2018 Intellect Ltd Article. English language. doi: 10.1386/ijcm.11.3.353_1

Debbie Ann Rohwer

University of North Texas

A content analysis of the

International Journal of
Community Music, 2008–18

Abstract Keywords
The purpose of the current content analysis was to describe the publication character- community
istics found in the International Journal of Community Music from the first print content analysis
issue in 2008 through 2018. Across the ten years, each of the 30 issues were coded education
for page length, types of articles, editorials, review board characteristics, single- and international
co-authored article details, repeat authors and author countries. Results showed that music
approximately half of the articles were research, with qualitative studies being the
most common. Exemplars and position papers were the most common non-research
articles. Adults were the most common age level addressed. Approximately three-
quarters of the articles were single-authored and the United States was the most
common country of publications. Conclusions address the strengths of the journal
and future directions for community music writings, including expansion of topics,
areas and article formats.

The investigation of respected, quality research resources in music educa-

tion has commonly been conducted in terms of eminence. Researchers who
have cited eminent journals have most commonly investigated the Journal
of Research in Music Education (Brittin and Standley 1997; Diaz and Silveira
2014; Ebie 2002; Hamann and Lucas 1998; Humphreys and Stauffer 2000;
Kratus 1992; Lane 2011; LeBlanc and McCrary 1991; Miksza and Johnson

353
Debbie Ann Rohwer

2012; Price and Orman 1996; Reynolds and Hamann 2010; Sample 1992;
Schmidt and Zdzinski 1993; Standley 1984; Yarbrough 1984, 2002), Bulletin of
the Council for Research in Music Education (Brittin and Standley 1997; Hamann
and Lucas 1998; Kratus 1992; Lane 2011; LeBlanc and McCrary 1991; Sample
1992; Schmidt and Zdzinski 1993; Standley 1984) and Contributions to Music
Education (Hall 1998; Hamann and Lucas 1998; Kratus 1992; Reynolds and
Hamann 2010; Sample 1992; Schmidt and Zdzinski 1993) as the journals for
their analyses.
Researchers have analysed additional eminent professional resources such
as conferences (Orman and Price 2007; Price and Orman 2001; Todd and
Hancock 2015) and the issues of the Handbook of Research on Music Teaching
and Learning (Kratus 1993; Randles et al. 2010). Some of the eminence anal-
yses have been content-area based, addressing topics such as string disser-
tations (Kantorski 1995); disabilities (Dobbs 2012); affective research (Diaz
and Silveira 2014); and social media interactions (Brewer and Rickels 2014).
Those analyses that have addressed the research components that can guide
eminence have highlighted qualitative research (Lane 2011); quantitative
research (Schmidt and Zdzinski 1993); retrievability (Brittin and Standley 1997);
sample characteristics (Kratus 1992); and theoretical frameworks (Miksza and
Johnson 2012).
Content analyses have been completed to document eminence and research
characteristics representing many of the major journals in the field of music
education. The International Journal of Community Music publishes articles that
highlight current and pivotal knowledge in the field of community music. The
content areas addressed in the articles in the International Journal of Community
Music vary to a greater extent than music education journals commonly do;
content coverage addresses a variety of topic areas such as therapy, prisons and
exemplar international music programmes in the community, and the lenses
represent both research and non-research perspectives. To have a compre-
hensive understanding of the scope of the International Journal of Community
Music, a content analysis is needed. This historical context will allow authors to
help move the field of community music forward in a strategic and thoughtful
way. The aim of the current content analysis was to describe the publication
characteristics found in the International Journal of Community Music for the
ten-year span from the first print issue in 2008 through 2018.

Methodology
To obtain a comprehensive picture of the scope of the International Journal of
Community Music’s coverage, the following components were described: types
of publications; authorship (single author or co-author), most represented
authors and countries, and content areas and methodologies of the arti-
cles. Past researchers have determined researcher/journal eminence by citing
the numbers of publications (Brittin and Standley 1997; Goldenberg 2006;
Standley 1984; Yarbrough 1984, 2002) to describe the most compelling and
extensive trends. For the current analysis, findings were documented through
coding the data for the most common areas represented. Across the ten years,
each journal issue was coded for page length, types of articles, editorial char-
acteristics, review board details, single- and co-authored article categorization,
repeat author status and author country.
The classification of type of publication was completed to understand the
type, format and scope of each published writing. Publications were coded into

354   International Journal of Community Music

 A content analysis of the International Journal …

the following categories: articles, editorials, project reports/reviews/reflections,

book reviews, interviews, film reviews, personal reflections and dedications/
memorials. Articles were analysed according to content and methodology area
by key words, titles, headings and research terminology. Content and meth-
odology were coded according to term consistency and were reviewed by an
external auditor for accuracy and authenticity.

