Update: Applications of Research in Music

Education
http://upd.sagepub.com/

Preservice Music Teachers' Attitudes Toward Popular Music in the Music Classroom
D. Gregory Springer and Lori F. Gooding
Update: Applications of Research in Music Education 2013 32: 25 originally published online 24 September 2013
DOI: 10.1177/8755123313502349
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://upd.sagepub.com/content/32/1/25

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

National Association for Music Education

Additional services and information for Update: Applications of Research in Music Education can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://upd.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://upd.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://upd.sagepub.com/content/32/1/25.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Oct 16, 2013

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Sep 24, 2013
What is This?

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

502349

research-article2013

UPDXXX10.1177/8755123313502349UpdateSpringer and Gooding

Article

Preservice Music Teachers Attitudes

Toward Popular Music in the Music
Classroom

Update
32(1) 2533
2013 National Association for
Music Education
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/8755123313502349
update.sagepub.com

D. Gregory Springer1 and Lori F. Gooding2

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine preservice music educators attitudes toward popular music in the music
classroom. On a survey instrument designed by the investigators, participants (N = 82) rated (a) the effectiveness of
popular music in addressing the National Standards for Music Education, (b) the appropriateness of popular music in
various age-groups and music classroom settings, (c) their overall attitudes toward the use of popular music in the
classroom, and (d) their perceived preparation to teach popular music based on their preservice coursework. Results
suggest that the participants find popular music to be more appropriate for older students than for younger students
and appropriate only in certain classroom settings. Attitudes toward popular music varied within the sample, and
participants responded that their preservice training to teach popular music was minimal.
Keywords
informal learning, pedagogy, popular music, preservice teacher training, vernacular, youth music

The role of popular music in the classroom has been one

of the most contentious areas of practice in music education since the middle of the 20th century. Educators have
periodically called for the need for popular music in the
music classroom, but it has yet to gain widespread acceptance. One of the strongest calls for popular music in
classroom settings occurred at the 1967 Tanglewood
Symposium. As stated in the Tanglewood Declaration,
students should have experiences in the music classroom
with music of all periods, styles, forms and cultures . . .,
including current popular teenage music and avant-garde
music, American folk music, and the music of other cultures (Choate, 1968, p. 139).
Since Tanglewood, much has been written about the
role of popular music in music classrooms in practitioner
publications. These writings have discussed the value of
popular music in music classes (e.g., MacCluskey, 1979;
OBrien, 1982; Woody, 2007) and how popular music can
be effectively taught in music classes (e.g., Cutietta &
Brennan, 1991; MacCluskey, 1969; Vulliamy & Lee,
1982). Research articles have also been published on the
use of popular music in the curriculum since that time,
and these have been summarized in two reviews (Isbell,
2007; Pembrook, 1990).
Variously referred to as youth music (Mark, 1994), rock
music (Fowler, 1970; MacCluskey, 1969), and pop music
(MacCluskey, 1979; OBrien, 1982), popular music is a
complex descriptor that holds different meanings for

different people. As a result, defining the term popular

music is problematic, and authors have expressed disagreement on how this term can be adequately limited to a singular definition (Bowman, 2004). Rodriguez (2004) defines
popular music based on three common features, including
its (a) consumption (measured by ranking systems such as
Top 40 radio stations or Billboard charts), (b) presentation
in certain media that are indicators of its popularity (e.g.,
movie soundtracks, sheet music, etc.), and (c) alignment
with a socially desirable group. Others (Frith, 1996;
Toynbee, 2000) describe popular music based on how it differs from folk or art music. Humphreys (2004) describes
popular music as any music that is intended for mass audience appeal, but he claims that this method is troublesome
because it presumes that listeners can interpret the intention
of the composers, performers, and producers. Davis and
Blair (2011) offer a broader, more inclusive definition of
popular music from a sociocultural perspective. They
describe popular music as a social construct influenced
historically and culturally while also developing and transforming over time (Davis & Blair, 2011, p. 127).
1

Boise State University, Boise, ID, USA

University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA

Corresponding Author:
D. Gregory Springer, Boise State University, 1910 University Drive,
Boise, ID 83725, USA.
Email: gregoryspringer@boisestate.edu

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

26

Update 32(1)

