Musical Value and Praxical Music Education

Abstract

Since post-war II, music education has advocated its presumed aesthetic benefits. Aesthetic advocacy became instituted through the abundance of publications by Bennett Reimer (e.g., 1970, 1989, 1995, 2003). That aesthetic meme is still influential. The debate about Music Education as Aesthetic Education MEAE may be weakening; still, the philosophically untutored conviction remains that involvement with music automatically promotes an educationally valuable aesthetic experience. Hence, teachers need only to enable music experiences. By definition, however, aesthetic experiences defy explicit evaluation. This lack of noticeably improved ‘aesthetic refinement' creates legitimation crises among school boards and education ministries, doubting music's value in the curriculum. Following a critique of Reimer’s theorizing, I argue for a praxical alternative for music education. Compared to the vagueness of aesthetic experience, praxical music education promotes music as a social praxis that depends on substantial and noticeable musicianship gains capable of continuation in adult life. These demonstrate the evident social values of musicking that make aesthetic rationales unnecessary. I argue for a 'turn' in music education that regards music as a social praxis promoting musical sociality throughout life and society, one that is philosophically and pragmatically warranted, and where long-term practical (praxical) results are gained instead of 'activities' that terminate with graduation. A philosophy that guides music educators to promote musicking responsive to human sociality can instead foster professional teaching praxis that society can respect and value as with the other helping professions.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.