Lucia Švecová

The Kodály Method in Community Musicking with Children of Pre-School Age

Contents

1. The role of music in the development of children of pre-school age 3

2. The Kodály method in the musical development of children of pre-school age 8

3. Strengths and weaknesses of the method 11

4. Conclusions 15

Bibliography 17

2
1. The role of music in the development of children of pre-school age

In her recent book on musicking with young children, the Critical New Perspectives in Early

Childhood Music, Susan Young describes the rapid expansion of music education with a shift

to younger pre-school ages over the last ten to fifteen years.1 She points out, however, that

the expansion has mainly happened in terms of practice, whilst there is little theoretical

grounding for the current practices.2 Although Young is specifically talking about music

education, this expansion has been, according to George McKay, parallel to the expansion in

community music in the UK, which is therefore likely to suffer from the same lack of

theoretical grounding.3 There exist methods, formulated to guide children’s musical

development, that could be explored in the community context in order to provide the

needed theoretical basis – the Kodály method is, together with Dalcroze’s and Orff’s

methods, one of the main methodological platforms created in the twentieth century and

still widely used in music education today. The present essay therefore attempts to evaluate

which aspects of the Kodály method could be utilised in formulating a theoretical basis for

community music projects with young children.

The role of music in childhood has been addressed by neuroscientific research into the

influence of music on the infant brain. Dawn L. Merrett and Sarah J. Wilson, for instance,

talk about the effects of early musical development on the neural structure and

1
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music: Young Children Engaging and Learning through
Music, New York: Routledge, 2018, p. 11.
2
Ibid. p. 13.
3
G. McKay, ‘Improvisation and the development of community music in Britain’, in P. Moser and G. McKay,
Community Music: A Handbook, Lyme Regis: Russell House Publishing, 2005, p. 62.

3
development of neuroplasticity in the brain.4 They argue that neuroplasticity ‘peaks’ during

early developmental periods, which also makes these periods essential for musical training,

as we can see it in the early start of musical training of successful virtuosic musicians. In

addition to musical development as such, Gottfried Schlaug points out that early musical

training also has other benefits for the brain – he argues that learning to play a musical

instrument is ‘a multisensory motor experience’, which prompts the growth of grey matter.5

The results of his study show that professional players have significantly more grey matter

in particular brain regions, such as the primary sensorimotor cortex, the adjacent superior

premotor and anterior superior parietal cortex bilaterally, mesial Heschl's gyrus (primary

auditory cortex), the cerebellum, the inferior frontal gyrus, and part of the lateral inferior

temporal lobe, than either amateur musicians or non-musicians.6 Thus, there are several

benefits to musicking with children.

In order to consider the suitability of any method for leading musical learning in children’s

early formative years, musical development needs to be considered as part of the general

childhood development. A formal study of early childhood development started with Jean

Piaget, a psychologist who formulated his ideas on childhood together with Lev Vygotsky in

the 1920s, and who, according to Young, remains one of the most important influences in

developmental psychology.7 Piaget argued that there are distinct stages of development

during childhood, from the sensorimotor action development to the development of logical

4
D. L. Merrett and S. J. Wilson, ‘Music and Neural Plasticity’, in N. S. Rickard and K. McFerran, Lifelong
Engagement With Music: Benefits for Mental Health and Well-Being, New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2012,
p. 128.
5
G. Schlaug, ‘Effects of Music Training on the Child’s Brain and Cognitive Development’, The Neuroscience and
Music II: From Perception to Performance Vol. 1060 No. 1, Dec 2005, pp. 219-230.
6
Ibid.
7
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, p. 75.

4
thinking, and each stage is characteristic by specific cognitive behaviours, which gradually

evolve into adult competencies. However, his theory was based on a particular cultural view

of childhood as an evolutionary development, and Young says that modern childhood

studies were founded to move away from such culturally-embedded views.8 These studies

recognised that our ideas of childhood are ‘historically and culturally situated’ and that we

need to find a way to ‘capture the multiplicity and complexity of children’s (musical)

childhoods’.9 Today, the socio-cultural context is changing again and therefore a ‘new wave’

in childhood studies has emerged, which suggests alternative philosophies of childhood

development.10 Consequently, any theoretical basis of early childhood education, whether

formal or in a community setting, should be adaptable to this changing context.