The Appropriateness of Popular Music in the

Classroom
Voices of Assent.Since Tanglewood, music educators
have engaged in lively discourse on whether popular
music should be used in school music programs. Many
educators and researchers have written favorably about
the uses of popular music in the classroom, citing a variety of benefits. First, it is widely reported that popular
music is the preferred genre of many students (e.g.,
Boyle, Hosterman, & Ramsey, 1981; Finns, 1989;
LeBlanc, 1979; North, Hargreaves, & ONeill, 2000;
Rentz, 1994). Some scholars (Davis & Blair, 2011;
Hebert & Campbell, 2000) also assert that the use of
popular music can affect how students understand social
experiences.
Many support the inclusion of popular music in the
classroom because it can help students achieve desirable
learning outcomes. Ponick (2000) advocates for the use
of popular music in the classroom because it can be used
with other styles to address the National Standards for
Music Education. For example, experiences with popular
music in the schools provide opportunities for students to
compose, improvise, and arrange music (Green, 2002;
Hebert & Campbell, 2000). Others contend that popular
music can be used effectively to teach students the elements of music and performance techniques, and these
techniques can then be transferred to other musical styles
(Mann, 1995; OBrien, 1982; Pembrook, 1991). Allsup
(2003) maintains that through popular music study, students will have opportunities to enhance their creativity
and promote self-expression. Additionally, an oft-ignored
benefit of popular music study is that imitative learning
practices, which are commonly used in popular music
learning, can improve students aural musicianship
(Green, 2002; Woody, 2007).
Some authors perceive a disconnect between inschool and out-of-school music experiences (Hargreaves,
Comber, & Colley, 1995; Isbell, 2007; Lamont,
Hargreaves, Marshall, & Tarrant, 2003), and this need
for relevant musical experiences provides one of the
most compelling arguments for including popular music
in the classroom. Woody (2007) also defends popular
music on the basis that its inclusion in school music programs can encourage and prepare students for a lifetime
of participatory music making.
Voices of Dissent. While some music educators favor the
use of popular music, others have expressed skepticism
on the appropriateness of popular music in the classroom. Three years after the Tanglewood Symposium,
Fowler (1970) iterated several commonly stated arguments against the use of rock and other forms of youth
music in the classroom, including the following: (a) rock

is aesthetically inferior to more traditional genres, especially art music; (b) rock is morally damaging to students; and (c) instructional time should not be spent
teaching the vernacular culture. Hebert and Campbell
(2000) critically reviewed these three arguments and
appended three others: (a) preservice music teachers in
the United States often receive inadequate training in
popular music, (b) popular music can foster defiant or
rebellious behavior among students, and (c) popular
music curricula are difficult to find in the United States.
Mark (1994) expressed uncertainty about whether
popular music should be given equal footing with other
genres in the classroom. He introduced three primary
concerns about the appropriateness of popular music in
the music classroom. His first concern relates to instructional content. If schools are supposed to teach what is
not usually learned outside school, should popular music
be included as a content area? Students are surrounded by
popular music in their daily lives and, as a result, he
claims they receive ample exposure to popular music
away from school. As his second concern, Mark expresses
doubt on whether the resources of time and money should
be spent on popular music in the classroom. Finally, Mark
questions whether popular music, which is sometimes
considered to have a shorter life span than other musical
genres, should be used in a classroom setting if the goal is
to educate students for a lifetime.
Another reason that some are skeptical of using popular music in the classroom is the shallow way in which it
is sometimes integrated into the curriculum. The clearest
example of this is the bait-and-switch technique
whereby the teacher uses a popular music selection only
to grab the students attention before changing focus to a
more traditional genre of school music (Cutietta, 1991).
As a related concern, Woody (2007) points out that popular music is not always treated with the same authenticity
as that which is expressed in other genres.

Bringing Popular Music Into the Classroom

Through Informal Learning Practices
The methods of skill acquisition for popular music are
conspicuously different from that of the traditional school
rehearsal model (Woody, 2007). A flexible, informal
approach is generally considered to be requisite for learning popular music, and some suggest that this approach
offers a great deal of pedagogical promise for formal
music education models as well (Davis & Blair, 2011;
Green, 2002). Some informal learning practices common
with popular music learning that are not often found in
formal music education settings include the following:
Performers (i.e., students) often have autonomy in
terms of musical choice (Allsup, 2003; Davis &
Blair; 2011; Green, 2002).

