Community music therapy in schools: Realigning with the needs of contemporary students, staff and systems

Transcription

1 IJCM 7 (1) pp Intellect Limited 2014 International Journal of Community Music Volume 7 Number Intellect Ltd Article. English language. doi: /ijcm _1 Katrina Skewes McFerran University of Melbourne Daphne Rickson New Zealand School of Music Community music therapy in schools: Realigning with the needs of contemporary students, staff and systems Abstract The nature of schooling in first world western countries has changed significantly in the past decade. The philosophy of inclusion has been embraced internationally and has led to school communities comprising of staff and students who have considerably diverse backgrounds and abilities. Pedagogical emphases are therefore slowly shifting from teaching universalized curricula to developing universal designs that can take account of the individual needs of students. While the tradition of withdrawing students from class in order to participate in individualized therapy does not fit well in these contexts, music therapists have a lot to offer contemporary schools. The music therapy literature suggests innovative practices are occurring in mainstream and special school contexts, yet they continue to be framed by traditional theories. In contrast community music therapy (CoMT) provides a congruent theoretical framework for current practice, with an emphasis on equality, resourceorientation, collaboration and acknowledgment of the systems that shape music therapists work. These theories can be translated into practice principles for music Keywords music community community music therapy (CoMT) schools students collaboration inclusion culture 75

2 Katrina Skewes McFerran Daphne Rickson therapists working in schools to assist in the transition away from a sole focus on the pathology of individuals and towards the flourishing of musical cultures within whole school systems. In this article we outline the various forces of change that we perceive to be influencing schools, how they intersect with both traditional and innovative practices of music therapists, and suggest key principles that have been helpful in our own school-based projects in the past decade. Drawing on five key features of CoMT we present a framework for contemporary music therapy practice in schools. Music therapists have been working within school systems since the profession was first established (Adamek 2002; Davis et al. 2008; de Gainza 1989; Nordoff and Robbins 1971; Pratt 1989a, 1989b; Roehmann 1989) and in many ways, the forms of practice that were developed initially continue to be honoured. Although there is diversity across international borders, there has been a consistent focus on individual development that is in keeping with the educational context. For some music therapists this has involved an emphasis on practice aligned with behavioural theories, and the development of observable skills has been targeted both in practice and research (Jellison 2000; Pethybridge and Robertson 2010). Others have focused on fostering creativity and transcending the limitations of various disorders by engaging students in positive musical experiences that aspire to outcomes aligned with humanistic theories (Aigen 1997; Derrington 2012). Still others have targeted the unconscious dynamics that are restricting students full participation in learning and have analysed musical choices and fostered insightful music making in keeping with psychodynamic theories (Mahns 2002; Strange 2012). In the most common forms of practice however, music therapists draw on multiple theoretical perspectives, with an integrated blend of analysis, goal setting and encouraging creative expression being a popular approach in special school contexts. The changing nature of education has resulted in some challenges to these approaches, particularly in relation to withdrawing students from classrooms for music therapy experiences. The idea of withdrawal has been based primarily on psycho dynamic notion that safe and contained spaces are most appropriate for both group and individual therapeutic experiences. However, contemporary educational pedagogy emphasizes inclusion and teamwork so that students of diverse abilities are supported to remain within a single classroom (Meyer and Bevan-Brown 2005; UNESCO 2009). In addition, the belief that the achievement of skills in music therapy sessions will naturally transfer into the students behaviours in broader contexts has been borne out by music therapy research with some students (Pasiali 2004; Rickson 2006), but most often this transfer has not been measured. The reality of practice within the special school sector has been an increasing emphasis on music therapy groups with whole classes that is often thought to be driven by economic factors more than changing policies that emphasize inclusion. Many schools have also required the therapist to be dual qualified as a music or generalist teacher, possibly to achieve consistency with requirements for other professionals in the sector, or associated with special education funding mechanisms. It may even reflect an increasingly risk averse stance by school administrators concerned by the potential abuse that can occur within the school system. The political agenda of inclusion has even greater ramifications for traditional music therapy practice (see Table 1), with a fundamental movement 76

