Article published In: Ramos, Fernando Sadio (ed.) 2007, Educação para a Cidadania Europeia com as Artes. Coimbra: Universidad de Granada, Center for Intercultural Music Arts. 105-116.
This article focuses on the challenges confronting European music education in relation to various social changes experienced at the beginning of this century: the increasing mobility of people across the globe, the growing influence from immigrant culture and the growing availability of cultural expressions from virtually all over the world. A key understanding is that both music education and music performance by necessity are ideologically founded practices. In the European discourse concerning children and the arts, a dominating trend can be characterised as a multicultural ideology. By analysing selected multicultural music projects in Scandinavia – both in schools and elsewhere – this article looks at current trends, assessing results and consequences of a few highly profiled projects of an experimental or pioneering character. Based on an evaluation of this material, it is argued that there is a need for increasing the awareness of music as a social practice which on the one hand produces identification and group coherence, but on the other hand, also may contribute to the production and maintenance of social difference. In conclusion, it is argued that there is a need for reconceptualising the prevailing image of music as an instrument for cross-cultural understanding in music education and in the general presentation of music directed towards children.
Music has always has been a vehicle of cultural contact across borders and continents. What characterises the so-called age of globalisation we are living in is the increased mobility of people across the globe, increased opportunities for cultural contact and the ever-growing speed and effortlessness of such contact facilitated by the rapid development of communication technology. Music cultures are no longer connected primarily to place . As demonstrated by Mark Slobin (1993) , thanks to global marketing a locally embedded music – a subculture – can take the leap and become a superculture in a matter of weeks. Increasingly, as Dan Lundberg has pointed out, (Lundberg, Malm, and Ronström 2003) through use of the Internet as an arena of cultural interaction, social groups and communities are constructed and maintained in cyberspace, sometimes without any fundamental connection to a physical place at all.
From a European perspective one of the most obvious consequences is the growing presence of different ethnic groups, especially in urban spaces. Over the past 20-30 years we have witnessed a development in most of Europe which forcefully places interaction – or lack of interaction – between people of different national or ethnic groups on the social, cultural and political agenda. Waves of labour immigrants started arriving to Western Europe in the late 1960s, and later on, asylum seekers from many different parts of the world have arrived. Today we live in what are often described as multicultural societies, characterised by the presence of a large number of more or less visible ethnic communities, and possibilities for involving ourselves in cultural expressions from virtually all over the world. Consequently, there is a need for challenging the notion of a “European citizenship” and how this relates to cultural diversity. In this article I have chosen to concentrate on a number of issues closely related this multicultural challenge using examples from “cutting edge” music education projects in Scandinavia . This will be supplemented with some considerations concerning terminology and a discussion focussing on the Norwegian national education plan, L97.
Now, what do we understand by “multicultural”. Over the past two decades this warhorse of a word has become a politically correct mantra, strewn generously over the plans and projects of cultural organisations and institutions. In our context, it may be useful to regard multiculturalism in reference to ideology: to more or less coherent systems of thoughts and ideas. In a number of cultural, educational and political institutions the implementation of a multicultural ideology is seen as an appropriate way of confronting our social reality. In many cases, it is seen as the most logical, necessary way of confronting this reality.
There are various understandings of what a multicultural ideology entails, but some central points can be identified. The term draws upon a number of other discourses with wide implications, democracy, equality, and even human rights. It generally implies a relativistic stance in the sense that it upholds the equal worth of all cultural expressions. The cultural meeting point is seen as more valuable than authenticity. It is held that everyone has a right to enjoy all the musics of the world, and any specific music culture may very well be taught and enjoyed detached from its original setting. Implementing a multicultural ideology in music education generally refers to the teaching of a broad spectrum of music cultures in the curriculum although, as we shall see later, it may refer to the in-depth study of one particular non-Western music culture.
It may be noted that the term “multicultural” is showing signs of wear. Increasingly we find that cultural institutions tend to refrain from using this label for their projects. Alternative terms like “cultural diversity” or sometimes “cultural super-diversity” are being employed. Efforts are being made to integrate the multicultural strategies into the more ordinary activity of institutions without necessarily assigning the multicultural label to this work. Still, this does not mean that there is no longer a need for addressing issues related to the social role of music culture in modern society: creating bonds, building boundaries and stimulating interaction between groups of people.