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

27

Springer and Gooding

Performers listen to recordings frequently (Woody,
2007) and copy musical ideas by ear as a primary
learning mechanism (Green, 2002).
The role of musical notation is diminished
(Dunbar-Hall & Wemyss, 2000; Green, 2004), and
notation often occurs after the music is learned,
composed, or arranged.
Creative processes such as composition, improvisation, and arranging are often integrated throughout
the learning process (Boespflug, 2004; Green, 2002).
Musical material used in practice sessions usually
includes learning new songs, tunes, or licks that
the performers have heard, rather than scales,
arpeggios, and other out-of-context technique
exercises (Woody, 2007).
Learning often occurs through collaboration with
peers in small groups, like cooperative learning
environments (Allsup, 2003; Boespflug, 2004;
Green, 2002; Woody, 2007).
Performers often watch and imitate behaviors
modeled by their peers (Green, 2002).
Performers are more intrinsically motivated
throughout the learning process (Woody, 2007).
Popular music instruction requires the teacher to
take a nontraditional role as a guide or facilitator,
rather than as an autocrat or dictator (Allsup, 2011;
Boespflug, 2004).
Woody (2007) emphasizes the significant role that
these informal learning practices could have when transferred to formal music education settings: . . . the way
vernacular musicians learn may be more in line with the
nature of music and the nature of learning altogether, as
compared to some traditional methods of formal music
education (p. 34). Allsups (2003, 2011) classroom
garage band model is an exemplar of the use of informal
learning practices within a formal educational context. It
embraces collaborative and student-centered music learning processes, which can be used in many music classroom settings.
As noted above, educators and researchers have
described both the benefits and encumbrances of the use
of popular music in the classroom, yet little has been
done to investigate preservice music teachers attitudes
on this issue. In an effort to address this need, the purpose
of this study was to examine preservice music teachers
attitudes toward popular music in the music classroom by
addressing the following specific research questions:
1. How do preservice teachers rate the effectiveness
of popular music as a tool to address the National
Standards for Music Education?
2. Which age groups do preservice teachers rate as
appropriate for using popular music in music
classroom settings?

3. Which formal music classroom settings (e.g.,

orchestra, general music class, piano class, etc.)
do preservice music teachers rate as appropriate
for including popular music?
4. Do instrumentalists and vocalists report different
attitudes toward popular music in the classroom?
5. How do preservice music teachers rate their undergraduate preparation for teaching popular music?

Method
Participants
Participants (N = 82) in this study were music education
students at a large Southern university. They were sampled from choral, general, and instrumental music methods classes and freshman aural skills classes, which were
required for music education majors at the university. The
mean age of the participants was 20.39 years. Participants
represented all student classifications, including freshmen (14.6%), sophomores (36.6%), juniors (28.1%),
seniors (18.3%), and graduate students (2.4%). The graduate students who were included in this sample were pursuing a masters degree in music education with teaching
licensure, as they had neither a bachelors degree in music
education nor a teaching certificate. As such, they were
enrolled in undergraduate methods courses to fulfill their
preservice teacher certification requirements.
The sample was composed of 51.2% females and
48.8% males. In terms of musical background, 75.6%
reported a primary instrumental background, while
24.4% reported a primary vocal background. Participants
in this sample reported varied teaching interests. The
majority of the sample (56.8%) reported that they would
most prefer to teach in a band setting. The remainder of
the sample reported that they would most prefer to teach
in a choir setting (25.9%), general music setting (11.1%),
or orchestra setting (6.2%).

Survey Instrument
A survey instrument, designed by the investigators, was
used to measure participants attitudes toward popular
music in various music classroom settings. The construction of the survey was informed by the review of prior
research used in the present study. The study procedures
were explained to participants, and 82 surveys were distributed. All the participants provided informed consent
to participate and completed the survey. In the first section of the survey, participants supplied demographic
data and information about their prior musical experiences. In the second section of the survey, participants
rated the effectiveness of popular music as a teaching tool
to address each of the National Standards for Music
Education using a 5-point rating scale between 1 (very

