ISBN 952-9658-92-3 (Print) ISBN 952-9658-97-4 (PDF)
Abstract
Marja Heimonen Sibelius Academy Docmus Department
MUSIC EDUCATION & LAW Regulation as an instrument.
The aim of this study is to explore the relationship between music education and the law. The principal questions to be addressed are:
1. How do the principles “the right to education” and “freedom in education”
function in music education for children and adolescents?
Different kinds of music-education systems are explored. The study focuses on the network of Finnish music schools, and on extra-curricular music education for children and adolescents in Sweden, England and Germany.
2. What kind of regulative model would best promote the aims in extra-curricular music education for children and adolescents?
Here, regulation as an instrument (means) is examined, and a closer look is taken at the different kinds that are in existence.
As a result, a partially open and fl exible regulative model of extra-curricular music education for children and adolescents is supported. A balance between positive and negative freedom is the aim of this regulative model; in other words, the model secures the fi nancial resources but at the same time leaves space for human autonomy. It makes holistic aims in music education possible. These aims are similar to the “best interests of the child”, which is the most important legal principle in all action concerning children in Finland. Furthermore, this principle, which is formulated in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, has been ratifi ed over almost all of the world.
The conclusion is that the state has to produce the conditions and circumstances for extra-curricular music education for children and adolescents, rather than to regulate the content of music-education activities. This positive role of the law is its principal function regarding regulation governing Finnish music schools.
Perspective
The approach of this study is interdisciplinary; the research questions are related mainly to music research (especially music education) and law. The intention is to describe the legal and educational issues as they presently are, and in the process of doing this to raise some questions. The perspective is hermeneutic in a holistic way, yet the approach could also be characterised as analytical.
Contents
PREFACE ...15
INTRODUCTION...17
RESEARCHSUBJECT...17
PRINCIPALQUESTIONS...18
SOMEREMARKSONTHEMAINCONCEPTS...19
REGULATIONASANINSTRUMENT – ANOUTLINE...19
ABBREVIATIONS ...22
PART ONE MUSIC SCHOOLS IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES
CHAPTER 1 A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MUSIC SCHOOLS AND THEIR REGULATION ...251.1 INTRODUCTION: THEMUSICSCHOOL...26
1.2 COMPARATIVELAWRESEARCH...27
1.3 COMPARATIVEMUSIC-EDUCATIONRESEARCH...31
1.4 CHALLENGESINCOMPARATIVERESEARCH...33
1.5 CONCLUSIONS...34
CHAPTER 2 SWEDEN...37
2.1 BACKGROUND: VOLUNTARYMUSICACTIVITIESANDCREATINGAWELFARE STATE: FOLKHEMMET...38
2.2 LOCALSELF-GOVERNMENT: DIFFERENTKINDSOFORGANISATIONSANDNO SPECIALLEGISLATION...41
2.3 COLLABORATIONANDTHEPRINCIPLEOFEQUALITY...43
2.4 AIMSANDCURRICULA: LOCALDECISIONMAKING...45
2.5 ÖREBRO CULTURE SCHOOL...46
2.5.1 General Background ...46
2.5.2 Collaboration ...47
2.5.3 Forms of regulation ...48
2.5.3.1 Financial regulation and curricula...48
2.5.3.2 Conventions, declarations, visions, and aims...50
2.5.3.3 Challenges ...51
2.6 CONCLUSIONS...52
2.6.1 The right of every child ...52
2.6.2 Autonomy – Freedom within boundaries...54
CHAPTER 3 ENGLAND ...59
3.1 INTRODUCTION: NONETWORKOFMUSICSCHOOLS...60
3.2 BACKGROUND: FROMTEACHERAUTONOMYTO GOVERNMENTCONTROL...62
3.3 LEGISLATION, CURRICULAANDASSESSMENT...64
3.3.1 General remarks...64
3.3.2 The National Curriculum ...66
3.3.3 Music examinations...68
3.4 ELITISMOREQUALITY?...73
3.5 AIMSINMUSICEDUCATION...76
CHAPTER 4 GERMANY...81
4.1 BACKGROUND: MUSICSCHOOLSIN EASTAND WEST GERMANY...82
4.2 ORGANIZATIONANDFINANCE: MUNICIPALANDNON-PROFITORGANIZATIONS FINANCEDBYPUBLICRESOURCESANDPUPILFEES...85
4.3 CURRICULAANDAIMS: THEFRAMEWORKSYLLABUSOFTHE VDM ASSOCIATION...88
4.4 EDUCATIONALLEGISLATION...92
4.4.1 The responsibility of each federal state...92
4.4.2 Music-school legislation in four Länder ...93
4.5 CONCLUSIONS...97
4.5.1 Western and eastern perspectives on rights and freedom in education ...97
4.5.2 Germany today: several Länder and one Association ...100
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS OF THE
COMPARATIVE SECTION...103
5.1 SOMEGENERALREMARKS...104
5.2 RIGHTSANDFREEDOMINGENERALMUSICEDUCATION...105
5.3 THERIGHTTOMUSICEDUCATIONOUTSIDEGENERALEDUCATION...106
5.4 FREEDOMINMUSICEDUCATIONOUTSIDEGENERALEDUCATION: AQUESTIONOFINDIVIDUALNEEDS...107
5.5 CONCLUSIONS: ABALANCEBETWEENRIGHTSANDFREEDOM...110
PART TWO REGULATION AS AN INSTRUMENT
OUTLINE ...114CHAPTER 6 THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN MUSIC EDUCATION – PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVES ...117
6.1 THEBOUNDARIESANDLIMITSOFLEGALREGULATIONS...118
6.2 THESTATEANDTHEGOODLIFE...120
6.3 THESTATEANDTHEGOODOFPEOPLE: FROMTHEUNIVERSALGOODTO NEUTRALITY...124
6.3.1 Practices and the good life...124
6.3.2 Liberal views: neutrality and the good life ...127
6.4 THEMARKETORTHESTATE? RIGHTSANDFREEDOMINMUSICEDUCATION... 132
6.4.1 Music education as a public and a private good ...132
6.4.2 The content of “the good” and aims in education ...134
6.4.3 Rights and freedom in education: principles of equality, personal autonomy, and liberty ...136
6.5 JUSTIFYINGMUSICEDUCATION: SOCIALANDINDIVIDUALASPECTS...139