In the many multicultural music projects in Scandinavia there has always been a particular focus on reaching children. This is based on the view that children possess a natural curiosity for “otherness”, that they have an open mind when it comes to conceptions of difference and that they show a much greater ability for identification and social interaction across ethnic boundaries than teenagers or adults. It is therefore regarded as crucial to reach children with multicultural efforts before racial or ethnic prejudice - which they unavoidably will encounter during their upbringing - gets a chance to take hold (see Skyllstad 1993) .
In justifying multicultural music education, different rationales can be identified. At the one end of the scale we find rationales of a socio-political kind, which have a dominating presence in music education debates, especially concerning the primary and secondary schools. It is held that through the study of various music cultures – especially immigrant cultures – pupils can develop a better understanding for the different peoples that make up our common society, gain self-esteem and learn tolerance for others. Pupils may study a particular music culture as a way to understand the people who make the music or identify with the music. We may also speak of a global rationale which maintains that by getting to know music from various parts of the world students are likely to develop a better understanding of international relationships and a respect for the inhabitants of other countries. Socio-political rationales focus on the relationship between music and the social reality that surrounds us. They imply an instrumental way of viewing music: music is seen as a useful tool for reaching social, educational or other “non-musical” goals.
At the other end of the scale we find aesthetic or subject-oriented rationales for encouraging multicultural music education. These may focus on the intrinsic value of the music experience, which may be appreciated by anyone regardless of cultural background. They may a focus on musical elements; arguing that studying the music of other cultures can broaden the student's view of music making in general and make them more open to new musical sounds. Learning concepts, performance practices and instrumental techniques of various different cultures worldwide can provide a wider palette of musical ideas, compositional techniques, and improvisational devices.
The field of tension established between these sets of rationales relates to “eternal” debates in music education and cultural policies which can be articulated in various ways: As the appreciation of music based on intrinsic qualities in the music or is it culturally constructed? Are we interested in aesthetic qualities or qualities of human interaction? Should we regard engaging in music as a goal in itself or an instrument for reaching extra-musical goals? As we will see further on, addressing these questions has major consequences for the development of music education. They appear in different ways in the music education projects I will refer to in the remainder of this lecture.
The use of labels such as multicultural may be simplifying and may have some troublesome implications, especially by leading to a type of categorisation which in certain cases is unwanted by musicians or other actors involved. When applied to music styles, the term multicultural can have a number of different meanings - anything from “non-European” to “cross-over” to “hybrid”. In the press, individual performers or music teachers even find themselves labelled multicultural artists although the music they play is limited to one particular style of music from some non-Western country. For example, when the Municipal School for Music and Culture in Oslo launched their new so-called multicultural music education program in late 2002, they started out by offering children “with roots in Asian culture” courses in tabla and traditional song from their own countries of origin. Evidently, the only multicultural aspect of this music teaching comes down to the fact that this was “foreign” music being taught in Norway .
For musicians and music educators alike, being placed in the category “multicultural” may be experienced as an under-estimation of their qualities as musicians for the benefit of the social effects of their art. It is my impression from various “multicultural projects” in Scandinavia that immigrant musicians do not always look at their work as multicultural and do not necessarily share the ideological foundations of egalitarianism and relativism promoted by the project organisers. In my many conversations with immigrant performers I have become acquainted with various other issues that are seen as more important, such as notions of authenticity, the commercial potential of their music, a focus on aesthetic qualities or a focus on music activity as a tool for developing and maintaining the culture of their own particular immigrant culture.
