Culturally Responsive Music Education - Vanessa L. Bond, Ph.D

Vanessa L. Bond, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Music Education Rowan University Glassboro, New Jersey

It seems impossible to talk about any aspect of teaching right now without addressing the elephant in the room: the multi-ton weight of COVID-19 anxiety on our shoulders. We, as a broader society and more specifically as a community of music educators, are experiencing a collective trauma. Whether a preservice teacher entering a classroom in the teacher role for the first time or a veteran of 20 years, we are all novices in navigating what it means to teach during a pandemic. We must acknowledge the personal strain we face as educators. Because of this, I want to hold that acknowledgement in dialectic with also viewing this moment as an opportunity -- an opportunity for heightened awareness of our practices and our values. Most have had to rethink the status quo of the classroom. A virtual space has required new tools, new pedagogical strategies to foster engagement, and document achievement. Teaching in person is only possible within limited conditions of musicking, such as singing outdoors only, using bell covers and physical distancing, or pushing into classrooms on a cart. In a hybrid context, a teacher must negotiate multiple spaces and pedagogies. The pandemic has also heightened awareness of student anxiety and inequities in our systems that have been present long before. While at a distance, we have been brought closer to each other, in a sense, by entering students’ home spaces. We were not invited, but, by necessity, into their homes we go. More than ever, perhaps, we are made aware of students’ varied academic and social-emotional needs, and the systems that privilege some while oppressing others. More than ever, a responsive approach is needed in our classrooms.

Culturally responsive education

Culturally responsive teaching is a mindset. It is an approach to teaching that encompasses pedagogy, curriculum, climate -- all facets of working with students, families, and communities. Referenced in many ways, such as culturally relevant pedagogy, culturally responsive teaching, culturally sustaining pedagogy, I have (see Bond, 2017; Bond & Russell, 2019) and continue to use “culturally responsive education” as an umbrella term to refer to a commitment to student academic success by teaching to and through students’ strengths, the development of intercultural competence, and the raising of a critical consciousness about one’s field and our sociopolitical contexts1. As a framework that sees and validates the whole student, and acknowledges the potential conflict between students’ cultural lenses and the structures of our educational system, cultivating a responsive mindset can help us meet students’ needs in these challenging times and in our future. I offer the following strategies as an entry point to becoming more responsive as an educator.

Explore identities and raise awareness of implicit bias

Culture is positioned front and center in this approach to acknowledge and validate how varied norms and life experiences influenced by cultural identities shape one’s worldview, means of communication, and social mores. I am purposeful in presenting identity in plural form; each of us identifies in a variety of ways (e.g., gender, race, class) and, in that sense, are multicultural beings in and of ourselves. An initial step of this work is to turn inward, make conscious, and explore the many ways in which you identify yourself. After better understanding your cultural frame(s), consider how that frame has shaped your experiences and outlook on the world.

1In doing so I am building off of Ladson-Billings (1995) initial definition primarily.

• What feels “normal” in your day-to-day experiences? • In which social situations are you most comfortable/ uncomfortable? • What are your expectations for gender roles, relationships with time, or physical space?

In thinking through these questions, you may begin to uncover your implicit bias, your unconscious attitudes and beliefs that shape your response to others. Implicit bias is within us all, even if you have an orientation toward social justice and equity. As participants in our society, we are conditioned by the messaging that surrounds us. By recognizing and exploring our implicit bias we can be aware of our cultural programming and manage our responses in a way that honors the cultural frames of others.

Know and build relationship with students

A fundamental aspect of culturally responsive education is acknowledging and validating students’ experiences, identities, and funds of knowledge (Moll et al., 2005). A necessary first step in adopting a responsive frame, therefore, is knowing the students in your care.

• What are their strengths? • In what ways do they identify? • What teaching and learning strategies are embedded in their communities? • With which genres and ways of making music are they most comfortable?

These are questions that cannot be answered without student input (i.e., we should not be making assumptions based on visual evidence) and it is unlikely that students will be explicit without an established rapport. Devoting time and energy to building those relationships is of paramount importance. As a part of or in addition to that process, teachers need to create opportunities to gather information about students in direct and indirect ways.

In the current context, this may prove especially challenging as you may not be in the same physical space or able to communicate with them synchronously in any capacity, but it is still possible. For example, you can use a direct approach to data gathering through a digital questionnaire. I send a Google form to students every couple of weeks in which I ask for direct feedback and • What are you enjoying most about our class currently? • What are you enjoying least? • Please share any aspects about your home learning environment that might influence your work/experience in this class. • In what ways have you experienced music in your community?

Collected information allows me to adjust class logistics, instructional delivery, and content based on their feedback in a way that meets their ever-changing needs. I also use assessment opportunities that help me learn about students indirectly. For example, I have established a dialogue journal with each student in which they are required to respond to specific prompts related to our course content. Because we use a Google document, I can respond to their entries via the commenting feature and it has become a way to have a personal conversation with each student asynchronously. In addition, students create a musical identity podcast in which they select meaningful pieces of music and narrate the importance of the specific examples in their lives. Although it is never requested in the prompt, students have shared a great deal with me in these moments, including information about their emotional health, family structures, feelings about performance, and school experiences outside of the music setting. In this, and in other assessment examples, I strive to provide feedback via the video commenting feature whenever possible. By using this or the audio-commenting feature in Google Classroom, Canvas, other learning management systems or online tools (e.g., Flipgrid), we can lessen the psychological distance in building relationships with students and ensure the tone of our feedback is communicated accurately, as well as provide feedback that students are more likely to apply to future work (Ice et al., 2007).

