Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy

Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy examines the capacity of musicking to cultivate ecological literacy, approaching eco-literate music pedagogy through philosophical and autoethnographical lenses. Building on the principle that music contributes uniquely to human ecological thinking, this volume tracks the course of eco-literate music pedagogy while guiding the discussion forward: x x x x What does it mean to embrace the impulse to teach music for ecological literacy? What is it like to theorize eco-literate music pedagogy? What is learned through enacting this pedagogy? How do the impulsion, the theorizing, and the enacting relate to one another? Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Music education for ecological consciousness is experienced in local places, and this study explores the theory underlying eco-literate music pedagogy in juxtaposition with the author’s personal experiences. The work arrives at a new philosophy for music education: a spiritual praxis rooted in soil communities, one informed by ecology’s intrinsic value for non-human being and musicking. Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy adds to the emerging body of music education literature considering ecological and environmental issues. Daniel J. Shevock is a Lecturer in Music at Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, where he served as Emerging Musical Artist in Residence in Jazz. He taught instrumental and general music in the Pittsburgh Public Schools for eleven years. The Routledge New Directions in Music Education Series Series Editor: Clint Randles The Routledge New Directions in Music Education Series consists of concise monographs that attempt to bring more of the wide world of music, education, and society into the discourse in music education. Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy Daniel J. Shevock The Music Profiles Learning Project Radio Cremata, Gareth Dylan Smith, Joseph Michael Pignato, and Bryan Powell Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy Daniel J. Shevock PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, ALTOONA Taylor and Francis Not for distribution First published 2018 by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business ” 2018 Taylor & Francis The right of Daniel J. Shevock to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Names: Shevock, Daniel J., author. Title: Eco-literate music pedagogy : a philosophy/autoethnography of music education of soil / Daniel J. Shevock. Description: New York : Routledge, 2017. | Series: Routledge focus on music education: new directions Identifiers: LCCN 2017016700 (print) | LCCN 2017021200 (ebook) | ISBN 9781315211596 (ebook) | ISBN 9780415792578 (hardback) Subjects: LCSH: Ecomusicology. | Music—Instruction and study— Environmental aspects. | Environmentalism. Classification: LCC ML3799.3 (ebook) | LCC ML3799.3.S54 2017 (print) | DDC 780.71—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017016700 Taylor and Francis Not for distribution ISBN: 978-0-415-79257-8 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-21159-6 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Swales & Willis Ltd, Exeter, Devon, UK Contents Series Foreword Acknowledgements Prelude vi vii 1 1 Philosophy on Soil 22 2 Ecological Literacy 37 3 Ecomusicology 57 4 Deep Ecology 70 5 Spiritual Praxis 89 Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Postlude 109 Series Foreword The Routledge New Directions in Music Education Series consists of concise monographs that attempt to bring more of the wide world of music, education, and society—and all of the conceptualizations and pragmatic implications that come with that world—into the discourse in music education. It is about discovering and uncovering big ideas for the profession, criticizing our long held assumptions, suggesting new courses of action, and putting ideas into motion for the prosperity of future generations of music makers, teachers of music, researchers, scholars, and society. Clint Randles, Series Editor Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Acknowledgements Like reality, scholarship is ecological. This book is a product of interconnected relationships among beings, and not only the result of individual work. My wife and son (my hiking and gardening partners), Mercedes and Penny inspired this work by helping me recognize resonances—the musics of the spheres, of birds, wind, and soil. Vincent Bates’s work on place, rural ideals, and sustainability in music education formed a basis for my scholarship. He read and commented extensively on every chapter of the book. Darrin Thornton, Valerie Flamini, and Joanne Rutkowski each read and commented on chapters. Clint Randles, the series editor, provided insight without which this work would have been impossible. The chickadees, perennial companions musicking at the backyard birdfeeder, improved this work. I’m grateful to these music educators, but any errors are my own. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Daniel J. Shevock Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Prelude We stand now where two roads diverge. But unlike the roads in Robert Frost’s familiar poem, they are not equally fair. The road we have long been travelling is deceptively easy, a smooth superhighway on which we progress with great speed, but at its end lies disaster. The other fork in the road—the one “less travelled by”—offers our last, our only chance to reach a destination that assures the preservation of our earth. Rachel Carson, 19621 Taylor and Francis Walking a Road Less Travelled By We walk under a green canopy. For humans, walking as a mode of transportation and a meditation is natural. Its pace is natural, especially compared to flight or driving a car. Unlike motorized transport, there’s no obvious machine mediating the walker from soil. Beneath my feet, I remain connected to soil, to dirt, to small plants, to Mother Earth, to life. Walking on pavement, a hiking trail, and grass each generate distinctive sounds. How should my sound, my life, blend with nature? Do my feet and heartbeat synchronize to the rhythms of nature? Birds sing above, and insects below. Musicking without and within. Walkers can, and often do, talk with others, and convivial sounds become a part of an activity humankind has repeated for hundreds of thousands of years, since well before evolving into homo sapiens. These sounds make an inconsequential musicking activity, too often repeated to notice: except that music teachers and students do not often walk together. Certainly, band directors direct marching band students: “left, right, left, right.” But just walking together is atypical, and simply being out of doors together is uncommon in music education. On this particular July day, I was walking with youth chorale students during their yearly summer music camp at a park outside of rural West Milton, Pennsylvania. Like my hometown in Patton, this park contained green deciduous and coniferous trees, songbirds, squirrels, and deer. Both places are Not for distribution 2 Prelude populated by rural people, town-folk, and farmers who modern industrial society ignores or forgets. Valerie invited me to guest-teach this session. Inspired by the eco-music concepts I was forming, I was re-pairing detached aspects of my life. I was joining my loves of hiking and music; combining countless hours spent toiling in practice rooms to childhood hours spent idly in Prince Gallitzin State Park; linking music education philosophy to ecological literacy. A fork in the road was turned on its head, converging to draw two parts of myself together. Of course, I was a little nervous about this session. Though I had thought about and theorized eco-literate music pedagogy, I had yet to try it in the real world. As we walked and talked, my butterflies dissolved step by step in the delightful soundscape. Cicadas, sparrows, chickadees, cardinals, and the wind’s crescendo through the leaves above soothed my fears, and I reflected on the activities I had planned—a listening meditation to feel this place’s rhythm, echoing the songs in nature using singing voices, and co-composing music using these melodies and organic found sounds. By the time we arrived at Sylvan Chapel, a cement and brick altar with pews in the woods, I was in a calm state of mind, suitable for teaching and learning. I walked to the altar— am I a priest or teacher?