Formal music education, however, is not accessible to everyone, and therefore community

music projects are immensely important in filling this opportunity gap. That is, community

projects offer an opportunity to develop a common interest of the community without the

structures of formal education. Firstly, community environment can be particularly

important in providing the correct learning environment for young children. Margaret S.

Barret mentions Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi’s 1993 study of environment

influences on the development of ‘giftedness’, identifying two characteristic features of the

environments in which the children, who as adolescents experienced ‘high degrees of

academic success’, were developing – ‘(1) a stimulating environment which provided

opportunities for learning and in which there were high educational expectations; and (2) a

8
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, p. 75.
9
Ibid. p. 19.
10
Ibid. pp. 32-39.

5
highly supportive and coherent family structure’.11 Community projects aimed at providing

learning opportunities facilitate the first feature, and, through the sense of a close-knit

community, they may also be helpful in cases where the second feature is lacking.

Secondly, the sense of community can be especially important for the musical development

of children. Christine Hornbach researched the influence of the environment on children’s

musical development by comparing musical learning at home as a comfortable space and in

early childhood music classes as a social environment.12 She found that children tended to

respond to relationships and the sense of community, whereby the teacher had a unique

ability to foster the parent-child relationship and children also imitated the position of the

teacher when they tried to control the order of songs they sang in a group. This led her to

conclude not only that the ‘formation and nurturing of an interactive community was

essential for a vital learning environment’, but also that ‘music learning is enhanced when

an interactionist and playful environment between children, parents, and teachers is

fostered’.13 The influence of the community environment is furthermore important for the

development of musical creativity. Pamela Burnard argues that children’s ‘early musico-

communicative interaction with others’, such as can be experienced in the community

setting on a playground, evolves into ‘a myriad of forms of musical creativity’, which can be

observed in their invented playground songs.14

11
M. S. Barret, ‘Preparing the mind for musical creativity: early music learning and engagement’, in O. Odena,
Musical Creativity: Insights from Music Education Research, Farnham: Ashgate, 2012, p. 57.
12
C. M. Hornbach, ‘Building community to elicit responses in early childhood music classes’, in S. L. Burton and
C. C. Taggart, Learning from Young Children: Research in Early Childhood Music, Plymouth: Rowman &
Littlefield Education, 2011, pp. 63-78.
13
Ibid.
14
P. Burnard, ‘Rethinking “musical creativity” and notion of multiple creativities in music’, in O. Odena, Musical
Creativity, p. 7.

6
Furthermore, musicking with children of pre-school age is not only best facilitated through

the community environment but also best suited for the community environment. Gary

Ansdell summarises the role of music in the development of children of pre-school age by

referring to the research into ‘core musicality’, which is now developing in order to bridge

‘the biological, psychological and socio-cultural areas’ – this body of theory emphasises the

connection between the ‘core human musicality and social companionship and cultural

learning’.15 He argues that musicking is a ‘deployment of musicality through musicianship-

in-action’, or in other words through ‘activities and events which attract participation and

create relationships’.16 Alongside that, musicking ‘creates a favourable coupling of the

nervous system’ and facilitates the social aspect of life through music’s social

‘affordances’.17

Overall, however, as Young points out, the ‘practical activity’ of musicking with children

needs to adopt ‘innovative theoretical ideas’ around children’s development in order to

facilitate their development in the right way.18 This is an urgent problem because there are

still prevailing evolutionary views of childhood development, which encourage the opinion

that the practical activity is also ‘easy and unskilled’ – for instance, with regards to

musicking, ‘becoming a practitioner is thought to consist of little more than collecting an

age-appropriate repertoire of attractive children’s songs with accompanying movement

actions and props’.19 Hence, developing a theory or a method that could ground the

15
G. Ansdell, ‘Rethinking Music and Community: Theoretical Perspectives in Support of Community Music
Therapy’, in M. Pavlicevic and G. Ansdell, Community Music Therapy, London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2004,
p. 69.
16
Ibid. p. 69.
17
Ibid. pp. 70;73.
18
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, p. 12.
19
Ibid. p. 13.