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

28

Update 32(1)

ineffective) and 5 (very effective). In the third and fourth

sections of the survey, participants rated the appropriateness of the use of popular music within specific age
groups and classroom settings, respectively. These sections used a 5-point rating scale between 1 (very inappropriate) and 5 (very appropriate).
In the next section of the survey, participants rated
their agreement with 16 attitude statements concerning
the use of popular music in the classroom (e.g., Popular
music is culturally relevant to students lives or Popular
music study improves students aural musicianship)
using a 5-point rating scale between 1 (strongly disagree)
and 5 (strongly agree). To reduce acquiescence response
effects, seven of the items were negatively worded and
reverse scored (e.g., Instructional time should not be
spent on popular music.). The positively and negatively
worded items were assigned to a random order for this
section of the survey.
In the final section, participants provided the number of
undergraduate courses that they have taken that included
teaching skills specific to popular music. Then, they rated
how prepared they feel to teach popular music, based on
their undergraduate coursework. This item used a 5-point
rating scale between 1 (very unprepared) and 5 (very prepared). Three open-ended questions concluded the questionnaire (What reasons would make you more likely to
use popular music in the music classroom?; What reasons
would make you less likely to use popular music in the
music classroom?; Is there anything else that you would
like to share about popular music in the classroom?).

Results
Perceived Effectiveness of Popular Music in
the Classroom
The first research question concerned preservice music
teachers perceived effectiveness of popular music in
addressing the National Standards for Music Education.
Descriptive analyses of the data indicate that participants
generally rate popular music to be an effective tool for
addressing these standards. Mean responses were highest
for Standard 6, listening (M = 4.07, SD = 1.05), and
Standard 1, singing (M = 4.00, SD = 0.90). Lowest mean
responses were for Standard 7, evaluating music and musical performances (M = 3.59, SD = 1.34), and Standard 9,
understanding music in relation to history and culture (M =
3.59, SD = 1.20). Data describing participants responses to
each of the standards are summarized in Table 1.

Perceived Appropriateness of Popular Music in

the Classroom
The second research question focused on perceived
appropriateness of popular music in the classroom based

on student age. Participants rated popular music to be

more appropriate for older age groups than for younger
age groups. Descriptive statistics for each age group were
conducted first. Mean ratings were lowest for the Early
childhood through preschool age group (M = 2.57, SD =
1.22) and highest for the Grades 9 through 12 agegroup (M = 4.05, SD = 1.02). As shown in Table 2, a
noticeable pattern emerged in the participants responses.
With each increasing age group, mean ratings increased,
while variability decreased.
In response to the third research question, which investigated appropriateness based on classroom setting, participants appropriateness ratings varied among different
classroom settings. Mean appropriateness ratings were
highest for marching band (M = 4.35, SD = 0.79) and guitar class (M = 4.33, SD = 0.75), whereas mean ratings were
lowest for orchestra (M = 2.70, SD = 1.22) and chamber
music ensemble (M = 2.91, SD = 1.14). Prior to examining
the differences in appropriateness ratings among different
age groups and classroom settings, responses were tested
for normality. Results of a KolmogorovSmirnov test indicate that responses to all the age-groups and classroom settings significantly deviated from the normal distribution
(p < .001). Table 2 outlines the results of the descriptive
analyses and the normality tests for various age-groups and
classroom settings.
Because the collected data did not meet the assumption of normality, a nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank
test was used to compare participants responses between
pairs of age groups and between pairs of classroom settings. Because this test involved multiple pairwise
comparisons of age groups and classroom settings, a
Bonferroni correction was used to control for inflated
familywise error rates. Significant differences were found
between participants appropriateness ratings on 9 of the
10 age-group pairs and between 48 of the 91 pairs of
classroom settings. These differences are summarized in
Tables 3 and 4.

Attitudes Toward Popular Music in the

Classroom
The fourth research question was concerned with the participants attitudes toward popular music in the music
classroom, specifically the differences in attitudes
between instrumentalists and vocalists. Responses to the
16 attitude statements were added to calculate each participants overall attitude score. The negatively worded
items were included in the calculation with a reversekeyed response (i.e., a response of 1 was calculated as 5).
As an overall sample, the participants attitude scores displayed variability (M = 60.05, SD = 8.44). Between
instrumentalists (M = 59.68, SD = 8.95) and vocalists
(M = 61.16, SD = 6.74), however, results from an independent samples t test indicate no significant differences

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

29

Springer and Gooding

Table 1. Perceived Effectiveness of Popular Music as a Tool to Address the National Standards for Music Education.