Results
Journal background
The International Journal of Community Music’s roots stem from community
music discussions at the International Society for Music Education’s (ISME)
Community Music Activity (CMA) commission meetings. These discussions led
to the vision for a journal that could disseminate community music publi-
cations. The leadership describes the journal as publishing ‘research articles,
practical discussions, timely reviews, readers’ notes and special issues concern-
ing all aspects of Community Music’, and having ‘an open concept of commu-
nity music’ that includes ‘music teaching-learning interactions (for all people
of all ages, ability levels, and interests) outside “formal” music institutions
(e.g., public schools, university music departments, conservatories, symphony
orchestras), and/or partnerships between formal institutions and community
music programs’ (1, volume 1:1).
The International Journal of Community Music follows double-blind review
procedures and is published by Intellect. The journal is abstracted and indexed
in a variety of resources, such as RILM, ERIC, EBSCO and Academic Search
Complete. Journal subscriptions have been primarily institution based, with
2018 showing 81 institution and six individual subscriptions. Over the most
recent four years, the number of subscriptions for individual, single issue and
institutions has ranged from 72 to 133 (M=94.25, SD=26.68). Over the most
recent four years, monthly online usage data for downloads have ranged from
140 to 667 (M=313.30, SD=131.81).

Publication characteristics
From 2008 to 2018 there were 30 print issues of the International Journal of
Community Music published, totalling 3587 pages. Issues averaged 119.56
pages in length (ranging from 72 to 168, SD=22.70). Out of the total number
of publications (N=284) across the 30 issues, there were 222 articles, 30 edito-
rials, 22 project reports/reviews/reflections, four book reviews, three inter-
views, one film review and two dedications/memorials. The journal has had
three issues per volume since 2008, other than in volume two, where issues
two and three were combined into one issue.
Higgins wrote single-authored editorials for fifteen issues, and a total of
23 other guest editors wrote editorials for the other fifteen issues. The edito-
rial content commonly highlighted the sources of the articles, including calls
for special issues (e.g., criminal justice in music, participatory music or arti-
cles from specific countries), or symposium/conference articles (e.g., Music
and Lifelong Learning Conference or the International Society of Music Education’s
Commission for Community Music Activity). Across the ten-year span, the size
of the review board varied from fourteen to 26 members, representing as
many as eleven countries, with the most common representation across the
issues coming from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. The

www.intellectbooks.com   355
Debbie Ann Rohwer

22 project reports/reviews/reflections most commonly presented reviews of

symposia.
Out of all 284 publications, 221 (78 per cent) were single-authored and
63 (22 per cent) were joint-authored, including 52 articles, seven editorials,
two reports and one dedication. The most common joint-authored publica-
tion countries were the United States (n=14), United Kingdom/Great Britain/
England (n=10) and Australia (n=10). The most common countries represented
across all articles were also the United States (n=82), the United Kingdom/
Great Britain/England (n=24) and Australia (n=19). The most commonly
published authors were from articles by Coffman (n=6), Dabback (n=5) and
Rohwer (n=5).
Across the 222 full articles, music for adults/lifelong learning was the
most common age level addressed (n=45), followed by articles addressing
music for children (n=34). The most common music ensembles represented
in the article topic areas were choir (n=25), followed by band (n=15) and
other (n=13, folk, rock, drumming, jazz). In the ensemble studies from the
United States, the New Horizons programme was used most consistently
as an adult band model (n=6), while the choral examples varied greatly
by cultural background and locale, ranging from LGBTQI choirs in New
Zealand to spirituality in South African choirs, and choirs for people with
learning disabilities in England. The variety in choral content included such
lenses as culturally relevant pedagogy, positive ageing, singing in prisons,
children singing and intercultural performance in choir. The contextual
nature of the idiosyncratic community music setting, such as festivals, semi-
nars, schools and hospitals, was highlighted in 26 articles, with the context
of prisons being the most common setting to be described in-depth (n=14).
Health issue topics, including mental health, physical health and therapy,
were addressed in seventeen articles.
For the 222 articles, 116 (52 per cent) were labelled as research by the
inclusion of research headings (e.g., methodology or results) or the use of
research terminology (e.g., research study, phenomenology, or case study).
Of the 116 research studies, the most common methodology was the qualita-
tive case study/ethnography (n=72, 62 per cent). Only ten studies used quan-
titative data in the results section, with the most common quantitative data
presented being descriptive results from questionnaires (n=9).
The majority of those articles labelled as something other than research
tended to serve as exemplar descriptions of community music settings/topic
areas but without the methodological processes that would normally be linked
to research studies (n=36, 16 per cent). These articles commonly were prag-
matic examples of an ensemble or a contextual setting, and often included
great detail in description, sometimes with pictures. The most common
ensemble/context described was choral/singing. The most common non-
research format that did not describe an exemplar of community music was
the perspective-definition-position article, with issue one highlighting this
publication format most commonly to set the stage for the journal’s discus-
sions, topics and definitions.
Across the 30 issues, there was an average of 3.87 (SD=1.87) research and
3.33 (SD=2.61) non-research articles per issue. The balance of research to non-
research articles in the journal was weighted more to the non-research format
early in the journal volumes (research averaging 9.75 articles [SD=2.50] across
the first four volumes and non-research averaging 13.50 articles [SD=6.56]),
whereas the prevalence of research articles increased from volume five onward