In Denmark we can find a parallel to these considerations in the social construction of the word “ rytmisk ” (rhythmic) in recent efforts aimed at including popular music genres in the educational system. In Danish music education the “rytmisk” has over the past 20 years been constructed as an overarching term designating a large group of styles including jazz, popular music, Latin-American and African music. According to rhythmic music educators in Denmark , this use of the label “ rytmisk ” has been an overall success. It has become a necessary and effective tool in their struggles aimed at challenging the hegemony of classical European music in higher education, and has contributed to the establishment of various new courses and educational institutions such as Rytmisk Aftenskole and Rytmisk Musikkonservatorium in Copenhagen . More recently this terminology has also spread to Norway , for example in the naming of the “ rytmisk linje ”, the rhythmic course of study at the Agder University College .
I would argue that although wide and sometimes unclear terms like “ rytmisk ” or “multicultural” produce a simplified understanding of a complex field consisting of a variety of music genres, they have still been effective instruments in educational debates. The use of these terms has established a field, which politicians and educators alike can recognise and refer to in their work. However, regardless of how we understand the terms, what counts in this connection is whether music education, within the school system and elsewhere, is up to confronting the cultural and social challenges posed by the dramatic changes in society resulting from globalisation.
In any nation music education is used as a nation-building tool; not least through the school system. During my school years in Oslo in the late 1960s – long before globalization and multiculture were even invented – we had no music on our timetables, we had song . Our very traditional song teacher from a western fjord had a special preference for psalms and songs of the national romanticist canon which he would sing, very loudly, sometimes walking up and down the aisles, accompanied by 26 boys - only boys – standing beside our desks and singing along as best we could. After school I would perhaps go to a friend's house and listen to records of Jimmi Hendrix, the Beatles or Cornelis Wreesvijk. The national Norwegian mythology prevailed in music education and there was a deep divide between school culture and popular culture outside the classroom.
Much has happened since then, and Norway is today a very different society. Music educators today recognise that their teaching must reach much further than the so-called “Norwegian song treasure” ( den norske sangskatten ) and that there is an urgent need for music education to keep in touch with the present social and cultural world outside the classroom. Still, I would argue that in many educational institutions and, not least, in official publications on education the national mythology persists as the predominating ideology.
The national educational plan in force in Norway today, - L97 - displays strong emphasis on values linked to the Norwegian nation and national heritage. Norwegian national identity is evidently understood as coinciding with the identity of the individual pupil; linked to notions of a common history and heritage. The language of L97 is directed exclusively towards teachers of a Norwegian background; clearly constructing a boundary between a “we” and an “other”. It is taken for granted that the “we” refers to ethnic Norwegian teachers and pupils, while the “other” is to be understood as people with some kind of unspecified immigrant background. In reference to music, this becomes evident through the way in which concepts like “ our song and dance traditions” and “songs from other cultures and countries” are used.
If we take a closer look at what L97 says in the section about music education, we see a certain influence from what can be called a “multidimensional” view of music culture. It stresses that music education should take into account the different cultural backgrounds of the pupils, but at the same time emphasises strongly the need for developing national identity by teaching music of the so-called “Norwegian cultural heritage”, “ den norske kulturarven ”. Looking at the musical repertoire suggested for teaching we can find a number of references to music of different cultures and styles, especially for the higher grades, but still, a dominating focus on the promotion of nationally emblematic culture prevails (1). I have a feeling that many music teachers, especially those teaching classes including children of various ethnic backgrounds, will feel that complying with a repertoire of this kind is rather problematic.
It may be necessary to point out what I find worth criticising in the L97 is not the promotion of Norwegian culture as such, but the particular kind of Norwegian-ness suggested, and the way in which notions of otherness are constructed. This issue has to do with fundamental questions regarding what understandings we have of the nation and national identity. Is the nation an inherited, homogenous and basically unchangeable entity, or is it a diverse, multifaceted and ever-changing imagined community? There is no room for further treatment of this issue here, although it requires little imagination to acknowledge that it poses substantial challenges for any socially conscious music teacher.