1. Singing, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of music

2. Performing on instruments, alone and with others, a varied repertoire of music
3. Improvising melodies, variations, and accompaniments
4. Composing and arranging music within specified guidelines
5. Reading and notating music
6. Listening to, analyzing, and describing music
7. Evaluating music and music performances
8. Understanding relationships between music, the other arts, and disciplines outside the arts
9. Understanding music in relation to history and culture

SD

82
81
82
82
82
82
81
82
81

4.00
3.67
3.98
3.60
3.65
4.07
3.59
3.61
3.59

0.90
1.10
1.09
1.16
1.16
1.05
1.34
1.22
1.20

Note. Some participants did not respond to all items, resulting in a variation in sample size.

Table 2. Perceived Appropriateness of Popular Music Across Age Groups and Classroom Settings.
KolmogorovSmirnov

Age-groups
Early childhood through preschool
Kindergarten through Grade 2
Grades 3 through 5
Grades 6 through 8
Grades 9 through 12
Classroom settings
Chamber music ensemble
Choir
Concert band
Folk or regional music ensemble
General music
Guitar class
Jazz ensemble
Marching band
Music appreciation
Music history
Music theory
Orchestra
Piano class
World music ensemble

SD

df

82
82
81
82
82

2.57
2.73
3.30
3.90
4.05

1.22
1.14
1.09
1.03
1.02

.20
.19
.21
.28
.31

81
81
81
81
81

<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001

82
82
81
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
81
82
82
82

2.91
3.74
3.31
3.27
4.09
4.33
4.06
4.35
4.12
3.34
3.80
2.70
3.78
3.28

1.14
1.06
1.08
1.19
0.76
0.75
0.87
0.79
1.02
1.26
1.08
1.22
0.98
1.25

.17
.29
.21
.20
.32
.28
.28
.29
.28
.22
.27
.18
.27
.18

80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80

<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001
<.001

Note. Some participants did not respond to all items, resulting in a variation in sample size.

Table 3. Significant Differences in Appropriateness Ratings Between Pairs of Age Groups From Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test.
Higher rated group
KindergartenGrade 2
Grade 3Grade 5
Grade 6Grade 8
Grade 9Grade 12
Grade 3Grade 5
Grade 6Grade 8
Grade 9Grade 12
Grade 6Grade 8
Grade 9Grade 12

Lower rated group

Early childhoodpreschool

2.98
5.88
6.70
6.39
5.61
6.72
6.24
6.30
5.16

<.005
<.005
<.005
<.005
<.005
<.005
<.005
<.005
<.005

KindergartenGrade 2

Grade 3Grade 5

Note. Because of the Bonferroni correction, only the pairings with p values less than .005 were considered significant. Nonsignificant pairs were
omitted from the table.
Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

30

Update 32(1)

Table 4. Significant Differences in Appropriateness Ratings Between Pairs of Classroom Settings From Wilcoxon Signed-Rank
Test.
Higher rated setting
Choir

Concert band
General music

Guitar class

Jazz ensemble

Marching band

Music appreciation

Music history
Music theory

Piano class

World music ensemble

Lower rated setting

Chamber music ensemble

Concert band
Orchestra
Orchestra
Chamber music ensemble
Concert band
Folk or regional music ensemble
Music history
Orchestra
World music ensemble
Chamber music ensemble
Choir
Concert band
Folk or regional music ensemble
Music history
Music theory
Orchestra
Piano class
World music ensemble
Chamber music ensemble
Concert band
Folk or regional music ensemble
Music history
Orchestra
World music ensemble
Chamber music ensemble
Choir
Concert band
Folk or regional music ensemble
Music history
Music theory
Orchestra
Piano class
World music ensemble
Chamber music ensemble
Concert band
Folk or regional music ensemble
Music history
Orchestra
World music ensemble
Orchestra
Chamber music ensemble
Orchestra
Chamber music ensemble
Concert band
Orchestra
World music ensemble
Orchestra

5.88
4.26
5.98
4.97
6.09
5.18
5.22
4.64
6.43
5.08
6.85
4.42
5.95
6.08
5.68
4.22
6.97
4.45
5.68
6.18
4.91
5.33
4.68
6.26
4.48
6.74
4.67
5.95
5.90
5.61
4.54
6.71
5.02
5.73
6.24
5.30
4.75
5.83
6.67
4.96
4.61
5.22
5.75
5.11
3.92
6.19
3.80
4.02

<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055
<.00055

Note. Because of the Bonferroni correction, only the pairings with p values less than .00055 were considered significant. Nonsignificant pairs were
omitted from the table.

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

31

Springer and Gooding

in attitude toward popular music in the classroom, t(74) =
.657, p = .513. Results from further exploratory data
analyses demonstrated no significant differences between
gender groups, between student classifications, or
between preferred teaching setting groups.