3 Community music therapy in schools CoMT Getting a feel for the system Providing examples of what music can do Experimenting with potential programmes Establishing music in the school culture Traditional music therapy Receiving referrals Providing active assessment Treating and evaluating Providing ongoing music therapy programmes Table 1: A comparison of CoMT and traditional approaches by music therapists in schools Further detail and expanded comparisons will be made in our forthcoming book Creating Music Cultures in the Schools: A Perspective from Community Music Therapy. 2. Not limited to music therapy in school contexts. away from special education. This is supported by policy ratified by over 100 countries worldwide where parents have the right to access any government funded school of their choosing (DfES 2001; UNESCO 2009), and many parents are opting for mainstream educational contexts. Emphasizing the DISability of the student has become controversial, and critics question assumptions about where the problem is located with the system that cannot cope with difference, or with the student who is different (Neilson 2005). As a result, schools are increasingly diverse and multi-cultural, in terms of abilities, ethnicity, religion and gender (Dinham 2008; Nieto 2000). Despite these enormous systemic changes, the way that music therapists describe their practices in schools appears fairly consistent. Two systematic reviews of the literature 2 by Katrina McFerran (the first author) have explored the representation of music therapy, one with reference to research investigating people who have disabilities (McFerran et al. 2009), and the other describing practice with adolescents (McFerran 2010). In the analysis of the disabilities research, a stable picture emerged that was in keeping with a traditional approach to music therapy treatment where goals are clearly related to diagnosis. People whose disabilities were severe and profound participated in programmes targeting communication and motor goals. The goals of those whose intellectual disabilities were mild to moderate were focused on behavioural, social and learning domains. The review of the literature on music therapy with adolescents who have physical and/or mental illness, disabilities, emotional and behavioural challenges, or who are considered to be at-risk revealed a different, but nonetheless similarly traditional emphasis on treating problems. Most of the literature from both western and eastern cultures, published in English, described work in institutions, with educational contexts only being the focus of 26% of the literature, and the dominant theoretical orientations were broadly categorized as psychodynamic (52%), closely followed by humanistic (44%), and behavioural (12%). Little reference was made to ecologically informed practices when the review was done in 2008 (McFerran 2010). These analyses of the literature are relevant because the approaches to practice and research being described indicate a need to expand thinking about the role of music therapists in schools. Despite the emergence of community music therapy (CoMT) discourse at the turn of the century, and a plethora of literature that overtly adopts this approach (see Stige and Aarø (2012) for a vast number of examples), the translation to school contexts has been minimal. Some noteworthy examples do exist however. Cochavit 77

4 Katrina Skewes McFerran Daphne Rickson Elefant s (2010) action research with a group of students in Israel provides an example of how inclusive practices can emerge from the interests and needs of young people with diverse abilities. The contribution of the music therapist in this case was to listen and respond to the desires of the students to make changes in their lives and to appropriate the bonding potentials of music to make it so. Inclusive practices have also been overtly framed as CoMT by Daphne Rickson (the second author) (2010), who provides case studies illustrating collaborative consultation with teachers, parents, support staff and other therapists that are supporting students in inclusive settings. She found that as participants increasingly used music within the classrooms, corridors and playgrounds, the adults more readily recognized their students strengths, relationships improved and attitudes changed. The enriched environment was considered to be more inclusive overall. Inclusion provides a powerful rationale for adopting a CoMT orientation within school contexts, but moving away from a pathology orientation has other implications. Once again, the literature suggests that music therapists practising in mainstream schools with students who do not have disabilities have been inclined to adjust traditional practices, but not to consider a more systemic lens. Phillipa Derrington s (2012) work with students who have behavioural and emotional difficulties provides an example of a humanistic, strengths-based approach, with strong psychodynamic influences. While this is an excellent example of student empowerment, Derrington does not consider how music therapy might have a wider impact on the school system. Indeed few examples describe music therapists looking beyond the bounds of the music therapy room to consider a broader impact. Katrina McFerran and Kate Teggelove s (2011) work with teenagers in a school following severe bush-fires takes a step in that direction, reporting an intentional decision not to focus on the internal trauma associated with the event, but rather to collaborate with the students and community to decide how they would like to use the musical opportunity. Mercédès Pavlicevic (2010) describes a CoMT programme that accesses students from local schools and engages them in working towards a performance in conjunction with a youth development organization. This is a clear example of practice that is grounded in an ecological framework, but in this case, the majority of the programme is outside of the school context. In addition to inclusion and collaboration, CoMT discourse promotes the adoption of activist positions if participants are being oppressed by the dominant system. Anti-oppressive practices are achieving greater prominence within the music therapy literature generally (Baines 2013). Whilst feminist music therapy practices have not been documented in school contexts, music therapists with feminist agendas have highlighted the relevance of the Rights of the Child to educational contexts. In Canada, Sandi Curtis and Guylaine Vaillancourt (2012) have established forums that challenge educators and families to fulfil on the promises set out in the United Nations Convention. In Germany, a peace orientation was adopted by Monika Nöcker-Ribaupierrea and Andreas Wölfl (2010) as they developed an anti-violence programme with students. It is interesting that these authors demonstrate a strong affinity with the concepts associated with CoMT yet neither explicitly identified with that orientation. Whilst some music therapists (Elefant 2010) are beginning to refer to practices in schools using the features of CoMT described by scholars as resource oriented, performative, participatory, ecological or actively reflective, it is rare for the role of the music therapist to be completely re-envisaged in the 78