However, regarding the educational plan L97, it must be said that it does reflect a growing interest in socio-cultural aspects of involvement in music. Processes of enculturation - through which much informal social learning is accomplished – have been taken seriously. This involves a recognition that individuals refer to their musical identity when positioning themselves in relation to social variables such as gender, age, ethnicity or religion. To use Christopher Small's terminology, “ musicking” (Small 1998) is seen as an important sociocultural activity which binds people together, an expressive, communicative and essentially non-verbal art. In the educational setting, music is recognised not only as a subject centred on acquiring knowledge about music or learning practical skills, but a subject that articulates and communicates values and attitudes; that challenges and shapes personal and collective identities. Quoting L97, in music education “community and cooperation are just as important as quality and the mastering of skills ” (2) (KUF 1996) .
A number of pioneering music projects in Scandinavia have during the past 15-20 years been based on the understanding of music as a useful tool for creating this community and cooperation. Among these it is impossible to overlook the “Resonant community” project organised by the Norwegian concert institute from 1989 to 1992.
Here the articulated rationale was basically socio-political. The project was founded on an explicit anti-racist agenda guided by a vision of a future society based on solidarity and co-operation. The underlying ideology was closely connected to a sociocultural understanding of the practice of music implying that musical cooperation creates social values, sympathy and togetherness. The main goal was “to contribute to a change of attitude towards immigrants among Norwegian elementary school pupils” (Skyllstad 1993: 3) . This was to be achieved by presenting pupils with live music from Africa, Latin America and Asia , combined with preparatory lessons in class and music and dance workshops with the musicians. Through concerts and active participation the project aimed at improving inter-group relations and reducing intolerance and discrimination.
“The resonant community” project was evaluated through extensive questionnaires and observation. Basically, what the project report (Skyllstad 1993) says is that music works as a socio-political instrument. That “fostering intercultural understanding through music” is possible. The most noteworthy result was the reported reduction in racial and ethnic prejudice in groups of pupils who had been engaged in the most extensive and active contact with immigrant musicians. The report concludes that in the eyes of many of the Norwegian pupils, immigrant culture and the bearers of this culture stand out in a new light. The “Resonant community” report from has been of great use to anyone wanting to justify cultural projects aimed at encouraging anti-racism and cross-ethnic relations. One could hardly underestimate the impact it has had on Norwegian as well as other Scandinavian thinking about music education.
In the years that followed the Norwegian Concert institute continued its multicultural efforts, organising several thousand school concerts and workshops involving immigrant musicians. A market for immigrant music in schools was created, with the spin-off effect of stimulating various immigrant performers in music education as well as in the concert setting.
A number of other “multicultural” initiatives followed, although rarely based on exclusively social aims, as in the case of the “resonant community”. In the county of Akershus, a two-year project (1995-1997) called “multicultural music experiments” provided funding for a wide array of very different initiatives in schools youth clubs an international culture centres. (Show overhead) The only main thing they had in common was that the projects employed music educators with an immigrant background and set them to work with children and adolescents.
As in the “resonant community” project, the basic justification was largely of a socio-political character. Its primary aims were: “to give knowledge about the musical tradition of other cultures, to spread knowledge and create understanding for the values of immigrant cultures and to integrate musicians from non-European cultures into the Norwegian Municipal music schools.
The evaluation of this project, which I carried out myself in cooperation with anthropologist Odd Are Berkaak presented a more complex picture (Knudsen and Berkaak 1998) . While there was overall satisfaction with the way in which cultural meeting places were made possible through music, a number of controversies arose connected to, among other things, the role of the music teacher and the choice of repertoire. Cultural differences surfaced, occasionally challenging the overall aims of the project. When the project management tried to arrange a musical meeting between an immigrant Vietnamese pop group and the local heavy-metal band it soon became obvious that their cultural worlds were incompatible. Despite the good intentions and the pluralistic ideology of the organisers it soon proved that death metal did not match very well with the love music of the young Vietnamese. Music, which was meant to be a medium for creating contact between the two groups, served first and foremost as a marker of difference and a tool for maintaining the distance between them. Music may create bonds, but it creates boundaries too. This particular case is discussed in a fascinating master's thesis in sociology by H. P. Einarsen called The meeting that didn't take place (Einarsen 1998) .
The focus on multicultural issues has prevailed. In recent projects such as the ambitious Norwegian initiative “T he Cultural Rucksack (3)” ( Den kulturelle skolesekken ) – a national program for professional arts and culture in schools – organisers are explicitly obliged to make cultural programs that reflect the cultural diversity of Norwegian society.