Preparation for Teaching Popular Music in the

Classroom
Participants reported that their preparation to teach popular music in their undergraduate coursework was minimal. The majority of participants (86.3%) responded that
they had either zero or one class that included teaching
skills specific to popular music in their undergraduate
coursework. Because of response error, one participants
score was excluded from the above percentage.
Participants also rated how prepared they feel to teach
popular music on a scale from 1 (very unprepared) to 5
(very prepared), based on their undergraduate coursework. Results suggest that the majority of the respondents
felt unprepared (M = 2.63, SD = 1.05). It is interesting to
note that no participants selected response choice 5 (very
prepared) on this item; all participants selected choices 1
through 4. Though the majority of the participants stated
that they had completed zero or one class that included
training in popular music pedagogy, a disproportionately
large portion (26.8%) of the sample selected response
choice 4 (prepared).
All participants freely responded to at least one of the
open-ended items, and 96% of the sample responded to at
least two of the open-ended items. Responses to these
three items were analyzed for common themes and classified into one of two categoriesthemes that support the
use of popular music in the classroom and themes that
oppose the use of popular music in the classroom. The
four most prominent themes that supported popular music
in the classroom included the following: (a) popular
music as a powerful motivational tool, (b) students
familiarity with popular music, (c) easy transfer of music
content to other genres, and (d) students preference for
popular music. The four most prominent themes that
opposed popular music in the classroom included the following: (a) inappropriate language or thematic content,
(b) perceived lack of depth or complexity, (c) risk of
offending parents, teachers, administrators, or community members, and (d) poor quality arrangements for
ensembles.

Discussion
The responses of the preservice music teachers who participated in this study highlight the complicated nature of
the matter of popular music in the classroom. Generally,
the sample indicated that popular music can be used to

effectively address the National Standards for Music

Education, but their responses suggest that they view
popular music as more appropriate for older students than
for younger students. They also responded that popular
music was more appropriate for some types of music
classrooms than for others. These responses did not differ
as a function of musical background; both instrumentalists and vocalists rated the appropriateness of popular
music similarly. In terms of overall attitude toward popular music in the classroom, participants responded with
some variability. Results show that some of the participants strongly supported the use of popular music in
the classroom, while others opposed its use in the
classroom.
These differing attitudes can be examined in light of
participants responses to the three open-ended questions
at the end of the survey. Common themes that emerged in
response to these items can provide a tentative explanation of why some students reported positive attitudes
toward popular music in the classroom while others
reported negative attitudes, though this explanation is
only provisional.
Supporting the use of popular music in the classroom,
the theme that emerged with the greatest frequency was
that popular music can be used as a powerful motivational tool, one that can grab students attention, maintain
students interest, and increase students involvement in
classroom procedures. In fact, one participant claimed, I
strongly, strongly believe a ton more students would stay
involved w/music if popular music was at least somewhat
incorporated into teaching. Everyone listens to music!
Consistent with findings from prior research (e.g.,
LeBlanc, 1979; North, Hargreaves, & ONeill, 2000),
many participants also cited students preference for popular music as a reason that would make them more likely
to use popular music in their classrooms. Additionally,
students familiarity with popular music and the ease of
transfer to other musical genres were reported as common themes that support the use of popular music in the
classroom. One participant summarized,
Kids really love it. To teach certain musical elements,
popular music works really well because you dont have to
orient them to the music first. They already know it, or can
very easily learn and then go and build on it.

In addition to supportive statements, a number of comments opposing the use of popular music in the classroom
were also reported by participants. These comments generally fell into four themes: (a) the presence of inappropriate thematic content (such as profanity, sexual imagery,
and violent or vulgar themes), (b) a perceived inferior
musical quality in comparison to other genres, (c) a perceived inappropriateness for advanced musicians, and

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

32

Update 32(1)

