Music education research today continues in well-worn paths. While it may be productive in quantity, it is not clear the degree to which it informs current music teacher education or has produced advances in teaching practice. Indeed, as some critics of university-based teacher education research have argued (e.g., Boyer 1990; Schwandt 2005), such research is more often conducted according to the paradigms, interests, and needs of the Ivory Tower rather than to the down-to-earth conditions and needs of schools and schooling. The present essay raises questions about and offers a perspective on some key aspects of this problem in music education. After a survey of some general concerns regarding scholarship and disciplinarity, the articles in the present issue of ACT are used to expand upon particular themes of importance to both to music teachers and to music education researchers. i. Despite reflecting certain trends in scholarship, many of the premises and modes of music education research remain firmly rooted in conceptions of research and disciplinarity that are being critiqued and analyzed in other fields. Some disciplines have become progressively more reflexive and analyze and critique their own premises (e.g., DeNora 2003; Bourdieu & Wacquant
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.