During the 1990s, the ideological foundation of multicultural music projects in Scandinavia widened considerably and a number of interesting issues surfaced. One could notice a stronger focus on ways in which music education methods could benefit from impulses from non-European cultures, notably African. In 1994, a music school in Fredrikstad ( Norway ), in cooperation with the Østfold University College embarked on a bilateral cooperation project with Zimbabwe , involving on the Zimbabwean side, music schools, several Teachers' colleges and ZAME: the Zimbabwe Association of Music Educators. Contrasting the social goals of projects mentioned earlier, this project was initially based entirely on a wish to inspire and improve Norwegian music education. There was little emphasis on socio-political side effects. This cooperation has continued over more than ten years, organising exchanges of teachers and students, seminars, concerts and workshops in both countries. For the opening of the Oslo World music festival in October 2003, a group of girls from Fredrikstad performed at the opening concert playing a set of the large Marimbas developed in Zimbabwean educational institutions.
For the Norwegian music educators the cooperation with Zimbabwe has led to a long-lasting and profound engagement in a foreign music culture. It has made a deep impact on the individual music teacher, challenging and provoking common conceptions of African culture and African music education. Eventually, new instruments, music material and teaching methods with a focus on oral transmission, became a permanent part of music education in the Fredrikstad music school. But what was even more interesting was what happened to the organisational structure of the school. The teachers soon found that Zimbabwean music and music teaching methods didn't fit very well into the organisational structure of a Norwegian municipal music school. In order to be taken seriously, this music demanded a profound restructuring of the school. Consequently, a new model was implemented involving more playing in groups, more frequent informal performances, and compulsory dance and movement lessons for all pupils. What the Fredrikstad teachers understood was that simply introducing new music styles into this conservative middle-class institution was not possible without changing the entire educational structure. A different music requires a different organisation – you can't put new wine in old wineskins.
There are many other examples of the African influence, which for almost 20 years has exerted a growing influence on Norwegian music education. Educators and students have regularly visited countries such as South Africa , Tanzania and Zimbabwe ; some of them engaged in long-lasting projects involving study trips and teacher exchange. From 1992 until today, the music teacher training program at the Malmö Music Academy ( Sweden ) has sent students to The Gambia as a compulsory part of their training (Sæther 2003, 1993) . Through a “total immersion” in African music and traditional culture they were to receive impressions and inspiration, and develop a “multicultural consciousness”. A key conception was that a “cultural shock” might lead to a reconsideration of existing educational practice, and thereby make the students better equipped to face the challenges of teaching music in multicultural Sweden .
The small number of African music educators living in Scandinavia have become sought-after instructors regularly teaching courses at most of the conservatories, universities and teacher training institutions. African percussion instruments are recognised as handy and adaptable instruments, requiring little training in order to function acceptably as educational instruments. Today, in the early childhood education courses at the Oslo University College , the originally West-African djembe is undoubtedly the most common instrument, having completely ousted traditional educational instruments such as the recorder, the piano and the Orff xylophone.
Adapting for example West-African rhythms to Norwegian music education involves changes in teaching methods as well as in the music material. Arguably, a new style of primarily educational music is being constructed. In adapting African elements to practical teaching in a Norwegian setting, links to roots and origins often become secondary. Djembe rhythms are simplified and adapted to non-African styles such as calypso or swing. Sometimes they are given new “Scandinavian” names such as galopp or ja en-to . New instruments are being designed, such as brightly coloured fibre-glass djembes, or sound boxes made of plywood, based on the principles of the African slit-drums.
The most obvious difference between the African-based music of the Scandinavian educational music culture and traditional music heard in the countries of origin is that the polyrhythmic aspect is often lost. In West Africa , music structured around only one djembe drum rhythm is rare. As John Chernoff (1979:72) puts it: “in African music there are always at least two rhythms going on at the same time”. Regretfully, in Norwegian music education there has so far not been anyone with interest and capacity to create a comprehensive music teaching program taking the complexities and cultural connotations of African musics seriously, in the way that pioneers such as Robert Kwami did in the UK, Ghana and South Africa (Kwami 1993, 1995) .