(d) a perceived inappropriateness for performance-based

ensembles. With regard to the potential presence of inappropriate content, one participant stated, Impressionable
young minds dont need exposure, while another participant concurred, Modern music is swiftly losing integrity. . . . I dont feel comfortable playing music about
making love in this club to 3rd graders. Participants
who responded that popular music is an inferior genre in
terms of quality noted a perceived lack of depth and complexity, and they claimed that listening to popular music
required little cognitive investment from students. One
participant described popular music as not as in depth . . .
popular music = cut & paste, while another participant
described it as the complete degradation of mental
faculties.
Others claimed that popular music study was inappropriate for advanced musicians and for classrooms in
which ensemble performance was the primary goal. One
participant explained that popular music would only be
appropriate if I was teaching the nonmusic major type
students, like those in the lowest level choirs, music
appreciation, or guitar class. Another participant
explained that popular music is easier in general music
classes than in some proper [italics added] ensembles,
and another participant explained that its no comparison to music we play as band students. These statements
call attention to an important issue; should music education be elite or egalitarian in purpose? In other words,
should music programs be designed for only the most talented students, or should they be accessible to all, regardless of ability level? The responses provided in the current
investigation raise an interesting question for future
study.
The benefits of informal pedagogies have been discussed in research and practitioner publications, but
results from this study support an earlier claim (Hebert &
Campbell, 2000) that preservice teacher training is lacking in the area of popular music pedagogy. Indeed, the
majority of the participants in this study responded that
their undergraduate coursework has offered minimal
preparation in the area of popular music pedagogy. Their
responses suggest that they generally find popular music
to be an effective instructional tool in the music classroom, yet their responses indicate negligible preservice
training in this area. No participants responded that they
felt very prepared to teach popular music, and much of
the sample indicated that they felt unprepared. One participant explained that popular music was absent
throughout his or her preservice preparation: No one
talks about [popular music] here . . . kinda sucks.
Another participant continued: Popular music, when
correctly chosen, can have as much musical importance
as a Beethoven symphony. . . . I think XXXX should
prepare us to teach and perform all musical styles, not
just classical.

The disproportionately large portion of the sample that

responded that they felt prepared to teach popular music
was an unexpected outcome of the study. If 86.3% of the
sample responded that they have had between zero and
one class that included popular music teaching skills,
then how are these preservice teachers acquiring the skills
and dispositions to make them feel prepared to teach popular music? Though the answer to this question is beyond
the scope of this investigation, it can be speculated that
these skills could have been obtained in various formal or
informal waysfrom experience in ensembles, from recreational listening experiences, from observing peers, or
from observing models in the media.
Some limitations of this study should be considered
when interpreting its findings. First, the participants in
this sample were preservice music teachers at one university, so the applicability of these findings to other universities and geographical locations is unknown. Second,
results of this study are subject to response biases that are
common with self-report measures, such as acquiescence
and social desirability. Although certain measures were
taken to reduce these bias effects (e.g., assurance of confidentiality, presenting attitude items in both the affirmative and negative direction, etc.), they could have affected
the results of the study.
Further research should consider the above limitations
as well as other promising directions in this area of study.
Studies comparing preservice teachers attitudes toward
popular music with those of novice and expert teachers are
needed. Additionally, future descriptive studies should
also examine the types of popular music genres that preservice teachers rate as appropriate for use in different age
groups and classroom settings. Future investigations
should also examine the sources from which practicing
music teachers received training to teach popular music,
noting especially whether these skills were acquired in
preservice coursework or in more informal settings (e.g.,
from experience in ensembles, from friends, from singing
karaoke, from religious practice, from listening to a variety of musical styles, from social media experiences, etc.).
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References
Allsup, R. E. (2003). Mutual learning and democratic action
in instrumental music education. Journal of Research in
Music Education, 51, 2437. doi:10.2307/3345646