CHAPTER 7 THE INSTRUMENTAL CHARACTER OF REGULATION...147
7.1 REGULATIONASINTERVENTIONANDANINSTRUMENTOFTHESTATE...148
7.2 HYDÉN’STYPOLOGYAPPLIEDTOTHEDEVELOPMENTOF FINNISHMUSIC SCHOOLS...150
7.2.1 Hydén’s typology ...150
7.2.2 The development of Finnish music schools ...152
7.2.3 Some remarks on the current situation...157
CHAPTER 8 REGULATION AS A MEANS TOWARDS BROADER AIMS IN MUSIC EDUCATION ...161
8.1 THE FINNISHLAWAND “CORRECTLAW”...162
8.2 FRAMEWORKLEGISLATIONANDFLEXIBLELEGALNORMS...163
8.3 REFLEXIVELAW...164
8.4 DIRECTINGBYRESULTS...166
8.5 SOFTLAW...168
8.5.1 The concept of soft law...168
8.5.2 Soft law and international treaties ...170
8.5.3 The Constitution and by-laws of the International Society of Music Education...173
8.6 THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTIONONTHE RIGHTSOFTHE CHILD...178
8.6.1 The principles of the best interests and autonomy of the child...178
8.6.2 The best interests of the child in music education ...180
8.6.3 The right of every child to extra-curricular music education ..181
8.7 SUMMARY...183
PART THREE MUSIC SCHOOLS AND THE ROLE OF THE STATE
CHAPTER 9 MUSIC SCHOOLS IN FINLAND...1899.1 BACKGROUND...190
9.2 GOAL-ORIENTATEDEDUCATION – POSITIVEANDNEGATIVEASPECTS...191
9.3 EDUCATINGPROFESSIONALSORAMATEURS?...194
9.4 THEPRESENTAIM: SELF-EXPRESSIONANDATRAININGGROUNDFOR FUTUREPROFESSIONALS...195
9.5 THEPRINCIPLEOFEQUALITYANDTHERIGHTTOEDUCATION...196
9.6 CURRENTPROBLEMS: EDUCATIONANDFREE-MARKETPRINCIPLES...199
9.7 NEWVISIONSOFMUSICSCHOOLS...201
9.8 THE BASIC ARTS EDUCATION ACT (633/98)...207
9.8.1 Background: from music schools to arts education ...207
9.8.2 Aims in basic arts education ...209
9.8.3 The content of the present Act ...211
9.9 CONCLUSIONS...213
CHAPTER 10 TO REGULATE OR NOT TO REGULATE? ...217
10.1 THERIGHTTOEDUCATION...218
10.2 THELAWASANINSTRUMENTINPROMOTINGEQUALOPPORTUNITIESFOR EXTRA-CURRICULARMUSICEDUCATION...220
10.2.1 The law as an instrument in German music schools ...220
10.2.2 Finnish music schools: the law as a means of promoting the principle of equality ...222
10.2.3 Equality in Sweden: rights without state regulation ...224
10.2.4 Extra-curricular music education in England: no right ...225
CHAPTER 11 IF WE REGULATE, HOW SHOULD WE REGULATE? ...229
11.1 FREEDOMINEDUCATION: AIMS – THENEEDSOFINDIVIDUALSAND GOVERNMENTS...230
11.2 INSTRUMENTSOFREGULATION – COMPARATIVEASPECTS...234
11.3 LEGALCONTRAFINANCIALINSTRUMENTS...238
11.3.1 The market or the state?...238
11.3.2 Elitism and paternalism ...240
11.3.3 The role of law...243
11.3.4 Instruments of government intervention...245
11.3.5 From a “deluge of norms” to deregulation ...247
CHAPTER 12 SOME FINAL REMARKS ...253
12.1 THEMARKETORTHESTATE? MUSICEDUCATIONINTODAY’SSOCIETY...254
REFERENCES...260
1 LITERATURE...260
2 CONVENTIONS, CURRICULA, DOCUMENTS, LEGISLATION...282
3 BROCHURES, BOOKLETSANDWEBSITEMATERIAL...287
4 ARTICLESINNEWSPAPERSANDJOURNALS...288
5 INTERVIEWS, DISCUSSIONSANDCORRESPONDENCE...294
Motto
Of all the fi ne arts, music has the greatest infl uence on passions; it is that which the law-giver must encourage most: a piece of music written by a master inevitably touches the feelings and has more infl uence on morality than a good book, which convinces reason without affecting our habits.
Napoleon 17971
1 Grew 1940, p. 162.
Preface
This research examines the relationship between music education and law, and focuses on extra-curricular music education for children and adolescents. After examining music schools and music-education systems in Sweden, England and Germany, I turn to Finnish music schools, and especially the role of the state. The tension between the general (law) and the particular (individual needs of each pupil) is described. However, achieving harmony (consonance) is important both in law and in music. A composer may create a composite piece of music (order) out of fragments (disorder)2 just as a judge creates order when he or she decides a legal case, or a law-giver enacts a statute that takes account of different kinds of interests of people usually represented by political parties or associations.
The concept of freedom is also important both in music and in law. It has been stated that there is no freedom without boundaries. In addition, there may be even more freedom (especially experienced freedom) when the boundaries are tight. An individual has to operate within boundaries consisting not only of legal but also of various other (moral, ethical and aesthetic) norms. In other words, he or she operates in a rule-bound situation within a structure of norms, within a culture. Furthermore, legal norms (that usually restrict the freedom of human behaviour) have an important role in creating freedom, for instance opportunities and circumstances for musical activities. This positive role of law has been the main function of legislation governing Finnish music schools.
This thesis was pursued at the DocMus Department of the Sibelius Academy, and it was written under the aegis of the Graduate School of Performing Arts (2000–2002) and the Research and Development Project on Music Schools. I have also derived a great deal of inspiration from the Helsinki University Law Department.
I would like to direct special thanks to the examiners of this work, Professor Estelle Jorgensen (Indiana University, Bloomington) and Professor Raimo Siltala (Helsinki University, Law Department) for their most valuable comments.
Furthermore, I have received advice and support from Professors Anthony E.