However, I don't think we should fall for the temptation to denounce this emerging educational music as inferior because of the obvious westernisation it is marked by. For the common music educator, notions of authenticity are by and large seen as irrelevant in the practical teaching situation - the main point is that the music works; that it creates a foundation for playing groovy music, and that it produces easily accessible experiences of the enjoyment of music in groups of children. Rather than asking for authenticity, we should perhaps recognise that a new style of syncretic music is evolving. Parallel to the so-called Orff-music of the past century – which also came with its own a particular instrumentarium – this Scandi-African style of educational music not only creates a good foundation for other music learning, but has its own qualities by virtue of its capacity for creating a music experience centred on rhythm, body movement, social interaction and improvisation.
The interest in African music in teaching institutions is in many cases linked to a search for holism and authenticity combined with the idea of something missing in Western culture. In a Danish book on drum games presently on the curriculum at the Oslo University College the introduction says:
“In our culture we have lost music as en integrated and important part of everyday life, and we are witnessing a collective “delearning” of the rhythmical and musical creative potential during the course of childhood” (Hedegaard 1995:7) .
Parallel as to what I pointed out in dealing with L97, this quote refers to an unspecified “we” which in continuation is contrasted with the “other” of Afro-American culture. It almost seems as if African music provides some kind of cure for a deficiency disease affecting Westerners. In writings by various other Scandinavian authors (see for example Bjørkvold 1992) engaged in re-conceptualising music education we find a similar emphasis on the innate rhythmic and bodily qualities of Africans, contrasting “us”, the stiff mind-oriented westerners. The risk of constructing romantic stereotypes – the noble savage etc. – should be obvious.
Until now I have dealt with a few perspectives related to largely successful music projects influencing music education. Before finishing I would like to focus on a couple of the more critical voices. In his recent book: “music – strategy and happiness” Øyvind Varkøy (2003) criticises the dominating instrumental view of music education in general, and the way this view dominates L97 in particular. Varkøy asserts that in current debates on music education, notions of quality are as good as absent. He attributes this to pluralistic tendencies in cultural discourse; to a widespread and naïve belief in the limitlessness of tolerance, and to the fear many music educators have of expressing attitudes that in any way might be understood as ethnocentric. Varkøy calls for music educators to base their teaching on the understanding of music as an aesthetic experience, especially highlighting the emotional engagement this experience involves. He encourages educators to bear in mind what he calls the “useless use” of music. Instead of focusing on the social effects of a musical practice, they should treat music as an initiator of emotional experiences, individually or with others - within a culture or cross-culturally. According to Varkøy “It is when we focus on the aesthetic experience as the primary goal of music education that the positive side effects (secondary functions) are shown to best advantage” (4) (Varkøy 2003: 209) .
Another critique, specifically aimed at multicultural music education comes from a different angle. Danish ethnologist Eva Fock (1997) asserts that music education under the banner of multiculturalism misses the mark. She accuses it of being fragmentary, exoticising and superficial, reflecting a popular fad instead of taking immigrant music cultures seriously. According to her observations, the Danish music curriculum is imbalanced: there is plenty of non-western music included - especially African and Latin-American music - but practically nothing from the three largest immigrant groups: Turks, Moroccans and Pakistanis. Less than ten per cent of the Danish music teachers she interviewed had ever used music from these countries in their teaching.
Moreover, Eva Fock criticises the ways in which non-Western music is employed; maintaining that education always seems to concentrate on the musical qualities that are considered the most exotic, the most authentic and the most different. Young immigrants in the Danish school system may find that if the music of their country of origin is ever referred to in class, only very traditional folk music is presented, and never the modern forms they identify with themselves. All in all, Eva Fock maintains that the handling of multicultural music in the school system contributes to the creation of ethnic stereotypes and cultural taboos rather than promoting cross-cultural understanding and cooperation. Needless to say, her allegations are not very popular among most Danish music educators. Still, her work is absolutely worth our attention, not least because of the thorough investigations it is based on. Besides conducting research among young immigrants in Denmark , Eva Fock has studied both modern and traditional musics in Pakistan , Turkey and Morocco . Her work has resulted in a ground-breaking book intended for the Danish school curriculum “Music around us” (Fock 2003) .