7
activities in a researched theoretical basis would represent an invaluable contribution to

community music projects with young children. Whilst the scope of this essay does not

allow for inventing a new method, I will consider how the Kodály method could be adapted

towards this purpose.

2. The Kodály method in the musical development of children of pre-school age

The Kodály method is one of the widely used methods in early music education. Zoltán

Kodály, its founder, developed a system which encompasses the whole schooling system

and was among the first to incorporate music education in nursery schools.20 He considered

how music ‘contributed to the many-sided capabilities of a child’, taking into consideration

not only formal musical skills but also ‘general hearing’, the ‘ability to concentrate’,

‘conditional reflexes’, the ‘emotional horizon’, and the ‘physical culture’.21 Nursery schools

in Hungary (intended for 3- to 6-year-olds) incorporated the Kodály method through regular

music classes and singing games ‘where children are taught ear and rhythm development’.22

In the British kindergarten curriculums today, however, music education is not taken into

account and therefore children of pre-school age largely only have the opportunity to start

music training in community settings.

The Kodály method has a particular potential for the use in community music projects

because, as Erzsébet Szönyi points out, the primary premise of the method is connected to

the sort of democratization of arts that stood behind the expansion of community arts too –

20
E. Szönyi, Kodály’s Principles in Practice: An Approach to Music Education through the Kodály Method,
London: Boosey & Hawkes, 1973, p. 15.
21
Ibid.
22
Ibid. p. 7.

8
Kodály expressed the main intention behind his method in his famous slogan “Music

belongs to everybody!”.23 Some community groups already partly use the Kodály method –

for instance, The Singing Tree is a Bristol group of community music teachers who run music

sessions structured according to Kodály’s and Dalcroze’s methods.24 Nevertheless, there is

more scope for adapting the method to create a cohesive community programme rather

than individual music sessions. I will now attempt to briefly describe the crux of the method,

in order to then evaluate its strengths and weaknesses in community use.

The Kodály method is based on several principles that outline what musical development of

young children should consist of, and these are subsequently translated into individual

activities that gradually progress in difficulty.25 Firstly, the method emphasises practical

music-making and focuses on the ‘special importance of part-singing’ (polyphonic singing),

since singing is the most accessible way of participating in music-making.26 Secondly, Kodály

decided to use folk music as most closely related to ‘popular folk games’, deriving the ‘most

familiar and frequent motifs in Hungarian nursery rhymes’ through which intervals would be

taught.27 Hence, the method is also founded on the importance of both children’s games

and interval teaching as the basis of musicality.

From these principles Kodály derived different tools for teaching different musical features

and skills. Szönyi describes them in the categories of rhythm, form, harmony, and

transposition.28 Rhythm training starts with an even pulse, taught through ‘stepping and

23
E. Szönyi, Kodály’s Principles in Practice, pp. 7-8.; L. Higgins, Community Music in Theory and in Practice,
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 1-2.
24
The Singing Tree, ‘Our Approach’, The Singing Tree, http://www.thesingingtree.co.uk/our-approach.php
(accessed 7 November 2019).
25
E. Szönyi, Kodály’s Principles in Practice, pp. 14-58.
26
Ibid. pp. 14-15.
27
Ibid. pp. 16-28.
28
Ibid. pp. 28-58.

9
walking steadily to a crotchet beat’ and later to half-beats.29 After that the action is coupled

with rhythmic syllables according to the model of Emile-Joseph Chêvé, which are taught

through a popular game of pronouncing children’s names in speech rhythm of short and

long syllables. Kodály argued that children naturally recognise structure in music through

repeated motifs, and therefore his method addresses form and structure through creativity

– in a group improvisation, children develop a first line of a melody, which then serves for

‘developing musical climax and in general for giving children a sense of balance within

traditional forms’.30 Kodály revived the solfeggio system for the purpose of teaching

harmony, whereby ‘the child is first made aware of the descending minor third – SOH-ME

and SOH-LAH-SOH-ME (LAH being an auxiliary note of SOH)’, and gradually discovers all

intervals, scales, and chords.31 The solfeggio technique would always be accompanied by

singing folk songs, where children learn to ‘distinguish between major and minor and

modal’, ‘so that the syllabus is always introduced through active music-making’.32 After this,

children are introduced to transposition, which comes ‘naturally from the very nature of

solmisation’.33 Other formal stages, such as musical notation, are only introduced in primary

school.