Kemp (University of Reading) and Kari Kurkela (Sibelius Academy) as well as from Professor Matti Huttunen (Sibelius Academy), Dr Pekka Vapaavuori (Rector, Sibelius Academy), Professor Christer Bouij (Örebro Musikhögskola, Luleå Tekniska Universitet) and Dr Siglind Bruhn (The University of Michigan).
I would also like to thank Professor John Rink (Royal Holloway, University
2 Kemp 1996, p. 207.
of London), Professor Hanne Petersen (University of Copenhagen) and Jarmo Kuitunen, M.A. (Helsinki University), for interesting discussions and encouraging comments. I remember with gratitude Dr Outi Korhonen and her helpful contacts at the University of Reading Law Department, and the inspiring seminars of the Law and Art Association.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to Dr Annikka Konttori-Gustafsson (Head of DocMus Department) and to all my colleagues at the Sibelius Academy for their kind support. I would also like to thank Professor Erik T. Tawaststjerna (Sibelius Academy), Professor George Odam (Guildhall School of Music and Drama), Dr Peter Renshaw (Guildhall School of Music and Drama), Dr Duncan A. French (University of Reading), Jeffrey Sharkey (Director of Music at The Purcell School), Hans Skoglund (Head of Stockholm Kulturskola), Deborah Harris (Director of The North London Colourstrings Centre) and the pianist Jan Czajkowski for giving me several hours of their most valuable time, as well as all my Swedish colleagues, Helene Eriksson, Olle Tivenius and Dr Stephan Bladh.
To my other contacts at these departments, other university departments, music schools, libraries, and elsewhere, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks.
I am grateful to the following foundations and institutions for supporting this work: The Graduate School of Performing Arts (VEST), the DocMus Department at the Sibelius Academy, the Rector´s Fund, Oskar ja Aurora Honkasalon Rahasto, Viljo ja Riitta Laitisen Rahasto, Suomalainen Konkordia-liitto, Letterstedska Föreningen, Suomalais-ruotsalainen kulttuurirahasto, Naisten tiedesäätiö.
I give special thanks to my family: my husband, our daughters Anna and Aino, and our grandparents for their love and support. I am especially indebted to my husband Panu Heimonen for the encouragement and intellectual stimulus he has always provided, not to mention his large collection of literature on music research. It is to them that this dissertation is dedicated.
Finally, I would like to thank Harri Niemelä and Kari Kääriäinen for their computing help, and Joan Nordlund for her help with the language.
Helsinki, November 2002
Marja Heimonen
Introduction
Research subject
This study focuses on music education for children and adolescents offered by music schools receiving public fi nancial support (from the municipality or the state). In Finland these schools are governed by law (Basic Arts Education Act 633/98) and a national curriculum framework issued by the National Board of Education.
The Finnish network of music schools is compared with the Swedish counterparts as well as with music schools in England and Germany. The aim is to promote understanding of the positive as well as the problematic factors in the Finnish system from other perspectives. Sweden was chosen because of the several similarities it has with Finland. Both countries are so-called Nordic welfare societies with the same kinds of educational and cultural policies. However, the Swedish and Finnish systems of music and arts schools are quite different from each other. Germany was chosen because of its strong tradition in classical music and its background of two different educational systems in the eastern and western parts of the country. The German system of music schools has similarities with the Finnish network, but several differences are also apparent.
British educational policy differs greatly from the educational policies in Finland, Sweden and the other Nordic countries, since the British system (or “non-system”) is mainly based on private tuition, peripatetic (visiting) teachers, Saturday music schools and a few specialist music schools for especially talented children and young people. The British “liberal” way of arranging music education for children and young people was chosen because it differs from the network system. Yet, the new trends in Finland (for instance, evaluation) as well as in Britain (attempts to strengthen state control) have brought these two countries closer to each other in spite of their different backgrounds.
Certain legal aspects related to music education are approached in the light of two principles: the right to education and freedom in education. In the last part of this study, the legal questions focus on music education for children and adolescents offered by music schools in Finland. The intention is not to solve all the problems addressed in this study (that lies outside the scope of this work), but rather to describe the legal and educational issues as they presently are, and in the process of doing this to raise certain philosophical questions.
Principal questions
The following questions are examined in particular:
1. How do the principles “the right to education and freedom in education”
function in extra-curricular music education for children and adolescents?
Firstly, the music-education systems in Sweden, England and Germany are examined. The backgrounds, aims and principles, as well as the forms of organisation, fi nancing and legislation, are explored and compared in the light of various traditions and solutions in different countries.
2. To regulate or not to regulate? If one regulates, how should one regulate?
Music as part of the human “good”, and the role of the state in securing prerequisites for the good life, are examined. The study supports the demand for public fi nancial resources for music education in Finland and the necessary regulation involved.
In response to the second question (how to regulate?), regulation as an instrument is explored. A closer look is then taken at different kinds of instruments (means) of regulation, focusing on the principle of the best interests of the child. This principle refers to the right of every child to receive music education. How this principle works in practice is studied in the context of a municipal arts school (kulturskola) in Sweden offering extra-curricular education in music and other arts subjects for children and adolescents.
3. Is regulation an instrument in Finnish music schools?
The background of the Finnish music-school system (concerning the relationship between the state and these schools) is studied, as are the objectives of and justifi cations for state-supported music schools. The balance between musical skills (proper training for future studies) and personal autonomy (self-expression), between the common good and the needs of individuals, is explored.
One of the aims is to explore what kind of regulative model would be suitable, and would promote music education in Finland. The right to education refers to the right to music education, and to the duty of the state to secure the relevant conditions and circumstances, whereas freedom in education refers to individual needs and freedom regarding the content.
Some remarks on the main concepts
Concepts such as regulation, legislation, justice, law,3 music and “musics”,4 education, schooling and training can be interpreted in different ways. Therefore, the use of the two main terms in this study is briefl y explained. The meaning of the concepts is also clarifi ed by the context in which the terms are used.
1. Justice, law and regulation
In this study, regulation (legal, fi nancial, etc.) refers to state intervention.
Regulation as well as law (referring to legislation including acts and statutes) can be used by the state as an instrument in achieving justice, for instance.