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014

33

Springer and Gooding

Allsup, R. E. (2011). Popular music and classical musicians:
Strategies and perspectives. Music Educators Journal,
97(3), 3034. doi:10.1177/0027432110391810
Boespflug, G. (2004). The pop music ensemble in music education.
In C. X. Rodriguez (Ed.), Bridging the gap: Popular music
and music education (pp. 191203). Reston, VA: MENC.
Bowman, W. D. (2004). Pop goes . . . ? Taking popular music
seriously. In C. X. Rodriguez (Ed.), Bridging the gap:
Popular music and music education (pp. 2949). Reston,
VA: MENC.
Boyle, J. D., Hosterman, G. L., & Ramsey, D. S. (1981).
Factors influencing pop music preferences of young people. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29, 4755.
doi:10.2307/3344679
Choate, R. (Ed.). (1968). Documentary report of the Tanglewood
Symposium. Washington, DC: MENC.
Cutietta, R. A. (1991). Popular music: An ongoing challenge.
Music Educators Journal, 77(8), 2629. doi:10.2307/3398149
Cutietta, R. A., & Brennan, T. (1991). Coaching a pop/
rock ensemble. Music Educators Journal, 77(8), 4045.
doi:10.2307/3398152
Davis, S. G., & Blair, D. V. (2011). Popular music in American
teacher education: A glimpse into a secondary methods
course. International Journal of Music Education, 29,
124140. doi:10.1177/0255761410396962
Dunbar-Hall, P., & Wemyss, K. (2000). The effects of the
study of popular music on music education. International
Journal of Music Education, 36, 2334. doi:10.1177/
025576140003600104
Finns, L. (1989). A comparison between young peoples privately
and publicly expressed musical preferences. Psychology of
Music, 17, 132145. doi:10.1177/0305735689172004
Fowler, C. B. (1970). The case against rock: A reply. Music
Educators Journal, 57(1), 3842. doi:10.2307/3392869
Frith, S. (1996). Performing rites: On the value of popular
music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Green, L. (2002). How popular musicians learn: A way ahead
for music education. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
Green, L. (2004). What can music educators learn from popular musicians? In C. X. Rodriguez (Ed.), Bridging the gap:
Popular music and music education (pp. 225240). Reston,
VA: MENC.
Hargreaves, D. J., Comber, C., & Colley, A. (1995). Effects of
age, gender, and training on musical preferences of British
secondary school students. Journal of Research in Music
Education, 43, 242250. doi:10.2307/3345639
Hebert, D. G., & Campbell, P. S. (2000). Rock music in
American schools: Positions and practices since the 1960s.
International Journal of Music Education, 36, 1422.
doi:10.1177/025576140003600103
Humphreys, J. T. (2004). Popular music in the American
schools: What history tells us about the present and the
future. In C. X. Rodriguez (Ed.), Bridging the gap: Popular

music and music education (pp. 91105). Reston, VA:

MENC.
Isbell, D. (2007). Popular music and the public school music
curriculum. Update: Applications of Research in Music
Education, 26(1), 5363. doi:10.1177/875512330702600
10106
Lamont, A., Hargreaves, D. J., Marshall, N. A., & Tarrant, M.
(2003). Young peoples music in and out of school. British
Journal of Music Education, 20, 229241. doi:10.1017/
S0265051703005412
Leblanc, A. (1979). Generic style music preferences of fifthgrade students. Journal of Research in Music Education,
27, 255270. doi:10.2307/3344712
MacCluskey, T. (1969). Rock in its elements. Music Educators
Journal, 56(3), 4749. doi:10.1177/002743216905600305
MacCluskey, T. (1979). Peaceful coexistence between pop
and the classics. Music Educators Journal, 65(8), 5457.
doi:10.2307/3395676
Mann, L. (1995). Chasm or continuum? The applicability of
classical vocal techniques to popular vocalism (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses database. (UMI No. 9622180)
Mark, M. L. (1994). Youth music: Is it right for the schools?
Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning, 5(2),
7682.
North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & ONeill, S. A. (2000). The importance of music to adolescents. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 70, 255272. doi:10.1348/000709900158083
OBrien, J. P. (1982). A plea for pop. Music Educators Journal,
68(7), 4454. doi:10.2307/3395940
Pembrook, R. G. (1990). Popular music in research and in the
classroom. Update: Applications of Research in Music
Education, 8(2), 3035. doi:10.1177/875512339000800209
Pembrook, R. G. (1991). Exploring the musical side of pop. Music
Educators Journal, 77(8), 3034. doi:10.2307/3398150
Ponick, F. S. (2000). Bach and rock in the music classroom.
Teaching Music, 8(3), 2229.
Rentz, E. (1994). Music opinions and preferences of high
school students in select and nonselect choruses. Bulletin of
the Council for Research in Music Education, 121, 1628.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40318664
Rodriguez, C. X. (2004). Popular music in music education:
Toward a new conception of musicality. In C. X. Rodriguez
(Ed.), Bridging the gap: Popular music and music education (pp. 1327). Reston, VA: MENC.
Toynbee, J. (2000). Making popular music: Musicians, creativity and institutions. London, England: Arnold.
Vulliamy, G., & Lee, E. (Eds). (1982). Pop, rock, and ethnic music in school. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Woody, R. H. (2007). Popular music in the school: Remixing
the issues. Music Educators Journal, 93(4), 3237.
doi:10.2307/4127131

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com by guest on October 24, 2014