These tools and activities that are used to teach individual musical features follow the

gradual development of children, while not undermining their abilities but encouraging their

creativity. Furthermore, they follow what Elizabeth Schwartz defines as particular interests

that young children find in music – ‘stimulation’ and ‘cognitive satisfaction’ through

29
E. Szönyi, Kodály’s Principles in Practice, p. 28.
30
Ibid. p. 53.
31
Ibid. p. 28.
32
Ibid. pp. 56-57.
33
Ibid. p. 58.

10
progressively more difficult activities, ‘excitement’ and ‘kinaesthetic satisfaction’ through

children’s games, ‘affirmation’ through the valued role of the individual in the improvisation

exercises, and ‘preservation’ as a repetition of one musical activity through always returning

to the solfeggio basis of all melodies.34 Kodály also emphasised the fact that engagement in

these musical activities ‘contributes to the development of a child’s other faculties as well’,

positively influencing especially ‘child’s physical and intellectual abilities’.35 Thus, his method

provides a useful theoretical basis that follows children’s general cognitive and physical

development and lays an essential foundation of musical training.

3. Strengths and weaknesses of the method

In order to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the Kodály method in the context of

community projects, I will first evaluate the method in itself and then its suitability for use in

the community context. The most important strengths of the method lie in the fact that it

follows and fosters the way children develop, creating a stimulating programme that

supports their creativity. On the other hand, the method as a whole is clearly a product of a

specific socio-cultural context to which Kodály was responding, and therefore, in order to be

used today, it needs to be adapted to the current context. Nevertheless, the suitability of its

principles and activities for the community environment makes it a useful theoretical basis

for community music projects.

Firstly, the method, despite being formulated almost a century ago, often agrees with the

more recent theories of childhood development – the assumption of a gradual development

34
E. Schwartz, ‘Music and young children’, in Music, Therapy, and Early Childhood, New Hampshire: Barcelona
Publishers, 2008. pp. 15-20.
35
E. Szönyi, Kodály’s Principles in Practice, p. 9.

11
avoids the ‘oppositional thinking’ of ‘child/adult’ that Young associates with the earlier

childhood theories, and whilst Young points out that Piaget’s theory is wrong to argue that

children do not have any logic prior to the age of seven, the Kodály method in fact sees the

pre-school age as particularly important in the cognitive development.36 The gradual

progress in difficulty of musical activities also correlates with what Jacinta Calabro describes

as the changing ‘emotional and social perception of music’ in childhood – as children grow

and develop, they develop ‘a greater range of emotion and expression’ and also ‘respond to

a musical stimulus with increased complexity’.37 Furthermore, Calabro points at the value of

active music-making, which the Kodály method emphasises, saying that, in comparison to

listening, ‘active engagement … activates more areas of the brain and may also impact on

cognitive performance’.38 Secondly, the method’s focus on children’s play and creative

engagement represents another strength of the method, since it responds to what

contemporary childhood studies regard as ‘central’ in ‘children’s learning and development’

– Barrett and Tafuri argue that ‘children’s imaginative play is a domain of human thought

and activity where performance standards are set and regulated by children’, and therefore

‘creative play’ is not just ‘a peripheral phenomenon’ but rather a ‘”leading activity” in

children’s learning’.39

However, there are other aspects of the method which highlight its cultural outdatedness,

whilst current childhood studies point at the need for theories to adapt to the rapidly

36
S. Young, Susan, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, pp. 7;75.
37
J. Calabro, ‘Musical Development in Infancy’, in N. S. Rickard and K. McFerran, Lifelong Engagement With
Music, p. 22.
38
Ibid. p. 45.
39
M. Barrett and J. Tafuri, ‘Creative meaning-making in infants’ and young children’s musical cultures’, in G. E.
McPherson and G. F. Welch, The Oxford Handbook of Music Education Vol. 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2012, pp. 296-314.

12
changing socio-cultural context that influences the way children experience childhood.