Use students’ cultural tools

Learning about students is a constant endeavor. Culture is fluid and students’ identities will shift over time. In addition, building your own intercultural competence will be a lifelong pursuit as you strive to expose yourself to cultural experiences lived by your students in order to “widen your interpretation aperture” (Hammond, 2015,

p. 58) and analyze behaviors through various cultural frames. Because it may seem overwhelming to familiarize yourself with the many cultures present in a heterogeneous classroom, Zaretta Hammond (2015) suggested to “focus on the roots of culture” at which there are similarities in worldview and values. Hammond identified two cultural archetypes, collectivism and individualism, as a starting point to understand a student’s general cultural orientation.

Characteristics of collectivism include an emphasis on group success and harmony, interdependence, and a relational approach to learning (i.e., through group interaction and dialogue). The vast majority of the world’s cultures are or lean collectivist, including African American, Latinx, and Indigenous communities. In contrast, individualism heralds independence, individual contribution, self-reliance, competition, and a technical approach to learning (i.e., through individual study and reading) (Hammond, 2015), and is the dominant culture in the United States. One should take caution not to overgeneralize, but viewing the classroom in light of these archetypes might help disrupt the frame of individualism (and whiteness) through which many of us teach and/or were taught to teach. In planning lessons, one might consider how selected strategies align with collectivist characteristics.

• Are students given opportunities to work collaboratively? • Are you encouraging dialogue between peers as a means to construct knowledge? • Using group-focused games, call and response, story, rituals, and routine? • Building on students’ experiences and culture from a musical perspective, what ways of being musical are valued in your classroom? • Is notational literacy the primary focus or only one means to musicking? • Are various genres and cultures represented, and if so, how are they represented and experienced?

Reflecting on these questions can help us consider the ways we are building on students’ cultural tools in order to increase access and connection to the content for all. Develop (sociopolitical) critical thinking

A necessary and sometimes overlooked component of responsive education is the raising of a critical consciousness in students. Developing critical thinking, “thinking that attempts to arrive at a decision or judgement only after honestly evaluating alternatives with respect to available evidence and arguments” (Hatcher & Spencer, 2006, p. 1), is a lauded educational goal, one that is viewed as crucial for cultivating independent musicianship (Garrett, 2013). In a responsive framework, one is led to use critical thinking skills with a sociopolitical lens through which we “challenge the status quo of the current social order” (Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 160). Put more plainly, we question how and why things are as they are. For example, in my work with preservice teachers we look at the publishing industry and question the nature of knowledge. We challenge what is considered to be the “truth” by highlighting the decisions made behind what information is deemed valuable, what information is shared, which composers are given access and promoted, and how such decisions made by those in positions of power influence the field of music education and, ultimately, students’ experience in music classrooms.

In PK-12 settings, one might lead students to adopt a critical perspective by taking time to encourage conversations that reveal the Eurocentric view of music that tends to prevail in school music experiences. For the youngest learners, this might be a conversation about instrument classifications. Rather than presenting the orchestral instrument family alone, one can lead students to discover how the majority of instruments in the world will not fit into the categorization of winds, strings, percussion, and brass. This may lead to a broader discussion of why applying Eurocentric systems and norms to other cultures of musicking is inappropriate. After facilitating this discussion, in developmentally appropriate language, of course, a teacher could introduce the Sachs-Hornbostel classification system (e.g., aerophone, idiophone). For middle school students, one might problematize which music is shared (typically) in music class and how it is described. For high school students, a discussion about the function of notation could be stimulating. Why is notation used? What other systems of notation exist outside of the Western European frame? Does notational literacy equate music literacy? Although sociopolitical critique could be connected to a specific activity, ideally,

Final thoughts

The pandemic has required our flexibility and adaptability, pushing us to let some things go so we can focus on what is truly important to us. As we re-evaluate what we do, how we do it, and why we do it, let us use this forced juncture point to catapult us into new ideas and redouble our focus on meeting the academic and socioemotional needs of the students. A responsive mindset can be a guidepost to better serve the students through this turbulent era and beyond.

For further reading:

Bond, V. L., & Russell, J. A. (in press). Culturally responsive pedagogical/andragogical context knowledge: A proposed framework for music education. Journal of Music Teacher Education.

Hammond, Z. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students.

Corwin.

Lind, V. R., & McKoy, C. L. (2016). Culturally responsive teaching in music education: From understanding to application. Routledge.

McEvoy, C. A., & Salvador, K. (2020). Aligning culturally responsive and trauma-informed pedagogies in elementary general music.

General Music Today, 34(1), 21-28. https://doi. org/10.1177/1048371320909806 Bond, V. L. (2017). Culturally responsive education in music education: A literature review. Contributions to Music Education, 42, 153-180.

Bond, V. L., & Russell, J. A. (2019). Music teacher educator perceptions of and engagement with culturally responsive education. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, (221), 7-28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/bulcoures musedu.221.0007

Garrett, M. L. (2013). An examination of critical thinking skills in high school choir rehearsals.

Journal of Research in Music Education, 61(3), 303 317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429413497219

Hammond, Z. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin.

Hatcher, D. L., & Spencer, L. A. (2006). Reasoning and writing: From critical thinking to composition (3rd ed.). American Press.

Ice, P., Curtis, R., Phillips, P., & Wells, J. (2007). Using asynchronous audio feedback to enhance teacher presence and student’s sense of community. Online Learning, 11(2), 3-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/ olj.v11i2.1724

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. doi: 10.3102/00028312032003465

Moll, L., Gonzales, N., &Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.