—asked the students to close their eyes, to listen, and, in this simple, natural, ecological, true place, we took our first steps. Taylor and Francis Introduction Not for distribution Months before guest-lecturing, I went to the woods for inspiration. Walking in the woods, I desired coherence. Coherence among the wild, uncultivated musics of non-human animals and nature enveloping me since my youth, and my anthropocentric (human-centered) music teaching practice. Without knowing to where I would walk, my legs took me toward eco-literate music pedagogy. This walking began in February 2015, just after completing my doctoral dissertation. There is something freeing about completing such a large project. Free from work and in the habit of writing daily, walking became a jog and then a sprint. Inspired by deep ecology and ecofeminism, ecomusicology and ecological literacy, I wrote a short philosophical paper outlining possible directions for ecology in music education praxis (Shevock 2015b). Presenting this study at a conference, I met a music teacher who invited me to explore these concepts at a youth choir camp. This camp, which I have taught at twice at the time of writing, afforded a wonderful opportunity to share these ideas with the world outside of my own mind, where possibilities were transforming into practice. In this book, I reveal the eco-literate music pedagogy that I have attempted since beginning this walk. As an academic, I have attempted to include scholarship and personal experiences. While this book cannot hope to provide a full depiction of Prelude 3 these experiences, it provides a map—an imperfect map, but also a longing, searching, and hopefully thoughtful map. This Prelude introduces readers to the concept of eco-literate music pedagogy. The historical precedents for this concept began in time immemorial, and found institutional beginnings in the 1920s with Satis Coleman’s oncepopular creative music method. Her pedagogy drew from nature as a source of inspiration for classroom music activities. In the 1970s R. Murray Schafer’s soundscape provided a rationale for the sounds of places becoming the object of study in music classrooms. However, neither of these historical precedents gained wide appeal in the music education profession. I have struggled with why this is—it may be due to music education’s move from progressive to aesthetic ideals in the mid-20th century, or it may be an anthropocentric valuing of composers above the possibility of non-human musics. Perhaps the lack of an eco-literate music pedagogy is the result of an institutionalized avoidance of ecological realities, or perhaps a result of institutionalized patriarchy. Ecofeminists have drawn connections between the unjust dominations of women and nature. Activist Judi Bari (1994) wrote, “it is the hatred of feminine, which is the hatred of life, that has helped bring about the destruction of the planet. And it is the strength of women that can restore the balance we need to survive” (225). An awareness of music education as a patriarchal institution might help us reestablish Satis Coleman’s insights, to live well in our places, and address ecological crises. As a patriarchal institution, music education has had a blind faith in unsustainable technological fixes, synchronized to Rachel Carson’s insights into blind faith in DDT in her day. More recent calls for environmental sustainability in music education by Vincent C. Bates, Charlene A. Morton, and Julia Eklund Koza2 seem not to be widely heeded, leading to the current book’s guiding questions. In previous work, I introduced music education for ecological consciousness and ecological literacy, including an essential structure (Shevock 2015b). I used this essential structure, shared later in this prelude, to make pedagogical choices. Reflective writing, a staple of environmentalism since Thoreau, is used to introduce autoethnographic writing in music education and the current method, philosophy/autoethnography. Though this composite term is unique to this book, philosophy/autoethnography makes explicit the personal nature of writing environmental philosophy. If postmodernism is generally understood as skepticism toward metanarratives, philosophy/ autoethnography provides a subjective approach to theoretical questions in line with the postmodern and ecological challenges. I explain the method, which led to reflections, such as “Walking a Road Less Travelled By,” and fictional “creative vignettes.” Each chapter of this book begins with a reflection, includes a vignette, and ends with a poem. These represent the analysis and findings of this philosophy/autoethnography. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution 4 Prelude Creative Vignette After class at the school garden, a veteran teacher puts her hand in soil, cool and yielding between her fingers. This soil is well hoed and watered. Life abounds below and above each flower. Below, bacteria, fungi, algae, and earthworms make the soil a living thing. Bees buzz above. This corner of the garden, with its orange mums, rosy autumn joys, purple turtleheads, and, soaring above them all, tall yellow sunflowers, has become her favorite. It is a sanctuary of sights, scents, and sounds. It is a sanctuary from the fast-paced, testdriven place of schooling inside. This garden recalls her to childhood, spending long afternoons with her grandmother gardening, watering plants, learning about soil and seeds, and pulling weeds. Gardens teach much about life. The garden was then, and continues to be, an education in living and loving on soil.3 It teaches what it means to live well in a place, to balance culture and nature, and to become a sustainable part of a local ecology. She wants her students to experience this. She hopes her pedagogy provides an opportunity for them to cultivate deep connections with soil. The bees, so crucial to each flower’s growth, gently buzz around her. Pulling weeds by the roots and, emptying the school’s rain barrel, watering flowers, she led her students in a discussion about bees’ buzzing—how it’s a natural result of flying; how buzzing becomes more aggressive when bees feel threatened; and that buzzing is important to flower pollination. The buzzing of bees is a song of life, guaranteeing new beauty each year. The touch of soil and the sounds of the garden teach the gardener how to live and love. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Historical Precedents The work of music educator Satis Coleman (1878–1961) provides a seed for eco-literate music pedagogy. It was a seed that took root in the 1920s. A seed that currently lies dormant. She taught in private piano studios and music classrooms in Washington, DC and New York City, at Teachers College, Columbia University, and at the Lincoln Lab School. Her creative music method included field trips to understand the musics of others, instrument construction, and improvisation (Boston 1992). She published a number of books and articles, and her pedagogy was influential in the first half of the 20th century, but was lost to the annals of history. Perhaps her ecological vision for music education can be understood as our profession’s road not Prelude 5 taken (echoing Rachel Carson’s quote). Some seeds sprout after remaining dormant for decades. If her ideas had remained influential, a new eco-literate music pedagogy might not be required in the first half of the 21st century. Music education might already be a sustainable, place-rooted, ecologically literate profession. Music has an opportunity to be an important part of the education of children, because hearing is one of the five senses. This statement is not a validation of music in schools. Parents and communities educate children to be seeing, hearing, tasting, scenting, and feeling adults. Experienced arts such as crafts, foods, and musics often define a culture. Hearing is a primary way people experience the world, and music education may be able to help cultivate listening. Coleman’s (1939) music pedagogy involved listening to nature as music. Many people go through life deaf to some of the most beautiful sounds in Nature. . . . All this rare music is missed, probably because the traveler was never taught, as a little child, to listen for these things and to love Nature with his4 ears as well as with his other senses. (95) Pedagogically, Coleman (1939) described activities that connect children to nature, including the “dramatization of songs . . . representing an animal or other character” (134–135), and promoted summer camps so children experience “out-of-door life, and all other healthy summer activities which are so fine for a child’s health and social development” (129). She viewed nature’s music as an opportunity for cultivating spiritual wellbeing, “a bit of understanding of the voice of God” (92). There are many assumptions in Coleman’s writing about music and nature that seem progressive, even today. In the praxial position, a position I begin with, music is understood as something people do (see Elliott and Silverman 2015; Goble 2010; Small 1998). To Coleman, music is more than something people do, but something all of nature does (humans, non-human animals, plants, and natural systems such as wind). Considered as intentionality, drawn from Husserl’s (1983) phenomenology (ego cogito cogitata: a human intends [music]; this structure is extended in Chapter 5, “Spiritual Praxis”), Coleman’s position is radically ecocentric, ecology-centered (humans intend music; but also, chickadees intend music; whales intend music; even the moon, wind, and waves intend music). This has implications for what music is (music as something people do becomes music as something people, nonhuman animals, plants, and natural processes do). And this ecocentric position has basic implications for what humans find sonically valuable. The praxial position demands we consider other musics “on their own terms, thereby gaining intercultural knowledge” (Goble 2010: 279, emphasis in original). Taylor and Francis Not for distribution 6 Prelude If considering music praxially5 helps music teachers and learners value people outside of the Western world (because we value not only classical music, but also gamelan, mariachi, hip-hop, bluegrass, etc.), an ecocentric position insists we value musics beyond the anthropocentric. Extending Goble’s position, and inspired by Coleman’s ecocentric understanding of musics, we can study non-human musics on their own terms, thereby gaining ecological knowledge (see Chapter 4, “Deep Ecology”). Coleman’s pedagogy seems in line with the work of Canadian composer R. Murray Schafer (1994), which began in the 1970s. Schafer’s soundscape influenced the contemporary disciplines of ecomusicology and soundscape ecology (the scientific study of ecological systems through sound).6 Schafer suggests that studying a society’s soundscape can inform us about social conditions and trends, and that the world’s soundscape is getting worse owing to noise pollution. That we have learned to ignore noises is problematic. He recommends a practice of clairaudience, “clean hearing” (11), to assuage noise pollution. Schafer’s (1994) discussion of the natural soundscape and the sounds of life are valuable to eco-literate music pedagogy. He categorizes the natural soundscape into the voices of the sea, the transformations of water, voices of wind, the miraculous land, unique tones, and apocalyptic sounds (15–28). For instance, when discussing voices of wind, Schafer writes, “The wind is an element that grasps the ears forcefully. The sensation is tactile as well as aural” (22). This connects to his pedagogy: “Sometimes I ask students to identify moving sounds in the soundscape. ‘The wind,’ say some. ‘Trees,’ say others. But without objects in its path, the wind betrays no apparent movement. It hovers in the ears, energetic but directionless” (23). Wind’s contributions to the soundscape were some of the first sounds camp students noticed. The sounds of life include birdsong, insects, the sounds of water creatures, and the sounds of animals in Schafer’s (1994) categorization (29–41). Human speech, especially noticeable in onomatopoeia and music, can be VWXGLHGDVLPLWDWLRQRIWKHVRXQGVRIOLIH HJ.ƯVrGMrPXVLFLPLWDWHVQRQ human animal sounds; see Chapter 3, “Ecomusicology”). Speech is limited when it comes to imitating the sounds of life. Music is important because “it is in music alone that man finds the true harmony of the inner and outer world” (42). It seems music connects humans’ internal, psychological, and spiritual lives with external soundscapes. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Ecology in Music Education Schafer (1994) identified rural soundscapes as exhibiting better quality (43). Noise pollution degrades urban soundscapes, which negatively impacts people Prelude 7 living in urban places. It is not surprising then that the work of Vincent C. Bates (2011, 2013a, 2013b, 2014, 2016) on rural ideals, such as living sustainability within a place (Bates 2013b), initiates music education’s current move toward eco-literate music pedagogy. In this body of work, Bates connects ecological and social class, including in how social mobility means moving rural people to urban places (Bates 2011: 112). Bates expounds a hierarchy of musical engagements that places “school over outside-of-school, formal over informal, presentational over participatory, highbrow over lowbrow” (Bates 2011: 109), and recommends an agrarian perspective, which finds beauty in nature, and that values “households, neighborhoods, small towns” (Bates 2013a: 85) allowing students to live in “comfortable and original musical cultures” (Bates 2014: 321). This rural music education provides a model to begin thinking about music education about, in, and for the environment (Bates 2013a: 80), which provides an opening for eco-literate music pedagogy, which aims to be placed 7 and sustainable. In line with the move toward eco-literate music pedagogy and because global ecological crises stem from inequalities in human and non-human “relationships,” Charlene A. Morton (2012) recommends a music education philosophy for “all my relations” (472). Morton draws on Deweyan theory to suggest music education can embrace social and ecological justice, can identify its ecological impact, and can be a force for solving the world’s problems. Morton’s work leads to eco-literate music pedagogy’s focus on ecological justice, and on recognizing the power of music as a way of knowing and solving the ecological crises. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Guiding Questions In the 1990s, music educators began to conceive of music education from a praxial position8 (e.g., Alperson 1991; Bowman 1998; Elliott 1997; Elliott and Silverman 2015; Regelski 1998). This turn can be seen as a leaving9 and as a returning. As a leaving, praxial music education called into question the values of music education as aesthetic education—values that seemed inextricably linked to classical music, intrinsic (to music) values, and music as an object (see Regelski 2016). Regelski suggests the aesthetic view is an ideology “so firmly taken for granted and engrained in many teacher’s minds that any evidence or departure from its status quo catechisms is often rejected out of hand” (11). In contrast, praxialists view music as something people do,10 emphasizing human, cultural, and social dimensions, and diversity (Alperson 1991; Bates 2013a; Elliott and Silverman 2015; Regelski 2016; Small 1998). As a returning, praxialists often look to pragmatic philosophers, especially John Dewey,11 prioritizing social aspects of music education 8 Prelude (see Silverman 2012). Thus pragmatic music educators from the early 20th century like Satis Coleman, whose philosophies seem to have been replaced by aesthetic theorists, can be linked to current social valuing in music education. Praxial music education is essentially democratic. But what is praxis in music education? Praxis is first and foremost a reflective action, “becoming a reflective practitioner” (Regelski 2016: 31). It begins with reflection as an ethical action. According to Elliott and Silverman (2015), praxis relates to musics in three ways: “(1) critically reflective and informed actions that are (2) embedded in and creatively responsive to both traditional and ever-changing musical/cultural/social values and (3) understood, taught, guided, and applied ethically and democratically for positive improvement of students’ personal and musical-social-community lives” (17). Following this conception, in the current book I am critically reflecting on ecologically informed actions. This is what autoethnographic research is about—reflecting honestly on actual experiences. These actions are embedded in and creatively responsive to both tradition and ever-changing values. They take place in schooling settings, including a university-level elective on Western music, and a summer choir camp. Also, the praxial rationale of this autoethnography is for the positive improvement of students’ personal and musical-social-community lives. It is the ecological crises that seem to characterize the 21st century as much as, if not more than, other social challenges facing humanity. As an expression of ecological consciousness and ecological literacy, the current book provides a unique contribution to praxial music education. Enacting music pedagogy for ecological consciousness and ecological literacy is praxis—reflection and action for positive transformation of humanity in regard to the ecological crises we face. The guiding questions for this autoethnography are: What does it mean to embrace the impulse to teach music for ecological literacy? What is it like to theorize eco-literate music pedagogy? What is learned through enacting this pedagogy? How do the impulsion, the theorizing, and the enacting relate to one another? These questions help me to recognize the urgency of teaching music for ecological literacy as humanity faces its greatest existential crises since the invention of nuclear weapons. They are “answered” in this book through reflections on my pedagogy in the first year of enacting eco-literate music pedagogy, constructively through the creative vignettes imagining different ways this pedagogy might be, artistically through the poems that end each chapter, and theoretically through scholarly literature (in all chapters, but heavily in Chapters 2 and 3, which function a bit as literature reviews) and building logical arguments (especially in Chapters 1, 4, and 5) for a spiritual praxis of music education on soil. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Prelude 9 Gardening and Wilderness As metaphors, gardening can be used to clarify ecological consciousness, and wilderness can be used to clarify ecological literacy. To understand eco-literate music pedagogy, understanding how I conceive of these two ideas becomes important. At a fundamental level, the idea of consciousness is awareness. People become aware of objects or ideas through five senses—sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell.12 Because of the small scale of consciousness—the individual person is the unit of measurement—consciousness can be seen through the lens of place: a person in a place becomes conscious of objects and ideas experienced through his/her five senses. If two metaphors guiding ecological discourse are wilderness (such as the work of Arne Naess) and gardening (such as the work of Wendell Berry and Michael Pollan), consciousness is understood through the act of gardening. Gardening is experienced through the five senses (including hearing). We choose which nature thrives in our gardens; we plant seeds and pull weeds. We’re guided by the wisdom of people who have lived on this soil before, and who live nearby. Ecological consciousness is a process of living well in a place, of balancing our cultural (including aesthetic) desires with nature near us. We choose what beauty to cultivate in our gardens. Ecological consciousness can and should involve forming positive experiences through education. This metaphorical use employs a simplified conception of gardening. The metaphor transforms by considering specific schools of gardening such as organic, raised-bed, no-till, or permaculture. However, all gardening techniques say something about how people live with nature. To control weeds one gardener sprays pesticide and another grows cover crops. To aerate soil one gardener plows and another plants radishes. These choices say something about how each person understands his/her relationship to nature. Each is specific and experienced. Ecological consciousness is experienced as cultural. In contrast, ecological literacy involves abstraction. In this way it is more like wilderness than gardening. Wilderness is necessary, but not lived in by us (human life makes a place un-wilderness or at least lesswilderness). Questions of wilderness invoke questions of policy. For instance, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management identifies wilderness as “special places where the earth and its community of life are essentially allowed to function without manipulation. They retain their primeval character, without permanent improvements and offer outstanding opportunities for solitude or primitive and unconfined recreation.”13 As policy, wilderness contains paradoxes. How does a place lacking human manipulation endure as recreation? Once we talk about human use of wilderness, we can ask, “Is there any wilderness left?” Wilderness is theoretical, which Taylor and Francis Not for distribution 10 Prelude leads to specific policies (e.g., the number of people who can enter; the permissibility