No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Falsches Dilemma
Abstract
Der Trugschluss des falschen Dilemmas wird häufig auch als „Alles-Oder-Nichts-Fehlschluss“, „Entweder-Oder-Irrtum“, „Schwarz-Weiß-Trugschluss“ oder „Falsche Dichotomie“ bezeichnet. Es wird hierbei suggeriert, dass es zu einer Streitfrage genau zwei bestimmte, einander gegensätzliche Möglichkeiten gibt, obwohl es im konkreten Fall mehr als zwei Möglichkeiten gibt. So werden künstliche Dilemmata konstruiert, die gar nicht existieren.
Warum obligatorischer Musikunterricht? Musikunterricht wird oft als ›nice-to-have‹ betrachtet und im Rahmen knapper Ressourcen in Frage gestellt. Der Begründungsdruck führt dazu, dass der Musik Wirkungen zugesprochen werden, die wissenschaftlich nicht haltbar sind. Ist das Schulfach Musik tatsächlich zu begründen? Wie soll es ausgerichtet sein? Gelingender Unterricht ist nicht nur von Lehrplan und Qualifikation der Lehrpersonen abhängig. Vielmehr spielen Haltungen und Überzeugungen von Lehrenden und Lernenden eine entscheidende Rolle. Markus Cslovjecsek zeigt auf, wo die Beteiligten die Legitimation von Musikunterricht sehen und richtet sich damit an alle, die an schulischem (Musik-)Unterricht und seiner Begründung interessiert sind - ein ›must-have‹ für alle Bildungsverantwortlichen.
School Music for All?
An explorative mixed methods study on beliefs regarding the justification of compulsory classroom music education
Abstract
The publication (doctoral thesis) is structured in an introduction, a theoretical part, an empirical study and first conclusions. After an introduction that discusses the author's own experiences as a research impulse as well as his own position on the research question and in the literature, chapters 2 to 5 focus on theoretical aspects of the legitimation of music as well as the presentation of possible polarities. The large chapter 6 contains an empirical clarification of the polarities by means of two qualitative preliminary studies and the actual quantitative main study. Chapter 7 contextualises the results of the work in the form of a discussion and a classification.
In the introductory chapter 1, the author focuses on his own experiences with the topic in the teaching profession at primary and secondary level, in music studies, in the project "Extended Music Teaching", at university as well as through international exchange, further education cooperation, development projects and publications. Furthermore, the author asks about his personal attitude to the research question, makes it transparent and, above all, searches for answers in the literature on legitimation arguments. Thus, a broad panorama of the current state of research and the debate in the music community (with historical recourse) is spread and different positions (e.g. between purposelessness or end in itself and performance orientation) are presented. Finally, a justification is given for the discussion of the topic.
In chapter 2, the question of theoretical aspects for the justification and legitimisation of music education in schools is raised. Starting with the question of what legitimation is in the first place and how this is reflected in a curriculum as a political framing (historical and current processes as well as the tension between the functions of legitimation and orientation are illuminated), theoretical justifications from the field of music education discourse are unfolded along three selected attempts at systematisation (Ott 1979, Spychiger 1995, Kaiser 2018). A panorama of disillusionment (Ott), a new attempt at an ideal-typical classification (instrumental, aesthetic, pragmatic, broad, semiotic) (Spychiger) and four types of justification (educational/therapeutic paradigm, anthropological, cultural-theoretical, aesthetic paradigm) as well as three legitimising instances (concept of music, learning subject, institution) (Kaiser) is thus spanned.
Metatheoretical considerations, questions and study design are addressed in chapter 3. Based on considerations of how a search for consensus on the justification of compulsory music lessons can take place, the research question is clarified, and the study design is developed from this. It is emphasised that an explorative investigation of the attitudes of important participants in the discourse is intended and that it cannot be about a "final justification".
For this purpose, understandings or basic music pedagogical assumptions, which serve as prerequisites, are clarified in advance in chapter 4 and "presented as axioms, i.e. as non-provable but reasonably clarified assumptions". Convictions on questions of professional (autonomy) as well as artistic integrity and on the definition of school success are developed and recorded as prerequisites for further investigation.
Chapter 5 deals with the theoretical clarification of polarities, primarily on the question of the purpose of school music lessons, which shape the subject didactic discourse. In particular, it will be examined to what extent dichotomies can be confirmed. Since it is recognised that theoretical clarification has only a limited influence on practice, the justification convictions of interested persons with regard to school music lessons will then be examined in an empirical study.
The empirical study is presented in chapter 6. It consists of a critically reflected description of the sample, several preliminary studies and a main study. A first qualitative preliminary study (chapter 6.2) focuses on the beliefs of students at secondary level I and the aggregated subjective theories of students entering the teacher training programme at secondary level I at the University of Teacher Education Northwestern Switzerland (PH FHNW). A guideline informed by the literature study and the results of the preliminary study is developed and presented and then serves as the basis for another preliminary study (chapter 6.3), which was conducted as a qualitative interview study with advanced students of the same degree programme. As a central product of qualitative content analysis, the research question is further specified and a corresponding instrument is prepared, which was then presented to a larger sample for assessment in the main study (chapter 6.4) as part of a comprehensive questionnaire (using SoSci-Survey; survey period 22.11.2019-04.03.2020; n=1437; after adjustment n=918). These data are then analysed descriptively and also factor-analytically after the formation of 12 qualification levels and 9 types in relation to the research questions.
The results are interpreted in chapter 7 as a preliminary insight into the justification beliefs of the sample. The instrument itself, thus tested for the first time, is made available for further development and validation.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.