356   International Journal of Community Music

 A content analysis of the International Journal …

(research averaging 11.00 articles [SD=3.51] across the last seven volumes and
non-research averaging 6.57 articles [SD=3.60]).

Discussion
The ten-year history and success of the International Journal of Community
Music documents the need for a journal with a community focus and an inter-
national perspective. Having an international forum for discussions of music
engagement that goes beyond the school walls is important for the under-
standing and cultural heritage documentation of authentic music making in
society. Also the ten-year lens provides a historical context to the continued
growth of community music perspectives.
Many of the content analyses in music education have addressed jour-
nals that have a primary focus on research. The unique representation of
both research and non-research publications in the International Journal of
Community Music makes the journal a valuable resource for both academi-
cians and community music practitioners and participants. As highlighted in
the results section, there were articles that were coded as either exemplars or
research-based articles in this content analysis based on whether the article
content used research terminology, methodologies or research practices. The
categorization of ‘exemplars’ of community music that were coded as non-
research may be a black and white discussion of a grey issue; many of the case
study research projects had a similar feel and style to the exemplar writings
that were not coded as research. It may be that the dichotomous categori-
zation of research and non-research is artificial and the true import is actu-
ally the content of the publications, which highlights community music in its
authentic form, whether that be in case study or exemplar language. Whether
labelled research or non-research, the case study/exemplar article model has
provided the readers of the International Journal of Community Music with valu-
able contextual examples for how community music practice occurs in current,
worldwide settings.
It is expected and logical that the primary content of articles highlighted
individual examples of community music across a variety of ages and settings.
Now that the stage has been set with ten years of case studies and exem-
plars, it may be useful to branch out to address ways to assist and improve
the community music experience. On the research side, this path can be
approached through use of a greater number of research techniques, such as
mixed methods, and relational and comparative designs. On the non-research
side, exemplars could highlight assistance mechanisms and resources that
exist in pre-existing community music settings. Preserving the heritage and
understanding the scope of community music is definitely a prerequisite to
quality assessments or mechanisms aimed at improving pedagogy or experi-
ence, but nonetheless, having access to the tools that can help improve experi-
ences for community may be an important next step. Research and exemplars
that can advance the field by expanding on best practices and future devel-
opments to improve processes would be valuable for the field of community
music.
Similarly, early in the journal’s history it was necessary to have position
articles provide context to our understanding of community music, given the
lack of history to the topic area, and it may be important to revisit these defi-
nitions and positions, now ten years later, to see whether there are modifi-
cations to the definitions that can aid the future path for community music.