5 Community music therapy in schools schools literature. We believe that an expansion of traditional practice is both timely (McFerran and Elefant 2012) and necessary in some cultural contexts where conventional approaches are becoming unpopular (such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada). We assert this challenge based on our own experiences across two decades of traditional music therapy work in schools, which we have both found rewarding and fulfilling, but have watched become less relevant to educational contexts. A model of CoMT in schools In this article we present a model that illustrates our practices in schools predominantly in New Zealand and Australia and incorporates the key features of CoMT, as well as an anti-oppressive lens (Baines 2013). Mutuality, respect, empowerment and commitment are all necessary in our work, which in some ways, brings us full circle back to traditional music therapy approaches in schools. Whilst we consider the model to be innovative in transcending an exclusive focus on the needs of individuals to include the needs of other players in the school community, we also see that it can be aligned with the traditional model, as seen in Table 1. It feels like a natural progression to expand our focus from the internal workings of the individual, to also include the systems that can support, and sometimes supress, the development of healthy musical communities in schools. Baines lists the many different dimensions of oppression that this may be relevant to, including issues related to age, gender, ethnicity, sexual identity, geographic location and health (Baines 2013: 2), all of which are regularly invoked in the kinds of programmes we have been involved in. Like the philosopher Freire (1972), she also notes the power of language in describing music therapy practice and for this reason we have carefully selected the words used to describe contemporary approaches in schools in Table 1. The language associated with the traditional treatment model places power in the hand of the expert professional, whereas our choice of language in describing a contemporary model for schools illustrates the exploratory and collaborative nature of the approach. Receiving referrals assumes that the student has a problem that has been identified by experts, and communicated between experts, for example. Likewise, assessment, treatment and evaluation all place power in the hand of the professional in comparison to a more responsive sharing of responsibility that is indicated by providing examples and experimenting. Although the traditional model is usually described as linear, we recognize that practice is always complex and that the professional skill of a music therapist is to respond to emerging needs and engage with individuals and groups flexibly throughout a prescribed treatment. This knowledge comes from our own experiences of traditional practice in this model as well as watching and reading about the work of our colleagues. Adopting a CoMT lens offers and explains possibilities for expansion and in our experience, the changes are substantial both in the form of practice (from individual treatment to community-oriented consultation) and in the methods of practice (from inwards facing to public facing, or from bonding to bridging as Stige and Aarø (2012) describe it. Reflexive practice is crucial to the approach we outline. In our CoMT model in schools we have drawn on our experiences as action researchers, where cycles of action and reflection are sometimes seen as a useful structure 79

6 Katrina Skewes McFerran Daphne Rickson 3. The ecological approach is developed from the work of Bronfenbrenner (1989) who posited that human development is variously and highly influenced by environmental systems, each containing roles, norms and rules. Figure 1: A model for action and reflection. (Reason and Bradbury 2001). The cyclic structure we have identified emphasizes a process that moves from: modelling shared musical experiences, to expanding understandings of musical possibilities within the community, supporting the growth of the inherent musical capacity of individuals, identifying opportunities for musical participation, and finally developing a sustainable music culture. Although Gary Ansdell has claimed that CoMT is an anti-model (Ansdell 2005a), we have found it helpful to delineate a model that communicates concretely about our approach to practice in schools. This model utilizes the five key features (ecological, participatory, reflective, resource oriented and performative) identified by Brynjulf Stige and Lief Aarø (2012) and has also been strongly influenced by Lucy Bolger s commitment to sustainable practices, both in developing contexts and in youth work (Bolger 2012; 2014). In the paragraphs below we will use examples from the literature, existing research findings and anecdotes to show how we have incorporated these key concepts of CoMT into our work in schools. We will also consider how this compares to the type of traditional approaches that are frequently presented in the literature. Similarly to the discourse about CoMT generally, we do not claim to have invented these kinds of practices. Rather, we hope that by articulating them in a single model we contribute to the innovative practices of music therapists and community musicians who can identify some of these ideas in their existing practice and wish to expand still further. Ecological emphasis Adopting an ecological lens results in a fundamental shift in practice in schools away from a sole commitment to the individual and towards the needs of the school system. 3 That is, while the progress of individual students remains paramount, the emphasis is on the how transactions between individuals and the various layers of context in which they exist, impact on their potential to participate and to progress. Brynjulf Stige (2003) articulated the importance of these transactions in reflections on his oft-quoted work with the UpBeat! project. Stige s case study discusses the way adults with disabilities express and claim their desire to be in the local band assisted by the music therapist, and clearly illustrates work that expands well beyond the walls of the therapy room (Stige 2003: 265). Similarly, Mercédès Pavlicevic (2010) has documented 80

