Improving music education advocacy

Arts Education Policy Review

Volumn 108, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 13-18

  Elpus, Kenneth ^a  

^a Science Department Hopewell Valley Central High School   (United States)

Author keywords

Advocacy; Education; Music; Practical

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920674396     PISSN: 10632913     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/AEPR.108.3.13-18     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Bowman, W. 1994. Justifying musical education: Contingency and solidarity. Canadian Music Educator 35 (6): 27-32.
2. Bowman, W. 2005. To what question(s) is music education advocacy the answer? International Journal of Music Education 23 (2): 125-29.
3. Center on Education Policy. 2006. From the capital to the classroom: Year 4 of the No Child Left Behind Act. http://www.cep-dc.org/nclb/Year4/CEP-NCLB-Report- 4.pdf (accessed October 8, 2006).
4. Clayton, M. 2000. Seize the moment! Music Educators Journal 87 (2): 6-7.
5. Deasy, R. ed. 2002. Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.
6. Elliott, D. J. 1995. Music matters: A new philosophy of music education. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Gee, C. B. 1999. For you dear—anything! Omnipotence, omipresence, and servitude Through the arts. Arts Education Policy Review 100 (4): 3-17.
8. Gee, C. B. 2002. The “use and abuse” of arts advocacy and its consequences for music education. In The new hand book of research on music teaching and learning, ed. R. Colwell and C. P. Richardson, 941-61. New York: Oxford University Press.
9. Gee, C. B. 2004. Sprit, mind, and body: Arts education the redeemer. Arts Education Policy Review 105 (4): 9-22.
10. Hinckley, J. 1999. Speaking up or being heard? Teaching Music 6 (6): 6-7.
11. Koza, J. E. 2006. Save the music?: Toward a culturally relevant, joyful, and sustainable school music. Philosophy of Music Education Review 14 (1): 23-38.
12. Libman, K. 2004. Some thoughts on arts advocacy: Separating the hype from the reality. Arts Education Policy Review 105 (3): 31-33.
13. Mark, M. L. 2002. A history of music education advocacy. Music Educators Journal 89 (1): 44-48.
14. Mark, M. L. 2005. Why does our profession need advocacy? International Journal of Music Education 23 (2): 95-98.
15. The National Association for Music Education. (MENC). 1999. http://web.archive.org/web/19990422131511/www.menc.org/information/advocate/glance.html (accessed April 22, 1999).
16. The National Association for Music Education. (MENC). 2007. Music makes the grade: Music programs contribute to higher attendance and graduation rates. Teaching Music 14 (4): insert between pages 36-37.
17. Regelski, T. A. 2005. Music and music education: Theory and praxis for “making a difference.” Educational Philosophy and Theory 37 (1): 7-27.
18. Reimer, B. 2005. The danger of music education advocacy. International Journal of Music Education 23 (2): 139-42.
19. Scripp, L. 2002. An overview of research on music and learning. In Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development, ed. R. Deasy. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.
20. U.S. Congress. House. 2006. Recognizing the benefits and importance of school- based music education, and for other purposes. H.Con.Res 355, 109th Congress, 2d sess. Congressional Record (April 6, 2006): H1415-1417.
21. U.S. Congress. House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth and Families of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. 1999. Elementary and secondary education act—educating diverse populations. 106th Congress, 1st sess. H. Doc 106-59.
22. Winner, E., and M. Cooper. 2000. Mute those claims: No evidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study and academic achievement. The Journal of Aesthetic Education 34 (3-4): 11-75.