www.intellectbooks.com   357
Debbie Ann Rohwer

It may be that definitions could be expanded to represent new sub-groups

and genres; for instance, there may be societal issues that should be impact-
ing and revising our definitional understanding. Authors who can contextually
advance the field of community music’s definitions and positions would help
to move these discussions forward.
As in past content analyses, coding the extent to which content areas were
addressed in articles can allow readers to understand interest trends (Brittin
and Standley 1997; Goldenberg 2006; Standley 1984; Yarbrough 1984, 2002).
In the current study, choral settings were covered substantively in the journal,
which is logical, given that every culture has some form of singing. The choral
variety in articles represented many of the ways in which choirs exist across
cultures. Given the impact of many societal factors on choral settings, it may
be valuable for authors to further expand upon factors such as gender, race,
politics, finances and mental health in a variety of settings that include single
age and also inter-generational choirs. In addition, it would be valuable to
further investigate how instructional and vocal pedagogy interact with these
societal factors in authentic community ensemble settings.
The second most commonly represented topic in the journal was bands
in the community and may be due to the popularity of bands in the schools,
the historical precedence for community bands that dates back to Sousa or
the New Horizons movement that is engaging adults in music making. As
with choirs, there are many societal and pedagogical lenses that could be
used to add context to these research or exemplar articles. In addition to
expanding content perspectives, it may be useful for new formats of articles
to be envisioned that can provide pragmatic and important information to
musicians and facilitators in community settings. For instance, it might be
useful for the field to weigh the knowledge that would be useful for some-
one to know about how to start a community music programme and recruit
new members and fund the equipment needed to make the programme
solvent, especially in band settings where the equipment needs are exten-
sive. In addition to the traditional choir and band settings, there are many
less common ensemble and musical genre types that could receive greater
exposure in the journal, allowing for expansion of the definitions and scope
of community music.
Across the journal’s issues, adult music making was often addressed in
articles, as was music for children, and so lifelong experiences seem to be
important in the discussion of community music. Writers can continue to
expand the coverage of community music across the lifespan to understand
the scope of engagement possibilities. Health through therapy and healthy
music making in community settings across the lifespan appears to be an area
of interest that could continue to expand.
The greater the diversity of conversation, the more complete the picture
of community music. Over the years, the International Journal of Community
Music has expanded their content to include such examples as heavy metal
music, LGBTQI issues and participatory culture discussions. These expansions
of content are integral to the journal’s development and should be a contin-
ued goal for the future. Interdisciplinary community music coverage could also
increase readership and a cross-pollination of ideas. In addition to expanded
topic areas, the journal could benefit from a greater use of under-utilized arti-
cle formats such as film reviews, book reviews and dedications. New article
formats could also be presented as possible models for authors to use, or
authors could be encouraged to propose their own new formats.

358   International Journal of Community Music

 A content analysis of the International Journal …

The three authors who were most commonly published in the journal
all were university professors who had a lifelong learning/adult/band back-
ground. This historical voice that can add continuation and progression of
stepwise knowledge is important to a journal, but so is the uniqueness of
varied and novel perspectives. Encouraging new authors with a variety of
perspectives and backgrounds to publish in the journal through disseminat-
ing calls for new and innovative topic areas in community music may help the
journal expand to include the greatest scope of information. In addition, track-
ing the balance of what might be considered ‘academic research’ to research
that is facilitated by practitioners in the field may be an important discussion
for the journal’s leaders and readers to have to delve into the creative tension
between research and practice and the future vision for the journal.
Increasing opportunities for joint authored articles is another opportunity
for the journal. Given that only 22 per cent of the articles were joint authored
across the ten years, this collaborative structure could be encouraged as a new
cultural model for the journal, especially given the potential interdisciplinary
nature that joint-authored work can encourage. The model used in science of
having five to eight or more authors definitely encourages a greater amount
of collaboration than often occurs with the silos that are endemic to single-
authored works. A greater representation of practitioners who do not consider
themselves to be ‘authors’ but have a wealth of practical knowledge could be
invited as content-expert, secondary authors by primary authors who could
serve as information synthesizers and collaborators. The idea of academicians
and practitioners mentoring each other to increase skill sets in community
music and research and non-research writing seems viable and positive for all
of those involved.
In terms of coverage, a few countries tended to dominate the representa-
tion of articles in the journal. The review board had a large number of countries
engaged and individual authors represented some uncommonly represented
countries in the discussion; however, there could still be an increase in the
representation of countries across the journal. One way to increase country
coverage could be to expand the journal’s review board membership to less
known areas to engage the perspective of experts from more diverse areas.
These review board members could then recruit authors who would represent
a greater diversity of community music experiences. In addition, invitations
to tell their community music programme’s story could be sent by the journal
editors to key, unique programmes in more remote areas.
As in past research, content analyses have highlighted eminent profes-
sional resources such as conferences (Orman and Price 2007; Price and
Orman 1996; Todd and Hancock 2015). The International Journal of Community
Music has also provided a link to conferences such as The Music and
Lifelong Learning Conference and the International Society of Music Education’s
Commission for Community Music Activity. Future issues of the journal could
spotlight community music discussions from other conferences such as the
College Music Society or another conference or symposium could be promoted
by the journal that would be linked to specific community music topic areas
such as pedagogy, resources or how-to models for community music facili-
tators. Brainstorming new conference themes could lead to special topics
issues that could help the journal approach the most pivotal and cutting-
edge discussions in the field so that leaders can have a forum to engage in
these novel, innovative ways to make music in society. Irrespective of the
conference or venue, it should be a primary goal to continue commission/