2. Education
The concept “education” is used in a broad sense, and includes education, training and schooling.5
3. Extra-curricular music education
Extra-curricular music education refers to “out of school” instrumental and vocal tuition, usually offered by music schools.6
Regulation as an instrument – an outline
The subtitle of this study (Regulation as an instrument) refers to Aristotle’s thought on the law7 as a means in moral education. In Aristotle’s view, the state8 has to educate its individual citizens in the exercise of virtue, since living
3 Even “correct law” is used; see, e.g., Panu Minkkinen (1998): Correct Law: A Philosophy of the Aporetic; Ari Hirvonen (2000): Oikeuden käynti. Antigonen laki ja oikea oikeus.
4 See e.g., Kemp & Lepherd (1992); Elliott (1995); Regelski (1996).
5 According to Jorgensen (1997, p. 13), “education” means to develop, elicit, or to draw out;
teachers (including music teachers) are like gardeners who arrange the conditions in which plants (in other words, their pupils) can grow. See also Winch & Ginger 1999, p. 70.
6 The use of the term “music school” is explained in Section 1.1.
7 The law is a translation of the Greek word “nomos”. In Ancient Greece the word “nomos”
was used to mean both law and a piece of music. It has been claimed that, in the past, legal texts were presented by singing them because people (who usually were not able to read) could memorise the text easily through music. (Michaelidas 1978, p. 222; Comotti 1989, p.
16; Anderson 1994, p. 54.) See Section 6.1.
8 See Aristotle: The Politics. Transl. by T. A. Sinclair. P. 42. The English word “state” is a translation of the Greek word “polis”, an ancient Greek city-state (Pol. P. 21–22). According to Copleston (1985, I, p. 352), “Aristotle’s horizon was more or less bounded by the confi nes of the Greek City-State”.
according to virtue means living in harmony with one’s own nature, this being the proper end of the individual. Aristotle referred to virtue as a disposition that demands long and careful exercise. Thus, for him and his followers, the law became an instrument in moral education.9
Aristotle argued that moral education was one of the functions of music10 because music has the power of forming character.11 He was of the opinion that virtues manifest themselves in forms of activity. For instance, in order to acquire
“correct” musical taste and judgement, free men should learn to play musical instruments; music education should include participation in actual playing. In general, Aristotle stressed the importance of education: “It is clear then that there should be laws laid down about education, and that education itself must be made a public concern.”12
Aristotle’s thoughts on the good life have become the basis for many thinkers, especially “communitarians”. Therefore, ideas put forward by Alasdair MacIntyre will be analysed. In addition, liberal concepts presented by Ronald Dworkin, for instance, will be examined and compared with communitarian conceptions of
“the good” and the role of the state in promoting it.13 It has also been claimed that the liberal and communitarian approaches may be integrated. For instance, the aim of “moral individualism” is to fi nd a way to promote the moral development of an individual in a pluralistic, multicultural society.14
The integration of communitarian and liberal views is explored in this study. This integration should help in fi nding a way to justify a positive role for the state in producing conditions and circumstances for a good, fl ourishing life. The content of a good life should not be directed by the state, although in practice it cannot be completely neutral. Thus, according to this study, music is a part of the good life.
Yet, music as a part of one’s life has to be a so-called “real option” that the state must provide for its citizens.
9 EN I, 1, 1094a1–3; Rhet. I, 6, 1362a23; Knuuttila 1989, p. 214; Haapala 1990, p. 8–9;
Sihvola 1994, p. 61.
10 On the meaning of “music” in ancient Greece, see Section 6.5.
11 Pol. VIII, 2, 1339a18–20; Pol., p. 461.
12 Pol. VIII, 2, 1337a33.
13 According to Mulhall and Swift (1992, p. viii), identifying liberalism and communitarian- ism is complicated because these terms mean “different things to different people”. Liberals are stated to emphasize the freedom and autonomy of the individual, whereas communitar- ians stress the common good.
14 Hellstén (1997): In Defense of Moral Individualism.
One of the main arguments in this study is that music education has an important role when music is regarded as part of the good life. The aims (in this study, music education refers especially to education offered at music schools) should be holistic: music education should take a broad view of the way it relates to human experience.15 In principle, the aims should be left open by state authorities and legislators to be defi ned more closely in practice. Such holistic objectives resemble the legal principle of the best interests of the child, which is the most important principle in all actions concerning children in Finland, as well as over almost all of the world. The child’s-best-interests principle is like an open concept, a “doughnut” (as Ronald Dworkin describes it).16 These concepts leave room for different kinds of interpretations.
This study considers the importance of the child’s-best-interests principle from the perspective of music education. According to the fi ndings, the applications of this principle must be determined on an individual basis. Thus, the state has to produce conditions and circumstances for music education, rather than to regulate the content. However, the following question may be asked: how can we leave the content open, and at the same time provide a structure for music education?
This is a question of legislation, especially in Finland. Different legal instruments are examined in the study. Furthermore, both legal and fi nancial instruments of various countries are analysed and compared in order to show how the law as an instrument in music education could help music educators to reach their principal educational aim: to promote music as part of the good life.