7 Community music therapy in schools projects in South Africa where establishing walls for contained therapy would have been inappropriate. She was instead inspired to view the possibilities for moments of therapeutic encounter within the broader context. This movement away from the provision of therapeutic experiences contained within therapy rooms exemplifies a quality that has often been necessary in schools, but infrequently described or understood using a new theoretical lens. In special education, the practice of moving beyond the therapy room has been quite common since music specialists are often called upon to contribute to school events where music is involved. Participating in Christmas concerts, school assemblies and graduation ceremonies is often necessary. However there is no literature in education (with the exceptions of Elefant (2010), and Rickson (2012c), quoted earlier) that has actively connected the action of moving beyond the therapy room to the theoretical framework of CoMT. One of the earliest CoMT texts describes a situation in a mental health setting that could equally have occurred in a school context (Maratos 2004). While Maratos explains how the action of participating in a play challenges the dominant psychodynamic perspectives in that context, the same tensions between different theoretical orientations might be similarly experienced in school settings. In a more recent text about music therapy in school contexts, Jan Hall (2012) refers implicitly to similar dilemmas when deliberating on her dual role as a music therapist and music teacher. She has ultimately come to consider this combination as strengthening her practice, but does not report a new theoretical lens. In our own experience, active engagement with school and community systems has required considerable time, effort and fortitude. Schools place a heavy emphasis on face-to-face time with students, since this is the most common practice for teachers, but adopting an ecological perspective requires time out of sessions to focus on collaborating with representatives of the system in order to establish shared agendas and possibilities for action. Whilst this requirement might be more justifiable in community-based contexts, we have found that a theoretical rationale to defend such departures from common practice is necessary in schools. Negotiating with school leadership for the time to innovate music projects that have emerged from students or staff requires persistence and commitment. This was highlighted in a collaborative project facilitated by Daphne Rickson (2012b) with young people enrolled in a high school learning support unit who performed a creative piece with a professional city orchestra. Teachers reported the scale of the commitment, especially the administration and logistics of attending weekly rehearsals at the university, were difficult for them. However, having the moral support of the wider school and their belief in the value of the project kept them fully and actively engaged. Participatory ethos Adopting a participatory ethos means more than offering opportunities for choice and control, which has been the traditional interpretation of empowerment adopted by music therapists. The qualities of mutual empowerment and democracy emphasized by Brynjulf Stige and Leif Aarø (2012) suggests moving beyond an expert-driven practice and into the sometimes chaotic space of participant generated practice. Stige carefully describes how participatory processes can look and how diverse that can be depending on the participants in the group. He uses an example of McFerran s work with teenagers in a 81

8 Katrina Skewes McFerran Daphne Rickson 4. This is based on data collected as part of an action research project where McFerran focused on building musical capacity across the school. This research is currently being written up for publication (McFerran et al. 2013). school alternative to illustrate how chaos might be the most comfortable way of being in a group for some, whilst structured, therapist-led groups may be desired by others. What is critical in participatory oriented practice is fostering the voices of participants to express their desires about how their time with the music therapist might go. Despite the fact that many therapists have a strong affinity with a participatory orientation, it is particularly challenging to enact within a system where adult expertise is assumed. In our experience, both students and staff in school systems enter any new space with the expectation that the adult will structure and frame the activity, and the student will participate with more or less influence. In a participatory action research project with refugees in a school context in Australia, Meagan Hunt discovered that asking students to take the lead was not as easy as she had expected (2007). The students resisted responsibility, relied on the music therapist to provide the necessary resources and materials, and whilst feeling enthusiastic about the group, felt no desire to take action beyond the walls of the therapy room. This experience is consistent with our experience in schools and has caused us to wonder whether it is suitable to expect students to rise to the challenge of responsibility within a system where it is not usually endorsed. Staff members also have a tendency to lean heavily on visiting specialists to give answers and fix problems. The music therapist has traditionally been perceived as the visiting expert who can provide relief and support to others by taking students away from their classrooms. Sutton (2002: 199) notes we can find ourselves cast as a rescuer, or someone with all the answers the expert, the concert performer, and therapist to all. However, we argue that idealizing special educators or therapists can only serve to disempower other team members, despite the momentarily powerful feeling it can evoke in the provider. What we have learned is that it is precisely when people begin to look to us for answers that a strong commitment to a participatory orientation is required. Collaborative projects in schools, particularly those led by students, can have a profound impact on the school system, and have been reported by school teachers as both the most challenging yet rewarding aspects of our recent projects in schools. 4 In describing a participatory project that aimed to build a well-being oriented and sustainable music culture across the whole school for children with autism, one teacher made the following statement, which articulated a key theme that many teachers related to. It used to be very much we d have the song on the CD player and the kids would sit and do songs. To get them to attend to a song, to follow simple imitation tasks, and simple beginning to extend their communication. And now it s just taken away from the teacher running the sessions and the students are leading the session. Having successfully applied CoMT principles in the special school context, we then challenged ourselves to undertake the same task in three mainstream schools the following year. We continued to gather vast amounts of feedback that have informed our understanding of what was most, and least helpful (McFerran et al. 2013). Although teachers have been extremely positive in reflecting on the achievements of music therapists in Australia who are working intentionally from a participatory orientation, a number of hurdles have also been encountered. Participatory approaches challenge traditional notions of power in the school system, and students do not always know how to be 82