www.intellectbooks.com   359
Debbie Ann Rohwer

symposium/conference discussions that can lead to publication dissemina-

tion as publications have greater longevity, staying power, and dissemination
possibilities than in-person presentations.
For the preparation of future facilitators/practitioners of community music
groups, it would be valuable for leaders in the field to consider where and how
this preparation can occur. There are many options. A teacher-apprenticeship
model could primarily be used to learn the skill set and practice of commu-
nity music as an observer and participant in authentic settings; learners could
engage with many settings to synthesize how ensembles work across a variety
of settings instead of just one; teacher education programmes in colleges could
have instruction addressing community music best practices as an integral part
of the preparation of every certified teacher; these programmes could have an
(or multiple) required authentic, in-the-community learning component(s)
to their programmes; and participation as a musician in a variety of musi-
cal and cultural genres could be required in programmes to meet ensemble
requirements. Discussions could abound on the ideal ways in which authentic
environments and higher education can work together for the betterment of
community music. The issues are extensive and the options are complex and
need to be weighed in terms of viability, feasibility and sustainability.
In terms of the continuation and progression of community music as a
field of study, it seems apparent that we should encourage the next genera-
tion to be involved in community music, irrespective of participant age. Even
ten years later, the field of community music is still relatively underdeveloped
in the understanding of community music across the lifespan, from infancy
to elderly. In the middle, we have school-age musicians, who, whether they
have music in the schools or not, could experience community music that
may expand their horizons and cultural acumen; these experiences have the
benefit of societal engagement that could possibly combat issues such as teen
depression and threats of mental health. The door is open for so many future
articles providing greater context to current societal issues related to commu-
nity music. We just have to keep our perspectives and eyes wide open.

References
Brewer, W. D. and Rickels, D. A. (2014), ‘A content analysis of social media
interactions in the Facebook Band Directors group’, Bulletin of the Council
for Research in Music Education, 183, pp. 7–22.
Brittin, R. V. and Standley, J. M. (1997), ‘Researchers in music education/
therapy: Analysis of publications, citations, and retrievability of work’,
Journal of Research in Music Education, 45:1, pp. 145–160.
Diaz, F. M. and Silveira, J. M. (2014), ‘Music and affective phenomena: A
20-year content and bibliometric analysis of research in three eminent
journals’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 62, pp. 66−77.
Dobbs, T. L. (2012), ‘A critical analysis of disabilities discourse in the Journal of
Research in Music Education, 1990–2011’, Bulletin of the Council for Research
in Music Education, 194, pp. 7–30, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/
bulcouresmusedu.194.0007. Accessed 10 October 2017.
Ebie, B. D. (2002), ‘Characteristics of 50 years of research samples found in the
Journal of Research in Music Education, 1953–2002’, Journal of Research in
Music Education, 50:4, pp. 280–91.
Goldenberg, Y. (2006), ‘Journal of Music Theory over the years: Content analy-
sis of the articles and related aspects’, Journal of Music Theory, 50, pp. 25–63,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/27639412. Accessed 10 October 2017.