of hiking or horses), which can be modified. In general, literacy means coming to understand many aspects of society (and not merely reading and writing). Many of the ecological crises—such as climate change, the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, species loss—do not necessarily involve individual consciousness of the ecological crises. These global crises may involve individual experiences of manifestations of a crisis. When a Yup-ik Eskimo loses his/her home to melting tundra, or when an Arizona farmer runs short of water, climate change is manifested, but climate change as a concept requires an ecologically literate citizen who connects these experiences to a theory. An ecologically literate citizen, especially in a suburb, may not actually experience any of these manifestations (e.g., waste can be artfully kept out of sight). Thinking historically and re-theorizing are important. When manifestations occur differently than previously theorized, the ecologically literate citizen understands a newer, more accurate theory (in recent history, the greenhouse effect was replaced by global warming and then climate change, each providing a better theory). Ecological literacy as praxis involves looking courageously at the ecological crises (reflection) and identifying ways to alleviate these crises (action). Both ecological consciousness/gardening and ecological literacy/wilderness are essential components of eco-literate music pedagogy, because people crave both experiences and sense making. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Essential Structure of Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy Previously I theorized eco-literate music pedagogy (Shevock 2015b: 17): 1 2 3 4 connecting to local places; experiencing music and nature in connected, meaningful, and ethical ways; developing ecological consciousness by ritualizing and creating music rooted in soil; connecting to the planet more broadly by connecting local understandings to global ecological crises. Eco-literate music pedagogy begins with helping students become conscious of local places. This is no small task for people focused on computer and cellphone screens. Because music is a way humans come to understand the world around them through sound and other senses, the sonic experiences of ecological consciousness are a fundamental aspect of eco-literate music pedagogy. Drawing on Coleman and Schafer, music teachers and students study the musics that surround them. This leads to teachers and students living well in place, connected to the health of local environments and dedicated Prelude 11 Figure P.1 Essential Structure of Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy Taylor and Francis to protecting those places. Music teachers and students can be inspired by the musics of non-human life to create musics for performance. These can provide an opportunity for pleasure and a more scientific understanding of these places (what non-human animals music in these places), and then can be connected to broader theories (such as climate change, waste, soil use, transportation, suburbanization), the understanding of which typifies an ecologically literate citizen. Not for distribution Reflecting with Purpose The purpose of this self-study is to explore the theory underlying eco-literate music pedagogy in juxtaposition with personal experiences of the author, a music teacher enacting this pedagogy. According to ecotheologian Thomas Berry (1999), ecological devastation is primarily caused by “a mode of consciousness that established a radical discontinuity between the human and other modes of being and the bestowal of all rights on humans” (4). To understand my consciousness, this book utilizes reflective self-study as I try to expand my conception of modes of being and of rights. This philosophy/ autoethnography represents my evolution as a music teacher and, in turn, modifies theory with practice. 12 Prelude Reflective Writing in Environmentalism Reflective writing dominates the environmental literature. Thoreau provided the model for much of this writing. Books such as Walden (Thoreau 1995) and essays such as “Walking” (Thoreau 1851) characterize self-reflective writing that moves theory. Thoreau’s writing pushes Emerson’s transcendental philosophy toward the biocentric, placing humankind in nature, rather than above it. Titon (2015) discussed Thoreau’s movement away from transcendentalism and toward a more scientific and experiential philosophy: “his thinking gradually moved away from spiritual correspondences and toward scientific truths experienced as patterns in nature. Unusually oriented to sensory experience, listening became an important means toward this knowledge” (144). In Walden, Thoreau wrote a chapter on “Sounds,” which can be seen as a basis for sound studies, soundscape ecology, ecomusicology, and eco-literate music pedagogy. Notable reflective writing includes the work of Sierra Club founder John Muir (1838–1914) and environmental advocate Edward Abbey (1927–1989).14 John Muir’s journals provide insight into the mind of the conservationist’s camping trips with President Theodore Roosevelt, the discovery of Glacier Bay, and his insight into American philosopher Emerson (Teale 2001). Abbey (1991)—like Pollan (2003) a decade later—begins his reflective insights with a critique of Thoreau, critiquing his mystical incoherence and his timidity. But ultimately, Thoreau needs to be approached: “I look for his name in the water, his face in the airy foam. He must be here. Wherever there are deer and hawks, wherever there is liberty and danger, wherever there is wilderness, wherever there is a living river, Henry Thoreau will find his eternal home” (48). This type of writing seems praxial, understanding theory through actual experience. More recent reflective writing has considered such topics as gardening and farming (Berry 2010; Kingsolver 2007; Pollan 2003), beekeeping (McKibben 2013), and living without money (Sundeen 2012). Even when no explicit theory is drawn, this body of writing puts forth a variety of theories. Many writers use Wendell Berry’s essays to develop agrarian theory, including in music education (e.g., Bates 2013a, 2013b, 2016). The message underlying Sundeen’s (2012) narrative is that living simply can lead to living better. Kingsolver (2007) promotes the importance of locavorism, living and growing food locally. McKibben (2013) tells his story during a time when he was shifting roles from environmental writer to activist, while at the same time purchasing a plot of land and learning about beekeeping. The message centers on the importance of global action, acting to change government policy, while connecting to a local place, concurring with the current concepts of wilderness and gardening. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Prelude 13 Autoethnographies in Music Education The first autoethnography I read was Kruse’s (2012) outlining his attempts to learn mandolin online. Caught up in this story of using only online resources, an act that deeply challenges institutional music education, he described not only successes, but also frustrations and challenges. Autoethnography can be about sharing vulnerability (Bartleet and Ellis 2009). Kruse’s research set me on a course to question the possibilities, roles, and means of scholarship in music education. My own autoethnographic research was, following Kruse’s model, an analysis of my praxis (Shevock 2015a). Later I began to realize the more evocative possibilities for autoethnography (such as proposed by Bartleet and Ellis 2009; Denzin 2014; Ellis 2004; Gouzouasis et al. 2014), though I have strived for a balance between analysis and expressiveness (Shevock 2016), which leads me to philosophy/autoethnography. Music education has seen a sharp increase in autoethnography. These studies have been published in many peer-reviewed publications, including Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education (Bates 2011; Lamb 2014; Shevock 2015a, 2016); British Journal of Music Education (Bartleet and Hultgren 2008; Mapana 2011); Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education (Taylor 2014); International Journal of Education and the Arts (Hendricks 2013; Gouzouasis et al. 2014); Journal of Music, Technology and Education (Kruse 2012); Journal of Research in Music Education (Nichols 2016); Music Education Research (Thompson 2015; Webb 2008); Qualitative Report (Nethsinghe 2012; Sutherland 2015); and Research Studies in Music Education (Heuser 2015; Saldaña 2008). Music education autoethnographies have been used to passionately explore issues of gender (Lamb 2014; Nichols 2016; Taylor 2014), race (Shevock 2016; Thompson 2015), class (Bates 2011; Shevock 2016), and emotional pain (Saldaña 2008; Shevock 2016; Taylor 2014); to analyze storytelling itself (Gouzouasis et al. 2014; Nichols 2016); to interpretively explore creative pedagogy (Bartleet and Hultgren 2008; Heuser 2015; Kruse 2012; Shevock 2015a; Sutherland 2015); to expand the cultural dimensions of music education (Mapana 2011; Webb 2008); and to challenge current teaching practices (Hendricks 2013; Nethsinghe 2012; Shevock 2016). These autoethnographies accomplished many purposes and, importantly to this book, describe and challenge theory (Bates 2011; Lamb 2014; Shevock 2015a, 2016). Bates’s work uses rural theory, Lamb’s feminism, and Shevock’s Freirean and Illichan theory. Autoethnography can be seen as part of a new ethos in music education research, “ethical, spiritual, and heartful . . . uncontrolled, rebellious, and gloriously perfect imperfection” (Gouzouasis et al. 2014: 18). Autoethnographies can be, in contrast, analytic and focused on developing and challenging social theory (Anderson 2006). In the current book, I hope to balance some of the Taylor and Francis Not for distribution 14 Prelude more analytic elements of autoethnography (such as exploring the possibilities of a new pedagogical model) with some of the more ethical (the ecological crises are deeply ethical concerns), spiritual (I recommend eco-literate music pedagogy as a spiritual praxis), and heartful (developing a new philosophy in practice is an emotional endeavor to which I lend my full self, including my professional reputation). I call this balancing act—of rugged interpretation, pliable heartfulness, and theory building—philosophy/autoethnography. Philosophy/Autoethnography As an autobiographical research method, autoethnography is typified by its use of insider knowledge, nuance, and accessible prose (Ellis and Adams 2014). Autoethnography has emerged as an important qualitative research methodology, compatible with our current concern with identity politics (259). Autoethnography aims for “triadic balance” (Chang 2008: 48) between self (auto-), culture (-ethno-), and research method (-graphy). Accordingly, “autoethnographers hope to gain cultural understanding of self and others directly and indirectly connected to self” (49). Music teaching institutions provide one culture in this analysis, but other cultures such as family and non-human species cultures emerged as essential. In the autoethnographic tradition Ellis (2004) promotes, the author writes in the first person, becoming a storyteller (30). This is consistent with how I understand good writing, which doesn’t hide the actor (the reader can easily identify the sentence structure to identify who did what), and in the current book I have chosen to utilize the “ethnographic I” extensively. Structured as memoirs, autoethnographies utilize the conventions of storytelling. Denzin (2014) identifies these conventions: “People depicted as characters; a scene, place, or context where the story occurs; an epiphany or crisis that provides dramatic tension . . . a temporal order of events; [and] a point or moral to the story” (4). As an example of how these conventions have guided this book, my “epiphany” occurred after completing my dissertation, when I longed to find coherence between my experiences with nature, music, and pedagogy. However, because this philosophy/autoethnography represents a combination of philosophy and autoethnography, the memoir aspects are divided with more theoretical writing. While a memoir may allude to philosophical truths, an aim of philosophy is to make those explicit. In my research—the present study is my third using autoethnography—I concluded, “because of autoethnography’s subjective nature, it is well suited for exploring theoretical concepts that might be difficult to quantify” (Shevock 2016: 47). Eco-literate music pedagogy is rooted in this body of theory-driven self-reflective research, which I am labeling philosophy/autoethnography. Philosophy/autoethnography is a subgenre of autoethnography that embraces the evocative nature of autoethnography and makes explicit and builds theory. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Prelude 15 Data analyzed for this philosophy/autoethnography were collected from February 2015 through September 2016 (1 year, 7 months) and include reflections kept in a journal of my teaching, and student assignments. Teaching experiences include two youth summer choir camps, and two semesters (four sections, teaching approximately thirty students in each) of teaching MUS 005: Introduction to Western Music at Penn State Altoona. The reflections were done as soon after teaching as possible, to help ensure accuracy. The choir camp listened to nature at a park and co-composed music with voices and natural found sounds.15 The Introduction to Western Music assignments included a written listening response to Hunter Hensley’s Requiem for the Mountains,16 which features Gregorian chant with images of the ecological damage to Kentucky mountains due to mountaintop removal mining; a reflection comparing Hensley’s requiem with Mike Townsend’s They Call It Progress,17 a folk song that deals with the same topic; and a sound ecology reflection on the “sounds of nature” as if they were an intended musical composition (using music elements, such as rhythm, pitch, and melody, and identifying “instruments” used, such as ducks, wind, and construction equipment), and various additional listening and discussions around nature and music. These data were reconstructed into various stories, which became the base unit of analysis for writing the memoir aspect of this philosophy/autoethnography. Data analysis is presented as reflections (reconstructing actual experiences) and creative vignettes (constructing fictional experiences to elucidate a truth or future possibility for eco-literate music pedagogy). Each chapter is ended with a poem, an artistic representation of analysis, following the lead of many autoethnographies (such as de Vries 2007; Shevock 2015a, 2016). These analyses are divided with theoretical writing—insight drawn from other scholars and arguments I construct. In Chapter 1, “Philosophy on Soil,” Ivan Illich, place-based education, and a theory of the commons provide a pedagogical foundation for ethical action in place. A music education on soil is advanced. Eco-literate music pedagogy is framed as interdisciplinary in Chapter 2, “Ecological Literacy.” In Chapter 3, “Ecomusicology,” ecomusicology, a subfield of both musicology and ethnomusicology, is described. In ecomusicology, the environment is portrayed as essential to understanding music: environments inspire music compositions and environmentalists use musics in their activism. Expanding the concept of music education on soil, Chapter 4, “Deep Ecology,” draws from the deep ecology platform to frame an ecocentric valuing of non-human musicking. Music education on soil as a deep ecology leads to the premise of a praxial spirituality of eco-literate music pedagogy in Chapter 5, “Spiritual Praxis.” Living the good life involves an expanded understanding of self: living for all our kin—human, non-human, and place. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution 16 Prelude Mysteries Pondered in a Garden agony, the garden work cut from life. cynicism’s burden. walking, listening, wildlife valuing on soil scourging, the pillar aching of rebirth. cocooned caterpillar. vigor and earth disentangling weeds crowning with thorns self-taunting thoughts. excesses are shorn. a seed, a fresh plot harking birdsongs carrying the cross setting pen to paper. a plot becomes acres pondering ground crucifixion and death completion and joy. ecological breath. detested, enjoyed IXO¿OOHGDQGRUJDQLF Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Prelude 17 Notes 1 From Carson’s (2002) foundational environmental science activism book Silent Spring (277). 2 Koza (2006) calls for a process of “sifting and winnowing” (36) to curb consumerism in music education. This seems consistent with eco-literate music pedagogy. 3 Ivan Illich (with Sigmar Groeneveld, Lee Hoinacki, and other friends) (1990) suggests “our generation has lost its grounding in both soil and virtue” (1). In the recommended philosophy on soil, discussed in Chapter 1, “Philosophy on Soil,” actions should be conscious of local traditions and place-bounded. A school garden can become, for teachers and students alike, an opportunity to cultivate such virtue, while many school activities seem to promote non-soil-bound actions, and are ecologically unsustainable. 4 Here I want to note that, while much of the literature used in this book employs gender-specific language, I prefer gender-inclusive language. However, I have made the choice to avoid including sic after each referenced occurrence, to improve flow for the reader. This was a hard choice for me, but was made as a result of standard practice in historical writing. 5 From some perspectives, praxial philosophies can be understood as anthropocentric. This is explored a little in this book. A full analysis of whether or not these are anthropocentric is beyond the scope of this book. This book aims to construct a philosophy of music education on soil, not critique praxial philosophy. Subjectively, praxial music education philosophy has inspired me to begin considering eco-literate music pedagogy. I understand a philosophy of music education on soil as praxial, which will be illuminated in Chapter 5, “Spiritual Praxis.” 6 For instance, studying two common birds in the Eastern U.S., the wood thrush and red-eyed vireo, might require soundscape ecology because both birds are rarely observable—they rarely leave dense undergrowth—but are prominent singers contributing to the soundscape. 7 This autoethnographic approach to understanding eco-literate music pedagogy tries to echo a tradition of writing in music education that is placed not only in physical space, but in the sense of local validity: “‘locally’ valid and persuasive without claiming applicability to all musical situations for all time” (Bowman 1998: 16). 8 Goble (2010) constructed a more robust description of this praxial movement that focuses more specifically on Elliott’s and Regelski’s influences and distinctions that might be of interest to readers (237–245). 9 For instance, Elliott (1997) identified his praxial philosophy of music education as “an alternative” (1) to Bennett Reimer’s music education as aesthetic education. Elliott aimed to stimulate critical thinking: “There are many ways to conceptualize the nature and significance of music education. There is ample room for alternative views” (3). Regelski (1998) referred to praxial philosophy as “a critical challenge to the main traditions of aesthetic theory and their implications for music education” (22). 10 Aesthetic considerations, from the praxial perspective, are subservient to social considerations. For instance, Alperson (1991) wrote, “The basic aim of a praxial philosophy of music is to understand, from a philosophical point of view, just what music has meant to people, an endeavor that includes but is not limited to a consideration of the function of music in aesthetic contexts” (234). 11 In addition to Dewey, Goble (2010) draws from Dewey’s teacher C. S. Peirce. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution 18 Prelude 12 These are the traditionally recognized senses. There seem to be more than five senses, including thermoception, proprioception, nociception, equilibrioception, and mechanoreception (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sense). Perhaps musicking is experienced using all of these senses. 13 Link: https://www.blm.gov/programs/national-conservation-lands/Wilderness-Areas. 14 Contrasting reflective writing, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, so important to the modern environmental movement, is expressly not reflective. It may be that, since she was dying of cancer while writing, she hoped to avoid the DDT industry claiming she was merely expressing a vendetta. Silent Spring, while artfully written, portrays its message as objective. 15 The students’ compositions can be found online at YouTube (Year 1 link: https://youtu.be/dNx5zZrIo9s; Year 2 link: https://youtu.be/5N4txoPzVUo). They performed these at their end-of-camp concert. 16 Link: https://youtu.be/g8gJrTe2O18. 17 Link: https://youtu.be/50v-nckcoSg. References Abbey, Edward. 1991. Down the River. New York: Plume. Alperson, Philip. 1991. “What Should One Expect From a Philosophy of Music Education?” Journal of Aesthetic Education 25, no. 3 (Autumn): 215–242. Anderson, Leon. 2006. “Analytic Autoethnography.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 35, no. 4 (August): 373–395. DOI: 10.1177/0891241605280449. Bari, Judi. 1994. Timber Wars. Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press. Bartleet, Brydie-Leigh, and Carolyn Ellis, eds. 2009. Music Autoethnographies: Making Autoethnography Sing/Making Music Personal. Bowen Hills: Australian Academic Press. Bartleet, Brydie-Leigh, and Ralph Hultgren. 2008. “Sharing the Podium: Exploring the Process of Peer Learning in Professional Conducting.” British Journal of Music Education 25, no. 2: 193–206. DOI: 10.1017/S0265051708007924. Bates, Vincent C. 2011. “Sustainable School Music for Poor, White, Rural Students.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 10, no. 2: 100–127. ——. 2013a. “Music Education Unplugged.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 12, no. 2 (September): 75–90. ——. 2013b. “Drawing from Rural Ideals for Sustainable School Music.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 12, no. 1 (April): 24–46. ——. 2014. “Rethinking Cosmopolitanism in Music Education.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 13, no. 1 (March): 310–327. ——. 2016. “Toward a Sociology of Music Curriculum Integration.