9 Community music therapy in schools if teachers are not in control. Another teacher, in another school, reflects on his own experience of the flexible structures that resulted, again, expressing a perspective that we have heard often. Challenges? Probably keeping the lid on a few kids that get a bit over excited. Particularly at first they saw we re in this open space and there s music and we can be silly. They now realise that you can do all of those things but you ve got to maintain some sensible behaviour at the same time. Despite the challenges, many teachers and therapists do wish to work in a mutually empowering way with students and consider the affordances of music to be particularly suitable to the task. Collaborative approaches enhance the potential that students and others will participate in meaningful ways. Being actively reflexive Being reflexive is to go beyond writing progress notes and considering where the therapeutic process may go or not. Being constantly attentive to the system involves critically considering how the musical experiences mirror and are impacted by the surrounding systems (Stige 2003), which includes the school community as well as society at large. This might mean considering the gender balance of music projects, or issues of ethnicity or ability. The role of the music therapist in this model is not so much one of acceptance and tolerance as it is to be alert to situations that inspire a social critique. The idea of empowering students happens in context, and is more than strengthening the sense of self; it may require social change (Stige et al. 2009). There are many aspects of the school system that invite critique, from the distribution of power to the expression of diversity. Music therapists in schools often provide space for issues to be addressed within groups, but seldom describe any attempts at impacting the views of the wider community. However, there are times where music provides a powerful vessel for grappling with confronting community issues. Judi Bosco (2002) describes the use of story songs in schools following the 9-11 attacks and discusses how she used music as a way of rebuilding community, as well as supporting traumatized students. This required her to be actively reflexive in considering the music therapy programme in context and being conscious of the power of music both for individuals to tell stories, and also for the community to come together in sharing hope and joy. In our own work, being actively reflexive has often become apparent as programmes progress and we strive to advocate for the voices of different players in the system to be heard. Leaderships responses to innovations from students often reflect community issues, and similarly, the reactions of staff to leadership initiatives also tell their own tale. One student-initiated project in a mainstream school had resulted in a Talent Quest where students from across the school auditioned to participate. Event organizers had also planned for audience participation. The music therapist s contribution was to advocate for the less talented of those who auditioned to be engaged in group performances that the student team supported and developed. Some key students and staff put a lot of effort into the project, but on the day of the performance, the atmosphere was flat and the audience was less enthusiastic than anticipated. 83

10 Katrina Skewes McFerran Daphne Rickson Lucy O Grady has emphasized the importance of audience preparation for such events (O Grady 2010; O Grady and McFerran 2012). But what actually emerged in the active reflections that took place in the weeks after the performance was evidence of a form of cultural repression within the school system. Although the event organizers had planned for audience participation, a last minute decision by school leadership had resulted in a focus on the concert as an opportunity to reinforce disciplinary issues. One of the key student organizers described it this way. This school is so boring. You re not allowed to do anything. Any student that stood up or called out got in trouble. Did you see that huge line of boys along the back at the end of the performance? They all got in trouble. Young men from one of the dominant cultural groups in the school (but not in the community surrounding the school) were both target and provocateurs. The schools no-tolerance policy with this group of students had reaped positive results in the past in terms of ending violence and significantly reducing bullying, but the performance highlighted how creativity and expressivity was also impacted by this strategy. The student organizers were frustrated by the ways that their attempts to include fun and active audience engagement had been thwarted. After a great deal of active reflection, the music therapist s response was to instigate new music projects that promoted loud, active and creative participation, but she also resisted engaging only young men from the one cultural group within the school, which may have suggested that this group had the problem that the programme would treat. A body percussion group with a diverse membership in relation to culture and gender was commenced in the following term, and the skills developed in that project led to further opportunities for creative expression across the school that involved a number of the young men who had been in trouble for their participation previously. Being resource oriented Randi Rolvsjord s (2010) resource-oriented perspective is deeply embedded in the CoMT discourse. This concept builds on the strengths-focused ideas that are common in many approaches to practice, but places heavier emphasis on the reciprocal nature of the encounter. Not only are students musical interests and desires seen as a resource, but also a resource orientation means withdrawing from every top-down aspect of the therapeutic encounter (Rolvsjord 2010: 44) and giving everyone who is involved equal status. This naturally leads to an emphasis on participation in music projects in CoMT, since a broad view of how music can be appropriated is one of the offerings made by the music therapist. The kinds of shared musical participation that music therapists facilitate can also provide a space where people can come together in a way that transcends the difference between individuals in the school (Cross 2008) and can embody a more equal distribution of power. This moves beyond individual and even group therapy, and provides a lens with which to advocate for whole-class and even whole-school music experiences as valuable, and not just economically viable and congruent with teaching approaches. In CoMT theory, the politics of a resource orientation can also be related to the musical resources that exist within the school, such as instruments and 84