360   International Journal of Community Music

 A content analysis of the International Journal …

Hall, W. R. (1998), ‘Twenty-five years of music research contributions’,

Contributions to Music Education, 25:1, pp. 24−43, http://www.jstor.org/
stable/24127065. Accessed 10 October 2017.
Hamann, D. L. and Lucas, K. V. (1998), ‘Establishing journal eminence in music
education research’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 46:3, pp. 405–13.
Humphreys, J. T. and Stauffer, S. L. (2000), ‘An analysis of the editorial commit-
tee of the Journal of Research in Music Education, 1953–1992’, Journal of
Research in Music Education, 48:1, pp. 65–77.
Kantorski, V. J. (1995), ‘A content analysis of doctoral research in string educa-
tion, 1936–1992’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 43:4, pp. 288–97.
Kratus, J. (1992),‘Subjects in music education research, 1961–1990’, The Quarterly
Journal of Research in Music Education, 3, pp. 50–54, http://www-usr.rider.
edu/~vrme/v16n1/volume3/visions/spring5. Accessed 10 October 2017.
—— (1993), ‘Eminence in music education research as measured in the
Handbook of Research on Music Teaching and Learning’, Bulletin of the
Council for Research in Music Education, 118, pp. 21–32, http://www.jstor.
org/stable/40318590. Accessed 10 October 2017.
Lane, J. (2011), ‘A descriptive analysis of qualitative research published in
two eminent music education research journals’, Bulletin of the Council
for Research in Music Education, 188, pp. 65–76, http://www.jstor.org/
stable/41162330. Accessed 10 October 2017.
LeBlanc, A. and McCrary, J. (1991), ‘Acquiring criteria of excellence for scholarly
journals in music’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 39:3, pp. 206–15.
Miksza, P. and Johnson, E. (2012), ‘Theoretical frameworks applied in music
education research: A content analysis of the Journal of Research in
Music Education: 1979–2009’, Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music
Education, 193, pp. 7–30, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/bulcouresmu-
sedu.193.0007. Accessed 10 October 2017.
Orman, E. K. and Price, H. E. (2007), ‘Content analysis of four national music
organizations’ conferences’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 55:2,
pp. 148–61.
Price, H. E. and Orman, E. K. (1996), ‘Influential Journal of Research in Music
Education articles as indicated by authors of two or more studies’, Research
Studies in Music Education, 6:1, pp. 59–69.
—— (2001), ‘MENC 2000 National Biennial In-Service Conference: A content
analysis’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 49:3, pp. 227–33.
Randles, C. Hagen, J., Gottlieb, B. and Salvador, K. (2010), ‘Eminence in music
education research as measured in the New Handbook of Research on
Music Teaching and Learning’, Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music
Education, 183, pp. 65–76, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27861473. Accessed
10 October 2017.
Reynolds, G. A. and Hamann, D. L. (2010), ‘Music education faculty research
publication productivity covering the years 1989–2003’, Contributions to
Music Education, 37:1, pp. 9–22.
Sample, D. (1992), ‘Frequently cited studies as indicators of music education
research interests, 1963–1989’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 40:2,
pp. 153–57.
Schmidt, C. P. and Zdzinski, S. F. (1993), ‘Cited quantitative research articles in
music education research journals, 1975–1990: A content analysis of selec-
ted studies’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 41:1, pp. 5–18.
Standley, J. M. (1984), ‘Productivity and eminence in music research’, Journal of
Research in Music Education, 32:3, pp. 149–57.

www.intellectbooks.com   361
Debbie Ann Rohwer

Todd, E. D. and Hancock, C. B. (2015), ‘A 30-year content analysis of a state-

sponsored professional development conference for music educators’,
Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 204, pp. 47–61, http://
www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.204.0047. Accessed 10
October 2017.
Yarbrough, C. (1984), ‘A content analysis of the Journal of Research in Music
Education, 1953–1983’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 32:4, pp. 213–22.
—— (2002), ‘The first 50 years of the Journal of Research in Music Education: A
content analysis’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 50:4, pp. 276–79.

Suggested citation
Rohwer, D. A. (2018),‘A content analysis of the International Journal of Community
Music, 2008–18’, International Journal of Community Music, 11:3, pp. 353–62,
doi: 10.1386/ijcm.11.3.353_1

Contributor details
Dr. Debbie Rohwer serves as associate to the President, Chief of Staff, and
Regents Professor of music education at the University of North Texas in
Denton. Debbie teaches the research and statistics courses, and pedagogy
courses at the graduate level at UNT. In 1998, she founded the Denton New
Horizons Senior Adult Beginning Band and currently serves as conduc-
tor, administrator, and arranger for the band. In her research, Debbie has
concentrated on skill development of musicians at various experience levels,
concentrating extensively on adult music learning. She has been published in
numerous research journals, and serves on state and international research
review boards.  Currently, Debbie serves as the lead editor for Update:
Applications of Research in Music Education.
Contact: University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311425, Denton, TX
76203-5017, USA.
E-mail: Debbie.rohwer@unt.edu
 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2061-3889

Debbie Ann Rohwer has asserted her right under the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of this work in the format that
was submitted to Intellect Ltd.

362   International Journal of Community Music

Copyright of International Journal of Community Music is the property of Intellect Ltd. and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.