Kodály formulated his theory as a response to Hungary’s fading ‘musical culture’, whereby

classical concerts were decreasing in attendance – educating children in music from early

childhood was meant to develop the nation’s ‘musical literacy’ and bring the children up to

become ‘concert-goers’.40 In addition to that, there is a sense of cultural supremacy

embedded in Kodály’s method – he wanted folk music to ‘become the child’s musical

mother-tongue’, and that was meant to prevent children ‘from coming into contact with

bad music’.41 In other words, Kodály argued that Hungarian folk music was the aesthetically

preferable music, and children were meant to be allowed to study music of ‘foreign peoples’

only once they had good knowledge of ‘their own music’ and were able to discover features

that the music of ‘related peoples’ had in common with Hungarian folk music.42 Young

therefore warns that adopting a method ‘devised for such different social, musical and

political situations from those children experience now’ represents a risk of continuing to

‘perpetuate retrospective versions of musical childhoods’.43

The risk of perpetuating outdated views of childhood is a drawback of Kodály’s method,

which is underpinned by an evolutionary view of childhood, as he described it in his 1951

writings: ‘In the same way as the child’s development repeats in brief the evolution of

mankind, his forms of music represent a history of music; indeed they afford a glimpse into

the prehistoric period of music’.44 His method is therefore based on an outdated notion of

child and a teleological view of the history of music, and is ignorant of innumerable cultural

40
E. Szönyi, Kodály’s Principles in Practice, p. 12.
41
Ibid. p. 13.
42
Ibid. pp. 14-15.
43
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, p. 14.
44
Z. Kodály, cited in: S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Musi,c p. 78.

13
factors in the aspect of cultural supremacy. Yet, even though Kodály’s beliefs about the

nature of childhood were embedded in the culture of his time, other aspects of his method

were nevertheless forward-thinking – Young argues that methods and theories that ‘look at

self-initiated music-making’ in children’s games, as Kodály’s method does, are characteristic

of the ‘new wave’ in childhood studies, and therefore his method has the potential to be

adapted in this wave of studies.45

With regards to the suitability of the method in the community context, the main advantage

is the fact that the method is accessible and adaptable to the environment where children

are, since it teaches everything through games and singing, rather than by using musical

instruments in a formal setting. Another strength is the fact that the method avoids formal

curriculum per se, yet offers a tested framework for the activities. That is, community

musicking with children of pre-school age can be seen as falling under Lee Higgins’ third

category of community music projects – ‘an active intervention between a music leader or

facilitator and participants’ – and Higgins distinguishes between ‘formal teaching’ and

community projects through the involvement or absence of a set curriculum.46 The Kodály

method outlines the various stages of musical development but does not set a curriculum as

such; it merely recommends types of activities. Yet, because these activities are part of a

comprehensible system and have been tested in practice in Hungarian nursery schools over

the past century, this method can provide the sort of theoretical basis that Young says

current practices of musicking with children of pre-school age need.47

45
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, p. 35.
46
L. Higgins, Community Music in Theory and in Practice, p. 3.
47
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, p. 13.

14
4. Conclusions

Even though the Kodály method in its original formulation is strongly embedded in Kodály’s

own socio-cultural context, many aspects of the method are still useful for community

music practices. Young similarly admits that, although methods such as Kodály’s need to be

‘critically examined’ and ‘reimagined in relation to contemporary situations’, they still ‘point

to traditions of practice and a pedagogical heritage from which we can all learn’.48 Young

then also proposes how these theories and methods could be reimagined, in order to retain

their strengths but avoid the embeddedness in an outdated cultural context – they should

not represent ‘prescriptive or dogmatic’ sets of information, but rather ‘active and

interactive’ tools.49 I believe that the Kodály method provides such a set of tools, which can

be applied interactively in community music projects.

In addition, it should also be noted that community setting not only creates a useful

environment for musical development, but musical development also encourages children

to become more engaged members of the community. Katrina McFerran and Nikki Rickard

argue that the ‘connections between life and music’ occur on multiple levels, which they

describe as a progress from the perception of the individual to the perception of

relationships and participation in the culture.50 This means that music helps the individual to

shift the focus of their perception from themselves to the community. Similarly, Gay

Hawkins, a key figure in the development of Australian cultural studies, says that

community ‘emerges out of collaboration and shared commitment and expression’, and any

48
S. Young, Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music, p. 14.
49
Ibid. p. 17.
50
K. McFerran and N. S. Rickard, ‘Introduction’, in N. S. Rickard and K. McFerran, Lifelong Engagement with
Music, p. xii.