For music educators as well as other actors in the European music education discourse, the main challenge in the years to come must be to keep abreast of social and cultural debates and to do their best to relate these debates to their own teaching. The consequences of globalisation make it crucial to discuss and reconsider music education in view the increasing cultural diversity. Much can be learned from the experiences of the Scandinavian music projects I have discussed here, and much more can be learned from critical analysis and reflection related to new projects and practices in the years to come. There is still a critical need for music educators – within the school system and elsewhere – to develop their cultural and ethical consciousness, and to avoid letting a fascination for otherness and the exotic become an obstacle in the development of constructive inter-cultural relations based on the experience of music.
Bjørkvold, Jon-Roar. 1992. The muse within : creativity and communication, song and play from childhood through maturity . New York: HarperCollins.
Chernoff, John Miller. 1979. African rhythm and African sensibility
aesthetics and social action in African musical idioms . Chicago ,: University of Chicago Press.
Einarsen, Hans Philip. 1998. Møtet som uteble : om ideologier og virkelighet i et musikkprosjekt knyttet til flerkulturell musikkformidling . Oslo: Universitetet.
Fock, Eva. 1997. "Music - intercultrual communication?" Nordicom-information , no. 4/1997.
________. 2003. Musik omkring os - om musik i Tyrkiet, Pakistan, Marokko ... og Danmark . København: Edition Wilhelm Hansen.
Hedegaard, Søren. 1995. Trommeleg : et musikpædagogisk grundlag . Brøndby: Semi-forlaget.
Knudsen, Jan Sverre and Odd Are Berkaak. 1998. Følg tonen verden rundt! : Prosjekt flerkulturelle musikkforsøk i Akershus : evalueringsrapport . Oslo: Akershus fylkeskommune.
KUF. 1996. Læreplanverket for den 10-årige grunnskolen . Oslo: Det kongelige kirke- utdannings og forskningsdepartement.
Kwami, Robert. 1993. "Music education in Britain and the school curriculum: A point of view". International Journal of Music education , no. 21.
________. 1995. " A framework for teaching West African musics in schools and colleges". British journal of music education 12, no. 3.
Lundberg, Dan, Krister Malm, and Owe Ronström. 2003. Music media multiculture - changing musicscapes . Stockholm: Svenskt Visarkiv.
Skyllstad, Kjell. 1993. The resonant community : klangrikt fellesskap : 1989-1992 : fostering interracial understanding through music : summary report . Oslo: Norwegian Concert Institute.
Slobin, Mark. 1993. Subcultural sounds : micromusics of the West . Hanover, N.H.: Wesleyan University Press.
Small, Christopher. 1998. Musicking : the meanings of performing and listening . Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England.
Sæther, Eva. 2003. The oral university - attitudes to music teaching and learning in the Gambia . Doctoral thesis, Lund University.
________, ed. 1993. På jakt etter en mångkulturell musiklärarutbildning . Musikpedagogik : forskning och utveckling, no. Malmö: Musikhögskolan i Malmö,.
Varkøy, Øivind. 2003. Musikk - strategi og lykke bidrag til musikkpedagogisk grunnlagstenkning . Oslo: Cappelen akademisk forl.
1. As recommended songs for first-graders, L97 mentions four examples, all with a significant national or religious character: “Mellom bakkar og berg”, “Blåmann Blåmann bukken min”, “Deilig er jorden, and “En sang til deg eg synge vil”.
2. Samvær og samhandling er like viktige som kvalitet og meistring .
3. http://www.denkulturelleskolesekken.no/oversettelser/english.htm
4. Og det er gjennom fokusering på kunstopplevelsen som målet med musikkundervisningen at de “positive bivirkningene” (sekundære funksjonene) kommer best til sin rett.
Jan Sverre Knudsen
Home page: http://home.hio.no/~jansk/