By AshaLee Ortiz
The end of the school year brings excitement, events, and energy. It is also the time for summative state assessments. Regardless of your opinion on the validity, value, or necessity of mandated state testing, the reality is it is a standardized measure of what is being accomplished in our profession, and it isn’t going away any time soon.
As a music teacher, I have an interesting vantage point for the state testing experience at my school. My district has adopted two assessments as our benchmark to demonstrate learning and growth in music: one based on music theory, and the other based on performance. However, my state has not adopted a standardized exam with a
music component, although rumors that one will be created have persisted throughout my professional career.
In some districts, this may translate into an unspoken culture of a “sub” content; that a class is of lesser importance because it is not being tested. Assessment in today’s educational environment is equated with validity for an educational professional. It is how educators show the “outside world” that what is happening within the walls of our classrooms has value and worth. I understand that mentality, but I don’t think it should be the only factor that determines what, or rather why, students are being taught.
Unfortunately, we are becoming a society where, if it cannot be quantified, it does not have value. In cases of districts across the country, when a budget crisis happens, arts education is often first on the chopping block because it is not seen as a necessary content area. But what defines necessity? Is it a demand for specific skills needed in our modern economy? Is it content relevant to developing a globally responsible citizen? Is it a subject’s role in helping students understand and articulate the human condition? Or is it merely the content’s presence on a state exam?
I posit that music education directly translates into skills that help determine both viable candidacy for and success in countless future careers. According to a 2010 study on Arts & Economic Prosperity by Americans for the Arts, the nonprofit arts industry generated $135 billion in economic activity that year. This figure doesn’t account for the many musical for-profit roles needed in an increasingly media-saturated environment. From studio musicians to composers, arrangers to sound editors, the jobs for people with music-specific skills not only exist, but provide a sustainable income.
What about students who have no desire to pursue music as a career? Does that mean studying music or playing in an ensemble is futile? Absolutely not. The skills one gains from participation in music have been determined to be a significant factor in student success. Music improves cognition. Music increases spatial reasoning. It promotes collaboration, critical thinking, and communication, which have all been deemed 21st century essential skills.
Making music is a form of creation, which is the highest level on the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (see below). Being musically literate translates into improved reading abilities. Studying music requires students to be reflective thinkers and more emotionally aware, which I personally believe are some of
the greatest experiences we can facilitate in an ever-disconnecting, digital world.
I have witnessed firsthand the benefits of music as part of a special education inclusion model. For a nonverbal, autistic, or emotionally challenged student, music can act as the great equalizer. Regardless of physical or mental abilities, music can heal. These students become an integral part of the whole, where their voice (whether self-generated or supplemented by an instrument) adds to the texture of the performance. Music is a place where uniqueness and unity coexist to create something beautiful: harmony.
As an advocate for music education, I declare that there is an undeniable benefit to incorporating music into a student’s curricular experience. Do I expect my students to go on to become professional recording artists, performers, composers, or arrangers? No more, I suppose, than a science teacher expects all of her students to become rocket scientists.
Occasionally you meet a student with a propensity for your content, and you think, “This kid could be the next Adele, or Beethoven, or whomever,” but I would argue that this is not the end goal of education. If it were, any student who did not become an award-winning poet or mathematician or groundbreaking scientist would be deemed a failure of the education system. Rather, I submit that the goal of education, and specifically music education, is to teach students about the human experience. Dr. Donald Hodges said, “We should teach music for all the wonderful humanizing benefits that accrue, and if academic achievement is affected positively, that is extra value added.”
Regardless of whether music content appears on a standardized test, it's easy to prove its viability as a content area to which students have access. See for yourself by attending your school’s next concert. Experience the music being shared there. Watch the students perform (and in some cases, transform, if you know them well enough). I think you will find the evidence for the validity of music in schools—no testing required.
AshaLee Ortiz has been teaching K–8 music for the past eight years in Peoria, Arizona. Her program was recognized as one of the best communities for music education in 2013 by the National Association of Music Merchants (NAMM). She has a bachelor’s in music education from California State University, Fullerton, and is currently working on a master’s in educational technology. In her spare time, AshaLee enjoys spending time with her family, arranging musical mash-ups, blogging, and sleeping.
Apart from test results, how can students demonstrate mastery in other content areas? How does the relevance and usefulness of your subject area resonate in students' lives? Please share your thoughts and experiences in the Comments field below.