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 15, no. 3 (May): 1–14. Berry, Thomas. 1999. The Great Work: Our Way into the Future. New York: Bell Tower. Berry, Wendell. 2010. What Are People For? Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint. Boston, Sheila C. 1992. “Satis N. Coleman (1878–1961: Her Career in Music Education.” PhD dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park. 9315605. Bowman, Wayne. 1998. “Universals, Relativism, and Music Education.” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education 135 (Winter): 1–20. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Prelude 19 Carson, Rachel. 2002. Silent Spring. Boston, MA: Mariner Books. [Originally published in 1962.] Chang, Heewon. 2008. Autoethnography as Method. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. Coleman, Satis N. 1939. Your Child’s Music. New York: John Day Company. Denzin, Norman K. 2014. Interpretive Autoethnography. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. de Vries, Peter. 2007. “Using Poetry as Data Representation to Explore Music Opportunities Parents Provide for Their Children at Home.” Music Education Research 9, no. 1 (March): 17–34. Elliott, David J. 1997. “Continuing Matters: Myths, Realities, Rejoinders.” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education 132 (Spring): 1–37. Elliott, David J., and Marissa Silverman. 2015. Music Matters: A New Philosophy for Music Education, 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press. Ellis, Carolyn. 2004. The Ethnographic I: A Methodological Novel about Autoethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Ellis, Carolyn, and Tony E. Adams. 2014. “The Purposes, Practices, and Principles of Autoethnographic Research.” In The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by Patricia Leavy, 254–276. New York: Oxford University Press. Goble, J. Scott. 2010. What’s So Important about Music Education? New York: Routledge. Gouzouasis, Peter, Danny Bakan, Jee Yoen Ryu, Helen Ballam, David Murphy, Diana Ihnatovych, Zoltan Virag, and Matthew Yanko. 2014. “Where Do Teachers and Learners Stand in Music Education Research? A Multi-Voiced Call for a New Ethos of Music Education Research.” International Journal of Education and the Arts 15, no. 15 (October): 1–23. Hendricks, Karin S. 2013. “Songs My Student Taught Me: Narrative of an Early Childhood Cello Teacher.” International Journal of Education and the Arts 14, no. 1.4. Heuser, Frank. 2015. “Pipe Dreams, Ideals and Transformation in Music Education: Lessons from the Field.” Research Studies in Music Education 37, no. 2: 215–231. DOI: 10.1177/1321103X15614322. Husserl, Edmund. 1983. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy, First Book, translated by F. Kersten. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Illich, Ivan. 1990. “Declaration on Soil: A Joint Statement, Drafted in Hebenshausen, Germany, December 6, 1990, in Collaboration with Sigmar Groeneveld, Lee Hoinacki and Other Friends.” Online: http://davidtinapple.com/illich/1990_declaraion_soil.PDF. Kingsolver, Barbara. 2007. Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life. New York: Harper Perennial. Koza, Julia Eklund. 2006. “‘Save the Music’? Toward Culturally Relevant, Joyful, and Sustainable School Music.” Philosophy of Music Education Review 14, no. 1 (Spring): 23–38. Kruse, Nathan B. 2012. “Locating ‘The Road to Lisdoonvarna’ via Autoethnography: Pathways, Barriers and Detours in Self-Directed Online Music Learning.” Journal of Music, Technology and Education 5, no. 3: 293–308. DOI: 10.1386/ jmte.5.3.293_1. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution 20 Prelude Lamb, Roberta. 2014. “Where Are the Women? And Other Questions, Asked Within an Historical Analysis of Sociology of Music Education Research Publications: Being a Self-Reflective Ethnographic Path.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 13, no. 1 (March): 188–222. Mapana, Kedmon. 2011. “The Musical Enculturation and Education of Wagogo Children.” British Journal of Music Education 28, no. 3 (November): 339–351. DOI: 10.1017/S0265051711000234. McKibben, Bill. 2013. Oil and Honey: The Education of an Unlikely Activist. New York: Times Books. Morton, Charlene A. 2012. “Music Education for ‘All My Relations.’” In The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy in Music Education, edited by Wayne D. Bowman and Ana Lucía Frega, 472–491. New York: Oxford University Press. Nethsinghe, Rohan. 2012. “The Influence of Informal Music Education in Teacher Formation: An Autoethnography.” Qualitative Report 17, no. 98: 1–16. Nichols, Jeananne. 2016. “Sharing the State: Ethical Dimensions of Narrative Inquiry in Music Education.” Journal of Research in Music Education 63, no. 4: 439–454. DOI: 10.1177/0022429415617745. Pollan, Michael. 2003. Second Nature: A Gardener’s Education. New York: Grove Press. Regelski, Thomas A. 1998. “The Aristotelian Bases of Praxis for Music and Music Education as Praxis.” Philosophy of Music Education Review 6, no. 1 (Spring): 22–59. ——. 2016. “Music, Music Education, and Institutional Ideology: A Praxial Philosophy of Music Sociality.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 15, no. 2 (March): 10–45. Saldaña, Johnny. 2008. “Second Chair: An Autoethnodrama.” Research Studies in Music Education 30, no. 2: 177–191. DOI: 10.1177/1321103X08097506. Schafer, R. Murray. 1994. The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World. Rochester, VT: Destiny Books. [Originally published in 1977.] Shevock, Daniel J. 2015a. “Reflections on Freirean Pedagogy in a Jazz Combo Lab.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 14, no. 2 (August): 85–121. ——. 2015b. “The Possibility of Eco-Literate Music Pedagogy.” TOPICS for Music Education Praxis 2015, no. 1: 1–23. ——. 2016. “Music Educated and Uprooted: My Story of Rurality, Whiteness, Musicing, and Teaching.” Action, Criticism, and Theory for Music Education 15, no. 4 (August): 30–55. DOI: 10.22176/act15.4.30. Silverman, Marissa. 2012. “John Dewey and James Mursell: An Introduction.” Visions of Research in Music Education 21: 1–19. Small, Christopher. 1998. Musicking: The Meanings of Performing and Listening. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press. Sundeen, Mark. 2012. The Man Who Quit Money. New York: Riverhead Books. Sutherland, Andrew. 2015. “From Isolation to Collaboration: An Autoethnographic Account.” Qualitative Report 20, no. 10: 1631–1645. Taylor, Donald. 2014. “Learning to Sing Again: A Gay Widower’s Journey.” Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education 199 (Winter): 69–86. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution Prelude 21 Teale, Edwin Way, ed. 2001. The Wilderness World of John Muir: A Selection from His Collected Work. Boston, MA: Mariner Books. Thompson, Jason D. 2015. “Towards Cultural Responsiveness in Music Instruction with Black Detained Youth: An Analytic Autoethnography.” Music Education Research 17, no. 4: 421–436. Thoreau, Henry David. 1851. “Walking.” [Kindle DX version.] ——. 1995. Walden, and On the Duty of Civil Disobedience. Project Gutenberg. Online: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/205. [Originally published in 1854.] Titon, Jeff Todd. 2015. “Thoreau’s Ear.” Sound Studies 1, no. 1: 144–154. DOI: 10.1080/20551940.2015.1079973. Webb, Michael. 2008. “Giles Apap’s Mozart Cadenza and Expanding Musical Competencies of Twenty-First-Century Musicians and Music Educators.” Music Education Research 10, no. 1 (March): 15–39. DOI: 10.1080/14613800701871348. Taylor and Francis Not for distribution