15 Kemp 1996, pp. 251, 255.
16 See Dworkin (1977): Is Law a System of Rules?
Abbreviations
ABRSM The Associated Board of the Royal Music Schools Art. Article
BbgMSchulG Gesetz zur Förderung der Musikschulen im Land Brandenburg (Act for the promotion of music schools in the state of Brandenburg)
DfEE The Department for Education and Employment
EMU The European Union of Music Schools
E.N. Nichomachean Ethics
FJME The Finnish Journal of Music Education ISME The International Society for Music Education
KM Komiteanmietintö (Committee Report)
LEA Local Education Authority
Lgr Läroplan för grundskolan (The Comprehensive School Curriculum)
Lpf Läroplan för de frivilliga skolformerna (The Curriculum for the Voluntary School)
Lpo Läroplan för det obligatoriska skolväsendet,
förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet (The Curriculum for Compulsory School, Pre-school and after-school recreation centres)
OFSTED The Offi ce for Standards in Education
SML Suomen Musiikkioppilaitosten Liitto (The Association of Finnish Music Schools)
SMoK Sveriges Musik- och Kulturskoleråd (The Association of Swedish Music and Culture Schools)
SOU Statens offentliga utredningar (Offi cial Reports of the Swedish Government)
UN The United Nations
VdM Verband der Deutschen Musikschulen (The Association of German Music Schools)
PART ONE
MUSIC SCHOOLS IN DIFFERENT
COUNTRIES
Chapter one
A comparative study of music schools and their regulation
1.1 INTRODUCTION: THEMUSICSCHOOL...26 1.2 COMPARATIVELAWRESEARCH...27 1.3 COMPARATIVEMUSIC-EDUCATIONRESEARCH...31 1.4 CHALLENGESINCOMPARATIVERESEARCH...33 1.5 CONCLUSIONS...34
Chapter 1 A comparative study of music schools and their regulation
1.1 Introduction: The music school
The term “music school” is commonly used in almost all European countries. No binding international commitments have been laid down regarding the minimum requirements that a school called a “music school” should fulfi l. In addition, the use of this term is seldom regulated by law; however, there are some exceptions.17
Membership of a national music association affi liated to the EMU (the European Union of Music Schools) entails certain prerequisites, concerning the subjects offered as well as the qualifi cations of the teachers, for example. In this way the national associations may try to distance “their music schools” from other, often commercial enterprises, which frequently also adopt the name music school.18 This kind of association has been established fairly recently in Sweden.19 Furthermore, in England there is no association that would qualify for membership of the EMU. The national associations of music schools in Germany and Finland (VdM and SML) are members of the Union.
In this study the use of the term music school is most problematic in the context of music education outside general education in England. No network of music schools has been established there; the term music school refers both to Saturday music schools as well as to specialist schools. In Sweden, several municipal music schools have changed their name to “culture school” (kulturskola), also translated as “school of arts”. Furthermore, the translation of the Finnish term
“musiikkioppilaitos” into English is complex; in fact, it has also been translated as “music institute”.20 However, “music school” has been declared to be the translation that best represents the nature of music education offered by these schools when the term is used in international and comparative contexts.21
17 For example, the use of the term music school is protected by law in Germany in Brandenburg (BbgMSchulG; see Chapter 4), Bayern and Sachsen-Anhalt (Statistisches Jahrbuch 1999, p. 10).
18 EMU 1995, p. 36.
19 SMoK, Sveriges Musik och Kulturskoleråd, was founded in 1996 at the annual meeting of the FSMK, föreningen Sveriges Musik och Kulturskolledare (which was founded in 1979 and liquidated in1997). http://www.smok.se/eng/ehistorik.htm (27 April 2001)
20 The Education System of Finland 2001, p. 112.
21 SML, Assocation of Finnish Music Schools. In Finland these music schools are granted state support by law.
1.2 Comparative law research
According to Legrand,22 the fundamental nature of comparative law research is expressed in the words of Montesquieu:
It is not the body of the laws I am looking for, but their soul.
Comparative research should therefore not merely concentrate on legislation and the legal norms of different countries; the surrounding social context, including the cultural, historical, administrative, political and ideological factors of the research subject, should also be taken into account. According to Legrand, studies on the nature of knowing and of observation conducted in other fi elds, for instance in social anthropology and psychology, are of relevance to cross-cultural research in comparative law. The researcher should study the nature rather than the structure of the law. In other words, the focus should not be on “law as rules”, in the form of legal texts and regulations, but on “law as culture”. This means that the hidden ideologies behind the legislation should also be taken into account.23 In this study, law as culture is more important than law as rules due to the fact that, in some countries (such as Sweden and England), there are no acts governing music education offered by music schools. In addition, when the law governing music and music education is studied, confi ning oneself to the very surface of the law would not provide an accurate picture of the research subject. On the other hand, “law as culture” is such a wide expression that its meaning has to be clarifi ed. This study focuses on two principles concerning law and music education: the right to music education and freedom in music education. These principles are closely connected to the principle addressing the best interests of the child, which is stated to be the most important legal principle in matters affecting children, and could be regarded as belonging to the surface of the law; in
22 Legrand 1996, p. 81; Sutela 2001.
23 Legrand 1995, p. 272; Sutela 2001, p. 76; Legrand 1996, p. 56. Legrand states that culture derives from historical experience and so do legal rules. Furthermore, rules are not the whole of the law; the “legal” cannot be separated from the “non-legal” reality of society since the aforementioned worlds are linked to each other. (Legrand 1996, pp. 56-58).
other words, “law as rules”. Yet, it is also involved with “law as culture”, in other words, the “deeper” levels.24
One of the aims of comparative research is to acquire knowledge of foreign legal systems; therefore, the structure of the music-school system and the law of different countries are explored. These may be used as examples, for instance, if recommendations are made in order to develop the legislation of the home country of the researcher.25 In this study, the aim of the comparative component is to shed light on the system of Finnish music schools. Exploring countries with different backgrounds – such as England, which is a common-law country,26 and Germany in which each state (Land) enacts its own laws – offers a new perspective on the positive as well as the problematic factors of regulation governing music schools in Finland.
Functionality is stated to be the basic methodological principle of comparative law.27 The theoretical and methodological perspectives of this approach are also functional; in other words, the main question is how a problem has been solved in different countries. The approach is systematic. Music schools are explored from the outside, the backgrounds of the institutions as well as their regulation (including, for instance, legislation and other offi cial documents) are described fi rst, then certain elements involving the aforementioned principles are compared.
According to the theory of “legal families”, the legal systems of the world are divided into a few large groups called legal families.28 The traditional legal family has been subdivided into Romanistic, Germanic, Nordic, Common Law, Socialist and the so-called non-western (e.g., Islamic) legal cultures. The idea of this
24 According to Tuori’s theory of the multi-layered structure of law, three levels can be defi ned: (1) the surface level (statutes and other legal regulations, court decisions and legal dogmatic work), (2) the level of legal culture (expert culture of legal professionals), and (3) the deep structure of law (the fundamental normative principles and the basic legal categories of the type of law in question) (Tuori 2000; 1997, pp. 432-436). See also Tolonen (2001) and Siltala (2000a, pp. 157–158) on the questions when “levels” in law are defi ned;
the “deeper” levels are regarded as particularly problematic.
25 Sutela 2001, p. 77. C.f. Tate 2001; Lepherd 1992; Kemp & Lepherd (1992) on the problems and dangers of cultural borrowing and the need for adaptation.