11 Community music therapy in schools equipment and spaces for musicking. A commitment to identifying resources includes advocating for funding for what is not available and ensuring that those resources are then truly available, both in terms of access and having the ability to use the resources. In addition, the nature of collaboration that is emphasized in definitions of CoMT (Stige and Aarø 2012) includes and transcends the student, which naturally leads to an interest in the abilities of school staff. Some may contribute organizational skills, others may have music making skills, and together, the resources of the team can often provide access to a more diverse range of opportunities than a single music therapist is capable of. It is important to emphasize that it is genuine collaboration that enables and empowers people to use their skills effectively. Daphne Rickson (2010) found that staff members at one school, who were generally confident musicking with students, needed support to include a young student who demonstrated aggressive responses in non-musical situations. They were aware that this particular student was often calmed or distracted by music, but were discouraged and fearful of attempting to engage him in interactive music making. Their collaborative consultation with the music therapist supported them to include him, and his positive responses enabled this cycle to be broken. This is an important example of collaboration leading to staff developing their own personal resources. When staff members are empowered to use their own resources to music with students, the strategies they introduce are more easily developed and sustained. 5. Voices ( no) is a world forum for the discussion of music therapy that has been the home to many debates by CoMT scholars. Performative dimensions Based on the discussion in the literature, it seems that one of the most provocative dimensions of CoMT discourse has been the privileging of performance (Turry 2005). Gary Ansdell (2005b) in particular, has described performance as a vital characteristic, although he qualifies this statement carefully by noting that performance can be key (at some times, in some places), but is also not central. Even Ruud (2004) has also described it as necessary, based on his reading of the discourse, defining CoMT as the reflexive use of performance based music therapy within a systemic perspective. Debates about how necessary performance is, are captured on the Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy 5 website, and there is a persistent emphasis on the performative aspect in most theoretical discourse, although Stige and Aarø (2012) avoid the notion of public performance, and instead attempt to refocus on the performance of relationships. The paradoxes of performance are real, and for both students and music therapists the increased pressure and anxiety that can be attached to public performances need to be carefully considered (O Grady 2008). Lucy O Grady (2010) suggests that overcoming the anxiety of performance can be a critical aspect of the therapeutic potential of engagement, but a survey of Australian music therapists (O Grady and McFerran 2012) also revealed that it was more often the outwards facing impacts that influenced the decision to generate a performance. Some professionals described promoting the discipline of a music therapy programme through performances because they enhanced understanding of achievements, or promoting social connections between staff members. Music therapists also chose to share the musical capacities of students through performances because they will otherwise happen in private and have no impact on how the young person was perceived more globally. 85

