This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
of research plays to the strengths of that particular student. If students do not have meaningful experiences with more than one research paradigm, they will be less able to pro- vide a rich context for their own research. They also will be less likely to be part of an inclusive research commu- nity with members who are working together to explicate the most compelling concerns of the profession. Down the road, that student may become a faculty member who is directing the research of others. Not every one of their students will have the same strengths and proclivities, nor will they want to ask the same types of research questions. We need to prepare our students to answer all types of questions, keeping in mind that students are different from one another and are drawn in by different types of ques- tions, rather than limiting their possibilities. Beyond this, we need to be careful not to model dismissing an entire paradigm because of weak work within it. Each has its place and has things to contribute to the larger discussion. So, at least at the doctoral level, every student should have a meaningful experience as both a quantitative and qualita- tive researcher during his or her degree program.

As a profession, we need to work toward more balance within the professional journals. Currently, we have jour- nals that are focused more toward quantitative work and others that are known to be friendly to qualitative research- ers. This is not surprising, given the ways in which many of the editorial boards are chosen -- either by appointment of the editor, who may value one paradigm over the other, or by elections voted on by the current editorial board members, who tend to self perpetuate. Editorial boards and editors should make a stand to balance the strengths and backgrounds of editorial board members as they move forward. If we segregate paradigm by journal, the conver- sations within our music education research community become less rich.

Finally, we need to explore and support new types of schol- arship, redefining it to include newer forms of knowledge making, including creative and scholarly use of digital me- dia to disseminate knowledge, the scholarship of engage- ment, and policy work. I am not arguing for a lowering of standards. Rather, I am arguing for more inclusivity. This work must be of high quality and must be able to demon- strate its impact. However, we need to look at the impact of work not only on the research community, but also on communities of practice and the world at large.

Music education must move forward by engaging in inclu- sive, open, conversations between scholars and scholarly communities, valuing one another’s work and keeping in mind its limitations, as well as acknowledging the limita- tions of one’s own work. None of us has all of the answers. With that in mind, there should always be room for all 26

types of thoughtful scholars at the table. Citations

American Society for Cell Biology. (2012). San Francisco declaration on research assessment: Putting science into the assessment of research. Retrieved from

Draves, T. J., Cruse, C. S., Mills, M. M., & Sweet, B. M. (2008). Subjects in music education research: 1991- 2005. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education (2008): 19-29. ProQuest. Web. 15 June 2014.

O’Meara, K. A. (2014). Essay calls for reform of tenure and promotion system. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from essay-calls-reform-tenure-and-promotion-system?wid th=775&height=500&iframe=true

Cynthia Crump Taggart, a Past- President of the College Music So- ciety, is Professor of Music Educa- tion at Michigan State University. She was awarded the Undergradu- ate Teaching Excellence Award for the Humanities and Social Sciences at Case Western Reserve Universi- ty. At MSU, she received the Teach- er-Scholar and the Beal Outstand- ing Faculty Awards.

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40