26 Common law has been created by the judiciary through the decisions in the cases. On the other hand, statute law has been created by Parliament in the form of legislation. There was a signifi cant increase in statute law in England in the 20th century. (Slapper & Kelly 1999, p. 5.)
27 Zweigert & Kötz 1998, p. 34.
28 Zweigert & Kötz 1998, p. 63.
kind of traditional grouping has recently been criticised. One reason for this is the rapid developments and the signifi cant changes within societies, exemplifi ed by the disappearance of most socialist members of the family. The law family can also be divided into groups on a different basis. For instance, nowadays membership of the European Union could be regarded as a factor that unifi es several countries, so that the legal systems of these countries could be regarded as a separate group.29 According to the idea of the traditional law family, Finland and Sweden belong to the Nordic, Germany to the Romanic-Germanic – the former East Germany to the Socialist – and England to the Anglo-American (common- law) legal cultures.30
The factors according to which legal systems are explored, compared with each other and put into groups have raised several questions. It is argued that the focus should not be on historical development, legal content and observable techniques concerning the rules of law, but rather on whether countries have the same legal culture, in other words whether the citizens’ attitudes to law and their expectations of it resemble each other.31 Furthermore, it is argued that the criterion for comparing and grouping should be the “style” of the legal systems. “Style” as a concept originates in the literary and fi ne arts, including music, and this is also used in law. Factors corresponding to different legal styles are numerous, but not all of them are important or essential as differentiating qualities. Yet, there is no fi nal proof of what could be regarded as important and essential by a scholar: the scholar makes his or her own judgements concerning how (and how many) styles are identifi ed. However, the following factors are said to be crucial for a style of legal system or legal family:32
1. Historical background and development determine the style of most legal systems. One example is the development of the common law that has, for instance, been described as “the law of the common people of England”33. The use of the term common law refers to all the legal systems (for instance, the systems of the United States and many other Commonwealth – or former Commonwealth - countries) that have adopted the historic English legal system.
29 Sutela 2001, p. 89-91.
30 See also Tuori 1997; according to him, legal culture consists of the expert culture of legal professionals and the general legal culture of ordinary people. The expert culture comprises general doctrines of law, canons of interpretation and patterns of argumentation.
31 Legrand 1995; op.cit. Zweigert & Kötz 1998, p. 67.
32 Zweigert & Kötz 1998, pp. 68-72.
33 Slapper & Kelly 1999, p. 3. Development of common-law in England (Slapper & Kelly 1999, pp. 3-5).
2. The distinctive modes of legal thinking. For instance, enacted statute law (“civil law”) consisting of abstract norms is used in continental European legal systems, whereas common law is case-centred and hence judge-centred; it has gradually developed from decision to decision. In short, the English “improvise”, whereas the Continentals draw up rules and systemise them. In reality, the aforementioned view is an extreme over-emphasising of the extent to which the common-law judge may impose his discretion. The doctrine of stare decisis, or binding precedent, refers to the fact that judges and courts are bound by previous decisions of courts.34
3. Distinctive legal institutions (such as trust in common law) lend a characteristic style to a legal system.
4. Sources of law and the methods of interpreting them mark the style of legal systems.
5. The style may be marked by an ideology (political or religious).
This factor is important in the study of Islamic and Hindu law, for instance.
In conclusion, all classifi cations have a utility and function depending on the perspective chosen by the researcher and the aspects most interesting to him or her. Furthermore, a detailed method for a comparative study cannot be laid down in advance; a method may be taken as a hypothesis, but it is followed through only by gradual trial and error.35
In this study, the criteria for different legal styles are used as a means to explore extra-curricular music education for children and adolescents in Sweden, England, Germany and Finland. The historical background is explored, as are the distinctive modes of legal as well as cultural and educational thinking. For instance, enacted law governing music schools is used in Finland and Germany, but not in England or Sweden. A systematic network of music schools has been established in Finland and Germany, whereas small societies and associations for music teachers and musicians of various instruments are typical in England.
No formal decision has been made to establish a network of music schools in England – nor in Sweden, although there is a municipal music or arts school in almost every Swedish municipality. Distinctive educational institutions such as specialist music schools lend a characteristic style to the English system. The style of the Finnish system is marked by the way in which legal and other regulations (including curricula) are interpreted. The ideology behind the educational policies in various countries is also explored, since educational aims, as well as public fi nancing of music education, are affected by ideological factors.
34 Slapper & Kelly 1999, pp. 3, 64; Zweigert & Kötz 1998, pp. 68-72.
35 Zweigert & Kötz 1998 pp. 33, 73.
1.3 Comparative music-education research
It has been suggested that studying aspects of music education in different countries helps the researcher to refl ect and better understand such education in his or her home country. However, comparative music education as a fi eld of research is also valuable in its own right. At least the following major contributions have been made to this fi eld. The importance of the systematic collection of data, interpretation and juxtaposition leading to comparison, as well as the need to acquire experience in the foreign culture under investigation, were stressed by Bereday in the 1960s.36 Quantitative methods were favoured by Noah and Eckstein in the late 1960s, for instance, since they argued that objectivity in comparison could be reached through minimising cultural bias.37 Other researchers were critical of approaches emphasising quantitative methods, since statistical methods lose the critical perspective that is linked to the cultural background of the researcher. Holmes argued in the 1980s that the problem- solving approach of Dewey could be applied in comparative research.38
Since the early 1980s, the methodological debate has shifted towards the acceptance of wider approaches of a broader character. In other words, it is unlikely that there is one ideal way to conduct comparative research. The growing interest in other research traditions such as anthropology and ethnology has also led to the development of alternative approaches. The purpose of the research is crucial when the method is chosen; a variety of methods may even be used in one study.39
Kemp and Lepherd provide a model or framework for the classifi cation of international music education that can be applied either to single-system or comparative studies. Global statements, as well as distinctions between systemic and non-systemic cultural transmission, are included in this framework. Global statements are studies that address issues related to music education that are of relevance to an international audience (for instance, philosophical issues such as music as a universal language – or nowadays more often, musics as languages).40 Systemic studies focus on formal systems of music education that exist within national systems (“in school”), whereas non-systemic studies focus on music education that does not involve formal tuition in schools. Of course, both of these systems can also be studied, for instance in terms of the relationship between
36 Bereday 1964.
37 Eckstein and Noah 1969; Tate 2001.
38 Holmes 1981. See also Tate 2001, p. 225-234.
39 Tate 2001.
40 Elliott 1995 and the so-called praxial philosophy of music education (e.g. Regelski, Alperson).
systemic and non-systemic instrumental tuition in school and out of school.