12 Katrina Skewes McFerran Daphne Rickson When this is combined with active reflection and ecological thinking, it does appear to be a natural process. But without careful thinking, the benefits may be adopted for recruiting financial resources for ongoing services rather than the promotion of health, which has far less theoretical substance. Daphne Rickson s (2012b) work with the young people attending a high school special unit, mentioned above, exemplifies the power of the performative qualities of CoMT. Her work ensured that these students were supported by a team of community musicians to perform a piece with a professional orchestra in a high profile public concert. Her research of this experience highlighted a general perception in the community and in the orchestra that these young people were vulnerable and in need of protection from potentially unsympathetic audiences. Yet the young people s performance was perceived as being interesting, creative and meaningful by concert-goers. The emotional engagement and connection between performers and audience members generated a sense of belonging and community, as they noticed, monitored and influenced each other s responses to the performance. Subsequently the young people were viewed as innovative artists who had the potential to attract wider audiences to their performances. Pursuing sustainability Sustainability has not been a key feature of CoMT discourse, but it is congruent with the emphasis on ethics that is embedded in the most recent articulation of relevant qualities encompassed in Stige and Aarø s (2012) PREPARE acronym. P=Participatory R=Resource Oriented E=Ecological P=Performative A=Activist R=Reflective E=Ethics driven Bolger provides a relevant definition of sustainability based on her work in Bangladesh stating a sustainable orientation to music therapy practice involves prioritising and planning for the ongoing impact of a music therapy programme beyond the life of the music therapy intervention itself (Bolger and McFerran 2013). This is consistent with ethics-driven practice because it centralizes people s rights to participate in music in a way that is accessible and for a time that lasts beyond the music therapists involvement. It is founded in the belief that all students have the right to access music in a culturally satisfying way that does not necessarily emphasize skill-development, but rather, promotes community building. Our emphasis on all students is only possible if the nature of projects proposed are not dependent on the involvement of a music therapist, since there are not yet enough qualified professionals to service the world s children. Thus, sustainability becomes a critical feature of any model of school-based CoMT we propose. 86

13 Community music therapy in schools An emphasis on sustainability is inherent in the approach adopted in the Children s Right to Music project noted earlier (Curtis and Vaillancourt 2012). By focusing on the Rights dimension, these scholars have moved beyond discipline building and into a world-view that Curtis later describes as founded in a social justice ethic (Curtis in press). Whilst generating music projects that do not embed an expectation of ongoing employment for the music therapist may be unappealing for some, it is increasingly noted in the music therapy education literature, particularly in the form of consultancy practices (Rickson 2012c). The synchronicity between collaboration and consultation is frequently, though not consistently, noted in this literature, and the emphasis varies between working with music educators (Adamek and Darrow 2005), working with students (Pellitteri 2000; Snell 1996), and working with classroom staff (Rickson 2012a). Consulting with an emphasis on the system has emerged from our consultation work, but is as yet un-documented. Rickson s (2010) four case studies in consultation provide a foundation for the possibilities of such a model. She demonstrates that school staff members who have a genuine interest in the contribution music can make to the school environment can be actively and productively involved in musicking despite initially feeling inadequate for the task. Key players in the schools suggested their musical abilities ranged from being able to hold a note (129), sing in the bath (129) or produce music which might be very hard on the ears (155), to another who had an associate level diploma and had taught piano. While some staff needed encouragement to develop a more positive perception of their musical abilities, others who were confident musicians needed support to reframe their understanding of how they might use music in new ways (Rickson 2010). One particular teacher who was a trained musician had planned and attempted programmes that she was unable to sustain, and consequently had decided against developing ideas that she might not be able to manage long term. She had put music aside, and placed considerable store in the music therapist s ability to come up with the right programme for her and her students. In contrast, over the period of the consultation she learnt that doing simple things was incredibly valuable. She described holding the hand of a student who had extreme developmental difficulties while they listened to music together and suggested that these were important communicative moments. Perhaps more importantly this teacher felt her increased understanding and confidence in using music incidentally throughout the day had transferred to other staff. I think it s just a confidence thing. And I think the more I do it, the more confident they (teacher s aides) become they ve got a positive attitude to it. Conclusion We have developed a strong and long-standing affinity with the theoretical and applied dimensions of CoMT discourse. We both greeted the emergence of these discussions with welcoming arms, as it seemed to explain and debate novel practices that we were already undertaking. As the theoretical notions have been increasingly elaborated, we have continued to draw inspiration from each articulation in our teaching, our practices in schools, and our writing. As full-time academics, we are in the privileged position of being freed from the need to focus on the creation of jobs, and instead required to be open to possibilities about how new knowledge expands professional practice 87