15
cultural activity, such as musicking, represents ‘an effective tool in the formation of

community’.51 Thus, the impact of music sets young children up for a development towards

participation in relationships and forming a close-knit community, and musical development

in the community environment can therefore be seen as increasing the benefits for the

development of young children two-fold. Indeed, with the lack of formal music education in

British nursery schools, community music projects for children of pre-school age have a

particularly important role in the UK today, and the Kodály method may be helpfully utilised

as a coherent framework substituting the formal music education.

51
G. Hawkins, cited in: G. McKay, ‘Improvisation and the development of community music in Britain’, p. 61.

16
Bibliography

Ansdell, G. ‘Rethinking Music and Community: Theoretical Perspectives in Support of

Community Music Therapy’, in Pavlicevic, M. and Ansdell, G. (eds.), Community Music
Therapy, London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2004.

Barret, M. S. ‘Preparing the mind for musical creativity: early music learning and
engagement’, in Odena, O. (ed.), Musical Creativity: Insights from Music Education Research,
Farnham: Ashgate, 2012.

Barrett, M. and Tafuri, J. ‘Creative meaning-making in infants’ and young children’s musical
cultures’, in McPherson, G. E. and Welch, G. F. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Music
Education Vol. 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

Burnard, P. ‘Rethinking “musical creativity” and notion of multiple creativities in music’, in

Odena, O. (ed.), Musical Creativity: Insights from Music Education Research, Farnham:
Ashgate, 2012.

Calabro, Ja. ‘Musical Development in Infancy’, in Rickard, N. S. and McFerran, K. (eds.),

Lifelong Engagement With Music: Benefits for Mental Health and Well-Being, New York:
Nova Science Publishers, 2012.

Higgins, L. Community Music in Theory and in Practice, Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2012.

Hornbach, C. M. ‘Building community to elicit responses in early childhood music classes’, in

Burton, S. L. and Taggart, C. C. (eds.), Learning from Young Children: Research in Early
Childhood Music, Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield Education, 2011.

Lewis, M. ‘The emergence of human emotions’, in Lewis, M. and Haviland-Jones, J. (eds.),

Handbook of emotions, London: Guildford Press, 2000.

Marsh, K. and Young, S. ‘Musical Play’, in McPherson, G. E. (ed.), The Child as Musician,
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

McFerran, K. and Rickard, N. S. ‘Introduction’, in Rickard, N. S. and McFerran, K. (eds.),

Lifelong Engagement With Music: Benefits for Mental Health and Well-Being, New York:
Nova Science Publishers, 2012.

McKay, G. ‘Improvisation and the development of community music in Britain’, in Moser, P.

and McKay, G. (eds.), Community Music: A Handbook, Lyme Regis: Russell House Publishing,
2005.

Merrett, D. L. and Wilson, S. J. ‘Music and Neural Plasticity’, in Rickard, N. S. and McFerran,
K. (eds.), Lifelong Engagement With Music: Benefits for Mental Health and Well-Being, New
York: Nova Science Publishers, 2012.

17
Schlaug, G. ‘Effects of Music Training on the Child’s Brain and Cognitive Development’, The
Neuroscience and Music II: From Perception to Performance Vol.1060 No.1, Dec 2005, pp.
219-230.

Schwartz, E. ‘Music and young children’, in Schwartz, E. (ed.) Music, Therapy, and Early
Childhood, New Hampshire: Barcelona Publishers, 2008.

The Singing Tree, ‘Our Approach’, The Singing Tree, http://www.thesingingtree.co.uk/our-

approach.php (accessed 7 November 2019).

Szönyi, E. Kodály’s Principles in Practice: An Approach to Music Education through the

Kodály Method, London: Boosey & Hawkes, 1973.

Young, S. ‘Early Childhood Music Education in England: Changes, Choices, and Challenges’,
Arts Education Policy Review Vol. 109 No. 2, 2007, pp. 19-26.

Young, S. Critical New Perspectives in Early Childhood Music: Young Children Engaging and
Learning through Music, New York: Routledge, 2018.

18