Systemic education research is divided into the overview and the thematic in a national context. These studies are either single-system or comparative studies, but in practice most of them have been single-system studies including only informal comparisons. Unlike comprehensive overviews, smaller studies may focus on particular themes (or they may include brief overviews).41 According to Lepherd, thematic comparisons may cover assessment procedures in different music conservatories. National systems may also be the focus for comparison.
One conceptual framework for nation-state comparison is provided by Holmes.
According to him, one of the aspects to be studied concerns the aims of education, in terms of constitutions, legislation, curricula and professional associations.
Aims have been divided into child-centred, society-centred, and subject-centred aims, and the comparative interest is in the degree to which they are stressed in various countries. Another category to be explored is administration, especially the relationship between the national, provincial and local levels. The fi nancing of education (for instance, government provisions), the organisation of music- education, curricula, and teacher education are also worthy of study.42 In conjunction with the aforementioned model, the comparative method developed by Bereday is useful when national systems are in focus. According to Bereday, national systems have to be described and interpreted (for instance, according to the model of Holmes). Juxtaposition and preliminary comparison ending in detailed comparison then follow.43
The approach of this study embraces both comparative law and comparative music-education research. It begins with an investigation of extra-curricular music education in different countries, and then a closer look is taken at the music- school system in Finland. Quantitative methods are not used. The framework of Kemp and Lepherd is applied, and adapted to the research questions. For instance, music schools in Finland acquiring law-based public support are part of the formal education system (although studying there is voluntary). In other countries such schools do not necesserily belong to the formal education system, although they may have considerable collaboration with the offi cial schools (even more than in Finland). Finnish music schools are educational institutions that resemble offi cial schools to some extent. Thus the approach of this study is characterised as systemic and thematic (focusing on two principles: the right to education and freedom in education), and also includes a brief overview of the music-education systems of each country in question. In addition, Holmes’
41 Kemp & Lepherd 1992, pp. 775–786; Tate 2001, p. 228–229.
42 Holmes 1981.
43 Bereday 1964; Lepherd 1992, p. 33-39; Kemp & Lepherd 1992, pp. 777–778.
framework is used and adapted when different music-school systems (including educational aims, administration, fi nance, structure and organisation, and teacher education) are explored.
According to Lepherd, breadth and currency of sources, which include offi cial government and media publications (newspaper articles) and discussions, are crucial for making comparisons. Furthermore, primary sources in the original language should be obtained.44 Thus, legislation, national curricula and other government documents in the original languages (Swedish, German, English and Finnish) are used as sources. Newspaper articles were scrutinised and interviews in music schools conducted in order to obtain a picture of the way offi cial government policy is implemented and perceived in reality.
1.4 Challenges in comparative research
One of the basic problems in comparative research (regarding both law and music education) is the question of what is comparable. Satori refers to apples and pears; in some respects they are comparable (fruits), but in other respects they are not (shape). According to Satori, only entities that share similarities as well as differences (although not too big differences) can be compared with each other.
Careful classifi cation is an effective instrument for differentiating what is similar and what is different.45
The political use of comparisons of educational achievement is signifi cant, although not as common in music education as in other subjects such as mathematics, reading and writing. For instance, in the late 1980s, English politicians began to refer to comparisons; generalisations such as “England beats France in mathematics” may be used to confi rm the existing education policy (or vice versa). Therefore, researchers should minimise the tendency to oversimplify and to make inappropriate generalisations in comparative studies.46
The cultural background of the researcher may limit the objective study of other cultures. Therefore the values of the researcher should be made explicit in order to avoid ethnocentric bias in the interpretation of the fi ndings. Another related issue is the extent to which educational practices in one country may be “borrowed”
and implemented in another. Adaptation is necessary for cultural borrowing and transplantation. For instance, Kodály himself suggested that American folk songs
44 Lepherd 1992, p. 39-40.
45 Satori 1994; Lepherd 1992, p. 41.
46 Tate 2001, p. 231.
should be used when his method was adopted in America.47
The use and meaning of language need to be carefully considered in comparative research (as well as in other fi elds of research), since some terms may be diffi cult or even impossible to translate because they do not exist, or they have differing meanings, in the countries that are being compared. Comparisons may also be problematic due to differences in the structure and organisation of schools.
For instance, it is diffi cult to give cross-cultural meaning to concepts such as secondary school, comprehensive school, high school, college and music school. A challenge for comparative research is that national systems are often divided into different kinds of sub-systems; for instance, some nations consist of numerous autonomous states, each with its own education policy.48
1.5 Conclusions
The aforementioned challenges for comparative research also have to be dealt with in this approach. For instance, the use and meaning of the term “music school” is different in various countries, especially in England (as mentioned in Section 1.1).49 It is not only such translation problems, but also the different structures and organisations regarding general education, music education and music schools, that create challenges for comparison. For instance, Germany is divided into several Länder, four of them with their own music-school legislation.50 Yet, differences (if not too extensive) between entities are necessary as well as fruitful for comparative research. Even if one factor (such as a Music School Act) is missing, this will raise further questions such as why another country has created such legislation.
Choosing countries and systems to be compared is a crucial aspect of comparative research. The purpose of the study, the importance of certain legal or music- education systems, as well as the interests of the researcher, are relevant when the choice is made. In this study, the following countries are explored: Sweden as an example of the Nordic countries representing an ideology of “music for all”, England as an Anglo-American counterpoint with specialist music schools for especially talented children, Germany with a background of an Eastern Socialist system and a liberal Western system, as well as a long tradition in classical music, and fi nally Finland with a younger tradition but with a systematic structure and network of music schools covering the whole country. There are similarities,
47 Kodály 1974; Tate 2001, p. 232; Lepherd 1992, p. 42.
48 Lepherd 1992, p. 41-42; Tate 2001.
49 See Section 1.1.
50 Länder is an abbreviation of Bundesländer (see Chapter 4.5.2).
between Finland and Sweden, for instance (Nordic systems with a common history – Finland has been part of Sweden), as well as between Germany and Finland (acts governing music schools). Differences are also apparent; for instance, two of the countries compared do not have acts governing music schools.
These differences are of relevance when questions concerning the necessity of legal regulation governing music education is explored.
The institutional level is especially focused on in this study, and the way in which legislation or national curricula are applied in practice on the micro level (in the classroom) is not explored. Future studies could offer insights into the actuality of education in practice. Both kinds of approach benefi t from each other. Two themes, the right to education and freedom in education, form the key threads of the approach. These principles are relevant internationally, and the tension between them in each of the countries is explored.
One step in the process of comparative research is to build a system, preferably a very loose but coherent one.51 As mentioned earlier in connection with comparative music education, successful cultural borrowing needs adaptation.
The same point could be made when a researcher is choosing a method or a perspective. This study applies the frameworks or models developed by Kemp and Lepherd and Holmes, which are nevertheless adapted to the research questions.
Legal style as a criterion of systematisation and comparison, as presented by Zweigert and Kötz, is also applied and adapted here. However, as mentioned earlier, a method can only be taken as a hypothesis. Whether it is suitable or not to a particular approach must be discovered by gradual trial and error.
51 See Lepherd (1992) about the problems if the system is too strict.
Chapter two Sweden
2.1 BACKGROUND: VOLUNTARYMUSICACTIVITIESANDCREATINGAWELFARE STATE: FOLKHEMMET...38 2.2 LOCALSELF-GOVERNMENT: DIFFERENTKINDSOFORGANISATIONSANDNO SPECIALLEGISLATION...41 2.3 COLLABORATIONANDTHEPRINCIPLEOFEQUALITY...43 2.4 AIMSANDCURRICULA: LOCALDECISIONMAKING...45 2.5 ÖREBRO CULTURE SCHOOL...46 2.5.1 General Background ...46 2.5.2 Collaboration ...47 2.5.3 Forms of regulation ...48 2.5.3.1 Financial regulation and curricula...48 2.5.3.2 Conventions, declarations, visions, and aims...50 2.5.3.3 Challenges ...51 2.6 CONCLUSIONS...52 2.6.1 The right of every child ...52 2.6.2 Autonomy – Freedom within boundaries...54
Chapter 2 Sweden
2.1 Background: voluntary music activities and creating a wel- fare state: Folkhemmet
Music education has been offered in municipal music schools in Sweden since the 1940s.52 It was provided in about 50 municipalities in the 1950s, and has gradually expanded to nearly every municipality.53 Municipal music and arts schools (kommunala musik- och kulturskolor) became the “general arena for instrumental teaching” in the 1960s and 1970s.54 In the 1980s, a music school existed in 282 of the 284 municipalities.55
There are various reasons for the growth of municipal music schools in Sweden:
the main idea has been to create an opportunity to learn to play an instrument or to sing regardless of the social and economic background of the child.56 In line with the growth of the nine-year comprehensive-school curriculum (which was instituted in 1961), local authorities felt the need to organise the teaching of instrumental music. The popular education movement, the attempt to strengthen the musical life of the municipality, and the involvement of enthusiastic individuals have also infl uenced the increase in the number of these schools. No special statement on establishing a network of municipal music schools has been made by the state authorities. Voluntary musical activities have been the basis for these schools in most municipalities.57
52 Finansdepartementet 1999, p. 129. See also Den kommunala musikskolan 1976, p. 10;
music circles existed in the 1930s, and musical activities in these circles have been regarded as the basis for municipal music schools (referring to voluntary municipal music education).
53 Stålhammar 1995, pp. 34, 261; in 1966, the number of municipal music schools was 318, with 98 343 pupils (SOU 1968: 15).
54 Stålhammar 1995, p. 261; Graneheim 1994, p. 4; Den kommunala musikskolan 1976, p.
10. According to the EMU (1995, p. 237), there are 283 music schools with over 300 000 pupils and almost 6000 teachers in Sweden.
55 Gustafsson 2000, p. 202.
56 According to Olsson (1993), during the early 70s the general aim of the cultural policy in Sweden was to make the arts more accessible to people. See also SOU 1954:2; “democracy”
does not only refer to politics or economics; on the contrary, it also has a cultural content. All citizens should have an opportunity to take part in music (SOU 1954, p. 19.)
57 Persson 1998, pp. 1-3; Stålhammar 1995, pp. 260-261; Gustafsson 2000, p. 203.
In the 1960s (during the time of a lively popular-education movement in Sweden),58 different kinds of cultural projects were granted considerable fi nancial resources. This continued in the 1970s, yet the concept of culture as a basis for these investments widened. The Statement in which eight goals in the fi eld of cultural policy were formulated by Parliament has been considered of great importance. According to this Statement, cultural policy should:59
1. promote the right to free expression and create factual preconditions for the realization of this right;
2. create opportunities for creative activities of people as well as promote contacts between them;
3. counterbalance negative impacts of commercialism in the fi eld of culture;
4. promote the decentralization of activities and decision making in the fi eld of culture;
5. take account of the needs and experiences of existing groups;
6. enable artistic and cultural renewal;
7. secure the maintenance of earlier culture as well as keeping it alive;
8. promote the exchange of cultural experiences and ideas both nationally and internationally.
According to the 1976 Statement “Music – the Human Being – Society” (Musiken – människan – samhället), music is regarded both as a form of art essential for the development of individuals and as a means of communication with crucial functions in society. This view of music as an instrument of communication should have an effect on teacher education, as well as on the training of future orchestra musicians. According to the Statement, one of the aims of municipal music schools was to offer a basis for future professional studies. Therefore, special study programmes should also be available. In short, the social functions of music and music education were emphasised by Parliament. In addition, creativity and improvisation were stated to be of great importance, and several poems are included in this offi cial Statement.60
58 See SOU 1968: 15. The importance of the social functions of music education was stressed. For instance, playing in an ensemble (instrumental or vocal) was suggested to be good for training pupils to listen and follow the voices of the other members of the group (SOU 1968: 15, p. 19).
59 SOU 1976:33 pp. 50-52.
60 SOU 1976:33, pp. 78, 155, 207.