14 Katrina Skewes McFerran Daphne Rickson in our discipline. Our research and our ideologies suggest that an exclusive focus on the needs of the individual student is incongruent with current policy and restricts the possibilities for the contribution that a music therapist could make in a school. In this article we have outlined a model of practice that has emerged from our more recent expanded practices, research and shared theorizing in the past five years. Reconsidering the role of music therapists in schools from the lens of CoMT generates exciting possibilities for understanding the nature of music therapists contribution in schools. Our intention in taking this one step further and describing a model of practice is to provide a frame that helps make this accessible at a practical level and supplements the theoretical notions articulated in the discourse. We elaborate these ideas for music therapists and other key collaborators, particularly administrators and music educators, in our forthcoming book Creating Music Cultures in the Schools: A Perspective from Community Music Therapy (Barcelona Publishers, in process). We aim to contribute to the rich descriptive and theoretical literature in the field as well as to push practice thinking forward, beyond a focus on the individual pathology of others and towards a collaborative and anti-oppressive approach that may make a difference to the whole school community. References Adamek, M. S. (2002), In the beginning: A review of early special education services and legislative/regulatory activity affecting the teaching and placement of special learners, in B. L. Wilson (ed.), Models of Service Delivery and their Relation to the IEP, Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association, pp Adamek, M. S. and Darrow, A.-A. (2005), Music in Special Education, Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Adelman, H. S. and Taylor, L. (2010), Mental Health in Schools: Engaging Learners, Preventing Problems, Improving Schools, Los Angeles: Center for Mental Health in Schools, Dept of Psychology, UCLA. Aigen, K. (1997), Here We Are in Music: One Year with an Adolescent Creative Music Therapy Group, New York: MMB Music Inc. Ansdell, G. (2005a), Community music therapy: A plea for fuzzy recognition instead of final definition, Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy, voices.no/discussions/discm4_07.html. Accessed 10 March (2005b), Being who you aren t; doing what you can t: Community music therapy and the paradoxes of performance, Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy, 5: 33, html. Accessed 21 February Baines, S. (2013), Music therapy as an anti-oppressive practice, Arts in Psychotherapy, 40: 1, pp Bolger, L. (2012), Music therapy and international development in action and reflection: A case study of a women s music group in rural Bangladesh, Australian Journal of Music Therapy, 23, pp (2014), Understanding and articulating the process and meaning of collaboration in participatory music projects with marginalised young people and their supporting communities, doctoral dissertation, Melbourne: University of Melbourne. Bolger, L. and Mcferran, K. S. (2013), Demonstrating sustainability in the practices of music therapists: Reflections from Bangladesh, Voices: A World 88

15 Community music therapy in schools Forum for Music Therapy, 13: 2, view/715/603. Accessed 1 December Bosco, J. (2002), From chaos to creative expression: The New York City Music Therapy Relief Project (in response to 9 11), Early Childhood Connections: Journal of Music and Movement-Based Learning, 8, pp Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989), Ecological systems theory, in R. Vasta (ed.), Annals of Child Development, volume 6, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp Cross, I. (2008), Musicality and the human capacity for culture, Musicae Scientiae, 12 (Special issue), pp Curtis, S. L. (2012), Music therapy and social justice: A personal journey, Arts in Psychotherapy, 39: 3, pp Curtis, S. and Vaillancourt, G. (2012), The children s right to music project, Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy, 12:3, php/voices/article/view/676/565. Accessed 10 May Davis, W. B., Gfeller, K. E. and Thaut, M. H. (eds) (2008), An Introduction to Music Therapy: Theory and Practice, 3rd ed., Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. De Gainza, V. H. (1989), Music therapy and music in special education, in R. Pratt (ed.), Music Therapy and Music in Special Education: The International State of the Art, St. Louis, MI: International Society for Music Education, pp Derrington, P. (2012), Yeah, I ll do music! Working with secondary-aged students who have complex emotional and behavioural difficulties, in J. Tomlinson, P. Derrington and A. Oldfield (eds), Music Therapy in Schools: Working with Children of all Ages in Mainstream and Special Education, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp DfES (2001), Inclusive Schooling: Children with special Educational Needs, London: Department for Education and Skills. Dinham, S. (2008), Diversity in Australian Education, Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. Elefant, C. (2010), Must we really end: Community integration of children in Raanana, Israel, in B. Stige, G. Ansdell, C. Elefant and M. Pavlicevic (eds), Where Music Helps: Community Music Therapy in Action and Reflection, Farnham: Ashgate, pp Freire, P. (1972), Pedogogy of the Oppressed, New York: Herder and Herder. Hall, J. (2012), The school challenge: Combining the roles of music therapist and music teacher, in J. Tomlinson, P. Derrington and A. Oldfield (eds), Music Therapy in Schools: Working with Children of all Ages in Mainstream and Special Education, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp Hunt, M. (2007), The use of group music therapy to empower young refugees to develop a sense of belonging, unpublished masters thesis, Melbourne: University of Melbourne. Jellison, J. (2000), A content analysis of music research with disabled children and youth ( ): Applications in special education, Effectiveness of Music Therapy Procedures. Documentation of Research and Clinical Practice, Silver Spring, MD: The American Music Therapy Association Inc. Mahns, W. (2002), Psychodynamic function of music in analytical music therapy with children, in J. T. Eschen (ed.), Analytical Music Therapy, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp Maratos, A. (2004), Whatever next? Community music therapy for the institution!, in M. Pavilcevic and G. Ansdell (eds), Community Music Therapy, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp