Reaching the Disenfranchised: At-Risk Student Participation in Music

Abstract

Nearly all music educators will undoubtedly encounter at-risk students in their classrooms and these students are often influenced by a host of factors which have influence over their participation in music. Amidst research findings and contrasting definitions in literature, at-risk students, for the purposes of this study, are identified as individuals who are disenfranchised in school due to their socio-economic environment, lack of parental support, and/or low motivation. Research indicates that socioeconomic status, in particular, is seemingly interwoven with nearly all other factors influencing at-risk students, though it is neither the sole nor dominating factor. Furthermore, the influence of parental opinion on students as well as a mismatch between teacher instructional styles and student learning styles reflects other important connected factors affecting motivation. Research findings included interviews with a middle school band teacher along with observations of a 6 th grade middle school student over the course of several months, paralleling findings found in the literature review. This research aims to identify several key factors affecting at-risk student participation in music and provide possible strategies to aid student learning, however, further research into effective methods of adapting a variety of instructional styles in music is still needed.

Part I: Introduction

A scene of organized chaos filled the halls as groups of students slammed their lockers shut while catching up on summer gossip. This was a typical morning hallway scene during the first week of school at Reading Middle School in Iowa. With nearly 600 students clamoring through the halls, I anxiously awaited my first encounters working with highly energetic 6 th, 7 th, and 8 th grade students, anticipating challenges and growth throughout my student teaching experience. I was assigned to alternate between two music classrooms, spending my first day in the band room and the next day in the choir room. This unique opportunity to work in both the band and choir rooms at Reading Middle School allowed me to see nearly every student in the school, as music was a required course for middle school students in the district.

Among a group of 6 th grade students entering the band room, one particularly enthusiastic boy named Ben sat down eagerly on a chair in the 3-row horseshoe seating arrangement. There was no performing on the first day as my band mentor teacher, Mrs. Browning, and I administered a “getting to know you” activity. Ben and his classmates quickly took their sheets with various questions and began interviewing as many students as they could, finding out fascinating factual and biographical information about their peers. Ben’s eagerness continued as instruments were eventually assigned. Ben seemed to express great desire to examine and study his new saxophone. He showed good progress in lessons and class for the first few weeks.

Several more weeks passed with nearly every student beginning to grasp the touch and feel of their instruments along with a basic understanding of how to create a consistent sound on their instrument. Ben, however, began to fall slightly behind his peers in lesson books as he came to individual lessons and band class somewhat tired and unprepared. In an effort to understand this Ben’s falling performance, Mrs. Browning decided to wave a rental fee on the instrument after a series of numerous unanswered emails, phone calls, and notes home regarding our concerns. She even provided free reeds for Ben to use so he would not have to purchase a seemingly costly box of reeds. I offered to help Ben after school with extra lessons to help him catch up. Despite these various efforts to help relieve any financial and academic challenges, he continued to fall behind the class in his lesson book. Mrs. Browning and I unsuccessfully attempted to contact Ben’s father to see if Ben was receiving encouragement to practice at home. Eventually, Ben’s father finally contacted us, however he informed us that he wanted Ben to drop band and move into choir. Though we were disappointed with this decision, Ben was transferred.

Ben displayed little interest in choir. He seemed to return to his fatigued and less enthusiastic demeanor. He eventually became disruptive and uncooperative, refusing to sing while displaying an antagonistic attitude towards instruction. He eventually began encouraging others to join his “rebellion” of music and I disappointedly sent him to the office one class period for refusing to stand and join the choir when asked more than three times to cooperate. I saw Ben’s downward spiral as a disappointing and tragic loss as I witnessed a child’s enthusiasm for music education diminish before my eyes and I wondered: what was influencing Ben’s diminishing performance?

I was surprised to see such a culturally and economically diverse group at Reading. I grew up overseas in England, on a small military base with my family. Attending the DoDDS (Department of Defense Dependent Schools) system, I went to a school in a military community with strong parental support. With the strict military discipline of their parents, most students were well behaved and discipline issues were less prevalent. Unlike at Reading where, according to Mrs. Browning, nearly 60% of its students are on free or reduced lunch, my school had no students needing this form of financial support. I had fewer encounters with at-risk students growing up and therefore my interactions and observations with Ben at Reading Middle School was an eye-opening experience.

As I observed and interacted with Ben through his transition from band to choir, I was uneasy about his transformation and gradual unwillingness to participate in class. Reflecting on my experiences, two questions seem to demand clarity. First, what factors of at-risk students affect student participation in music? Second, what strategies can teachers employ to increase at-risk student participation? To help address these questions, I have reviewed research regarding the impact of parental support, physical and financial environment, and motivational conditions on at-risk student participation.

Part II: Literature Review

In an effort to shed light on factors which affect at-risk students, I uncovered a spectrum of definitions and interpretations regarding the term “at-risk.” Nearly all the sources I researched insisted that this term be clearly defined to establish a context in which at-risk students are identified and observed. In her study “Who is At Risk in the Music Classroom?” (2004), Nicole Robinson interviewed various music directors on how they defined “at-risk” students. These music teachers, working with a diverse range of grade levels in urban and rural school settings, described at-risk students as individuals with a lack of interest in school, those with extreme behavioral problems, or those students who are simply disadvantaged for any reason in school (p. 1). In a simpler over-arching explanation, J. Lynn McBrien and Ronald Brandt define “at-risk” students in their text The Language of Learning (1997), as “students who have a higher than average probability of dropping out or failing school” (p. 9). Both of these resources demonstrate contrasting and varied understandings of the term “at-risk” and it is important to note the existence of this dichotomy. Based on several common recurring themes throughout my research shared as well in my student teaching experience, I will define “at-risk” students as individuals who are disenfranchised in school due to their socio-economic environment, lack of parental support, and/or low motivation.

With this understanding of my parameters in defining “at-risk,” my research unveiled information regarding the influence of socioeconomic status (SES) in music. In Daniel Albert’s research entitled “Socioeconomic Status and Instrumental Music” (2006), several studies by other researchers regarding the relationship between SES and instrumental music programs were analyzed. Albert describes correlations in these studies between SES and the environment at home and school in several studies. Researcher J. Kozol (cited in Albert, 2006) argued that SES directly influences teaching environments. Describing his time spent in low SES schools, Kozol noticed poorly equipped instrumental music programs where students used old and worn instruments in overcrowded rooms (cited in Albert, 2006, p. 39).

In another related study from this article, researcher S. Phillips (cited in Albert, 2006) observed several 6 th through 8 th grade instrumental music classes in comparison with federal free and reduced lunch statistics. Phillips noted how SES seemed to affect the rate of participation in a music program (cited in Albert, 2006, p. 41). Albert presents a series of studies in his article which indicate a relationship between the level of participation in instrumental music and SES. There is, however, no mention by Albert of the relationship between vocal music programs and SES in his research.

The impact of SES on students’ perception of music and retention in the music classroom seems to be revealed by Barr Corenblum and Eric Marshall in their article “The Band Played On: Predicting Students’ Intentions to Continue Studying Music” (1998). They discuss their research with a ninth grade band class, explaining how students provided information in a survey about their SES levels, academic performance, and perceptions about band (p. 134). The results of the survey indicated that SES level correlated with the level of student interest in continuing in band (p. 134). According to Corenblum and Marshall (1998), lower SES students had less of an interest in continuing their music studies while those students “in privileged positions within [our] culture….believ[ed] that people should be encouraged to excel at and continue in music…” (p. 136). Based on this research and my experience in various music classrooms I wondered: is SES the dominating factor which affects student participation in music?

Further study of Corenblum and Marshall’s survey (1998, p. 130) seems to indicate that other factors affecting student participation in music, such as the relationship between parent opinion about a school and student participation in music, is only partially explained by SES. Their survey revealed that SES level could be used to predict the level of support from parents to students, ultimately influencing whether a student intends to continue participating in instrumental music or not (p.136). They concluded that students valued and often shared their parents’ opinion regarding music participation (p.137). Corenblum and Marshall acknowledge in their study that parental opinion is still of value to students, though other factors are influential in at-risk student music participation as well.
Another characteristic which seems to affect at-risk student participation in music includes motivational issues. Scott Schuler describes in his article “Music, At-Risk Students, and the Missing Piece” (1991), how reasons for at-risk students’ failure can be narrowed down to an “inability to learn” and the “lack of desire to learn” (p. 23). Specifically, at-risk students with a limited background of “physical and intellectual tools,” coupled with our limited ability as educators to influence our students’ home environments create a nearly impossible situation to learn (p. 23). This failure seems to create the lack of motivation to pursue learning. Though he does not relate his research solely to music, Schuler mentions how in education there is generally a mismatch between preferred learning styles and the actual method of instruction used (1991, p.23). Schuler also explains that “most teachers teach...biased toward their own preferred style,” often in the way they were taught (1991, p. 24). Schuler’s article seems to indicate that lack of motivation, as a result of much mismatch in instruction and learning styles, is a significant factor which influences participation in all subjects, including music.

Through all my previous research, it is evident that there are far more studies pertaining to elements which influence at-risk students in instrumental music than in vocal. In addition, the term “at-risk” poses a dichotomy of definitions, with an endless list of factors which together seem to create a wide interpretive framework for students falling in this category. It is clear that there are a host of explanations and ways to interpret what factors influence “at-risk” student participation in music, however, socio-economics seem to be interwoven in nearly all research. With research indicating how SES is seemingly interwoven in nearly all other factors involving “at-risk” students, this “mesh” seems to be evident in my own observations in my student teaching experience. In my music student teaching experience at Reading, I noticed similar factors influencing at-risk student participation identified in my research. However, as I recall the financial costs of participation in the music program at Reading Middle School, my previous inquiry will be redirected: how does socioeconomic status influence other factors of at-risk student participation in music, based on my own teaching experience? Are socioeconomics the dominating factor on at-risk student participation?

Part III: Research Findings

Focusing on the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on at-risk students in my classroom during my student teaching experience, it seems necessary to acknowledge my background and perspective as I began my interactions and observations at Reading Middle School. Coming from a two-parent household, I grew up overseas in various countries as a “military brat,” attending a school in the DoDDS (Department of Defense Dependent Schools) system. With a strong sense of militaristic discipline instilled in most of my fellow students, lack of parental support was not a significant issue at my school. School programs and students were well supported financially with no students needing a free or reduced lunch. My school, with an enrolment of approximately 250 students in grades 7-12, was dwarfed by the nearly 600 students in grades 6-8 at Reading. With my school’s music program structured around a few instrument ensembles, I was amazed with Reading’s numerous bands and a structured schedule of individual instrument lessons. Thus, I came to Reading with a partial awareness of socioeconomic influence on student participation in music and limited experience with many behavioral issues associated with at-risk students as I negotiated an unfamiliar music program structure. With these stark contrasts and potential biases acknowledged, I will embark on a review of my time at Reading Middle School as I reveal my past reflections, interviews, and observations about a music student seemingly influenced by socioeconomics.

During my first week of student teaching, I was overwhelmed with a new school culture and a lengthy list of tasks, including distributing instruments to the 6 th grade band students. While distributing instruments to the 6 th grade band students, I noticed that one student in particular who seemed lost and confused amongst his peers. Most students had taken summer lessons with Mrs. Browning, my cooperating teacher, and seemed to know the correct procedure of how to assemble their instruments; Ben, however, appeared somewhat frustrated. Mrs. Browning eventually directed Ben to his instrument locker and then assigned me to take him to the orchestra room next door to help him learn the basics on how to assemble his instrument. As I was heading next door, Mrs. Browning commented to me that she wasn’t surprised with Ben confusion and frustration as she explained that she knew Ben’s family in past due to Ben’s brother being in band for several years. She mentioned how Ben’s family constantly disapproved of the band program and it would be somewhat of an “interesting and challenging start in band for Ben.”

In the orchestra room Ben appeared to have never seen, nonetheless touch or assemble, a saxophone in his entire life as he tentatively opened and stared at the instrument in its case. I demonstrated how to attach the neck to the main body of the saxophone, explaining the necessity of being delicate to avoid bending any fragile keys as well as the intricacies of putting a reed on a mouthpiece. After I disassembled the entire instrument, Ben eagerly reassembled the instrument together with enthusiasm, however, he broke the reed in half and I calmly reminded him about how fragile the reed was. We then returned to the music room to rejoin the band and to find a replacement reed for Ben. When I explained what had happened with the reed to Mrs. Browning, she seemed disappointed as she handed another reed to Ben, reminding him once again to be careful with his instrument. From my numerous discussions with Mrs. Browning, it seems that she had hoped that Ben, despite her lower expectations that he would succeed, would somehow break a mold of failure established by his brother in the past. As he left the classroom, Ben seemed intimidated yet excited in his expression about the prospects of performing his saxophone. Mrs. Browning, on the other hand, seemed less optimistic in her expression and demeanor as Ben exited. She explained that she questioned Ben’s probable success and continuation in band. It seems that McBrien and Brandt’s (1997) description of at-risk students as those likely to drop out of school would ring true as it was at this point in my observation and interactions with Ben that I would begin recognizing him as at-risk.

I wondered if Mrs. Browning was able to predict, based on her many years of working with at-risk students, the outcome for Ben in the coming months. I interviewed her about any previous encounters with Ben’s father and his overall family situation. According to Mrs. Browning, many of the faculty and administration struggled with Ben’s father as he was constantly aggressive in confrontations in previous years. Ben’s father was quite antagonistic as he disagreed with many academic and scholastic requirements, such as school starting at 8:10 a.m. It was known by the school that Ben’s mother apparently did not live with his father and Ben’s brother in the past struggled with truancy, occasionally missing morning classes or an entire day. His brother was, according to Mrs. Browning, very “disrespectful and often unprepared” in band. Based on this information and the fact that Ben and his brother were qualified for free or reduced lunches, it was acknowledged by most of the faculty that Ben was from a single-parent low-socioeconomic household. Mrs. Browning concluded my informal interview by mentioning how Ben’s father’s less supportive role regarding band in the past seemed to indicate that Ben, like his brother, would likely struggle with participation and interest in band. In my literary research, Correnblum and Marshall (1998) mentioned that students valued and often shared their parents’ opinion regarding music participation (p.137). Would Ben share a negative opinion about band with his father, showing little care of his instrument or dropping the class altogether?

For the next month, Ben defied this presumption as he showed great interest and desire to excel with the saxophone despite his struggle to progress with his peers in completing assignments. During one band period near the end of the month, however, as Mrs. Browning was leading the ensemble, I walked over to the saxophone section to see Ben bored and unengaged, turning his saxophone upside down and bouncing it on his knee. With one of the most fragile keys, the long and thin octave key, in jeopardy of being bent beyond repair, I attempted to discretely yet quickly move to intercept. Unfortunately, I did not reach Ben in time and the instrument hit the floor with a loud bang, abruptly stopping the rehearsal as Mrs. Browning scolded Ben for a lack of care for his instrument. I had to take Ben, once again, to the orchestra room to review proper instrument care. To my surprise, Ben showed great focus and desire to learn as we began our “mini-lesson,” remarking that he felt he was more motivated when working individually and that he learned more in individual lessons. Despite his optimism with the prospects of an individual lesson with me, Ben seemed to still struggle with understanding the true value of his instrument.

Perhaps, with little or no support from home, Ben did not understand the value of his instrument and the costs to the band program when repairing an instrument. Ben’s inability to fully grasp a basic understanding of how to read music or play his instrument seems to confirm Schuler’s (1991) study which describes reasons for at-risk student failure as an “inability to learn” and “lack of desire to learn,” ultimately resulting from little control over the home environment (p. 23). In addition, Ben seemed to be more engaged with learning how to play his instrument within individual lessons as opposed working with the entire ensemble, paralleling Schuler’s (1991) conclusions about a mismatch between many at-risk students’ learning styles and teachers’ preferred instructional styles. Ben’s preference for individual lessons and attention did not seem to correspond well with the general larger group style instruction commonly associated with band. With several examples regarding Ben’s falling participation in Band, the inquiry of whether SES is the main factor influencing participation in music remains.

Parent-teacher conferences were held, a month later, near the end of the first trimester. As music teachers, there were no specific conferences scheduled for us with parents; however, we made an effort to seek out various conferences throughout the building to provide praise or alerts for successful and struggling students. Mrs. Browning and I targeted Ben’s conference with caution as we anticipated a temper-filled response from his father regarding Ben’s low grade. I left our brief conference in shock as Ben’s father informed us that Ben would be dropping band and taking choir instead, as a result of “financial burdens.” Ben had informed me earlier in the year that he strongly disliked singing as the main reason for choosing band. This transfer seemed to contradict my understanding of Ben’s desire to be in band. Mrs. Browning seemed less surprised at the end of the conference as she mentioned that despite her efforts to waive the instrument rental fee and provide free instrument supplies, it seemed inevitable that Ben would leave band. She mentioned how this situation happened in the past with Ben’s brother as she explained that without parental support, it was simply a matter of time. Whether this was possibly the result of low SES, poor parental support, or most likely the combination of both, I was disheartened as I pondered over how I could have been more of a help to Ben.

Through my research findings during my student teaching experience, I have found various examples of factors which seem to influence at-risk student participation in music. In my observations and discussions at Reading Middle School, I discovered various issues regarding SES and its influence on Ben’s success in music. It seems that despite all of Ben’s enthusiasm and energy towards learning how to play the saxophone earlier in the year, there were many hurdles blocking his progress. As I reflect on my student teaching experience, I wonder if there was something more that could have been done to help nurture Ben’s desire to study music. What can be done for at-risk student participation in music?

Part IV: Implications for Future Practice

Through a literature review and observations within my research findings, several commonly repeated key factors such as socio-economic environment, lack of parental support, and/or low motivation are common influences on at-risk student participation in music. A review of literature seems to discuss, in particular, the common influences of SES in music. Though this does not appear to be the only factor which is significant in affecting at-risk student participation in music, it seems that SES should not be simply placed equally in a list of other influential factors, such as parental support and motivation. Rather, SES appears to be interwoven with nearly all factors affecting at-risk students. Based on my observations of one student during my student teaching experience, I would assert that the level of parental support is sometimes influenced by income. This in turn, appears to negatively affect student motivation at school as lack of home support for studies and low financial support for various scholastic fees seems to stunt student achievement. In Ben’s case, monetary restraints and a mismatch between learning and teaching styles made it seemingly inevitable that he would lose some interest in his learning. These negative factors, combined with his father’s poor support of band, most likely led to Ben’s transfer to choir and our failure to nurture an at-risk’s students desire to learn.

Nearly all educators will undoubtedly encounter at-risk students in their classrooms and I believe that all educators should question whether they or the school have a full understanding of an at-risk student’s background before adapting instruction, administering discipline, or passing judgment. As music educators, I would contend that there is much that can be done for at-risk students to improve their participation in music. An understanding of the how socioeconomic situations influence participation in music, along with reduced or waived fees in music, would allow at-risk students to participate free from financial burdens. In addition, perhaps providing a more varied array of instructional styles as opposed to the traditional group rehearsal, such as hosting sectionals or individual rehearsal periods, would accommodate students, such as Ben, with different learning styles. Most importantly, however, I would contend that a realization that parental support affects student motivation is crucial, as fostering a positive relationship with the parent could positively affect student attitude and motivation at school. I found the opposite true in student teaching as neither Mrs. Browning nor I was able to develop a positive rapport with Ben’s father. Perhaps, had we established a positive relationship, Ben’s outcome in music would have been different.

I have learned that there is no crystal clear definition of what constitutes an at-risk student and that there are no sole factors which can be selected as the factor to address when faced with participation issues. I have taken one approach in addressing these issues, however, there are undoubtedly many ways to assess and diagnose problems with at-risk student participation in music. Perhaps further research into methods of adapting instructional styles in music would allow music educators to effectively accommodate the varied learning styles of at-risk students. Ultimately, what seems most important is that an effort is made by all educators to tackle this broad issue in an attempt to help those students who are truly disenfranchised.

References:

Albert, D. J. (2006). Socioeconomic status and instrumental music: What does the research say about the relationshipand its implications? Applications of Research in Music Education, 25(1), 39-45.

Cirenblum, B. & Marshall, E. (1998). The band played on: Predicting students’ intentions to continue studying music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(1), 128-140.

McBrien, J. Lynn & Brandt, Ronald S. (1997). The language of learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Robinson, Nicole R. (2004). Who is “at-risk” in the music classroom? Music Educators Journal, 90(4), 38-45.

Schuler, Scott C. (1991). Music, at-risk students, and the missing piece. Music Educators Journal, 78(3), 21-29.